Abstract: This text deals with the manners in which Romanian and Polish politicians and writers imagined their countries in relation to the West in two important moments of the nineteenth century: the political events of the 1848 and the political radicalism in the context of mass society of the 1890s. These moments are known as Romanticism and, respectively, Neo-Romanticism due mainly to being contemporary with the homonymous art trends.
The study shows that the mentioned actors employed arguments from the language of art to support their political projects. Consequently, they employed aestheticism as a dependent category of art (e.g. art for the artʼs sake) in the attempt to describe the status of their country at the given time. Aware that they were coming from a geographic periphery, they tried to represent, define, and negotiate this quality of their countries, sometimes with surprising outcomes.
Key words: (Neo-)Romanticism, Fin-de-Siècle, Central and Eastern Europe, Nineteenth Century, Center-periphery dichotomy
‘On the contrary, some others think that it is strategic and patriotic to locate ourselves more towards the West. “You are not in the place you are located, but rather in the place you aspire to be located” ʼ (Pleșu 2000, 9) (1)
These words belong to a public intellectual who commented in a pamphlet about the conflicting regional identities separating West from the East in contemporary Romania. Indeed, looking back to the history of the Romanian provinces, many local intellectuals and politicians suggest an incompatibility existing between the administrative and cultural legacy of one part of the country (e.g. northern-western) if compared to the other (e.g. southern-eastern) (Spiridon 2006, 382). This is due to the latterʼs various degrees of connection with the most powerful empires of the region, The Ottoman, The Habsburg and The Russian Empire.
In other words, if for some being in the Balkans via a common past with the Ottoman Empire may mean, yet another type of modernity crowned by aestheticism presented under the form of exoticism (Getka-Kenig 2014, 240), to others, being in Central Europe means the membership or, at least, the aspiration to belong to Western Europe. In short, to these, Occident is seen as the embodiment of political freedom and technological advance. This state of mind triggered a re-visitation of older identities, of which the most lasting has been the one of ‘Central Europeʼ. It came back to the forefront of the public discourse in the 1980s, focusing particularly on the difference existing between the countries further East, and those located between the East and the West (e.g. ‘the bridgeʼ that connects the two worlds). This discourse was intelligently coined by Bakić-Hayden as Nesting Orientalism. According to this theory, we may talk of a “cascading orientalism”, according to which the countries located more to the West, in geographic terms, looked down on those located on their Eastern side, and, in turn, the same could be applied to these countries in relation to their even ‘more Easternʼ neighbours, etc. (Bakić-Hayden 1995, 922, 924). To put it differently is to say that, for those geographically located in Central Europe, it was vital to be differentiated from ‘the Eastʼ. This was a kind of compensation for the fact that they could not be perceived as ‘Westernʼ straight away.
To conclude this short discussion we may comment that we encounter here a double frustration, one of those communities and cultures that aspire to the West, however, they are not perceived as being in the West, at least not yet… and the one of those communities and cultures that consider themselves excluded by those who are their geographic neighbours. Poland is a good example of the first case, whereas Romania illustrates the second instance.
It has become clear by now that the debates described above are not fuelled by geographic arguments of location, but rather by mental ones. Then, invoking again the words of the motto, it is important to state that we may identify two features specific to the entire region: the aspiration (Brzostek 2015, 27) and the sense of ‘unbelongingʼ to the place that the location on the map shows. These perceptions and attitudes governed the entire modern history of the two countries, particularly the local elitesʼ approach towards the strategies of democratizing and developing their societies.
Furthermore, the nineteenth century can be considered the time when these two tendencies proved to be the most conspicuous. This was partly due to the political projects that started to take shape at the time. Romania was established as modern state by the mid of the century. Poland in turn represented an anomaly against the general European trend that converged towards the concept of the national state; its compounding territories were split between the powerful neighbouring Empires of Austria, Russia, and Prussia, yet, the society held a strong sense of national beloging to the imagined community (Anderson 2006, 9, 25), meaning to Poland. Nonetheless, the feelings of aspiration and of ‘unbelongingʼ were stirred by the intensification of the West-East exchanges, as illustrated by the travellings of the local elites to the European metropolises of the time. It was with these occasions that the Central and Eastern European intellectuals and politicians started to conceive their countriesʼ identity in a new way, mostly related to the center-periphery dichotomy. The major breakthrough in this respect was represented by the so-called age of the revolutions, more precisely in 1848, when, amid the democratic enthusiasm trigerred by the official contestation of the autocratic regimes of Europe (e.g. including the old imperial entities), the radicalized Eastern intelligentsia travelled to ‘Westʼ, partly due to political reasons (e.g. persecutions of the Conservative establishment). In the exile, they would learn to compare their young states/cultures with the mainstream ‘Westernʼ one, and, more importantly, they would start defining their countries in terms of the contributions that they brought to a common European culture. Simply put it, the revolutionaries of the 1848 negotiated the status of their countries, and, subsequently, tried to remove the label of periphery that was associated to the region since the Enlightenment. As Said aptly demonstrated, Enlightenment was the age when the Western travellers discovered the ‘Eastʼ as part of an active process. Influenced as they were by the spirit of time, hence not escaping their mental maps and philosophical categories, they imposed their ideas of a perfect society on the visited places (Said 2003, 11).
The present text will analyze in an interdisciplinary way, by mainly employing historical and literary sources, this episode of political Romanticism, more precisely the way Central and Eastern European intellectuals and politicians defined periphery in relation to the center, that is the West. Afterwards, the study will investigate how Romanticism was revisited after half of century.
The last decades of the nineteenth century are officially known as neo-Romanticism mainly because the political and artistic expression was significantly inspired from the previous trend. In the region under focus in this paper, neo-Romanticism meant the elaboration of political programmes and strategies that were coated in the themes, images, and sensitivity of the Romantics (e.g. cult for the heroes, aestheticism, re-visitation of national myths).
Given these external features, the present paper will ascribe a second meaning to the mentioned epoch, namely the one associated to the technological revolution that brought for a romantic view of the world according to which the individual could, again, defeat the forces of nature. Indeed, the impressive scientific progresses such as those in transport and communication, in medicine, overall speaking, in peopleʼs living standards, gave a new impetus to the programmes of reforming society. Nevertheless, the modernization of society as expressed by the extension of the right to vote called on new forms of mass movements of which radicalism was the most prominent. Consequently, via the tabloid press as well as cyclical economic crises, new forms of intolerance and ethnic hatred came to the forefront.
As we shall see further, many a times, intellectuals and artists who were supporters of these views wrapped their messages in Romantic views and themes. In other words, they would lead what Pieter Judson called “culture wars”. In these “wars”, some communities were considered superior if compared to the others (Judson 2016, 269-70). Differently expressed it: the Romantically inspired intellectuals peripheralized some communities to the detriment of the others.
While the people of the 1848 tried to make a cultural center out of their countries, their peers of the mass society attempted to create islands (e.g. peripheries) within the same society. In 1848, the local elite wanted their countries to be seen not as a periphery, but rather equal to the ‘Westʼ, since they wished to emulate the ‘Westʼ. At the end of the nineteenth century however, an important part of the local elite would defy the ‘Westʼ, and thus consider their societies on a par with the ‘Westʼ; their countries, better said, their ethnic groups, represented centers in their own right, as these were superior to the ‘Westʼ. Naturally, it could be said that these also led to a peripheralization of their countries in relation to the universal ideals of equality, freedom of expression, individualism as promoted half of century earlier by the 1848 people.
Therefore, let us come closer now to the two mentioned discourses, and briefly discuss them comparatively in the concluding section.
In the first half of the nineteenth century, the ideological manifestations of 1789 did not find fertile soil in Central and Eastern Europe, provided that these societies had variations in the social stratification if compared to France. The urban stratum was less developed while the agrarian world constituted the majority in terms of number of population and occupational outlook. Yet, the democratic ideas of 1789 came in contact with these societies, even if later and mediated.
At the same time, as one would expect, the technical advancement that accompanied the political turmoil (e.g. spread of the means of communication, and especially of the railway networks) did not necessarily nurture mental change. Many a time, the bearers of progress, either material or intellectual, were sons of boyars and nobility who were the only in society at the time to detain the financial resources needed for travelling, writing, experimenting political projects. These were the people who looked with hope towards the humanitarian ideals disseminated by the French Revolution (Nedelea 1994, 131-56). They were sympathetic towards the principle of national sovereignty proclaimed by French Revolution and later put in practice by Napoleon, as, they thought, this would provide the ideological backup for the liberation of their own countries from the influence of the foreign powers.
Starting with the last part of the seventeenth century, this elite would travel to the ‘Westʼ (e.g. to the Italian, French, British, German lands) to complete their graduate education, to the point that this trend would become by mid eighteenth century the standard for the upper classes (Siupiur 2004, 28-30). All these conditions contributed to their attempt of setting the Western societies as model for their own countries, as rendered by the Romantic political programmes of the 1848s. The desire of emulation was accompanied by the need of representation expressed in writings and projects that would attempt to show the contribution of Eastern Europe to the common European history.
Ironic as it may seem, Romanticism, the European age of discovery and of the inward turn, had an aristocratic and elitist coat in Central and Eastern Europe. As we will see in the Polish case, the upper classes retained from the mainstream Romanticism the marked sense of the self, better said, the tendency to test the limits of one by visiting far-away places (e.g. invoking the category of the ‘exoticismʼ) (Braniște 2016, 144). Yet, the primary stress was on political causes. Indeed, in Central-Eastern Europe, political Romanticism predominated, and the 1848 Democratic Revolutions represented the peak of this type of Romanticism. The failure of the Democratic Revolutions meant that their political heads faced long years of exile. In exile, the romantic revolutionary sought to present his political project but also to issue a theory of the periphery.
Concretely, the Romanian and Polish local elites, like those we will present next, saw their countries as symbols of protest against autocracy and criticized the rigidity of the aristocratic governments like the Western ones: they suspected an oppressive administration that treated its citizens as children, fooling them with frivolous treats such as balls, cheap beer (Kogălniceanu 1934, 368). Themselves aristocrats, they proved reluctant to the Western aristocratic establishment who was ruthless in defending its lifestyle (Kogălniceanu 1934, 363). Our actors considered that, even more dangerous than these symptoms, there was the gap existing between the irresponsible aristocracy and the bourgeoisie who grew frustrated against the government on the account that the latter did not recognize the formerʼs share in the modernization of society (Kogălniceanu 1934, 363).
Mihail Kogălniceanu (1817-1891), politician of Liberal commitment, founder of modern Romanian historiography, personality connected with the reformation of society, wrote letters to his family during his student years in Western Europe. His comments are historical, sociological, and cultural alike. He perceived the relation existing between the advancement in civilization and the spread of the railways network throughout the entire Austrian lands (Kogălniceanu 1934, 362). He praised the charities, and, above all, the restrained manners of womenʼs dressing, arguing that the opposing tendency as existing in the Principalities deterred the appearance of the middle-class, and led to the impoverishment of the peasantry (Kogălniceanu 1934, 365-66).
The view of the autocratic Western Europe, one of a fatherly figure who turns to tough-handed measures when the kids are not listening to him, could be also found in the notes of Nicolae Filimon (1819-1865), writer of novels that blend Positivist and Romantic ideas in an inspired way, and contributor to the satirical prose in Romanian literature. On his way to Southern Germany, Filimon as he crossed Hungarian and Czech lands, reflected on the national traditions and symbols of the people inhabiting Transylvania and beyond, noting in Romantic spirit the peculiarities of Hungarian music, of historical architecture. Indeed, Filimon evolves through the Romantic paradigm: while residing in Prague, he was disturbed by what he considered as excessive and stiff bureaucracy, to such an extent that the request of the local authorities to register during his sojourn in the city, he interpreted in the light of the 1848 events. In other words, he simply associated his status to the one of the innocent nationalities who were persecuted by the Austrian military forces via officials who sometimes were of Czech, Hungarian, Romanian origin, etc..(Cazimir, Diaconescu 1982, 83-4).
Turning now to the Polish case, our discussion focuses on Maurycy Mann (1814-1876), journalist, editor-in-chief of the prestigious newspaper Czas, the press organ of Conservative movement in Galicia (e.g. Austrian Poland). Indeed, he was a Conservative by environment but Romantic at heart. Although, in his impressive multi volume travelogue he did not describe the lands of Western Europe, but of what we geographically name as Middle East and Northern Africa, we consider Mann as a suitable example of the Romantic view on exoticism, as both political and aesthetic category. Although he did not travel in exile, he can be considered part of the political Romanticism as promoted by the Central and Eastern European aristocratic elite in the given time. The observations made during his travels refined and, at the same time, filtered the idea of periphery. By gazing on lands mentally and geographically considered periphery, he re-evaluated the peripheral status of his own country, allowing the reader to infer that Polish lands were maybe ‘peripheralʼ in geographic but definitely not in cultural terms.
Concretely, Mannʼs view is the one of the ‘civilized Christian Europeanʼ, prepared to encounter the ‘alienʼ world of the Muslims, where the word ‘preparedʼ should be understood literally, since he took all the needed measures for ‘handlingʼ this adventure. By the time he set off for the destination, Mann was already equipped, both physically and morally for facing the East; he held a distinct, comprehensive, and punctual view on how the world there looked like, thus, not even feeling the need to confront his pre-conceptions with reality.
On 25th November 1852, Mann embarked from Trieste on a journey to Alexandria, one of the stopovers on his route to Jerusalem. The journey he saw as a pilgrimage, reflecting on “the fight that the Cross had led against the ignorance of the Crescent Moon [sic]” (Mann 1854, 2), a never-ending clash between “civilization and barbarianism, which only changed the name throughout the century, but not the spirit; in the nineteenth century, the battle evolving around the slogan of peace and civilization” (Mann 1854, 22, 23). On his way to Trieste he transited Vienna, where he took the opportunity to get his hand on the things essential for the European traveller to faraway places: books and items to offer knowledge of the places, and the much needed comfort. The books chosen were…The Bible, The Quran, Michaudʼs History of the Crusades, One Thousand and One Nights, and the Gotha Almanach (Mann 1854, 9)… as one can see, Mannʼs travel was in fact a detailed manifesto of the Conservative aristocrat. In which concerns the items, he bought gloves; pistols, including the necessary gunpowder as he doubted that he would find there the expected quantity or quality; cables, hatchets, spikes, all the needed objects for building up a house; and, obviously, plates, cups, tea pots, in short, a mobile canteen (Mann 1854, 15, 16). This way, Mann was ready “to say goodbye to civilization, that is to say goodbye to Europe” (Mann 1854, 21).
Upon arrival in Trieste, “this outlet to Orient” (Mann 1854, 10), he noticed the multiculturalism of the city, but he related the plethora of nationalities roaming on the streets to the main occupation of the settlement, the commerce, hence the outfit and the languages were corrupted due to the continuous contact with the sailors (Mann 1854, 13).
From Trieste, on 8th of December, he travelled to Alexandria via Corfu Island. During the voyage, in debt to the Romantic tradition, in Byronʼs fashion, he meditated to the Greek antiquity. Once in Alexandria, his visual memory worked after familiar canons, finding resemblance between the minarets and Venice (Mann 1854, 35) (i.e. Mann was an admirer of Italian culture in the age of Renaissance in particular). People seemed to him like pirates (which he heard of only in literature), moving en masse from one place to the other (Mann 1854, 36). He witnessed “all racial types, from European, to the blackest complexions like those of Sudanese people, all versions of outfit from the rich Oriental caftan to the simple African shirt (…)” (Mann 1854, 36). The city corresponded in outlook with the variety displayed by the clothes. Filled with dogs as it was, “it presented a maze of narrow streets, wooden houses, and, above all, a mix of colour, noise, dirt, in proportions that not even the filthiest Jewish village can have [sic]” (Mann 1854, 39, 41). In short, that was the Orient, as it appeared to Mann, a world where the tipping was the rule (Mann 1854, 39), a world of the clash between East and West, as the city had districts adorned with elegant European villas. During his stay in Hotel dʼEurope he met an acquaintance, a countess who evoked him in an original way the European world that he was leaving behind (Mann 1854, 42)…
The epoch of fin-de-siècle is characterized by the tendency to shape a new political and literary language. For many public personalities, society of the last decades of the nineteenth century provided fuel for defining political aspirations or for contesting the constitutional manners of doing politics of the elites that emerged after 1848. The intellectuals of fin-de-siècle sought to find a modus vivendi between the secular political legacy of the past and their craving for pure ideas. Although their productions presented a mosaic of ideological intentions, their generic feature is that they tried to merge politics with religion in order to create a rhetoric of faith or a secular religion, as their intention was to shift the stress from established modes of pursuing politics based on calculation to revolutionary understandings of national community based on feeling, emotion (Judson 2016, 370-6). In this project, literature and particularly literary manners had an important role.
The pervasive presence of mechanized principles in society, associated with the culture of political compromise, which was a working characteristic of the liberal-democratic system, imbued the elite of the time with a sense of the decline of values (i.e. Nietzsche has here a paramount intellectual contribution). Since religion could not satisfy their search for the absolute virtue, and since their worldview was oriented towards individualism with its longing for absoluteness achieved here, on earth, fin-de-siècle intellectuals crowned Art as the primary value of the universe. Hence, their production would submit to the principle of ‘the art for the sake of artʼ (Bacalbașa 1894, 9).
The play with aestheticism as major principle of art creation represented a common preoccupation of modernist-symbolist tendencies at the end of the nineteenth century (Packalén, Gustavsson 2003, 215). Yet, as it is the case with Western inspired political doctrines and the process of modernization itself, Central and Eastern Europe altered these tendencies by blending, for instance, the ‘upliftingʼ role of poetry with issues of national affirmation.
In Central and Eastern European culture, there was the widely accepted idea that the village, seen as an idyllic place, was paradigmatic for many intellectuals of the twentieth century, in the sense that they used it out of anti-modernist impulse. Considerable quantity of literature was dedicated to themes centered around the harsh living conditions of peasantry and to the problematic relation between it and an estranged elite educated in Western world, who despite its origins in the village, came to despise the simplicity and common sense of peasantry. An entire generation of intellectuals shared the common symbolist, Neo-Romantic orientation that introduced themes like the critique towards Western like civilization, the longing for rural environment, religious nostalgia.
As a matter of fact, one could say that the common orientation to the world of peasantry symbolic could be explained in terms of the local framework at the given time: the clash between the state rigidity of the authorities in Vienna (e.g. the imperial center of parts of both Romanian and Polish lands), and the multitude of ethnic communities inhabiting the region. The latter presented significant politically non-emancipated peasantry, which determined intellectuals to adopt the humanitarian cause of the ‘exploitedʼ ones in the era of the democratization of politics (Remenyi 1944, 94).
A related theme of this discourse evolved around the idea that the world of village and the one of city were intermingled. Since the dramas of the city were projected on the peaceful environment of the village, the result was that the intellectual craved for the patriarchal order. The intellectual did not belong to any of these worlds: while in the city, he had the memory of a harmonious community, whereas in the village he lost the contact with the latterʼs essential things (Nedelea 1994, 108). The village was the background against which the process of modernization itself was defined. According to this view, one had to return to the values of the village in protest against a belated industrialization. Finally, the imitation of ‘the Western-like livingʼ meant a simulacrum based on the state centralization of the human needs.
It follows that, due to the modernist quality of the criticism itself, the critique of civilization was a sophisticated intellectual construction. There was a mixed relation of the author with the city, one of attraction and rejection at the same time: the city was like a wanted and admired woman whom he could not reach at, hence she (or the city) became an object of despisal, irony and aversion. Further, at a different level, civilization was embodied in the representative political system based on bargaining and the presence of “decrepit old generations” who did not understand the urgency of a “national revolution” headed by the generation of the “steeled men” (Pârâianu 2004, 46).
By now, we are in the position to say that the theory of ‘art for the sake of artʼ had a special status in the Central and Eastern European modernism (Bacalbașa 1894, 7-8). Some of the authors expressed it by enforcing the national narrative with symbolist techniques, and this is the case of some Romanian poets like Octavian Goga. Others submitted to innocent aestheticism, enriching peasantry with attributes of primitiveness, and this is the case of one of the least known poets of Young Poland Movement (Młoda Polska), by his name Lucjan Rydel. They both could be labelled neo-Romantics by virtue of the manners in which they exploited the religious vocabulary in their shaping of the image of peasantry. To Goga, religious vocabulary was important in the sense that it helped him create powerful images. Yet, there was no mystical content in the words inspired from liturgical practice, or directly from the Bible, or from the folk adaptations of religion-inspired words. The intention of using religious rhetoric resided in the need of creating symbolism. To Rydel, religion retained its mystical content. In this case, there was an intimate relation between the life of peasant and the rituals of the church or of the priest.
To Goga, the stress on peasantry as the instrument for putting in practice the new radical discourse on nation was the result of the ethnic puzzle of Transylvania at the end of the nineteenth century (Pârâianu 2004, 100). In the case of Rydel, the attraction for the exterior features of the peasantry and his apparent indifference to integrating peasantry, an otherwise numerous social category, in the rhetoric on nation in fin-de-siècle, would be the consequence of the fact that the understanding of nation in the mentioned period kept its aristocratic character in the sense that nobility was considered of being solely responsible for the important tasks as regaining state independence (Himka 1983, 4). Given these circumstances, Rydel was not interested in the social aspect of peasantry, in the sense of transforming it in the harbinger of the new era of mass culture, but rather in the anthropological characteristics of the peasants of Cracow region, and in editing and integrating the sources of folklore for cultivated literature (Miłosz 1983, 356-7).
As a matter of fact, by borrowing the tendency of Romanticism to exploit popular resources, by classifying the typologies of peasantry and reading sociological monographs on the life of the peasantry and the village, Rydel achieved a re-construction of a peasant culture from the perspective of fin-de-siècle, in the sense that now we do not talk exclusively about the peasant as a source of aesthetic delight a in the case of Romanticism, but rather about one which has to be integrated in the theory of the two cultures, the one of the village values and the other of the cosmopolitan culture, as suggested at the beginning of the section.
Central Europe, perhaps innocently reminding at first sight a geographical area, has been the initiator of a heated debate concerning the degrees of Westerness of the countries of the region. This effort was usually aimed at setting the borders between the more advanced countries of the area, and the less “enlightened” ones. Even to a higher extent than the traditional view of Westerners on Easterners (i.e. civilization vs. barbarity), the discourse around the Central-Europe concept shows a particular care, not so much for stressing the resemblance with the Western world, but rather for distancing from the world that is located more to the East, on the map, as well as in the public imagination of Westerners or Central-Europeans.
It was with the occasion of 1848 Revolutions that the local elites sought officially to rank their own countries on the same par with Western societies, where they spent their exile. This came in a context in which they attempted to set the Western societies as model for their own countries, as rendered by their Romantic political programmes. The desire of emulation was accompanied by the need of representation expressed in writings and projects that intended to show the contribution of Eastern Europe to the common European history. Yet, since their method was meant to singularize their countries from the others, including those of the region (either by praising it or by undermining it in relation to the others), their attempt was one of distancing themselves and their country from both the region, and from what was known as Western Europe: they “operat[ed] dialectically, creating a self in opposition to an Other, however that other might be defined” (Bracewell 2004, 17).
Apart from this, travel writing was invested with a new dimension, the one of being the alter ego of the author as the audience was invited to contemplate the realities of the time through the lenses of the author. Travel writing became a learning project inasmuch as the reader was invited to apprehend and learn what the observer apprehended and learnt in the first instance. Moreover, it became a political manifesto finding a suitable parallel in the age of Neo-Romanticism. That was the time that proved the dichotomy aesthetics-politics as being an illusory one, with the latter making inroads in the former in the context of a more and more politicized society.
Irrespective of the geographical and historical regional distinctions implied in the stress on Eastern or Central, the travellers coming from the area would always invoke a “long-standing” European tradition that evolved around two axes: one of defining European heritage via opposition to the “other” world (Asian, Muslim); the other, of conceiving Europe as being rooted in the heritage of Roman Empire, and defined by restricted features such as Roman-Catholicism, Latin alphabet.
In this way, they produced a study on the discourse of the “two cultures”, to show the antithesis between the artificiality of civilization (e.g. the state as institution of Western influence), and the authenticity of the “true values” meaning all those social categories which existed before the emergence of political modernity. This theory echoed the center-periphery model in the sense of inverting the poles of power: the center was the village and its associated symbols, whereas what everybody considered as the crux of industrialization and political modernity, namely the metropolises of the time, were seen as a moral periphery to the authors described in this study.
In Romanian case, the authors who adhered to this view of center-periphery differentiated between an elite which got alienated of peasantry because of its contact with “the decadent” Western like city, and, naturally, the peasants seen as capable of changing the “old world”. In Polish case the discussion about the “two civilizations”, one of the people (lud) and the other of the nation (naród), in the sense of national culture represented in an extrapolated manner the values of the village and, respectively, those that were cosmopolitan in nature.
(1) The original text: Ceilalți socotesc, dimpotrivă, că strategic și patriotic e să ne amplasăm mai spre vest. ,,Nu ești în locul în care ești, ci în locul la care aspiri”.
Andreson, Benedict. 2006 (this edition). Imagined Communities. Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism. London: Verso.
Bacalbașa, Anton. 1894. Arta pentru artă (The Art for the Artʼs Sake). Bucharest: Carol Müller.
Bakić-Hayden, Milica. 1995. “Nesting Orientalisms: The Case of Former Yugoslavia”. Slavic Review 54.4: 917-931.
Braniște, Ludmila. 2016. “Exoticism in Romanian Literature. Vasile Alecsandri as a Traveller in the Orient”. Views of the East. Travel and Intercultural Communication in Europe, Oana Cogeanu (ed.). Iași: AL. I. Cuza, 138-164.
Bracewell, Wendy. 2004. “East Looks West: East European Travel Writing on Europe 1600-2000”. Călători români în Occident secolele XVII-XX (Romanian Travellers to the West, Seventeenth to Twentieth Century), Nicolae Bocşan, Ioan Bolovan(eds.). Cluj-Napoca: Institutul Cultural Român.
Brzostek, Błażej. 2015. Paryże Inney Europy. Warszawa i Bukareszt, XIX i XX wiek (Parises of Another Europe. Warsaw and Bucharest in the Nineteenth and Twentieth Centuries). Warsaw: WAB.
Cazimir, Ştefan, Viorica Diaconescu (eds.). Drumuri şi zări: antologie a prozei româneşti de călătorie (Paths and Horizons: Anthology of Romanian Travel Writing). Bucureşti: Sport-Turism.
Filimon, Nicolae. 1860. Escursiuni în Germania meridională. Memorii artistice, istorice şi critice (Trips to Southern Germany. Artistic, Historical and Critical Memoirs). 1 vol. Bucharest: Jurnalul Naţional.
Getka-Kenig, Mikołaj. 2014. ,,Islamski Orient i praktyka self-fashioning na ziemiach Rzeczypospolitej przełomu XVIII i XIX wieku: w stronę pytania o ,,środkowoeuropejskość” polsko-litewskiego orientalizmu” (Islamic Orient and the Practice of Self-Fashioning in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth at the turn of the Nineteenth Century…). Drogi odrębne, drogi wspólne. Problem specyfiki rozwoju historycznego Europy Środkowo-Wschodniej w XIX-XX wieku (Separated Roads, Common Roads. The Specificity of the Historical Development in Central and Eastern Europe in the Nineteenth and Twentieth Century), M. Janowski (ed.). Warsaw: IHPAN, 229-247.
Himka, J.P., 1983. Socialism in Galicia. The Emergence of Polish Social Democracy and Ukrainian Radicalism (1860-1890). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Hutnikiewicz, Artur. 2002. Młoda Polska, Warsaw: PWN.
Judson, Pieter M.. 2016. The Habsburg Empire. A New History. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.
Kogălniceanu, Mihail. 1934. “Various Letters”. Scrisori vechi de studenţi (Old Student Letters). Vălenii de Munte: Datina Românească, 1934.
Mann, Maurycy. 1854. Podróż na Wschód (Journey to the East). 1 vol. Cracow: Czas.
Miłosz, Czesław. 1983. The History of Polish Literature. Berkeley, L.A.: Univ. of California Press, Chapter IX : “Young Poland”.
Nedelea, Marin. 1994. Istoria României. Compendiu de curente şi personalităţi politice: paşoptismul, conservatorismul, liberalismul, (History of Romania. Compendium of Political Currents and Personalities). Bucharest: Niculescu.
Packalén Małgorzata, Anna, Sven Gustavsson (eds.). 2003. Swedish-Polish Modernism: Literature, Language, Culture. Stockholm: Kungl. Vitterhets Historie och Antikvitets Akademien.
Papadima, Ovidiu. 1942. Neam, Sat, Oraş în Poezia lui O. Goga (Kinship,Village, City in the Poetry of O. Goga), Bucureşti: Fundaţia pentru Literatură şi Artă.
Pârâianu, Răzvan. 2004. Octavian Goga, The Sacerdote of Nation. The National Idea from Emancipation to Integrism and Racism. Budapest: CEU (Doctoral Dissertation).
Pleșu, Andrei. 2000. ,,Geopolitică și șpriț” (Geopolitics and Spritz). Plai cu boi. Revista luʼ Dinescu, No. 2: 8-10.
Remenyi, Joseph. 1944. “Endre Ady, Hungaryʼs Apocalyptic Poet (1877-1919)”. Slavonic and East European Review. American Series, Vol. 3, No. 1: 84-105.
Rydel, Lucjan. 2004. Poezje Wybrane, (Selected Poems), Cracow: Wydawnictwo Literackie.
Said, Edward. 2003 (this edition). Orientalism. London: Penguin.
Slavici, Ioan. 1906. ,,Ce e naţional în artã?” (What Means National in Art). Semãnãtorul, V, no.4.
Siupiur, Elena. 2004. Intelectuali, elite, clase politice în sud-estul european. Secolul XIX (Intellectuals, Elites, and Political Structures in the South-Eastern Europe in the Nineteenth Century). Bucharest: Domino.
Spiridon, Monica. 2006. “Identity Discourses on Borders in Eastern Europe”. Comparative Literature, Vol. 58, No. 4: 376-386.