Radio România Internațional

Tag: communist Romania

  • DISCO BTT

    DISCO BTT





    Disco
    BTT – Discos of Communist Romania is an exhibition that was staged for the
    first time a year ago in Bucharest with support from the Cultural-National Fund
    Administration (AFCN). The exhibition proved to be a great success with 5,000
    visitors on the premises of the Stirbei Palace, which was housing the event
    last autumn. The event got the AFCN award for good results in its attempt to
    preserve the immaterial cultural patrimony.


    The concept of the DISCO BTT exhibition belongs to
    film director Iulia Rugina, known for her productions, Breaking News, Love Building
    and Stuck on Christmas. Here she is
    at the microphone with more on this idea.


    I got the idea a couple
    of years ago while I was doing research for a fiction film. I am a film
    director and the film I was working on was about a guy who used to be a DJ back
    in the 80s. While doing my research I met Sorin Lupascu who was a DJ in
    communist Romania and I got really captivated by this idea of introducing
    people to a period that was quite unknown to many as palpable evidence is still
    scarce. Of course there were stories from this period but no one was able to
    put these stories together. So we thought we should be trying to take steps in
    this direction.


    DISCO
    BTT is an original artistic creation inspired from that period, which is taking
    the visitor through various unconventional spaces mounted in six rooms. No
    groups are formed and that enables visitors to stay and admire the exhibits as
    long as they want. Here is Iulia Rugina with details.


    We started the project
    as an original artistic creation. The exhibition is displayed in several rooms,
    each room presenting an aspect of that time. Visitors are thus introduced to
    the places where music was being played at a time when communist censorship was
    at its highest. People got access to music only by means of these DJ or music
    presenters as they were called back in the day. I am convinced those places
    were quite known to the older generations. I talked to a lot of people who saw
    those places first hand and gleaned stories about them. I also got posters,
    devices and even music from that time on tapes, records and cassette tapes. All
    these are on view in the exhibition, which makes for a rather sensorial
    experience.


    The
    success of the aforementioned project happened to exceed the organizers’
    expectations. Here is Iulia Rugina back at the microphone.


    I personally didn’t
    expect the exhibition to enjoy such a tremendous success in Bucharest last year
    but it did. The explanation was that we had been visited by a varied public
    consisting of those who were young at that time and saw these things first
    hand. They later brought their children or grandchildren along. We also had a
    good number of young visitors, mainly people interested in this cultural area
    who later introduced the exhibition to their older relatives. This exhibition
    is a very warm place, which brings a lot of emotion into visitors’ hearts,
    whether they lived through those times or not.


    Visiting
    hours are more or less as opening hours used to be for discotheques in the
    communist times. There are also many surprise elements, which visitors are
    invited to discover while taking a tour of the exhibition. Entrance is free of
    charge. Iulia Rugina told us what visitors are to discover this time:


    The exhibition almost fully recreates
    that atmosphere back then in Bucharest. The changes it suffered were due to the
    space, which is slightly different. But it is divided into six rooms, and each
    room is dedicated to one element from that period, with lots of music, photos,
    archive materials. What is very nice, and was quite spectacular about the first
    edition, is that it’s an exhibition that takes you in, because in one of the
    rooms people start dancing: they come as visitors and they end up as
    participants, exhibits even, because they get to dance in the last room of the
    exhibition, which is in fact a 1980s discotheque, recreated as they used to be
    back then. The opening will be accompanied by lots of music, we have as guests
    the disco team and Florin Lupascu, who is the one who also provided the
    consulting part for the exhibition. What I think is interesting about this
    project is the fact that it takes you back in time.


    The one who provided specialist advice for the
    exhibition was Sorin Lupascu, who used to be one of the best DJs back then. The
    stage design was signed by Andreea Popa, whose record includes some 20 feature
    films and collaborations with directors such as Claude Lelouche, Joel
    Schumacher, Cristi Puiu, Cristian Nemescu or Nae Caranfil. The light design
    concept is signed by Alin Popa. And, another piece of good news: the organizers
    want to bring the exhibition to as many cities across Romania as possible.


  • The Banat Action Group

    The Banat Action Group

    Romanian-born writer Herta Muller, who is a member of Romania’s ethnic German community, was granted the Nobel Prize in 2009, which put this community in the limelight in Romania, in particular the Banat Action Group (Aktionsgruppe Banat in German). This was a group of poets Herta Muller used to frequent when she was still living in Romania. Set up in Timisoara in 1972, it consisted of nine members: Rolf Bossert, Werner Kremm, Johann Lippet, Gerhard Ortinau, Anton Sterbling, Albert Bohn, Richard Wagner, Ernest Wichner and William Totok. The group was known for their eccentric literary output, which often clashed with the repressive communist regime of the day. William Totok recalls the Soviet invasion of Czechoslovakia of 1968 had a great impact on the members of the group, who were about 17 years old at the time:



    “The invasion came at a time when student movements were staging anti-authoritarian protests in the West. We believed it was possible to change the frozen socialist regime and make it more humane. This wasn’t only a propaganda slogan used by the politicians of the time, but a metaphor we all believed could be achieved in reality. For many people, 1968 was a decisive year. For us, this was the start of our literary activities. The 1970s, with their short-lived liberalisation, also had an impact on the ethnic German literature produced in Romania. 30 people made their debut in some of the publications issued by a number of high schools from Timisoara over two years. 10 of them continued to write for a long time afterwards. In 1972, most of these people had already gone to university. I met them in Timisoara, after finishing my military service. We were all trying to get published. The group was officially born in April 1972, at the headquarters of the Neue Banater Zeitung. After long discussions we signed a kind of protocol. The most prominent and the most active of us, whom we regarded as our ideologist and mentor, was Richard Wagner, who also got his first book published in 1973. The literature we wrote was fairly unambiguous. While we didn’t have any aesthetic or political programme, we agreed to come up with a kind of literature that was different from what had been written before, from proletarian literature. Our work was also different from the literature written by well-established ethnic German writers from Romania, trying instead to align ourselves to the trends in the Federal Republic of Germany, the German Democratic Republic, as well as Austria. It was a challenge for us, a group of young people not yet in our mid 20s and claiming to be Marxist and trying to write Marxist literature. It was also a challenge for the country’s political police, the Securitate, which had never been confronted with such a phenomenon before, that is with writers who described themselves as Marxists and leftists. This is why they didn’t know how to react. They were probably thinking that being Marxists, we were on their side.”



    The Securitate was, however, keeping a close eye on these young people. 1974 saw the first and last mention of the collective term “the Banat Action Group” in the fourth issue of the Neue Literatur magazine. Unshelved by the Securitate, the publication cemented the reputation of the nine writers as producers of “formalist, negativistic and double-meaning texts” William Totok explains:



    “This issue set in motion an entire repressive campaign which culminated with our arrest in 1975 and the dismantling of the group. We were considered subversive and more dangerous than we really were. After 1977, what was left of the Action Group became part of the official literary community in Timisoara. At this time, our activity was in fact 15 times more serious than what we’d done before. We got unbelievable texts published in newspapers, anthologies and books published until 1984 or 1985, when we were banned from publishing.”



    Arrested and placed under investigation by the Securitate in 1975, the group’s members were released shortly afterwards, with the exception of William Totok, who remained in prison for nine more months. In the meantime, the Banat Action group had been dismantled. Its members stayed in the country until the mid-1980s, when they emigrated to the Federal Republic of Germany, with the exception of Werner Kremm.

  • The Constantin Brancusi Year

    The personality of Romanian sculptor Constantin Brancusi will be celebrated all throughout 2016. The commemoration of 140 years since one of the greatest fine artists of all time was born is an opportunity for a wide range of cultural events to be staged, such as conferences, workshops, projects, which are run in order to celebrate and promote the perennial dimension of Brancusis work.



    The Romanian Cultural Institute in Bucharest has organised the opening press conference for the series of cultural events of the year staged as a tribute to Constantin Brancusi. Matei Stircea-Craciun is a researcher with the “Francisc J. Rainer Anthropology Institute. He gave us details about one of the most important world-level initiatives to restore the heritage of Constantin Brancusi.



    The activity of the Brancusi research centre in Targu Jiu began at a time when the advancement of knowledge as regards Brancusis work was on a different level. In 1995, two retrospective Brancusi exhibitions were staged, in Paris and Philadelphia, respectively. They are the most important such events so far, actually setting the standard regarding the knowledge of Brancusis work. In the Paris catalogue, curator Karen Wilkin writes that to this day, Brancusis work remains impenetrable to critical analysis, that no sources of inspiration could be traced for his work, nor could the origins of that work and the artists outlook be clearly mapped. That, in effect, was the acknowledgement of a failure, after decades of research into Brancusis work. Acknowledging this failure in no way affected the artists recognition or rating – quite the contrary. It only admitted to a flaw in the research methodology, or to a total absence of the methodology used in order to go deeper into the imaginary infrastructure of his work.“



    Three decades ago, the “Francisc J. Rainer Anthropology Institute based in Brancusis native town of Targu Jiu initiated a research project focusing on the special language of Brancusis work. The defining feature of this Romanian fine artist was the effort to free sculpture from the concept of the imitation of nature. Instead, Brancusi chose to express the essence of things and the vitality and spirituality of forms. With details on that, here is Matei Stircea Craciun.



    In 2005, the Brancusi archives were published, which enabled critics to clarify whether some of the words, phrases, sentences, impressions that they had been using because they had been attributed to Brancusi by some of his friends, truly belonged to Brancusi or not. The archives include transcripts of the artists studio notes, and provide crucial information on him. Id like to mention a related initiative of the ‘Francisc J. Rainer Anthropology Institute, which nearly three decades ago launched a research project focusing on languages and arts. All objects are containers of cultural information, provided you have the tools to identify and circumscribe the information the object contains. Works of art are particularly suitable for this kind of research, because they have no utilitarian limitations, because the cultural information they contain is at its highest, and therefore the chances to put together a well-structured methodology are higher.



    Fine artist Mihai Topescu is the initiator of a project designed to promote Brancusis works in Targu Jiu as well as to restore the image of the artist. Back in the days of socialist realism in Romania, Brancusi was dismissed as a representative of bourgeois formalism. However, in December 1956, Brancusis first solo exhibition in Europe was opened at the Bucharest Art Museum of the Republic. It was not until 1964 that communist Romania promoted Brancusi as a national genius. As a result, maintenance works could be initiated and conducted on the compound in Targu Jiu, which includes the Endless Column, the Table of Silence and the Gate of Kiss. Here is Mihai Topescu.



    I am not a photo artist, but I put together a project I have been thinking about for quite some time. It involves the making of roughly twenty photographic works of the Targu Jiu ensemble, black and white and full-colour. These are neither artistic photos, nor tourist photos. I will be working with three photo artists. I will curate the project, if you will. The aluminium-print photos, sized two by two meters, are aimed at promoting the ensemble in Targu Jiu. We do that through a number of photo exhibitions staged in the cities where Brancusi himself travelled, that is Budapest, Vienna, Munich, and Paris. At the initiative of several MEPs, the exhibition will also be mounted in Brussels. These photographs of the ensemble in Targu Jiu will be accompanied by photographs from personal collections, images from the restoration time or the time before the restoration. The photographic works will remain in the custody of the Romanian Cultural Institutes ‘Constantin Brancusi Research, Documentation and Promotion Centre, and they will be part of various exhibitions scheduled around the world.“



    Acknowledged as one of the most noteworthy sculptors at world level, Constantin Brancusi revealed the spiritual dimension of reality, impregnating the material world with the very essence of things.


    (Translated by E. Nasta)

  • Industry in Romania over 1965-1975

    Industry in Romania over 1965-1975


    The communist regime counted on industry as the main economic sector. However, a systematic investment policy was only possible starting with the second half of the 1960s. In all socialist countries, the political regimes tried to invest in industry in order to increase production and economic productivity. Romania was no exception, contracting loans from the international financial institutions like the IMF, focusing on the building of big iron and steel and chemical platforms. Maxim Berghianu was the president of the State Planning Committee, in charge of economic planning. In 2002, he gave an interview to Radio Romanias Centre of Oral History about the investment in industrial development over 1965-1975.



    Maxim Berghianu: “During this period, the allied steel aggregate works in Targoviste was built, the iron and steel platform in Calarasi was opened, the iron and steel works in Hunedoara was overhauled, two bigger roll mills were built, as well as some new furnaces in Hunedoara. A roll mill in Resita was planned to make train rails. We used to make train rails, but just a small range. If we could find train rails in the East, we got them from the East, if not, we got them from the West as we couldnt do without train rails. The wire industry developed in Campia Turzii, producing all kinds of wire, from aluminum and copper cables to all sorts of shaped wire. We exported a lot of such products. They were rare products of the iron and steel industry which not any country could afford to manufacture. Concurrently, plants in Otelul Rosu, Calan and Hunedoara developed, to say nothing of the giant works in Galati, which had to produce around 6-8 million tons of steel and specific steel products.



    The investment policy encountered great difficulties because of the bureaucratic state and the lack of experience. Generalized ideology and the submission system hindered the completion of projects, which could not become effective. Such an example was the Galati platform.



    Maxim Berghianu: “As I worked at the State Planning Committee, I realized that a huge gap was taking shape there. So, I took charge of the Galati works myself. I brought together all ministers who had some connection with the works, from the energy, metallurgy, machine building, building materials ministries. In Galati, there was a command center involving the contractor, equipment and material producers. A deputy prime minister would go there, analyze and establish jointly with them what had to be done until the next month. We established every goal and deadline. I appointed Chesa, deputy minister at the Metallurgy Ministry, an experienced man whom I knew from Hunedoara, I appointed him general manager of the Galati works. I told him he was in charge of the works and of the deadlines. He would give me a ring every day at 8 a.m. And that went on for 8 months.



    Maxim Berghianu also spoke about the organizational shortcomings with a major impact on investment in industry: “We made mistakes too, we were not perfect. We allowed the investment to break down. We were keen on making investment in as many industrial units as possible. That was a generalized disease, especially in chemistry, metallurgy, machine building, where a lot of money was going. The largest amount of funds would go to energy, metallurgy, machine building and chemistry. Nearly three quarters of the investment over 1965-1975 were predominantly made in those industries. The investment was not prepared beforehand. Although we had a five-year plan spaced out over the years and they could start designing the units and conducting research, they did nothing. And the money was wasted. When we realized that, we drew a line. There were stocks of equipment, many of which were imported and fell into disuse because the construction of the respective factory or plant was not completed and they could not be put into operation. So, that was an ineffective system particularly during the first five-year plan over 1966-1970. We established more severe rules for the next five-year plan, no longer allowing an investment to be made in a certain industry unless the units were completed. We provided funds for the completion and commissioning of a plant or factory.



    However, Maxim Berghianu believes that after the first decade, those in charge of industrial development acquired a certain experience: “One cant say that the whole Romanian industry was below world standards because otherwise, the French and the Americans would not have bought low-tech products, numerically controlled tools, to say nothing of chemicals or face mill cutters made by IMGB. The iron and steel industry was in the front ranks, so we succeeded in making such products. That was Ceausescus madness. He wanted our production to be comparable with that of the developed countries. But hardly over 1971-1975 did we manage to capitalize on our potential, increase the quality of products, which also allowed for a rise in the price of exported products.



    The policy of fostering the Romanian industry over 1965-1975 was an ambitious project. Unfortunately, the system flaws, fully manifest in the 1980s, as well as the oil crisis triggering the increase in energy prices revealed the weak points of the Romanian industry, which in the absence of a command management, collapsed to a great extent after 1990.

  • People for sale in communist Romania

    People for sale in communist Romania

    With an economy ruined by war, by payment of war reparations to the Soviet Union and by systematic plundering, communist Romania was struggling to ensure minimum living standards for its people. The Securitate, the communist political police that had also undertaken an economic role, showed unlimited resourcefulness in procuring hard currency. And one of the ways to make money for the state was to sell people, more specifically those people who wished to leave Romania, especially members of the Jewish and German minorities. But in the 1970s and 1980s, such payments became a prerequisite for leaving Romania, and even ethnic Romanians who wished to flee the country could be “bought” by their relatives abroad.



    Germina Nagat is a researcher with the National Council for Studying the Archives of the Securitate. She told us how people began being sold by the communist authorities of the time:



    ”One of the files, the Foreign Intelligence Service file no. 2871, reports an incident that I believe could be a starting point in our efforts to understand how it all began. In May 1958, the Romanian Securitate office in London reported to Bucharest that arrangements had been made for renting an airplane to carry 11 Landrace pigs, purchased through a British dealer called Henry Jakober, code name Kraus. He might be the central figure in initiating and broadening the operative arrangement, as it was called, through which the Securitate took hundreds of thousands of people out of the country, most of them belonging to the ethnic Jewish and German communities. Born in 1900 in Moravia, in the former Habsburg Empire and having emigrated to England in the 1930s, a successful businessman and familiar with Romania since before WW1, Jakober was, in 1958, the manager of Oil Cakes & Doyle Seeds based in London. He had strong business relations with the Agriculture Ministry, the Ministry of Commerce and many companies in the People’s Republic of Romania. He understood Romanian well and even spoke it a little. In his discussions with his partners in Bucharest, most of them under cover officers working for the Securitate, he voiced anti-royalist views and great admiration for the political developments in Romania. At first, Mr. Jakober undertook to provide Romania not only with livestock, but also with genetic material from Denmark, and in May 1958 a first purchase of Landrace pigs is made.”



    The transition from buying farm animals to buying people was swift, owing much to the resilience of the businessman and to the cash-hungry Securitate:



    “One year after the first successful transaction, in May 1959, a report by Directorate 1 mentions that the British MP John Platz tried to persuade the Romanian authorities to allow a Jewish family to leave the country. At first, Jakober, who claimed to be talking on behalf of the British MP, was told that it was not a matter for the Ministry of Commerce to deal with, but that the contacts of those in charge would be provided to him. In September 1959, the Romanian citizen Beri Bernard (Marcu) sent a memo to the Interior Ministry, requesting the release from prison of his father, sentenced to forced labour in 1954 for hard currency trafficking. In this memo, Mr. Bernard offers to pay damages of 10,000 US dollars to the Romanian state, and explains that the money originates from his relatives abroad and will be paid in exchange for the release from prison and a visa for Israel. Bernard’s request was granted, and this seems to be the first visa sold for money, with the approval of high-level officials. What is important, in my opinion, was that the money also covered the release from prison.”



    The business potential of the deal was much greater, and the regime in Bucharest had no intention of missing on such an opportunity. Germina Nagat:



    “After successfully completing other imports of swine, poultry, cattle and other commodities, in April 1960 the Securitate decides on the following course of action, following talks with Mr. Jakober in London: upon the arrival of the first shipment of cattle or sheep into the country, Mentzer Marcu, Beri’s father, would get an exit visa, since Jakober would not get a single cent until Mentzer had gone. Then Beri Marcu’s relatives would be allowed to go after the shipment of Corriedale sheep arrived, while Beri would be allowed to go after the shipment of Zebu cattle arrived. The documents we quoted capture the moment when the bargaining per head of person started in earnest, as between true business people. The trade negotiations for cattle, sheep and swine were carried out at first concurrently with those for releasing people, and were recorded in the same documents. After farm animals, which included a few Collie puppies, the Securitate asked Jakober for feed, for milking machines, for machinery for the drug industry, and others as well. In November 1961, the basic rule was that all deals were cash-on-delivery only. The Romanian authorities, interested in special products and equally in money, issued without hesitation approvals for emigration, required for, quote, ‘re-establishing normal relations with Jakober, also with a view to ensuring future deals.’”



    Even though at some point the Bucharest authorities sought a way out of that business, it was much too tempting and lucrative to let go. 11,000 Deutschmarks was the fee in the 1980s for an ethnic German with higher education to be allowed to travel to West Germany. It is difficult to estimate the total amounts this business had generated. For ethnic Saxons alone, figures speak of 250,000 to as many as 400,000 people whose freedom was bought.