Gabriela Gavril-Antonesei

Biography and Fiction. The Contradictions of Panait Istrati – Traps for Exegetes

The proposed text is an excerpt from a larger study devoted to the writings of Panait Istrati. It aims to highlight the importance of literary history for a more accurate understanding of the reception of Panait Istrati in Romania, especially in the interwar period, taking a critical distance from the thesis of the author’s “marginalization” in Romanian and French literature. By researching Istrati’s articles from several decades and his correspondence with Romain Rolland, the study describes the contradictions of the author, the process of fictionalization of his biography, the invention of “roles” and the construction of a “personal myth”.

Our study is based on the almost generally accepted idea that phraseology represents a “language of culture” which retains numerous elements that define the identity and mentality of a community (see Telija et.al.). Starting from research dedicated to phraseology (Coseriu, Cowie), we emphasize the importance of comparative studies (in this case, Romanian-Polish) in phraseology and for the development of linguistic and cultural skills of non-native Romanian speakers, in the teaching of Romanian literature. Based on studies and books dedicated to phraseological expressions in the Romanian and Polish languages and on lexicographic works, we are presenting: 1. Romanian and Polish phraseology with similar structure and similar overall meaning; 2. Romanian and Polish phraseology with similar structure, but different meaning; 3. pseudo-equivalent Romanian-Polish phraseology; 4. Romanian-Polish phraseology with the same overall meaning, but functioning on different stylistic registers of the two languages.

Obrazy miejskiego życia w twórczości Iona Călugăru, Isaca Peltza i Ury’ego Benadora. Aspekty ich recepcji
Autorka tego artykułu postawiła sobie zadanie omówienia pewnych aspektów recepcji prozy trzech rumuńskich pisarzy o żydowskich korzeniach: Iona Călugăru, Isaca Peltza i Ury’ego Benadora. Uważa, że aby rozumieć i analizować „marginalność” literatury pisanej przez rumuńskich pisarzy pochodzenia żydowskiego, trzeba zakwestionować model literatury narodowej oraz rolę rumuńskiego kontekstu historycznego, politycznego i ideologicznego w konstytuowaniu się literackiego kanonu. Autorka podkreśla fakt, że dzieła rumuńskich pisarzy o żydowskich korzeniach – mimo wartości literackiej – pozostają jeszcze „literaturą niewidzialną”. Temat został ujęty w perspektywie, jaką daje amerykański „nowy historyzm” i krytyka postkolonialna.

The presentation focuses on federalist project and plans, political initiatives and addressing officials, (some of the) reactions of the Romanian intellectual and political elites to these projects, as well as their interpretations proposed by the Romanian historiography. Let us begin by stating that the Romanian culture is a distinctive example of the Central-European perception of being “in-between”, along with its possible conceptualizations, being mitigated by the deeply rooted conviction of the “enclave-like” character of this culture. The historic Habsburg heritage is presented exclusively negatively, and a number of historical fi gures, including both politicians and artists, are criticized for their “pro-Habsburg” or “pro-German” agitation, which is considered anti-national.