Comparative-critical study of the definition of "tradition" and "innovation" in literary criticism of Iran and the world

Introduction
“Tradition” is one of the widely used concepts in different fields of human sciences and has its specific use and special idiomatic meaning in diverse subcategories including philosophy, theology, sociology and literature. That is why this concept is closely connected to an extended range of concepts in different fields of human sciences. Even though there are common elements in the definition of tradition in these fields, its accurate and distinctive definition in each has exclusive elements and meaningful differences. In all these diverse semantic fields, literary tradition is quite remarkable as one of the most notable components leading to the creation of literary works. Regarding the outstanding role of the two concepts of literary tradition and innovation, in the present study, first, the views of Iranian authorities and their offered definitions of these terms are examined and criticized; then, their views are compared to those of non-Iranian theorists to offer an opportunity to the readers to critically compare these concepts from different views.  That is due to the fact that when these terms are explained in detail, it is much easier to know features rooted in tradition as well as turn-points of innovation and making changes in tradition; So it becomes clear how important a role the writers and poets had owing to their literary innovation and their choice to deviate from or follow the tradition.
 

Methodology

In the present paper, first, the views of Iranian critics, authorities and writers regarding the definition of tradition and innovation, elements leading to them and the correlation between the two concepts are expressed and some examples are mentioned for each. Then, these definitions are compared to those of Western and Arabian writers and their common and different points are highlighted.
 

Discussion

The definitions of literary tradition offered are diverse regarding the composing elements and the conditions leading to tradition. Most of the definitions, including the ones offered by Sima Dad, Ehsan Yarshater and Fatemeh Sayyah, consider literary tradition something like literary norms, principles and rules, and diverse elements including subject matters, themes, forms of prose and poetry, figures of speech and the like as composing elements of literary tradition. Nevertheless, in some definitions, including the ones offered by Jamal Mirsadeghi and Meimanat Zolghadr among the Iranian thinkers and T. S. Eliot among the Western ones, literary tradition is regarded much more extended and includes every sign of literary past and heritage left from past generations in a literary work which makes literary tradition a complicated and at the same time expanded term. On one hand, when it makes elements of tradition, there is usually an emphasis on repetition. In most definitions of literary tradition, repetition and continuance in a long period is the necessary condition to form a literary tradition. In the definitions offered by Sima Dad, Fatemeh Sayyah, Jamal Mirsadeghi and meimanat Zolghadr, there is an emphasis on repetition. On the other hand, in some definitions, there is no necessity for repetition and all of the literary history in a language, literary heritage of any kind, even the most exceptional ones, are considered as literary tradition. Among the Iranian writers, Taghi Poornamdairan, and among the Westerns, Eliot and Gadamer affirm this definition of tradition. This difference is much more significant when we have in mind the fact that there are some features in the works of literary geniuses and pioneering people which, due to this aspect of genius and forward-lookingness, have not been imitated nor repeated after them and have remained unique and exceptional. In such a circumstance, if the condition of repetition is extremely emphasized, some of the most significant and outstanding literary works do not find a way to the circle of literary tradition. To find a way out, the two concepts of the style of the age and individual style might be helpful, the two paradoxical views which can be reconciled by the fact that these unique features were not repeated at the time and even at the close periods following the time of their being created, which made them unable to form a literary tradition, but in many cases, they have been found worthy and significant after a period of time, imitated, repeated and considered as literary tradition as well.
Regarding the definition of innovation, it is worth mentioning that contrary to the concept of tradition, innovation by itself has not been much attractive and its correlation with tradition has been of more importance. In other words, innovation has mostly been meaningful in contrast to tradition and not independently. However, the most important point in present definitions by many Iranian and non-Iranian thinkers, including Mashallah Ajoudani and Ali Ahmad Said (Adunis), is the emphasis on accompaniment of innovation with identity, nobility and independence in every literary work.
While discussing the correlation between tradition and innovation, the main part of diverse definitions, the issue emphasized by many Iranian, Arabian and Western authorities, including Taghi Poornamdarian and Ali Mohammad Haghshenas among the Iranian thinkers and Eliot and Roman Jakobson among the Western ones, is the emphasis on their accompaniment, and it is tried to exposit and explain the dynamic and dialectic relation of the two concepts. So, innovation can only be durable and acceptable while based on tradition and tradition can only survive and pull through while opening the way for innovation to be revealed and acknowledged. That is why there are two kinds of innovation, one based on tradition and born out of traditional heritage and the other not rooted in tradition, isolated and separated. It is based on the first kind of innovation that some Iranian and Arabian authorities, including Abbas Milani and Adunis, hope to find the roots of the contemporary modernity and innovation in historical periods and deep in the pioneering and developed movements of eastern traditional thinking.
 

Conclusion

Tradition and innovation are two important and functional concepts in different fields of human sciences. Although the definitions of the two offered by Iranian and non-Iranian critics are different, they have many significant similarities. Analysis and examination of diverse definitions from a general view leads to the fact that they are different from two aspects: the extendedness of the composing elements of tradition and the necessity of repetition to form it. The definitions which consider more extended features of form and content seem to offer a more accurate definition of tradition. Moreover, apparently, despite the affirmation of the condition of repetition in forming a tradition, the condition is applicable not only in immediate imitation but also in further imitation in later periods and centuries. Therefore all features related to the form and content of past literary works, which have been repeated, continued and circulated after a short or long period, form a literary tradition. Regarding innovation, it is worth mentioning that its dynamic and complicated relationship with tradition, is the main essence of literary works which is, on the one hand, the guarantor of the durability and success of literary innovations and on the other, the main cause of revival and renaissance of tradition.
 
e constituent elements and the presence or absence of repetition among the conditions of the formation of tradition. Accordingly, all the formal and content features that exist in literary works and are repeated, and survived after short or long periods of time, form the literary tradition. In the case of innovation, its dynamic relationship with tradition is the main essence of literary works and is the guarantor of the success of innovations and will lead to a continuous renaissance of tradition.