Bulletin of the Transilvania University of Bra şov Series IV: Philology and Cultural Studies • Vol. 4 (53) No.1 - 2011 JEWISH-ROMANIAN WRITERS: A CONVERGING OR A PARALLEL CANON? Romulus BUCUR 1 Abstract: Starting from the discussions around the notion of canon in Romanian culture, especially since the translation of Harold Bloom’s The Western Canon, the present paper examines the canonical status of a particular group of writers, that is, those who belong simultaneously to Romanian literature, and to the Romanian-speaking Jewish minority. It reviews the cases of two writers, Mihail Sebastian and N. Steinhardt, both from the point of view of their self-image, and of the reception of their work. Keywords: canon, Jewish, inherited vs. acquired identity. revived and firmly stated in (Bloom, 1998), How do Jewish / minority writers situate and refined, within the field of Romanian (themselves) towards the literature of the literary theory, by Mircea Martin (Martin, majority? There are a series of approaches 1997-1998), (Martin, 2000a), (Martin, of the issue, from various points of view: 2000b), (Martin, 2000c), (Martin, 2000d). (Călinescu, 1983: 963-964, 791, 794, 796, Considering literature “in and for itself, and, especially, 973-976), (Crohm ălniceanu, beside any considerations foreign to its 2001), (Morar, 2006), the writers discussed intimate nature and to literary life”1 (Martin, being Ronetti-Roman, Felix Aderca, Mihail 2000b), and canonization taking place Sebastian, Max Blecher, I. Peltz, Ury “exclusively within the literary field”, a Benador, Ion C ălug ăru, H. Bonciu, Tristan decisive part is played by literary critics, but Tzara, B. Fundoianu, Ilarie Voronca, also by “the writers, themselves, through Gherasim Luca and Norman Manea, a their publicly asserted preferences and special issue of the Vatra review etc.; it does affinities” (Martin, 2000b). not result a definite position of these writers We shall discuss two cases, symptomatic with regard to the canon of Romanian through the fact that, without trying to hide literature: some are, rightfully, considered as their ethnic origin, the respective authors marginal, others are validated individually, explicitly set their references to Romanian others are claimed also by the canon of the culture, aiming at the canon of Romanian avant-garde, by that of French literature, by literature: Mihail Sebastian and N. a transnational canon of the diaspora Jewish Steinhardt. Which arises the question of literature. the defining criterion of the Jewish- It must be said that, by canon , we Romanian / Romanian-Jewish writer: is it understand the esthetic canon, such as the religious one, the linguistic one, that of undertaking certain cultural, in a broad 1 Transilvania University, Bra şov, Romania. 44 Bulletin of the Transilvania University of Bra şov. Series IV • Vol. 4 (53) No.1 - 2011 sense, values, that of (self-) identification identity, writing two books about it, with a certain image? (Steinhardt & Neuman, 1935), and There is a certain ambiguity in the (Steinhardt & Neuman, 1937), after his canonical situation of our two writers — religious conversion seems to try to that between the esthetic / critical canon, conceal it. and the school / academic one, which is In the case of Sebastian, his position in “only retrospective ”, and “open to the inter-war literature isn’t very clear — heteronomic aspects of culture” (Martin, one cannot speak of obvious denial of his 2000b); it remains to be seen to what value (the possible exception, De dou ă mii extent the interest in Mihail Sebastian’s de ani [For Two Thousand Years] caused and N. Steinhardt’s works is a genuine something very close to a character one, or can be tied to formerly assassination, but all was due to the unpublished, or out of print (and taboo) author’s Jewish identity), but a discreet works (Mihail Sebastian), or formerly marginalization can always be invoked. taboo themes (N. Steinhardt). It is certain, The beginning might be considered the though, that these works, published in the famous, in Romanian literature, G. nineties, shed a new light on their work as Călinescu’s, Istoria literaturii române de a whole, asking for a re-evaluation. la origini pân ă în prezent , where one can As to what ‘region’ of the canon do our find judgments like “Artistic talent as a authors belong, we might mention the fiction writer seems to be missing, division between a corpus of “canonical though”, or “One can feel the lack of literary texts”, and one of “afferent critical imagination” (Călinescu, 1983: 963), a comments” (Martin, 2000a), that is, a trend continued by the exegesis — “their creative canon, and a critical and [of Sebastian’s generation, R. B.] books theoretical one, both being “the faces of have (with a few exceptions) a the same esthetic canon, whose complex signification pertaining moreover to unity shouldn’t be ever lost from view” attitude, to a mentality different from the (Martin, 2000b). traditional one, than to esthetic As regards the canonical situation of the achievement” (Gr ăsoiu, 1986: 155), while two writers: Sebastian’s target is the his fiction, “no doubt interesting, creative canon, without neglecting the impressive through the pathos of the search critical one (through his reviews, essays, for his own identity”, does not succeed in cultural journalism), while the bulk of “achieving the level of the great novel of Steinhardt’s work consists of literary the inter-war period” (Gr ăsoiu, 1986: 155). criticism, and cultural and religious essays The situation seems to have slowly and sermons. At no point was there any changed, to this contributing the reprinting attempt to situate them in the canon as of his long-silenced novel De dou ă mii de Jews — Sebastian’s value as a writer is ani [For Two Thousand Years], generally denied exactly because of his ethnic origin, together with Cum am devenit huligan and, when he explicitly approaches the [How I Became a Hooligan], the pressbook theme of Judaism, he is violently attacked of the scandal caused by the books, by both sides, xenophobic Romanians together with the author’s responses, and considering him an alien trying to infiltrate especially the revelation of his Diary , in the healthy body of the Romanian nation published in 1996; also, the anniversary / culture, while Jews simply labeled him as moment in 2007 seems to have added to a renegade; Steinhardt, after having tried, the reevaluation: new monographs, press- in his youth, to undertake his Jewish inquiries, articles, conferences etc. R. BUCUR: Jewish-Romanian Writers 45 There is, nonetheless, an exception: His canonic status, already good, has (Petreu, 2009), (Petreu, 2010), a book been enhanced by a recent book, originally which tried to construct the image of an a PhD thesis, (Ardeleanu, 2009), which author totally indebted to his master, Nae examines thoroughly both his biography Ionescu, and thus to the interwar far right. and his work. In the author’s opinion, we have a It was formulated the hypothesis of “a “moderate far right extremist” Petreu, certain, problematic too, Jewish (micro) 2009: 126-127); although conscious of the specific in Romanian literature” aberrant term, she insists in using it (Cistelecan, 2000: 3). Developing it, in the (Petreu, 2009: 127). It is also worth same issue of the Vatra review, Leon mentioning that the book generated ample Volovici, referring to Ion Vinea’s inquiry reactions, mostly negative, and which may published in 1935, in Facla , quotes I. constitute in themselves another book. Peltz, who considers himself “a Romanian The volume Mihail Sebastian . Dilemele writer — just a Romanian writer”, and who identit ăţ ii [Mihail Sebastian. The does not hide his “Jewish origin. But this is Dilemmas Of Identity], although published something totally different” (Volovici, with a great delay after the international 2000: 14), or Ury Benador who, just like conference whose proceedings it publishes Sebastian, is preoccupied by “the intimate (Finkenthal, 2011), can also be viewed as fusion of the Romanian element with the an instance of the consolidating of Mihail Jewish one” (Volovici, 2000: 15); an Sebastian’s canonic status, as well as the interesting nuance is brought by Al. Robot: discovery of a few previously unpublished “A Jew become writer brings along too, in poems by him (Dinu, 2011), (Cernat, a greater or smaller quantity, an ancestral 2011); to the same conclusion lead a series contribution, but he can also represent, of papers recently published by Ion Vartic with dignity, the specific of the country to – (Vartic, 2011a), (Vartic, 2011b), (Vartic, whose art takes part, and in whose 2011c), (Vartic, 2011d). language he expresses himself” (Volovici, Steinhardt’s position was somehow 2000: 15). similar — without speaking about In the case of the authors we are writing marginalization (except, perhaps, by the about, their option is clear too; there is a authorities), he was known as an honorable rather doubtful reference to knowing critic and essayist, and, by a few personally each other: in the Resolution for connoisseurs, an as atypical Orthodox Closing file # 9802 , Steinhardt is monk; the change of image came with the characterized as “a close co-worker of a posthumous publication, in 1991, of his series of writers (such as Mihail Sebastian, prison diary, Jurnalul fericirii [The Diary N. D. Cocea, G. C ălinescu, Al. Rosetti) of Happiness], followed by the reprinting who were appreciative of his writings” of his previous books, by the publishing of (Cosmineanu & Moldovan, 2005: 123). his sermons and religious essays, by two Although hard to prove, they were small monographs, (Ardeleanu, 2000), and frequenting the same circles, and had, (Mure şan, 2006), and by a lot of articles in through family / affective ties, affinities for the literary reviews, among which a the same places: “I’d like to know, for dissonant voice, that of Alexandru Sever instance, what anti-Semitic law could (Sever, 1997), who denies, on a moderate annihilate in my being the irrevocable fact though firm, sometimes ironical tone, the of having been born near the Danube and author’s moral right to religious of loving this land” (Sebastian, 2003, 230), conversion.