ROMANIA - CULTURELITERATURE, ARCHITECTURE, THE FINE ARTS, THEATRE, MUSIC, CINEMA HISTORICAL BACKGROUND
Among the forty-five sovereign states of todays Europe, Romania ranks as medium-sized.
Its history and civilisation have been marked by its location at the crossroads of
three major regions Central Europe, Eastern Europe and the Balkans, belonging to none
but sharing with each their drawbacks and achievements. The Romanians, the sole descendents of the Eastern Romans, were born, like the other Latin
peoples, in the first millennium A.D. During the Middle Ages they lived in three
distinct but neighbouring principalities Wallachia, Moldavia and Transylvania. Throughout their history the Romanians have
found themselves at the confluence of the frontiers of several powerful kingdoms
and empires. Thus the Romanian territories have been an area of dispute and interference.
In spite of their large neighbours, the Romanians succeeded in preserving uninterruptedly
their polity, language, religious faith and culture. The national state was born
in 1859, when Wallachia and Moldavia were united, and Romania proclaimed its sovereign
independence in 1877. At the end of the First World War, in 1918, all the territories
inhabited by Romanians were united within Romania. The inter-war progress in all
areas was brutally stopped at the outbreak of the Second World War, when Romania
lost one-third of its territory and population. The end of the war saw Romania at the side
of the Allies; but soon after, under the Soviet domination, it shared the fate of
other Central and East-European countries. The communist regime, imposed by force, lasted almost
half a century. The popular revolt in December 1989 overthrew Ceausescus dictatorship
and his totalitarian communist regime. It opened the way to the restoration of democracy and the market economy, as well as to Romanias full integration into cultural
Europe to which it has always belonged.
Romania has its unique culture, which is the product of its geography and of its distinct
historical evolution. Romanians are the sole Christian Orthodox among the Latin peoples and the sole Latin people in the
Eastern Orthodox area. The Romanians sense of identity has always been deeply related to their Roman roots, in conjunction
with their Orthodoxy. A sense of their ethnic insularity in the area has kept Romanians available for a fruitful communication
with other peoples and cultures. From the first mediaeval forms of state organisation, in the 14th century, down to the 18th century,
Romanian culture and civilisation showed two major trends: one towards Central and Western Europe and the other oriented towards
the Eastern Orthodox world. Whether one or the other prevailed at various times in history depended on the region and the
field. Architecture developed both trends for centuries and gave interesting forms of synthesis; painting, linked to religious
canons, was closer to the great Byzantine tradition.
Another feature of Romanian culture is the special relationship between folklore and the learned culture, determined by two factors. First, the rural character
of the Romanian communities resulted in an exceptionally vital and creative traditional culture. Folk creations (the best
known is the ballad Miorita -The Ewe Lamb
) were the main literary genre until the 18th century. They were both a source of
inspiration for cultivated creators and a structural model. Second, for a long time learned culture was governed by official and
social commands and developed around courts of princes and boyars, as well as in monasteries. The first printed book, a prayer
book in Slavonic, was produced in Wallachia in 1508 and the first book in Romanian, a catechism, was printed in Transylvania, in
1544. Until the 18th century written culture mainly consisted of historical, moral, religious and legal writings. An outstanding
personality of that time was prince Dimitrie Cantemir (1673-1723), for a short while ruler of Moldavia, prominent in various areas
of humanist culture: history, philosophy, music, literature. He was known in the learned Europe as a remarkable scholar, author
of writings in Latin: Descriptio Moldaviae
(commissioned by the Academy of Berlin, the member of which he became in 1714) and
Incrementa atque decrementa aulae othomanicae
, which was printed in English in 1734-1735 (second edition in 1756), in French (1743)
and German (1745); the latter was a major reference work in European science and culture until the 19th century.
Romanias history has been full of rebounds: the culturally productive epochs were those of
stability, when the people of this country proved quite an impressive resourcefulness in making up for less propitious periods
and were able to rejoin the mainstream of European culture. This stands true for the years after the Phanariot rule, at the beginning
of the 19th century, when Romanians had a favourable historical context and chose the Western way of life, mainly French
model, which they pursued steadily and at a very fast pace. From the end of the 18th century, the sons of the upper classes started
having their education in Paris, and French became (and was until the communist years) a genuine second language of culture
for Romanians. The modeling role of France especially in the fields of political ideas, administration and law, as well as in
literature was paralleled, from the mid-19th century down to World War I, by German culture.
That was true especially in Moldavia, whose many intellectuals studied in Berlin. In Transylvania and the Banat, the Hapsburg rule
and the presence of the ethnic German population (the Saxons in Transylvania and the Swabians in the Banat), in the local communities,
triggered constant relationships with the German world not only at a cultural level but in daily life as well. The influence
of the German space was felt especially in the humanities (philosophy, logics, philology, history) and technical sciences.
The period of radical changes and modernisation of Romanian culture coincided with
the creation of the national state, by the union of Moldavia and Wallachia, in 1859. The national identity was thus defined in
relation to the European model. Later on, the decades of peace during the interwar period, after the completion of all the Romanians union into one state in 1918, were devoted to the synchronisation with European culture.
In both processes modernisation of culture and its synchronisation with European world not devoid of polemics, of confrontations between conservatives and the advocates
of progress, the assimilation of Western culture and capitalization on local tradition proved highly beneficial. The outcome was
the emergence of the triad of great classics in the Romanian literature in the latter half of the 19th century: Mihai Eminescu
(1850-1889), Romanian national poet par excellence
, Ion Luca Caragiale (1852-1912), the great Romanian playwright, and Ion Creanga (1837-1889), a great storyteller.
During communism, the freedom of expression was constantly restricted in various
ways: the Sovietization period was an attempt at building up a new cultural identity on the basis of socialist realism and lending
legitimacy to the new order by rejecting traditional values. That trend, covering the period of the communist takeover, gave
way to a time of relative relaxation of dogmatism and of ideological control in the 1960s. Ceausescus dictatorship brought new pressures to impose a shallow and shrill kind of nationalism
especially during the 1970s and 1980s. The attitude of the regime towards the intellectuals varied along the time from purges and interdictions (masswide in the 1950s) to their being lured into the trap
of privileges.
There was a chasm between the official, communist culture and genuine culture. On
the one hand, against the authorities intentions, the outstanding works were perceived as a realm of moral truths and the
significant representatives of genuine cultural achievement were held in very high esteem by the public opinion. On the other
hand, the slogans disseminated nationwide through the forms of official culture helped spread simplistic views, pseudo-truths which
were relatively successful among some ranks of the population. The tension between these two directions can still be perceived
at the level of society as a whole.
Another consequence of the communist attitude towards the elites, in general, was the creation, for the first time in Romanias history, of a diaspora, including great personalities of the scientific and cultural
fields: biologist George Emil Palade, Nobel Prize winner (1974); philosopher and logician Stephane Lupasco; Mircea Eliade (1907-1986), the renowned historian of religions; Eugene Ionesco (1909-1994), the playwright of the absurd; Emil Cioran (1911-1996), the greatest French-writing master of style after Pascal, etc. The communist rule in Romania, unlike most of the other countries of the Eastern
bloc, permanently repudiated the Romanians who had left their country and labelled them as traitors to the motherland. So,
neither Mircea Eliade, nor Eugene Ionesco, nor Emil Cioran, whose works would be published in this country sporadically
after 1960, could see their native land again. It was only after 1989 that the process of regaining the values of the diaspora
and of reintegrating its personalities into this countrys culture could be started seriously, a process marked in its turn by tension and
disagreements.
The fall of communism in 1989 elated the cultural world, but the embarkment on the
free market economy and the problems of the transition period has faced it with a tough experience. The discontinuation of state
and political control of culture brought about the long dreamt freedom of expression, but along with it culture stopped to be
state-subsidised, and was seriously affected by the side-effects of the incipient, still very imperfect free market economy and
by the poor, inadequate material resources. Culture has had to cope with a variety of problems, one of them being a shift in the
peoples interest towards other areas such as the press and television. The search for a
new cultural policy, relying on decentralisation, seems to prevail now. People speak about a crisis of culture in this country,
but if there is a crisis of culture, it is only at an institutional level.
After centuries of anonymous, oral traditions of Romanian folklore, the 16th-18th
centuries saw the development of the written culture. Those works, although not devoid of a certain aesthetic value, cannot be considered
as literary works proper. The end of the 18th century heralded the real start of a European clock for Romanian literature.
It spelled the breakaway of the structural universe of literature from the nonhomogeneous and polychrome area of the earlier
written culture. Moreover, that was a final breakaway from the previous cultural world, determined by a radical change of the
Romanian society (through a process of westernisation and liberalisation, change in literary expression by its connection to the
European styles, as well as in institutional aspect of culture). The first half of the 19th century was a time of great projects
for the creation of a national literature. After 1830, all literary genres were approached, and creative writing became a profession.
The renewal of language included also improper or caricatural expression, hence the urgent appeal launched by the 1848 Generation,
by the writers involved in the 1848 events, for the creation of a sound local creative literature and for capitalization
on folklore, which was seen as a source of aesthetic regeneration, owing to the simplicity and beauty of its language. Vasile
Alecsandri (1821-1890) was a trail-blazer in poetry, prose writing, drama, and he was also a collector of folklore. Costache Negruzzi
(1808-1868) was not only the founder of the Romanian short story but also of a model still not matched in historical short
story writing.
The second half of the 19th century was characterised by great quality leaps in literature.
A remarkable contribution was made by the Junimea
cultural society (f. 1863) and especially by its mentor, Titu Maiorescu (1840-1917),
through his struggle against mediocrity and for the introduction of the aesthetic criterion in establishing the hierarchy of
values. The review published by that society, Convorbiri literare
, helped impose the great 19th century writers: Mihai Eminescu, Ion Luca Caragiale and Ion Creanga. Romanian Athaeneum
Eminescu is to Romanians the prototype of the poet and of poetry. He was conversant
with both Western and Oriental philosophical speculation and, at the same time, was a great admirer of popular traditions. Due to his unique creative gift and his Weltanschauung
, he gave maximum brilliance to Romanian Romanticism. Eminescu radically changed the
poetic expression by doing away with rhetoric and essentialising lyrical writing by his own very high standards. Ion Luca Caragiales plays are a merciless mirror of the Romanian society of the time, standing out by
their biting criticism of political obsession and moral vacillation, ridiculing the contradiction between pettiness and pretense.
Owing to the value of his comedies of morals and characters, unfortunately written
in a language that does not have the advantage of international circulation, Ion Luca Caragiale is perhaps the greatest of the
unknown playwrights, wrote Eug ne Ionesco, the reputed founder of theatre of the absurd. The Junimea
Society also discovered and launched Ion Creanga, the other member of the triad of great classics, a matchless story teller standing
out by the oral style he used in his work, and Ioan Slavici (1848-1925), a Transylvanian writer, the author of the first masterpiece of Romanian novel writing
(Mara
, 1894). In opposition to Junimea
and Convorbiri literare
, the Literatorul
literary circle and review carried the first manifestos of symbolism, which could
be detected in the poems of Alexandru Macedonski (1854-1920)
The period between the two World Wars was characterised by great effervescence and
innovation. Poetry gravitated around several great models: Tudor Arghezi (1880-1967), poet of the materialisation of the abstract
and the ennoblement of the blunt expression, Lucian Blaga (1895-1961), who expressed metaphysical concerns in an expressionist
poetry, George Bacovia (1881-1957), a symbolist, a poet of neurosis and despair, Ion Barbu (1895-1964), a representative of hermetic
poetry and considerable stylistic economy of expression and symbolic substance (he was also a brilliant mathematician).
In prose writing, the great name of the time was Liviu Rebreanu (1885-1944), whose novels Ion
and Padurea Spanzuratilor (The Forest of the Hanged)
are masterpieces. The former is a realistic work with naturalistic influences, a
tragedy of rural life, stripped of the idyllic character that previously prevailed in Romanian literature. The latter was the first
psychological novel in Romanian literature. Mihail Sadoveanu (1880-1961) wrote a large number of novels, mainly historical,
and stories which are rather singular in Romanian literature owing to their metaphoric density and infusion of Oriental wisdom.
A series of younger writers included Camil Petrescu (1894-1957) and Hortensia Papadat-Bengescu (1876-1955), who distinguished themselves
in analytical prose writing. In the field of drama innovating tendencies were less spectacular, mainly due to the taste
of the time, which kept off the stage the theatre of ideas of Camil Petrescu, Lucian Blagas drama of mythic dimension, or the plays by Mihail Sebastian (1907-1945), that were
so outstanding due to the sensitivity and purity of their protagonists. Literary criticism and essay writing matched the development of poetry and prose writing. Standing out in
this domain is the singular personality of George Calinescu (1899-1965), who subjected the whole Romanian literature from its origins
to the present times to an axiological judgement and produced a monumental History of Romanian literature
.
But apart from the great personalities, that period saw such a diversification of
trends as never registered before. Orthodox-oriented traditionalism, which was represented especially by the review Gandirea
(1922-1944), headed by Nichifor Crainic (1889-1972), was opposed by modernism, promoted
by the literary circle and review Sburatorul
(1919-1922, 1926-1927), led by Eugen Lovinescu. Reviews of the avant-garde proper
started being issued, facilitating the literary debut of Tristan Tzara (1896-1963), the founder of Dadaism, Gherasim Luca (1913-1994)
and Ilarie Voronca (1903-1946), who later on made a name for themselves abroad much like Fundoianu (Benjamin Fondane, 1898-1944).
The connection of Romanian literature to the European trends, which was achieved
by the interwar generation, was abruptly cut short by the onset of communism. The proletcultism of the 50s left little room for authentic literature and, even if criticised in the late
60s, literature no longer had the freedom of creation of former days. It enjoyed instead
the necessary financial resources as it became subsidised by the state and, in spite of the ideological restrictions, disruptions
like those experienced during the Stalinist decade became no longer possible. Genuine, valuable literature was extremely
well received by readers, who could identify in it the symbol of a civic attitude. Never before was there such an accord between
public and critical taste like the one in the last decade of Ceausescus dictatorship. Prose writers like Marin Preda (1922-1980) and Augustin Buzura, poets
like Nichita Stanescu (1933-1983), Marin Sorescu (1936-1997), Ana Blandiana were appreciated by both
prestigious critics (Nicolae Manolescu, Eugen Simion) and readers. The last decade of Ceausescus regime saw the rise of a group of young writers who started a relentless struggle
against the attempts to level the artistic language, attempts encouraged by the then regime.
The years after 1990 have been a period of tests and also difficulties generated by the switch of the readers interest towards literary works that had been inaccessible to them before or towards
the mass-media. Moreover, the constraints of a culture not subsidised under the conditions of an incipient market economy influenced
the publication of their books. However the crisis has not affected creation as well. Young writers in particular (the
1990s writers who are imposing themselves especially in poetry, prose and essay writing) seem determined
to rebuild the bridges towards readers.
Wooden Church from Maramures During the Romanian mediaeval epoch there existed two types of construction, different in point of both materials and technique, which developed in parallel. The first is the popular architecture, whose most spectacular achievements were the wooden churches, especially those in the villages of Maramures, Banat and Apuseni Mountains, where the tradition is still carried out today. In Maramures, in Surdesti village, the 54-m high church tower built during 1721-1724 is among the highest of this kind in Europe. The second comprises mainly monasteries, as well as princely seats or boyar mansions. Most of the old lay edifices were destroyed by times, wars, earthquakes and fires. In mediaeval architecture, influences of Western trends can be traced, to a greater or lesser extent, in all the three lands inhabited by Romanians. Such influences are stronger in Transylvania, and weaker in Moldavia, in forms absorbed by local and Byzantine tradition. In Wallachia, Western elements in architecture were even fewer; there, from the 14th century architecture was based on the local adaptation of the Byzantine model (the Princely Church in Curtea de Arges and the Cozia Monastery).
There are monuments significant for the Transylvanian
Gothic style preserved to this day, in spite of all alterations, such as the Black Church in Brasov (14th-15th c.) and a number of other cathedrals, as well as the Bran Castle in
Brasov County (14th c.), the Hunyades Castle in Hunedoara (15th c.) a.o.
Transylvania also developed fortified towns extensively during the Middle Ages; their
urban growth respected principles of functionality (the usual pattern is a central market place with a church, narrow streets with sides linked here and there by archways): the cities of Sighisoara, Sibiu and Brasov are remarkable examples in that sense. Building greatly developed in Moldavia,
too. A great number of fortresses were built or rebuilt during the reign of Moldavias greatest prince, Stephen the Great (1457-1504). Suceava, Neamt, Hotin, Soroca and others were raised and successfully withstood the sieges laid
in the course of time by Sultan Mehmet II, the conqueror of Constantinople, by the kings of Poland and Hungary.
Neamt Monastery
It was during his time that the Moldavian style, of great originality and stylistic unity, developed, by blending Gothic elements
with the Byzantine structure specific to the churches. Among such constructions, the monumental church of the Neamt Monastery served, for more than a century, as a model for Moldavian churches and
monasteries.The style was continued in the 16th c., during the rule of Stephen the Greats son, Petru Rares (1527-1538; 1541-1546). The main innovation was the porch and the outwall paintings (the churches of Voronet, Sucevita, Moldovita monasteries). These churches of Northern Moldavia have become famous worldwide,
due to the beauty of their painted elegant shapes that can be seen from afar. Palace of Mogosoaia The 17th century, the zenith of the pre-modern Romanian civilisation, brought about a more significant development of outstanding lay constructions (elegant boyard mansions or sumptuous princely palaces in the principalities outside the Carpathian arc, Renaissance-style lordly castles in Transylvania), as well as the expansion of great monasteries. The latter were endowed with schools, art workshops, printing presses, and they were significant cultural centres. To this period belongs the church of the Trei Ierarhi Monastery in Iasi, raised in 1635-1639, a unique monument due to its lavish decoration with carved geometric motifs, coloured in lapis lazuli and golden foil, all over the facades. The architectural style developed in Wallachia, especially under the reigns of Matei Basarab (1632-1654) and Constantin Brancoveanu (1688-1714), is of a remarkable stylistic unity. The Brancovan style is characterized by integration of Baroque and Oriental features into the local tradition. Splendid examples are the Hurezi Monastery in Oltenia (Wallachia Minor) or the princely palace of Mogosoaia, both of which are lavishly decorated, with beautiful stone carvings, stucco work and paintings.
The 18th century (the Phanariot rule) brought to Wallachia and Moldavia elements
of Oriental influence in urban civil architecture, where the number of religious constructions decreased
relatively. In Transylvania, the Baroque dominated both religious (the Roman-Catholic churches in Timisoara and Oradea) and lay architecture (Banffy Palace in Cluj and Brukenthal Palace in Sibiu). Justice Palace In the first half of the 19th century, urban life grew considerably and there was a Western-type modernisation policy, due to which the architecture of the Romanian lands became a combination of Romantic and Neo-Classical elements. In the second half of the century a national tendency developed, to use to a great extent elements and forms of the traditional local architecture. Ion Mincu (1852-1912) was founder of both trends and of the Romanian school of architecture. His works, the Lahovary House or the Central Girls School in Bucharest, are among the most prominent achievements of this movement. It is due to an opposite trend that they designed houses and administrative buildings in the spirit of French ecclecticism (the Justice Palace, the Central Post Office) or by adapting classicism (the buildings that now hosts the House of the Men of Science, or the Cantacuzino Palace in Bucharest).
That was the time when the Romanian Athaeneum, one of the capitals most famous buildings, was erected in the same style (1886-1888). All those French-looking buildings raised around 1900 were a reason to nickname Bucharest Little Paris. Other important architects, like Petre Antonescu (1873-1965), Horia Creanga (1893-1943) and Duiliu Marcu (1885-1966) stood out by their commitment to simple and functional forms.
In the first
decades of the 20th century, Romanian towns and cities still had a contrasting aspect, exhibiting a sharp difference between the
downtown sumptuous buildings and the almost rural outskirts, while the villages remained, architecturally speaking, mainly unchanged.
Nevertheless, the first signs of town planning appeared in some urban districts (the first two- or three-storied blocks
of flats or one-family houses on two levels).
Industrialisation and fast urban growth, forced especially in the last two decades
of the communist epoch, introduced in architecture long-series typified projects and pre-fab technology in the construction of
8-10 storeyed blocks of flats, which resulted in huge living quarters, levelling up the Romanian townscape. Unfortunately, nationalism,
characterizing the last Ceausescu stage of Romanian communism, did not reflect in Romanian architecture. Traditional
urban central areas and rural towns were destroyed, and replaced by conglomerates of blocks of flats, while the same ruler imposed
the erection of monumental public buildings of a dull ecclectic solemnity. Proof of this intrusion of politics in the life of the
city stands the huge palace built on Ceausescus order in Bucharest, now the Parliament House, whose construction necessitated the
demolition of several quarters downtown. As in so many other domains, the post-revolutionary Romanian world will be bound to find
again in architecture the way that best answers its needs for functionality and outlook. THE FINE ARTS
The existence of an old Byzantine tradition was proved by the blossoming mural painting
in Wallachia in the 14th century. The wall paintings of the princely church of Curtea de Arges, completed in 13621366, are among the most imposing achievements in Byzantine-type mural painting. They
also became a model for the wall painters in the Romanian lands and Transylvania, who belonged to local schools of painting.
Besides the features (archetypal models and the contemplative, stylized canon) commonly shared with the entire Eastern Orthodox
world, Romanian painting has its own specific traits too. This is true regarding frescoes, miniatures, lithurgic embroidery, illuminations.
A Four Gospels illuminated by Gavriil Uric, the first Romanian painter known by name, in 1429, is now at the Bodleian Library of Oxford
University.
The 16th century Wallachian frescoes, and, even more so, the exceptional outwall paintings adorning the monasteries
in Northern Moldavia (Bucovina): Moldovita (1532-1537), Voronet (1547), Sucevita (1582-1596) represent the last flourishing epoch in the history of Byzantine painting
after the fall of Constantinople. These paintings display a harmonious composition, well-balanced relation between the whole
and the details, and brilliant colours. Sculpture holds a modest place in the Middle Ages in
the principalities outside the Carpathian arc, the Byzantine-type monuments being in general devoid of carved decorations. One
of the few exceptions is the 16th century Episcopal Church of Curtea de Arges, with a lavish decoration designed with Caucasian and Arab models in mind, a foundation
of the Wallachian ruler Neagoe Basarab (1512-1521). In Transylvania, on the contrary, sculpture was extensively used in
the decoration of Catholic religious abodes.
Detachment from Byzantine canons, characteristic of the 17th and 18th century, reached
an acme in the 19th century once the lay character asserted itself in the arts and arts became adapted to modern life both
in subject-matter (portraits and historical scenes) and in techniques (easel painting) or artistic trends (Academism and Romanticism).
Such trends, styles, preoccupations and fashions were introduced by foreign artists, who had come from Austria, Germany,
Poland, Italy, invited by the great boyards who commissioned them family portraits. In the early 40s of the 19th century, the first Romanian artists educated in the West started making
a name for themselves. They had been mainly educated in Germany, and, after 1850, the French vogue made its way in painting.
Theodor Aman (1831-1891) and Gheorghe Tattarescu (1820-1894), representatives of Academism, were the first beneficiaries of West
European education.
Nicolae Grigorescu (1838-1907), who brought plein-air painting into Romanian arts, and Ioan Andreescu (1850-1882) completed their education along with the Barbizon painters, while
Stefan Luchian (1868-1916) assimilated the post-Impressionist experience in Paris.
With them, Romanian painting made its brilliant entrance into the zone of modernity. The three great painters practically also represent three
types of reception and sensitivity. Grigorescu's portraits of peasant girls, effusive and proud, and particularly his landscapes
full of lyricism are quite famous. Andreescu had an unmistakable call for landscape painting, of a pensive, introvert atmosphere.
Luchian added a tragic intensity to the delicacy and grace of his flowers, which brought his renown.
In the same period of time, a renewal of the sculptural idiom came through resuming
the ties with timeless local traditions, by Dimitrie Paciurea (1873-1932) and Constantin Brancusi (1876-1957). Paciurea, the
first Romanian artist endowed with a gift for monumental sculpture, resorted to the mythological and fantastic vein of popular traditions
(chimeras, sphinxes). Brancusi, settled in Paris in 1904, who restructured the whole 20th century art and became the founding
father of this centurys abstract sculpture. A few of his works are in Romania: Prayer
(1907) an essentialised image of piety, Wisdom of the Earth
, and the ensemble (1936-1938) at Targu Jiu, a town close to his native place, the Hobita village, consisting of the Endless Column
, The Table of Silence
and of the Gate of Kiss
. The sculptures at Targu Jiu were dedicated to the Romanian soldiers who died in World War I. They are
Brancusi's only open air ensemble of sculptures in the world.
The period between the two world wars saw a considerable diversification and innovation
of Romanian painting, which absorbed a variety of modern trends. Nicolae Tonitza (1886-1940), Francisc Sirato (1877-1953) and Lucian Grigorescu (1894-1965) are among the best-known names. Worth mentioning
are also the names of Gheorghe Petrascu (1872-1949), whose work is characterized by the material nature of expression, elimination of narrative in painting, energy and nobility
of attitude. Theodor Pallady (1871-1956), a friend of Matisses, is characterized by rigour in composition and a discreet colour palette. The Romanian
avant-garde is represented by Victor Brauner (1903-1966), who would later became famous in France, Marcel Iancu (1895-1984),
as well as the abstractionist Hans Mattis-Teutsch (1884-1960) and many others.
The communist period tried to confine the arts, like all the other domains, into the fetters of ideological dogmatism, but as elsewhere, the boycotting
of ideological canons took on the most diversified forms: cultivation of oneirism and symbolism by Ion Tuculescu (1910-1962), of chromatic synthesis by Alexandru Ciucurencu (1903-1977), of essentialized and dramatic realism by Corneliu Baba (1906-1998),
etc. In sculpture outstanding artists were Ion Jalea (1887-1983) and Cornel Medrea (1889-1964), who produced remarkable monumental
sculptures, and Gheorghe Anghel (1904-1966), whose statues of great Romanian personalities are very much appreciated due to his
ability to capture a spiritual quality of the portraits.
The official birth date of the Romanian theatre was 27 December 1816, when writer Gheorghe Asachi (1788-1869)
organised in Iasi the first Romanian performance based on a drama by Florian. In 1817 the first theatres
were opened in Romania. One of them the Theatre of Cismeaua Rosie, in Bucharest, was built upon the initiative of Princess Ralu, daughter of ruling
Prince Caragea. By mid-century, the Romanian societys interest in theatre made it possible to have an almost continuous presence of foreign
troupes in the two capitals, Iasi and Bucharest. Drama schools were founded by the Philharmonic Society in Bucharest
(1833) and by the Philharmonic and Drama Conservatoire in Iasi (1836) and state-run schools for theatre education were also set up (1864). The
first independent theatre troupes appeared in 1852. Since the establishment of the National Theatres in
Bucharest and Iasi to our times, the Romanian theatre has been subsidised by the state, which helped
both the playwrights and the actors.
The first notable playwright was Vasile Alecsandri (1821-1890), a trail-blazer in theatre (dramas, comedies) and all
fields of literature. The best known character of his comedies, Madame Chirita, a provincial hankering to enter the high society, has had a durable and successful
career. At the end of the 19th century, the great and unique Romanian playwright Ion Luca
Caragiale (A Lost
Letter
, 1884, is the masterpiece of his writings and of Romanian drama), and a number of
great actors brought brilliance to the Romanian theatre. Paul Gusty (1859-1944), who was a stage director with the National Theatre
in Bucharest for almost six decades, was practically the one to start the Romanian stage directing, at the very beginning of
the 20th century. The bulk of literature for the stage was enriched with remarkable names such as Barbu Stefanescu Delavrancea (1858-1918), author of an historical trilogy about Moldavia during
the reign of Stephen the Great. Psychological dramas were too written, and social issues were approached too. Outstanding names
of dramatists in the inter-war period were Camil Petrescu, Lucian Blaga and Mihail
Sebastian. In the 30s and 40s a great number of private theatre companies were set up, some of which had a successful
activity until 1949, when private theatres were disbanded. Stage directors like Soare Z. Soare, Ion Sava, G.M. Zamfirescu, Sica Alexandrescu, alongside great actors as were for instance Zaharia Barsan, Marioara Voiculescu, Lucia Sturdza Bulandra, Tony Bulandra, Iancu Brezeanu
raised the Romanian theatre to high standards of professionalism and modernisation, introduced new experiments in
the interpretation of the naturalistic, expressionist and symbolist types of theatre.
During the communist regime, a number of stage directors made a name for themselves:
Liviu Ciulei, Lucian Giurchescu, Radu Penciulescu, Lucian Pintilie, Andrei Serban, David Esrig, Ion Cojar and others. Some of them emigrated in the later decades
of communism and are notable names in international theatre.
After 1989, the Romanian theatre continued to win acclaim on various stages of the world thanks to its exceptional actors
and the original stage directors like Silviu Purcarete, Catalina Buzoianu, Tompa Gabor and Mihai Maniutiu. A new generation of playwrights has been emerging these years. The number of theatre rose from 14-16, on the eve of the Second World War, to 45-50
in the 70s and 80s and 52 in 1996. The number of spectators fluctuated. From 1.5 million in 1938,
it increased to 6-7 million in the 80s and dropped to 1 million in the last few years. The audience currently frows in
number. MUSIC
The Byzantine type of monodic religious music, based on voices, usually without instrumental
accompaniment, was widely practiced in the churches. The Byzantine canons were nevertheless interestingly touched by
the local musical influences. Liturgical music saw a period of glory between the 15th-17th centuries, when reputed schools developed
at Romanian monasteries, the best known being that at Putna Monastery. They developed church choir, under both Russian and
Western influence. That kind of synthesis, in the range of polyphonic music, was subsequently developed by a number of Romanian
composers in the 19th and 20th centuries; prominent among them was Dumitru Georgescu-Kiriac (1866-1928).
Lay music developed its own traits in the Romanian Principalities by the end of the
18th century. Western patterns prevailed in Transylvania in both instrumental music (particularly the organ) and vocal music,
while Oriental influences were mainly taken over in Wallachia and Moldavia. However, after several foreign musicians had come to
these countries and tours by foreign opera troupes started, a drive towards Western music evolved in Wallachia and Moldavia as well. In the latter half
of the 19th century, the most important musical institutions were founded: the Conservatoires in Bucharest and Iasi in 1864, the Romanian Opera House in Bucharest, in 1866 (the Conservatoire in Cluj had been set up as early as 1825). The same period saw
the emergence of the national school of music, mainly based on choral music which drew inspiration from popular or Byzantine
music. That was also a period when Romanian names appeared in opera performance. Among them were Haricleea Darclee (1860-1939), who made a name for herself on the great opera stages of the world
and who performed Tosca,
when that opera was premiered in 1900.
|