In a sequential volume of almost 600 pages, based on a continuous knowledge of all the details of one of the most complex time intervals in the history of Romania (1948-1964), the interval commonly called Georgiou-Deja era, Ruxandra Campeanu unravels the twists and turns of the personal, political, and professional destinies of three extremely important cultural figures.

The volume, which I think was originally an exemplary doctoral research, supervised by Acad. Her name is Mircea Martin Outside the rules of the game has a subtitle Stages and limits of the current compromise in the period 1948-1964. appeared in the collection History – Romanian authors the main characters are Mihai Ralea, G. Calinescu and Tudor Vianu.

The above subtitle makes it clear that there is no doubt for Ruxandra Campeanu that those whose work and public activities she examines were in constant negotiations with the Communist authorities and that the negotiations on this matter did not take place without concessions. Or stage rehearsals. And Ralea, who after 1944 would almost completely abandon his literary activity in favor of the activity of a politician, sociologist and psychologist, as well as Calinescu and Vianu, decided to pay the price to remain in the public space. To be able to continue their activity, even if this activity involved a reorientation, approaching new areas less subject to party and ideological control, a change of job or job insecurity, canceled or uncertain relationship with the university from which they were until then, bind time with a good career of years. Three constantly revived the desire to publish new texts, and especially to get the right to get acquainted with reprinted works, which were considered not only by them to be fundamental, which appeared in the interwar period. However, from this last point of view, as the researchers emphasize and repeat several times, the results were insignificant. Disappointment. They took the form of failure.

Although he entered nomenclature circles, Mihai Ralea republished very little and with imposed or arbitrary interventions in the text of his works of the interwar period. He had to speak and fight with American psychology or adapt his creed to the twists and turns of belief characteristic of a changing era in which ideological criteria, not science, prevailed. Kelinescu was finally expelled from the university, sent as the director of the newly created Institute of Literary Criticism and History. Divine Critic he will be forced to seek refuge in the study of folklore and literary history with a factual basis, he will see his works on Eminescu and Creange republished, relatively late and with changes, but not History of Romanian literature from its origins to the present. He will give up the literary chronicle so as not to be forced to comment on the worthlessness agreed upon by the party, but still, during the period of recovery, he will praise A. Tom and create eulogies on the side of the party. Romanian pervert A road without dust Peter Dumitriou. Vianu, apparently supported by Ralea, will remain at the university, but without the right to study aesthetics and philosophy of culture. So he will devote himself to universal literature and, first of all, to stylistic research. However, all three will by no means be stationary, they will be watched, scolded on the open stage by the political tricksters of the time, regardless of whether they are called Leonte Reutu, Wittner or Nicolae Tertullian. They will be asked to persistently deepen Marxist-Leninist teachings.

Could they have done otherwise? Undoubtedly. In addition, it was also categorically supported, often even violently, without nuance, and with a rough knowledge of the problem, but also of the field, immediately after 1989. They could be silent. Don’t write. Because writing and publishing can mean income from Dej’s politics. That alone would probably mean their complete exit from the scene, which we understand from the last chapter titled Progeny, would further complicate the transition to a certain normality from the 60s. It began in the last years of Deja’s rule and continued in the conditional liberalization of the first part of the Ceausescu era. Normality, i.e. leaving the framework of dogmatic socialist realism, reprofessionalization of criticism, conditional opening to the West and the new French criticism, what undoubtedly marked the path of most critics and literary critics of the 60s generation. outlined their professional path Heavy names such as Manolescu, Simion, Sorin Alexandrescu, Matei Calinescu, Ion Pop. Regardless of whether, in declaring themselves Kalinisian, they favored thematic or identification criticism or, on the contrary, continued the path opened by Tudor Vianu, who found his salvation in what Ruxandra Campeanu prefers to call aesthetic stylisticsthey chose semiotics or textual theory.

The author of the book bases his research on the theoretical concept of Pierre Bourdieu. It is about literary field. Ruxandra Campeanu will follow the changes in the literary field, formulating answers to a number of questions that are more important. I list only a part of them here. How will the Romanian communists, as well as the three critics, treat such predecessors as Mayorescu, Ibrailianu, Gerea? How will these three contribute to Mayorescu’s recovery? How will they react to the initiative of Liviu Rusu from Cluj? How and to what extent can Eminescu be read, quoted and analyzed? What was the contribution, in particular, of Kelinescu and Vianu to the fact that the poet was not only the author of famous and despised Emperor and proletarian? How, when and how many will return to the field of literature Blah, Arghezi, Barbu? What will the characters of the book do to facilitate this delicate and extremely important operation? What is the history of writing school textbooks on Romanian literature, and especially the “Academic Treatise”, which ceased after the third volume appeared? Ș.amd Read the entire article and comment on Contributors.ro