| 1. |
- Bagiu, Lucian, et al.
(författare)
-
Diferite "voci" în "Meșterul Manole" de Lucian Blaga
- 2015
-
Ingår i: Discourse as a Form of Multiculturalism in Literature and Communication : Literature - Literature. - 9786068624211 ; , s. 1651-1658
-
Konferensbidrag (refereegranskat)abstract
- There are several characters with a brief appearance in the history of the drama, thus having an apparent minor significance in designing the play. They seem to be mere “working tools” for the playwright. However when relating them to the major issues of the literary product and if integrating them in a larger vision of the whole creation of the author their significance and role can be outlined in a more adequate manner. The Herald may stand for the impossibility of the common man to understand the drama of the artist, for the incapacity of a mediocre person to assimilate the aspirations of the genius. The Second Carter is a good opportunity to express the middle-ages relations between the Orthodoxy of the Romanians and the Lutheranism of the Saxons in Transylvania, the Protestantism and the whole religious Reform having been rejected naturally by the Romanian people. The Third Carter is the pretext to express in an artistic manner a historical reality, i.e. the major role Târgovişte played as a spiritual focal point for the Romanian middle-ages Orthodoxy, but also as a centre for the religious printings in Romanian or Slavonic languages. Also one can distinguish the suggestion of a light irony on the behalf of the author with regards to the human prosaic hypostasis of the Romanian Orthodox priests when associating their two fundamental habits, anointing the priests and taking care of their own housekeeping. The Voivode is an image of a person with a subtle, diplomatic intelligence that leaves room for a waggish wit. He is fully aware of his condition as patron of church building. He hesitates between two decisions he should make concerning Manole the Craftsman: either to highly praise the artist, the creator or to sentence to death the human murderer. Whichever decision he would make, he knows very well his prerogative as a ruler is absolute and supreme, the middle-ages autocracy allowing him anything. Having a refined spirit, the Voivode understands from the very beginning both the superlative features of the creation and the sacrifice of the creator. His attitude seems to be benevolent, conciliatory, as he is very satisfied with the “gift” of the Masons – in his view the church belongs both to the ruler and to God. It becomes obvious the Voivode urges Manole to enjoy the “fruit of his endeavor and of his hands”. He forgives Manole, having been convinced that at the Last Judgment the church Manole has built would exculpate him of all sins. After Manole commits suicide the Voivode pays him the proper respect. The whole portrait configures the Voivode as an exceptional ambassador of his people, at a far distance from the bloody figure portrayed in some variants of the folk ballad, closer to the real historical character, the benefactor of the Argeş Monastery, Neagoe.
|
|
| 2. |
- Bagiu, Lucian, et al.
(författare)
-
"Fartate" and "Nefartate" in Lucian Blaga's Arca lui Noe
- 2016
-
Ingår i: Journal of Romanian Literary Studies. - 2248-3004. ; :8, s. 177-187
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- "Arca lui Noe" ("Noah’s Ark", 1944) is based on a folk tale influenced by Bogomilism. Brother and Unbrother stand for the antinomic duality of the absolute principle. Fellow and Unfellow are indestructibly united. Unbrother cannot be mastered and Brother would be an ontic sterility if his fellow absent. However the Bogomilic vision becomes complicated in Blaga's meaning. The greybeard Brother, the Patriarch is "the forefather of all ancestors" who comes "from here and from further away", that is the archetype monad. Yet, if Unbrother is the shadow of Brother, one has to conclude that he dates from the same beginnings, also "the forefather of all ancestors". Therefore, who and where might be their father? If not "in existence" anymore, then the mankind might have been left at the mercy of an amicable but eternal facing of the two brothers. The prototype of humanity looks like a waste, a spiritual mutant so the will of the Patriarch arises with a drastic determination. If the mankind created in the likeness of Brother bears more resemblance to Unbrother, then the Patriarch himself is about to find his own needlessness. Thus a new series of ontology is to be created in order to provide another chance to the ontic itself. Through a coincidentia oppositorum we can assert that in "Manole, the Craftsman" life is a receptacle for creation whereas in "Noah’s Ark" the creation is the sole receptacle for life. One could argue a Sophianic expectation (adapted by the philosopher Lucian Blaga from Spengler and Frobenius, the transcendent descending, revealing itself in a embodiment of the universe): the Ark itself rises as the supreme receptacle of Life, assigned by the absolute.
|
|
