Rez 1 - Doctorate ULBS - "Lucian Blaga" din Sibiu

The following five subchapers deal with the analysis of the essential featuresof the distinct periods of time which marked the formation of the 60s writers (thepost-war transition period, the period dominated by socialist realism, the liberalizationperiod after 1965, the re-dogmatisation period and, finally, the period after 1989),with an emphasis, in the case of the pre-1989 period, on the pressures coming fromcultural politics, on the party’s political fluctuations and on the openings that thewriters took advantage of. In the context of the ideological dogmatism of socialistrealism, of the inauthentic fiction which abdicated the elementary criteria of artisticcreation, young writers such as Fănuş Neagu, D.R. Popescu, Nicolae Velea, IonBăieşu, Teodor Mazilu, Vasile Rebreanu, Nicuţă Tănase, Radu Cosaşu managed toescape the conformism which dominated the dawn of the 1960s and, giving up clichésand festivism, silently brought forward real social and moral issues, enlarging the areaof realism through a discourse founded on myth and symbol, through rediscoveringthe individual’s inner self, through new narrative forms, satire and humour.The prose fiction at the beginning of the 1960s represents the preamble to amuch more important movement that occurred in Romanian literature after 1964. Theconcessions and openings initiated by Gheorghiu-Dej that year also characterized thefirst years of Ceausescu’s leadership, elected as prime-secretary of the CommunistParty in July 1965. After the 9 th Congress of the Party in July 1965, the generalatmosphere was one of political, ideological and economic opening and relaxation.During this period, liberalization is to be felt in the literary area as well. NicolaeCeauşescu’s speech at the 9 th Congress of the Communist Party outlined a newattitude of the party towards literature. Art creators were encouraged to preservesocialist themes, to serve “the grand goal of forging a happier life for the people”, butat the same time it stressed the importance of “the diversity of styles” and of “theartists’ individuality”, which contradicted the uniformity of the socialist realismtheses. The rehabilitation of some key-figures of the inter-war literature, the enlargingof the theatrical and cinematographic repertoire, the explosion of translations fromworld literature, the multitude of literary and cultural reviews which outlined theaesthetic element (Gazeta literară, România literară, Luceafărul, Steaua, Tribuna,Iaşul literar, Cronica, Viaţa românească, Ramuri, Secolul 20, Flacăra), all fuelled thewriters’ hopes and courage.In the second half of the 1960s, along with writers who had initiated thedesideologization of literature and who were now perfecting their techniques, new7