OSA / Guide / RIP / 1956 / RFE/RL Background Reports : Subjects | Browse | Search

The text below might contain errors as it was reproduced by OCR software from the digitized originals,
also available as Scanned original in PDF.

BOX-FOLDER-REPORT: 52-1-184
TITLE:             The Power And The Truth -- A Political Play by Titus Popovici
BY:                Anneli Maier
DATE:              1973-4-4
COUNTRY:           Romania
ORIGINAL SUBJECT:  Rumania/5

--- Begin ---

RADIO FREE EUROPE Research

EAST EUROPE

This material was prepared of the use of the
editors and policy staff of Radio Free Europe

RUMANIA/5
4 April 1973

THE POWER AND THE TRUTH" -- A. POLITICAL PLAY BY TITUS POPOVICT

Summary: The analysis of this play and the extracts
translated from it are interesting because they
demonstrate the existence of new clichés in Rumanian literature,
drama, and films which, after the period of relative
liberalization, have come to replace the older patterns of
socialist realism. The play -- as well as the film on the
same subject preceding it -- is typical of a new kind of
pseudoprogressive literature which, without being able to
deny the more critical and more truthful representations of
Rumanian reality achieved during the 1960s, nevertheless
distills optimistic works out of it in which all conflicts
are eventually solved and good always triumphs over evil.
This new phenomenon in Rumanian literature did not go
unobserved by a few perspicacious young writers and critics
who disapprove of such a "perverse, insincere, profoundly
false artistic modality," which, according to what they
say, gives a "partial, and highly superficial image of
contemporary society."

xxx

Precisely one year after the release of the motion picture
entitled The Power and the Truth,, based on a scenario by the
writer Titus Popovici, [1] the theatrical review Teatru [2] has
published the text of the homonymous play Popovici has prepared
for the theater. To date, the play has already been staged by

-------------------

(1) See Rumanian Situation Report/10, Radio Free Europe Research
(EERA), 9 .March 1972, Item 2.

(2) No. 1, 1973.

[page 2]

the Cluj Hungarian Thaater, and it is in rehearsal at Bucharest´s
Bulandra Theater, where it is directed by Liviu Ciulei.

It is somewhat unusual for the screenplay of a film which
has had considerable public acclaim to be subsequently transformed
into a play, and critics expressed their doubt as to whether the
public would be interested in this reprise. The explanation for
this transposition can most probably be traced to the lack of
topical plays on the Rumanian stage in the. 1972-1973 season. The
most "daring" play of the season --Paul Everac's Un fluture pe
lampa (A Butterfly on the Lamp) --deals with the miseries and
humiliations endured by a Rumanian emigre in Prance. The most
profbund conflicts in present-day Rumanian society--if one is
to judge by the plays of the current theatrical season --are
those between the inhabitants of an apartment house, as presented
in Ion Baiesu's comedy Presul (The Doormat). Viewed in this
respect,Popovici's play is a positive achievement, but considered
independently, the play is another proof of the new clichés, a new
form of literary conformism which has been emerging in Rumania
during the past two years. What is meant by "new clichés"? 

With the setting in of the "cultural revolution" in July 1971,
the relative freedom of writers in dealing with topical problems
in Rumanian society and of viewing them critically has come to
an end. No basically "courageous" novel or play has appeared
since, and in poetry, Eugen Jebeleanu is a rara avis. However,
a return not only to the formal standards of socialist realism, but
also to outworn patterns of situation, character, and conflict
could not be revived, mainly because of the resistance of the
writers, and also because of apprehension about the public's
reaction to such a literary production.

Thus, new clichés had to replace the old ones. They are
based on many of the truths discovered and dealt with by the
literature of the liberal period, issues, that Here topical 10 years
ago, but which now seem outdated and concerned only with the
past. Moreover, whereas conflicts during the "liberal period"
could remain unsolved, or could even lead to a tragic ending,
it is now a rule that everything has to come to a happy, optimistic,
and utterly unequivocal ending. The new clichés, which in many
ways represent nothing more than a repetition on a higher scale of the
older, dogmatic formulas have already been given a theoretical

[page 3]

foundation by Dumitru Popescu, the chairman of the Council on
Socialist Culture and Education, [3]

An excerpt from the Titus Popovici play shows how these new
clichés operate. In what may be called a side aspect of the
dramatic conflict --the -peasant problem --the author created
the figure of the peasant Ion, who was sent to prison and
compulsory work, because he refused to pay his "quotas." According to
the old schemes of socialist realism, the conflict would be between
the poor peasant, who happily joined the collective farm following
the (enlightened tutelage of the party activists, and the base,
oppositional kulaks who are eventually "liquidated." Such a
literature can simply no longer be written at a time when a number
of writers (like Dumitru Eadu Popescu and Ion Lancranjan) have
already exposed the abuses committed during the forceful
collectivization of Rumanian agriculture.

According to the new clichés, injustice has been committed
in the past by people -- Communists --who did not have bad
intentions, but who were merely overzealous, used the wrong
tactics, people who eventually recanted and regretted these
methods. The person who has suffered from injustice is
eventually rehabilitated in this best of all possible worlds. The
peasant Ion is eventually elected --in the course of democratic
elections -- chairman of the collective farm of his village.
In order to be able to judge how unrealistic this sort of
literature is, the passage quoted above should be compared to the
extract from Paul Goma's second novel, The Door, which presents
striking similarities with the situation dealt with in Popovici 's
play. [4]

Stoian (the dogmatic party activist): Uncle Ion, our
party . . .and you are aware of this ... means well by
the people, . . . We are born in the sweat and sufferings
of our parents and forefathers....

-------------------

(3) See Anneli Maier, "Theatrical Meeting in Bucharest," Rumanian
Background Re port/1, RFER (EERA), 5 January 1973, and
Rumanian SR/7, RPER (EERA), 15 February 1973, Item 7.

(4) See Anneli Maier, "Paul Goma's Second Novel, "The Door/"
Rumanian BE/20, RFER (EERA), 8 December 1972.

[page 4]

Ion; Right you are, God bless you. . . .

Stoian: I know that this is no easy matter . .. Man parts
reluctantly with his old habits, even if he has had a hard
life, even if he his struggled hard....

Ion: It´s exactly as you say, and not otherwise.

Stoian; But things cannot go on like this in our country.
The world is progressing.

Ion: It is, .Lord love it, eyen too quickly.....

Stoian: The party comes and indicates to you, the working
peasants, the only path to follow: that of joint work, of
scientific work...

Ion: I won't sign up, comrade, I am the master on my
land and in my house.

-----

Stoian (holding out a cigarette to Ion. The peasant tears
the paper and stuffs the tobacco into a clay pipe): . .. Well,
uncle, one of us is not in his right senses . . .

Ion: I can't believe that...

Stoian: As it emerges from, our talk, you seem to
understand the advantages of the collective farm better than I.
I can see you have given the matter a lot of thought. ...

Ion: Man shouldn't die a fool

Stoian: You grasped the advantages quite clearly, and
still, you don't Bee your way through in this matter. How
does one approach chime with the other?

Ion: But, comrade, not all things chime with each other.
If so, one would die of boredom.

[page 5]

Stoian (turning abruptly to Duma --the democratic
Communist): And you? Why don't you say something?
Ion: Oh, Comrade Mihai [Duma] has been talking to me for
the last three weeks. Only, I'm a bit thick-headed....
(Seriously) I don't want to do it. That's all. I cannot
bear to be ordered about by, just anyone who comes along
(Getting up.) I don't think I am going to live long, and
I love freedom.. . . Let me be, with my poverty and my
little brains.... The collective farm must be set up --
I realize this is a commandment of our times. I am all for
it, only please let me stay away from it. . . . Look,
comrade, let's strike a bargain: I'll tell everybody I'm
going to sign up, and than half of the village will follow
in my footsteps. ... For, God knows why, I enjoy a lot of
prestige. . . . Perhaps because I am so pushy. . . . I'll
sign up, they'll all sign up, too, and then I'll cross off
my name. . ... I'll enlighten them all (their mother . . .)
.. . For they are all as stupid as a pack of donkeys and
don't want to think of the future (Racking his brains
desperately, and then blurting out the first quotation that
crosses his mind). "These have power to shut heaven, that
it rain not in the days of their prophecy." [5] ... Well,
is it all right with you?

Stoian (after a moment, sternly, emphatically): Therefore,
you don't trust the party! Therefore, in your opinion,
collectivization means depriving the people of their
freedom! According to your interpretation of the Apocalypse,
we, the communists, are using science to destroy crops and
force the people to surrender! 
Ion (scared): My dear comrade. . . .
Stoian: Enough of that! There's nothing else to talk about!
Here is a slip of paper! Write down on it your opinions
about our party; we shall talk it all over some other time!
(Turning to Duma.) Now it's clear to me why things went wrong
here! (To Ion) Haven't you been included on the list of
kulaks?

-------------------

(5) Revelation, xi, 6.

[page 6]

Ion; I have, . . . Course I have. ... I was the flower .
of the kulaks. Owning one hectare of land... . 

The limited nature of the "new clichés" is equally visible
in the main plot and characters, in spite of the fact that, in
many respects, Popovici's privileged position on the Rumanian
literary scene (reflected by his full membership in the RCP
Central Committee) enables him "to go further" on his criticism
of postwar Rumanian society than other dramatic writers can do at
present. It should also not be forgotten that being "courageous"
in literature does not mean going farther than what has already
been criticized in the party documents or discussed in the party
press.

The play centers on three main characters: Stoian, the
county party secretary during the proletcult era, a character
obviously designed to represent the late party leader
GheorghiuDej; Duma, the county party secretary of the new era, made to
resemble Ceausescu by using many of his verbal idiosyncrasies;
and Petrescu, the scientist, the victim of the injustices committed
during the Stalinist era., There are also some minor figures:
Manu, the secretary of the county council; Olariu, a colonel in
the Ministry of the Interior; and Andrei. All these men had
fought for communism in prewar times, when the communist party
was illegal. They were close friends at that time, together
performing acts of heroism, and spending years together in
prison. During that period, Stoian was the bravest and best
informed Communist of them all, and it was he who converted and
educated Duma, Manu, and the others. He and Petrescu were close
friends. Once the Communists came to power, it appeared natural
to everybody that Stoian should become the couiity party chief
and the others be subordinated to him. When, however, he
embarks on a gigantic construction project ---the building of a
dike-- to be carried out in two years, Petrescu opposes him and
tries to prove that it simply isn't feasible to accomplish such
a project in so short a period of time. Whereas Stoian is sure
of being able to do anything he wants ("We, the Communists, are
the greatest adventurers in history"), Petrescu holds that
"socialism means science, rigorous calculation, not words," and he
declares that he is not willing "to give in to people who aren't
even capable; of extracting a square root."

[page 7]

Although he tries to prove to these people that mathematics
do not have a class character, he is thrown out from the communist
party for reading Western books and reviews on mathematics.
Moreover, Stoian hands him over to Olariu, the security chief,
who submits him to an interrogation and, it is implied, to
physical torture, in order to extract from him an avowal of his
guilt. It is interesting to read the text of the interrogation
scene between Petrescu, the scientist, on the one side, and
Olariu, the security chief, and Andrei, his tool, on the other.
The first cliche: the victim is being interrogated by a friend
of his. (We have had this in a novel where many of these new
clichés are already evident, i.e., in Alexandru Ivasiuc 's novel
The Birds.[6] Secondly, the text is full of slogans and the
author's concern is obvious in trying to make the investigator
seem buman, too, or at least to make capitalist society culpable
for his inhuman behavior.

Petrescu; Look here, Andrei, shall we stop kidding? . . .
Tell, me, how are you faring? Do you still go fishing?
Did you ever get married? Do you have children? I'm still
a bachelor, ...

Andrei (coolly, officially): When and under what
circumrstances did you contact the imperialist espionage den?

Petrescu (laughing): I started this job at the age of eight.
With the Brothers Grimm. Germans.

Andrei: Mister Petrescu, may I draw you attention to the
fact that your frank, co-operative attitude toward the
investigating authorities will be responsible . ..

Petrescu: For what, Andrei?

Andrei (coolly): . For the attitude of the investigating
authorities toward you. Let me resume: "For what purpose,
and under what conditions did you obtain various materials
from an imperialist country?"

Petrescu: They are scientific, technical books and
magazines. 

-------------------------------------

(6) See Anneli Maier, "A Political Novel; vThe Birds,' by Alexandru
Ivasiuc," Rumanian BR/12, RFER (EEPA), 5 April 1971.


[page 8]

Andrei: Really? Inoffensive stuff? In whose service are
science and technology in the capitalist countries?
(Petrescu remains silent,) Here is an excerpt from one
of your articles, published in 1949: "The imperialist
circles are increasingly using science and technology to serve
their aggressive goals.". I reiterate my question: in
whose service are science and technology in the capitalist
countries? (Petrescu still maintains silence.) All right.. . .
Are the aggressive imperialist circles interested in having
socialism properly built in our country?.

Petrescu: No, they are not.

Andrei: Then for what purpose do they send your their
vile publications? (Petrescu remains silent.) Let me tell
you why: in order to disarm you, to induce you to lose
faith in the creative powers of our people.. . . (Sadly)
And, apparently, they have achieved their goal.
Petrescu (jumping up, warmly): Andrei, my son...
Andrei (coldly): Lieutenant, sir!

Petrescu:(also becoming cool and aloof): Lieutenant, sir!
You allowed yourself to be caught in the trap of formal
logic, of childish syllogism. There is no
connection absolutely none --between the fact that the aggressive
circles are using science and technology for their own
aggressive ends and the objective nature of any technical
discovery, irrespective of the meridian at which it has
been made. ...

Andrei: No connection, beyond the fact that you sabotaged
the opening of the site with might and main (He rings the
bell. Enter two shadows). Ponder on this, connection
(Enter Qlariu; he is wearing a colonel's uniform).

Olariu (addressing Andrei, as if Petrescu were a mere object):
Is he collaborating?

Petrescu (springing up. The shadows promptly move to either
side of him): I protest in the name of socialist legality! I
reject these provocative charges! And, from now on, I refuse
to say anything more!

[page 9]

(Light--action in the present)

Petrescu (alone in his armchair): I could still describe the
humiliation and amazement. . . . Yes. . . . The amazement
was stronger and more distressing than the humiliation.....
to be thrashed by your people . . . but what's the point?
I forgot it. I forgot it, indeed.... I kept silent. But
not the same way as when I faced the Sigurenta! (The
prewar secret police --ed.) Then, in my silence, I sensed the
trustful and affectionate presence of my comrades....
Now, I was all alone.

Olariu (from the shadow): You were not alone....

(The action switches back to the past)

(Olariu enters the spotlighted area in which Petrescu is
sitting in an armchair. His right arm is completely
bandaged, the jacket of his uniform hanging over his
shoulders. He looks tired; he is unshaven, and has red,
ringed eyes.)

Olariu: Petre ....(Petrescu looks at him hollow-eyed)
Look at me.

Perescui Get out.
 
Olariu: That's not so easy. And what will you gain by it?
Shall I tell them to bring you some food? Would you like
a drink? I brought your pipe ... (He holds out a pipe
and a box of tobacco).

Petrescu (after a short hesitation, begins to smoke
greedily): Vasile, how could we, old comrades and friends,
come to this point?

Olariu: .Only you can answer that question. That is why I
came here --to help you to answer it like a Communist and
not like a narrow-minded intellectual who feels offended.
Well, enough of that! (As if making an incidental point),
I was away. I rounded up Baniciu's band in the mountains.
I ordered that the blockhead who . . . molested you be
kicked out of the security forces.... A stupid clerk
(Smiling on the wrong side of his mouth). Withyou, such

[page 10]

proceedings only produce the reverse of what is wanted. I
know you all right, I. read your file at the Siguranta....

Petrescu: Do you think this is the best comparison you
could make? And you, what kind of proceeding are you
planning to resort to?

Olariu: None. ... Petre, what does the party mean to you?

Petrescu (simply): You know what. Everything,

Olariu: That's not true. It does not mean everything, . . .
Mind you, this is not a reproach; it's just an explanation..
It's the only thing. I could say. You are in the party, and,
at the same time. ...

Petrescu; I'm no longer in it.

Olariu: ... and, at the same time, you're trying to look
at it from the outside. Coolly I tell you again, I'm
not reproaching you with anything, I'm simply stating a fact.
You'd have got a long way under capitalism, as well. Even
if you had lived in France or in America. Anywhere.

Petrescu: And what induces you to think that my supreme
ambition is to attain eminence? Why don't you try to
understand that my only ambition is to do something, something
real, sound, rational, necessary for my people.

Dlariu: The two things boil down to the same thing, I
and the people, I and the party, I and the revolution..
When I was five, I used to rummage in garbage cans, looking
for leavings. My father had died, my mother. . . . My first
boss was a homosexual, he wanted to. ... I slapped him in
the face and broke his eardrum. I was put in prison.
I dreamt of being released and of soaking my knife in his
blood. He was lucky, he used to carry a silver cigarette
case in his breast pocket, and the blade slid. They threw
me into jail again. Then, at a time when I could . . .
what could ,I? Turn thief or a murderer ... I met the
party (With bright eyes). It made a man of me... And,
from then on, I am ready to crush any one who would dare
to brush it even with a shadow, my party. Get it? The
party that had made a man of me. This is the difference.

[page 11]

Petrescu (very sadly): The Communist Party, Vasile, is a
power based on reason. On the understanding of the mechanism
of this world, which is of a ferocious complexity. . ..

Olariu: For you, perhaps. You have already told me:
you are a fanatic. It's true. And I'm proud of it. Here,
in this institution, where I am working, you'll meet the
dregs of the dustbin of humanity and history. I should
go crazy with your cheap, "rationalistic" humanitarianism and
blow out my brains. . . . No, Petre, things are far less
complicated. The social evil should be branded with a
red-hot iron.

 Petrescu (in a low voice): And do you think. I am the
garbage which should be burnt? 

Olariu: Objectively speaking, you behaved like an inveterate
enemy. And now you're suffering the consequences . . .
(Abruptly, pitilessly). Against those like you, one should
use the edge of the revolutionary sword! Against those who,
from the inside, under the shield of their past, are spreading
the poison of doubt. ...

Petrescu (smiling): Marx s favorite aphorism was . . .
de omnibus dubitandum.


Olariu: With the others, it's an easier matter. The
strongest will win. They are also aware of this. And they
are fighting openly in the name of their class, of their
ideals. Not behind the screen of our ideas! And let me
tell you something else besides .... so far as the
gangsters go, I'm all for ruthless liquidation, then I
feel a kind of . . .let's call it understanding ... a kind
of sports-like esprit-de-corps. . . . But you? You, a
double-dealer ...

Olariu makes Petrescu sign a paper acknowledging the
accusations leveled against him, and is sent to prison.. (In the movie,
he was condemned to death!) Duma, whom Stoian had sent to Bucharest
when he prepared Petrescu's expulsion from the party and his
subsequent arrest, 'decides to do everything possible to get Petrescu
rehabilitated, for he cannot be brought to believe in the latter's
guilt. As a result of Duma's efforts, Petrescu is released, his

[page 12]

prison term is converted into forced domicile [a sort, of internal
exile --ed.] and he is obliged to work on completion of the dike.
In the meantime, the work on the dike is not progressing, the
difficulties which Petrescu had predicted arise. Olaru, the
security man, tries to blame everything on the actually
nonexistent "saboteurs,11 whom he would even be ready to see
condemned to death "if political necessity demanded it." After
being, interrupted for a while, the work on the dike is eventually
successfully completed. Stoian, however, has been replaced by
Puma, and Manu and Olariu find it difficult to adjust to the
"democratic" procedures of the new political climate. People
like Manu find it difficult to "conform to the new line," "to
listen to everybody, answer everybody, accept being criticized
by. whosoever chooses to do so. ..." "Sure, we need democracy,"
Manu says, "but it should not turn into anarchy."

When Stoian and Duma meet, a few years later, Stoian
finally understands and regrets many of the "errors" he has
committed-, but he also finds explanations, and even excuses for
them, which the spectator is obviously meant to take for granted.
He admits that, after the 1944 take-over, the and the other
Communists behaved "as if we had been given power by general
consensus, as if everybody, except a handful of exploiters,
had acclaimed us." He also admits that he was not right in
thinking, as Duma puts it, that "truth is the private property
of a few people." Since, in the final act of the play, Stoian is
 presented as being not only willing to understand and to recant,
but also ill, it is obvious that the author is trying hard to
make the spectators feel sympathy and even understanding for
Stoian who, after all, is a Communist. On the other hand, he has
to prevent his other character, Duma, alias Ceausescu, from
lacking human credibility by making him own up that he, too,
has some faults: he admits that, since 1950, he has not had to
travel by streetcar and that his wife no longer queues up in front
of food stores....

In spite of its limitations which, as is evident, are typical
of a new set of clichés in Rumanian literature, drama, and motion
pictures, and which are obviously meant to be standards to be
followed by all, the play is more "daring" than the other plays
performed during this season. In the general literary context,
however, this pseudoprogressive sort of literature, drama, and
films is meant to spread and serve as an alibi for the absence

[page 13]

of really daring representations of present-day Rumanian society.
There have already appeared a number of novels (by Bujor
Nedelcovici, Virgil Duda, Romulus Guga) within the past year
which very well fit the new schema. But this phenomenon has
not, however, gone unobserved in Rumania, and a number of young writers
and critics, such as the Cluj novelist Vasile Salajan. and the
Bucharest critic Nicolae Manolescu, have recently risen up to
object.

In the course of an interview published in the Cluj weekly
Tribuna, [7] Salajan puts it as follows:
Concentrating prose and dramatic writing exclusively
on the dialectics of certain abusive practices --i.e.,
the topic of the "person who has suffered an injustice" --
as well as the exacerbation of this tendency to nunveil"
only those injustices which have been committed [in the
past] appears to me as a weakness which undermines these
literary productions from the very outset. This sort of
approach to the present-day world, such a perverse,
insincere, profoundly false artistic mode of procedure, is
nothing more than a method of blackmailing readers of good
will: it is just form of evasionsim.

In an article published in Romania Literara, [8] Manolescu
speaks about a "crisis of topical novels" in Rumania. Novels
dealing with postwar subjects are said to "lack social
observation;, concrete historical truth"; they are said to present "just
a partial, and highly superficial image of contemporary society.

Anneli Maier

----------------------------------------

(7) No. 3, 18 January 1973.

(8) No. 6, 8 February 1973.

  OSA / Guide / RIP / 1956 / RFE/RL Background Reports : Subjects | Browse | Search