The Early
Synthesis between Tradition and Modernity.
The Model
from
Carmen Cornelia Balan
Unlike
the central areas of capitalism development, where the traditional culture has
been sacrificed on the altar of industrial society and the forms of balancing
its dehumanising tendencies remained to be elaborated by the mass and the elite
culture, at “the border of industrial society”, the traditional culture
resisted better. Even more, it has been supported by the progressive
intellectuals of the time to create on original synthesis with the cultural
innovation, with the modernisation specific to the industrial era.
We
catches the semnificant case of this synthesis – the early cultural organic
synthesis which was established in its most evaluate form in
The
early original synthesis established in
Under
the powerful political and economical pressure, the area of
This
model of early organic synthesis between tradition and modernity has at its
basis the absolute opening of the Banat people to technique innovation, to the
achievements of the civilisation and the large culture as well as the presence
of scholars capable of stimulating and
developing it, by adding a certain type of cultivated creation: the patriotic
song, the militant theatre or the culture of Romanians from beyond the borders
of empire.
As
the famous ethnographer Elena Secosan demonstrates in her works the Banat “has always known how to discern and give an
answer to the great questions, accepting what was to be accepted, rejecting
what was to be rejected and always remaining itself” (Secosan E, 1982, mss).
The
forms of participating at the most
advanced culture of our time have represented
here – only apparently paradoxically – conditions of rediscovering own
values and their consideration from this perspective organic structures are
pointed out as result of joining tradition with modernity – peasant journals,
peasant writers, peasant theatre, fanfares, chorus – as viable and lasting
signs of combination between tradition and modernity. It is thus proved that a
tradition that cannot be practised because of the changing of the objective
conditions that had created it, cannot manifest itself anymore but under the
conditions of a high level of individuals.
Thus
formulated the problem of understanding
the place and the role of
For
social sciences, this reality is not only paradoxical but a real “theoretic scandal”,
it is as if a group of phenomena made exception
from a law that is well-known and long accepted and that presses the theory and the ultimate
generalisations, compelling to a breaking of the previous frames of analysis to
the creation of a new paradigm of thinking over the evolution of cultures in
the relation to the technique progress.
Selective bibliography
BADESCU,
Ilie. 1988. Timp si cultura.Trei teme de
antropologie istorica, Bucuresti, Ed.Stiintifica si Enciclopedica.
BLAGA,
Lucian. 1996. Trilogia valorilor, III.,
Arta si valoare, Bucuresti, Ed.Humanitas.
DRAGAN,
Ioan. 1992. Modernizare si dezvoltare. O
perspectiva culturologica. Culegere de texte, Bucuresti.
HOBSBAWM, Eric; RANGER, Terence(coord). 1992. The Invention of Tradition, Cambridge Univ. Press Canto Edition.
MUYNH, Cao Tri. 1984. Approche et strategies pour un devéloppement endogene, Paris,
UNESCO.
OALLDE,
Petru. 1983. Lupta pentru limba
romaneasca in Banat, Timisoara,
Ed.Facla.
RADU
Nicolae, FURTUNA Carmen, JELEA-VANCEA Gabriela, BALAN Carmen Cornelia. 1996, Prefaceri socio-umane in Romania secolului
XX. De la comunitatea traditionala la societatea postcomunista, Bucuresti,
Editura Fundatiei “Romania de maine”
TOURAINE, Alain. 1988. La modernité et les specificités
culturalles, in Revue internationale des sciences sociales, nov.1988.