The rise of the Russian nationalism presented in chapter 37 was a common theme throughout the eastern European societies of the time. Henry Sienkievicz (1846-1916), the famous Nobel-Prize winning Polish novelist, published his famous trilogy in an attempt to show the world the great achievements and sacrifices of his people. (The second book, entitled The Deluge, happens to be the best love story I have ever read). Things were stirring (culturally and politically) all across the Eastern European nations as they tried to establish their national identity on the international stage.
Romania of those times was no different. The three provinces inhabited by Romanians (Transylvania, Moldavia and Wallachia) found themselves under different spheres of geopolitical influence. They were denied their union in 1600 when Michael the Brave unified the three only to be assassinated a year later. The three provinces feel again under different “masters” – Transylvania became part of the House of Habsburg, Wallachia part of the Turkish Empire and Moldavia remained solitary, fighting off Tatar invasions. It was not until 1859 that Moldavia and Wallachia finally united (in what is known today as The Small Union) and became The Great Kingdom of Romania. Transylvania will not take its place in this union until the devastating conclusion of World War One.
Beginning with the Small Union of 1859 nationalistic themes began to appear in the Romanian arts. The Kingdom of Romania’s capital, the city of Bucharest, was enjoying the same francophonic influences as Saint Petersburg was under the Great Duchess Catherine. The extravagant architecture and cosmopolitan high culture of this period won Bucharest the nickname of “The Paris of the East” (or “Little Paris”, Micul Paris), with Calea Victoriei as its Champs-Élysées or Fifth Avenue.
Not everyone in the country appreciated the foreign influences manifested by the urban culture. Most of the artists of the period ridiculed the behaviors of the bourgeoisie and advocated for a return to the Romanian spirit, traditions and habits, much like the great artists in Russia. This artistic current was further fueled by the desire of the Romanians to bring Transylvania into the union and complete the unification of the provinces once and for all.
Music: One of the most extraordinary composers of the period was Ciprian Porumbescu (1853-1883). (hint: if you come across a last name that ends in ‘escu’ chances are that it is a Romanian name). His beautiful Ballad for Violin and Orchestra skillfully introduces into the world of classical music the traditional Romanian leitmotif of “doina”. Doina is poetic and often melancholic. Doinas are often played with a slow, free rhythm melody against a fast accompaniment pattern in fixed tempo, giving an overall feeling of rhythmic tension. The skillful way in which the Romanian composer masters to introduce this folkloric motif into a classical composition is amazing. It is also a good representation of the way that nationalism penetrated the arts, with artists focused on promoting national elements. (For a contemporary example of how Romanian Romanticism transcended through time I invite you to listen to The Lonely Sheppard played by Gheorghe Zamfir on pan flute – you might recognize this song from the soundtrack of Kill Bill)
Painting: Nicolae Grigorescu (1838-1907) can be associated with the period’s nationalistic movement. During his carrier he studied at the École des Beaux-Arts in Paris and had as colleagues Pierre-Auguste Renoir, Jean-François Millet, Jean-Baptiste Camille Corot, Gustave Courbet and Théodore Rousseau. Early in his career he concentrated more on drawing and composition and later on he looked for new means of expression and followed the trend of en plein air painting.
The compositions that I have selected to illustrate the nationalistic tendencies are Happy Peasant Girl, Cart with Oxen and Peasant Girl from Muscel. In the Happy Peasant Girl the image of the girls strikes me as a portrait of Romanian spirit. Her eyes are honest; her posture open, welcoming and her attitude is hospitable, much like the Romanian culture traditionally is thought to be. I see this in opposition with the French tendencies to introduce sexual tension in the portraits of women. There is no sexual tension here because this is a traditional girl acting in a traditional way. The second composition Cart with Oxen is very similar with Ilya Repin’s Leo Tolstoy Ploughing. It is meant to show the Romanian’s attachment to land, its main mean of existence.
Poetry: The same theme of land as quintessence of the Romanian spirit comes across in the works of George Cosbuc (1866-1918). He is probably one of the most nationalistic poets of the time. This can be understood if we consider the fact that he was still living in a Romanian land found under the Austro-Hungarian occupation (Transylvania). He was one of many poets who led the charge for unification with what was called “the mother land”. I have selected the poem called We want land to illustrate the theme of land as a symbol of Romanian cultural identity. (Appendix 3)The voice of the poem can be any of the hundred of thousands of suppressed voices that were starting to question the foreigner’s right to rule them. Along the lines of the poem we also see another motif that identifies with the Romanian spirit: the Romanian commoner’s ability to suffer in silence and endure punishment only to explode later into violent revolt in search for social balance. This theme can be repeatedly seen throughout the country’s history. The final stanza of the poem is very strong in its message and it is viewed by the Romanians as the symbol of their fight for independence.
