User:Dahn/The sandbox of sandboxes

Balotă, Călinescu, Cernat, Cernat et al 1, Cioculescu, Marino, Negrici, I. Pârvulescu, Patapievici, Sebastian, Stanomir, Vianu

http://www.unifi.it/letrum/CMpro-v-p-913.html http://convorbiri-literare.dntis.ro/CIMPOImai.html http://www.uvvg.ro/socpol/docs/socpol_1_2009.pdf http://www.revista-studii-uvvg.ro/files/revista_V_4.pdf http://www.revista-studii-uvvg.ro/files/revista_IV_1.pdf http://www.curierulnational.ro/Specializat/2003-05-03/Revizuirile http://www.evenimentul.ro/articol/memorial-lovinescu-la-falticeni.html http://www.revisteaua.ro/core/numere/2009/Steaua%209%202009.pdf http://www.revisteaua.ro/core/numere/2010/Steaua%201-2%202010.pdf http://www.revisteaua.ro/core/numere/2009/Steaua%2012%202009.pdf http://convorbiri-literare.dntis.ro/PATRASapr13.htm http://convorbiri-literare.dntis.ro/PATRASiun13.htm http://convorbiri-literare.dntis.ro/PATRASaug13.htm http://convorbiri-literare.dntis.ro/CIMPOImai.html http://convorbiri-literare.dntis.ro/ANCHETAf.htm http://convorbiri-literare.dntis.ro/ZALISaug4.html http://convorbiri-literare.dntis.ro/STEFANESCUfeb4.html http://convorbiri-literare.dntis.ro/PRICOP2dec7.html http://convorbiri-literare.dntis.ro/DURNEAmai5.html http://convorbiri-literare.dntis.ro/DURNEAian3.html http://convorbiri-literare.dntis.ro/IANCUaug3.html http://convorbiri-literare.dntis.ro/IANCUian7.html http://convorbiri-literare.dntis.ro/GRIGURCUiun.html http://convorbiri-literare.dntis.ro/ZUBoct7.html http://convorbiri-literare.dntis.ro/GRIGURCUmar3.html http://convorbiri-literare.dntis.ro/MANUCAaug9.html http://convorbiri-literare.dntis.ro/COROIUapr6.html http://convorbiri-literare.dntis.ro/COROIUiul8.html http://convorbiri-literare.dntis.ro/MANUCAapr6.html http://convorbiri-literare.dntis.ro/MANUoct.html http://convorbiri-literare.dntis.ro/TATAaug4.html http://convorbiri-literare.dntis.ro/COROIUoct6.html http://convorbiri-literare.dntis.ro/CIOPoct8.html http://convorbiri-literare.dntis.ro/CIOPnov5.htm http://revistaramuri.ro/index.php?id=832&editie=37&autor=de%20Gabriel%20Dimisianu http://revistaramuri.ro/index.php?id=889&editie=39&autor=de%20Paul%20Aretzu http://revistaramuri.ro/index.php?id=390&editie=21&autor=de%20Ovidiu%20GHIDIRMIC http://revistaramuri.ro/index.php?id=236&editie=15&autor=de%20Dania-Ariana%20MOISA http://revistaramuri.ro/index.php?id=916&editie=40&autor=de%20Henri%20Zalis http://revistaramuri.ro/index.php?id=1093&editie=45&autor=de%20%AAtefan%20Vl%E3du%FEescu http://revistaramuri.ro/index.php?id=1507&editie=58&autor=de%20Gabriela%20Gheorghi%BAor http://revistaramuri.ro/index.php?id=510&editie=25&autor=de%20Maria-Ana%20Tupan http://revistaramuri.ro/index.php?id=530&editie=26&autor=de%20Paul%20ARETZU http://revistaramuri.ro/index.php?id=1406&editie=54&autor=de%20Octavian%20Soviany http://www.observatorcultural.ro/Informatii;-Stiri;-La-zi*articleID_10558-articles_details.html http://www.observatorcultural.ro/Monica-Lovinescu*articleID_18075-articles_details.html http://www.observatorcultural.ro/Dramaturgia-care-%28nu%29-este*articleID_15180-articles_details.html http://www.observatorcultural.ro/Ex-occidente-lux.-Literatura-romana-si-modelul-european*articleID_20927-articles_details.html http://www.observatorcultural.ro/Seniori-sub-o-stea-mai-putin-norocoasa*articleID_1156-articles_details.html http://www.observatorcultural.ro/INTERSECTII*articleID_20458-articles_details.html http://www.observatorcultural.ro/Un-bun-jurnalism-cultural-nu-se-poate-face-fara-sociologie-si-fara-un-bun-spirit-publicistic*articleID_14884-articles_details.html http://www.observatorcultural.ro/Limba-si-Literatura-Romana-Clasa-a-XII-a*articleID_4431-articles_details.html http://www.observatorcultural.ro/Romancierul-reformator-E.-Lovinescu*articleID_24673-articles_details.html http://www.observatorcultural.ro/Proza-lui-E.-Lovinescu-intre-Jarry-si-Breton-o-legitimare-a-suprainterpretarii*articleID_24672-articles_details.html http://www.observatorcultural.ro/index.html/articles|details?articleID=25816 http://www.observatorcultural.ro/M.-Sebastian-si-B.-Fondane-despre-identitati-si-optiuni-literare*articleID_18474-articles_details.html http://www.observatorcultural.ro/Critica-de-inalta-tinuta*articleID_15881-articles_details.html http://www.observatorcultural.ro/Culturi-de-opozitie*articleID_20890-articles_details.html http://www.observatorcultural.ro/Revizuiri-dupa-revizuiri*articleID_7527-articles_details.html http://www.observatorcultural.ro/Pianul-lui-Manolescu*articleID_945-articles_details.html http://www.observatorcultural.ro/Valoare-si-canon*articleID_3179-articles_details.html http://www.observatorcultural.ro/G.-Calinescu-si-conditia-criticii-autohtone-%28I%29*articleID_23068-articles_details.html http://www.observatorcultural.ro/Figura-lui-Sebastian-a-fost-mistificata-cu-premeditare*articleID_22089-articles_details.html http://www.observatorcultural.ro/Pajuri-imparatesti-si-flamuri-nationale*articleID_1728-articles_details.html http://www.observatorcultural.ro/Publicistica-unui-constructivist-risipitor*articleID_9408-articles_details.html http://www.observatorcultural.ro/Un-nou-criticism-junimist*articleID_3599-articles_details.htmlml http://www.observatorcultural.ro/Incendiarul-ziarist-Ion-Vinea*articleID_7474-articles_details.html http://www.observatorcultural.ro/Recurs-la-memorie.-Reviriment-pe-jumatate*articleID_22044-articles_details.html http://www.observatorcultural.ro/O-lectura-constructiva*articleID_14350-articles_details.html http://www.observatorcultural.ro/Criticul-si-potrivniciile-istoriei*articleID_6013-articles_details.html http://www.observatorcultural.ro/Pentru-o-noua-istorie-a-modernismului-literar-romanesc-%28II%29*articleID_21793-articles_details.html http://www.observatorcultural.ro/Dilemele-lui-Sebastian-%C4%8C%E2%84%A2i-enigma-Otiliei*articleID_25647-articles_details.html http://www.observatorcultural.ro/G.-Calinescu-si-conditia-criticii-autohtone-%28II%29*articleID_23107-articles_details.html http://www.observatorcultural.ro/Pentru-o-noua-istorie-a-modernismului-literar-romanesc-%28I%29*articleID_21746-articles_details.html http://www.observatorcultural.ro/Manualele-de-literatura-romana-intre-profesionalism-si-impostura*articleID_16493-articles_details.html http://www.observatorcultural.ro/Din-nou-despre-trecutul-lui-Cioran*articleID_4688-articles_details.html http://www.observatorcultural.ro/Manifest-pentru-normalitatea-criticii-literare*articleID_11340-articles_details.html http://www.observatorcultural.ro/Iluziile-revizionismului-est-etic-%28I%29*articleID_24183-articles_details.html http://www.observatorcultural.ro/Un-an-mai-bun-pentru-dezbaterile-de-idei*articleID_21014-articles_details.html http://www.observatorcultural.ro/Ideologii-literare-si-literare-in-Romania-postbelica*articleID_11948-articles_details.html http://www.observatorcultural.ro/ESEU.-Florin-MIHAILESCU-Critice-si-metacritice*articleID_3420-articles_details.html http://www.observatorcultural.ro/Sansa-jurnalului-intim*articleID_1929-articles_details.html http://www.observatorcultural.ro/Traiectoria-lui-Arghezi*articleID_25816-articles_details.html http://arhiva.revistafamilia.ro/2006/5/editorial.htm http://arhiva.revistafamilia.ro/2011/iunie2011.pdf http://www.viataromaneasca.eu/arhiva/48_viata-romaneasca-6-7-2008/28_eseuri/18_sebastian-lovinescu.html http://www.viataromaneasca.eu/arhiva/58_viata-romaneasca-3-4-2009/22_eveniment/281_o-epopee-a-diagnosticului.html http://www.viataromaneasca.eu/arhiva/56_viata-romaneasca-12-2008/10_cronici/196_generatie-prin-lustratie.html http://www.viataromaneasca.eu/articole/32_comentarii-critice/931_ibraileanu-astazi.html http://www.revistaluceafarul.ro/index.html?id=3625&editie=150 http://www.revistaluceafarul.ro/index.html?id=2963&editie=127 http://www.revistaluceafarul.ro/index.html?id=3266&editie=138 http://www.revistaluceafarul.ro/index.html?id=1840&editie=83 http://www.revistaluceafarul.ro/index.html?id=160&editie=13 http://www.revistaluceafarul.ro/index.html?id=841&editie=42 http://www.revistaluceafarul.ro/index.html?id=1311&editie=62 http://www.revistaluceafarul.ro/index.html?id=1204&editie=58 http://www.revistaluceafarul.ro/index.html?id=1390&editie=65 http://www.revistaluceafarul.ro/index.html?id=1508&editie=70 http://www.revistaluceafarul.ro/index.html?id=54&editie=9 http://www.revistaluceafarul.ro/index.html?id=946&editie=48 http://www.revistaluceafarul.ro/index.html?id=586&editie=31 http://www.revistaluceafarul.ro/index.html?id=739&editie=38 http://www.revistaluceafarul.ro/index.html?id=372&editie=22 http://www.revistaluceafarul.ro/index.html?id=1261&editie=60 http://www.revistaluceafarul.ro/index.html?id=2064&editie=92 http://www.revistaluceafarul.ro/index.html?id=984&editie=50 http://www.revistaluceafarul.ro/index.html?id=3292&editie=138 http://www.revistaluceafarul.ro/index.html?id=1862&editie=84 http://www.revistaluceafarul.ro/index.html?id=561&editie=30 http://www.revistaluceafarul.ro/index.html?id=651&editie=34 http://www.revistaluceafarul.ro/index.html?id=1228&editie=59 http://www.revistaluceafarul.ro/index.html?id=330&editie=20 http://revistaluceafarul.ro/index.html?id=1035&editie=52 http://lett.ubbcluj.ro/~phantasma/dezbateri/text/text7.html http://lett.ubbcluj.ro/~phantasma/dezbateri/masa/masa15.html http://www.revista-apostrof.ro/articole.php?id=93 http://www.revista-apostrof.ro/articole.php?id=105 http://www.revista-apostrof.ro/articole.php?id=240 http://www.revista-apostrof.ro/articole.php?id=1337 http://www.revista-apostrof.ro/articole.php?id=272 http://www.revista-apostrof.ro/articole.php?id=769 http://www.revista-apostrof.ro/articole.php?id=387 http://www.revista-apostrof.ro/articole.php?id=221 http://www.revista-apostrof.ro/articole.php?id=450 http://www.revista-apostrof.ro/articole.php?id=1021 http://www.revista-apostrof.ro/articole.php?id=970 http://www.revista-apostrof.ro/articole.php?id=1475 http://www.revista-apostrof.ro/articole.php?id=692 http://www.revista-apostrof.ro/articole.php?id=476 http://www.revista-apostrof.ro/articole.php?id=1079 http://www.revistavatra.ro/pdf/vatra_3_4-2011.pdf http://www.revistavatra.ro/pdf/vatra_11-2009.pdf http://www.revistavatra.ro/pdf/vatra_5-2008.pdf http://www.revistavatra.ro/pdf/vatra_4_5-2007.pdf http://www.ideeaeuropeana.ro/download/martie_2010_reader.pdf http://www.revista22.ro/filozofia-romaneasca-valorizata-la-casa-lovinescu-3759.html http://www.revista22.ro/actualitatea-cazului-sebastian-6532.html http://www.revista22.ro/scriitorii-romani-si-narcoticele-5-prima-jumatate-a-secolului-xx-4580.html http://www.revista22.ro/via355a-351i-timpurile-lui-eugen-jebeleanu-10576.html http://www.revista22.ro/cultura-romana-intre-comunism-si-nationalism-ii-241.html http://www.revista22.ro/cultura-romana-intre-comunism-si-nationalism-iii-252.html http://www.revista22.ro/identitate-tranzitie-si-aderare-o-perspectiva-critica-3227.html http://www.revista22.ro/bucurestiul-cultural-nr-5-2009-ii-6251.html http://www.revista22.ro/schimbarea-la-haine-a-romaniei-1011.html http://www.revista22.ro/a-href-istorie-si-ideologie-3147html-titleistorie-si-ideologie-a-3147.html http://www.revista22.ro/adevarul-integral-si-artistic-730.html http://www.revista22.ro/polul-de-centru-dreapta-3424.html http://www.revista22.ro/bucurestiul-cultural-nr-107-realistul-de-la-r259scruce-10966.html http://www.revista22.ro/despre-mituri-351i-identitate-na355ional259-6990.html http://www.revista22.ro/un-baraj-contra-uitarii-5145.html http://www.revista22.ro/monica-lovinescu-si-virgil-ierunca-sfarsitul-exilului-4521.html http://www.revista22.ro/statui-de-suflet-i-6017.html http://www.revista22.ro/nicolae-manolescu-despre-critic259-idei-351i-posteritate-8717.html http://www.revista22.ro/bucure351tiul-cultural-nr-94-un-debut-de-propor355ii-8534.html http://www.revista22.ro/posteritatile-lui-e-lovinescu-i-542.html http://www.revista22.ro/posteritatile-lui-e-lovinescu-ii-552.html http://www.revistaorizont.ro/arhiva/februarie2010.pdf http://www.revistaorizont.ro/arhiva/iulie2010.pdf http://www.revistaorizont.ro/arhiva/august2010.pdf http://www.revistaorizont.ro/arhiva/iulie2009.pdf http://www.revistaorizont.ro/arhiva/iunie2009.pdf http://www.revistaorizont.ro/arhiva/aprilie2007.pdf http://www.revistaorizont.ro/arhiva/septembrie2010.pdf http://www.revistaorizont.ro/arhiva/octombrie2010.pdf http://www.plural-magazine.com/article_e-lovinescu-and-the-modernization-of-romania.html http://www.plural-magazine.com/article_history-of-romanian-modern-civilization-1924-1925.html http://plural-magazine.com/article_loosening-the-lace.html http://www.plural-magazine.com/article_the-second-independence-1926.html http://www.plural-magazine.com/article_tradition-and-modernity-in-the-1920s-ch-IV.html http://www.plural-magazine.com/article_the-contribution-of-judaism.html http://www.plural-magazine.com/article_religion-and-identity-in-interwar-romania-orthodoxism.html http://plural-magazine.com/pdf/article_1594_1.pdf http://www.plural-magazine.com/article_the-new-spirituality-investigation-1928.html http://www.plural-magazine.com/article_on-the-generation-in-shambles-1936.html http://www.plural-magazine.com/article_intellectuals-and-their-radical-political-involvement-reflections-and-subsequent-perceptions.html http://www.plural-magazine.com/article_jean-jacques-weiss-son-esprit-romanesque-et-sa-fantaisie.html http://www.plural-magazine.com/article_du-billet-au-traite-le-francais-chez-les-roumains.html http://www.plural-magazine.com/article_la-poesie-aux-confins-des-langues-portraits-en-miroir.html http://www.plural-magazine.com/article_ideas-and-ideology-in-interwar-romania.html http://www.plural-magazine.com/article_history-of-romanian-modern-civilization-1924-1925.html http://www.plural-magazine.com/article_the-thirties-the-romanian-extreme-right.html http://www.plural-magazine.com/article_tradition-and-modernity-in-the-1920s-ch-III.html http://www.romlit.ro/amintirea_lui_e._lovinescu http://www.romlit.ro/agendele_literare_ale_lui_eugen_lovinescu http://www.romlit.ro/n_lumea_brbailor_-_jurnalul_hortensiei_papadat-bengescu_- http://www.romlit.ro/lecia_lui_lovinescu http://www.romlit.ro/e._lovinescu_-_125_-_bovarismul_ideologic http://www.romlit.ro/pompiliu_constantinescu http://www.romlit.ro/fiii_risipitori http://www.romlit.ro/g._ibrileanu http://www.romlit.ro/femina2 http://www.romlit.ro/je_est_un_autre_-_senintatea_destrmat http://www.romlit.ro/formele_fr_fond_sau_prima_btlie_canonic http://www.romlit.ro/maiorescu_astzi http://www.romlit.ro/muzeul_figurilor_de_cerneal http://www.romlit.ro/o_carte_glorioas http://www.romlit.ro/canon_dup_canon http://www.romlit.ro/memorii http://www.romlit.ro/radu_stanca http://www.romlit.ro/ion_minulescu http://www.romlit.ro/marele_singuratic_ii http://www.romlit.ro/critica_anilor_81 http://www.romlit.ro/srbtoarea_lecturii http://www.romlit.ro/oglinzi_fidele_i_contrafcute http://www.romlit.ro/profesorul_alexandru_dima http://www.romlit.ro/sadoveanu_n_texte_inedite http://www.romlit.ro/o_scrisoare_necunoscut_a_lui_paul_zarifopol http://www.romlit.ro/un_nou_dictionar http://www.romlit.ro/viaa_literar_n_1907 http://www.romlit.ro/dialog_peste_generaii http://www.romlit.ro/ion_gheorghe http://www.romlit.ro/g._clinescu_publicist http://www.romlit.ro/o_reeditare_binevenit http://www.romlit.ro/ce_s-a_ntmplat_cu_literatura_romn http://www.romlit.ro/mihai_cimpoibtlia_pentru_limba_romn_a_fost_una_de_fiecare_zi http://www.romlit.ro/liviu_rebreanu_-_ultimele_zile http://www.romlit.ro/mnctorulde_cri http://www.romlit.ro/ultimul_cerchist_de_la_sibiu http://www.romlit.ro/octombrie4 http://www.romlit.ro/prezentul_de_ieri_de_azi_i_de_mine http://www.romlit.ro/doamnele_ntre_ele.. http://www.romlit.ro/viaa_lui_bacovia http://www.romlit.ro/opera_romneasc_a_lui_cioran http://www.romlit.ro/cerchitii_nainte_de_coborrea_n_infern http://www.romlit.ro/polemic_i_pamflet http://www.romlit.ro/mai http://www.romlit.ro/criticilor_mei http://www.romlit.ro/de_la_cerchism_la_euphorionism http://www.romlit.ro/eecul_lui_camil http://www.romlit.ro/centenar_ilarie_voronca__miliardarul_de_imagini http://www.romlit.ro/cadouri_pentru_monica http://www.romlit.ro/scrisori_de_la_n._iorga_e._lovinescu_g._m._zamfirescu_b._fundoianu_camil_baltazar_petru_comarnescu http://www.romlit.ro/de_ce_l-a_ignorat_lovinescu_pe_slavici http://www.romlit.ro/acas_la_e._lovinescu http://www.romlit.ro/e._lovinescu_-_un_critic_mereu_actual http://www.romlit.ro/la_aniversar_-_gabriel_dimisianu http://www.romlit.ro/dou_decenii_de_scris_zilnic http://www.romlit.ro/e._lovinescu_-_125_-_confesiunile_unui_critic http://www.romlit.ro/un_episod_dramatic_din_viaa_lui_e._lovinescu http://www.romlit.ro/camil_petrescu_furios http://www.romlit.ro/g._clinescu2 http://www.romlit.ro/cteva_precizri_cu_privire_la_george_ivacu http://www.romlit.ro/mblnzitorul http://www.romlit.ro/cercul_literar_ntre_dou_manifeste http://www.romlit.ro/la_90_de_ani_ioana_postelnicu_de_vorb_cu_ovidiu_genaru http://www.romlit.ro/ediii_critice_ntrerupte http://www.romlit.ro/nicolae_manolescu_fa_cu_poeii_romantici http://www.romlit.ro/eminescu_i_modernizarea_romniei http://www.romlit.ro/un_scriitor_aproape_uitat http://www.romlit.ro/rebreanu_n_oglind http://www.romlit.ro/panait_istrati_m-a_ajutat_sa_raman_om_intr-o_lume_de_lupi http://www.romlit.ro/1927_-_an_de_graie_i_dizgraie http://www.romlit.ro/1927_-_an_de_graie_i_dizgraie2 http://www.romlit.ro/ntre_cercetare_i_istorie_literar http://www.romlit.ro/tren_de_plcere http://www.romlit.ro/eminescu_i_mite http://www.romlit.ro/bacovia_sau_paradoxul_degradrii http://www.romlit.ro/critica_pur http://www.romlit.ro/monumentalitatea_epic http://www.romlit.ro/critica_de_dicionar http://www.romlit.ro/cine_a_fost_panait_istrati http://www.romlit.ro/un_jurnal_est-etic http://www.romlit.ro/documente_literare2 http://www.romlit.ro/un_impresionist_lucid http://www.romlit.ro/narcotice_in_proza_romaneasca_interbelica http://www.romlit.ro/lumea_lui_caragiale http://www.romlit.ro/tinerii_din_secolul_trecut http://www.romlit.ro/amintirile_lui_erban_cioculescu http://www.romlit.ro/ntre_buncredin_i_conformism_i2 http://www.romlit.ro/mrturia_unei_generaii http://www.romlit.ro/mihail_sadoveanu http://www.romlit.ro/clinescu_for_ever http://www.romlit.ro/caragiale_ntre_actualitate_i_actualizare http://www.romlit.ro/vianu_si_vianu_ii http://www.romlit.ro/zeflemea_i_critic http://www.romlit.ro/eugen_simion_mi-ar_plcea_s_formez_o_echip_de_5-6_critici_tineri_care_s_scrie_cu_regularitate_despre_literatura_romn http://www.romlit.ro/comediile_lui_i._valjan http://www.romlit.ro/a_murit_poetul http://www.romlit.ro/vladimir_streinu_i_proza_romneasc http://www.romlit.ro/andrisant_ubicuu http://www.romlit.ro/causeries_du_lundi http://www.romlit.ro/m._blecher_n_epoca_sa http://www.romlit.ro/ce_este_identitatea_nationala http://www.romlit.ro/i._peltz_memorialist http://www.romlit.ro/blaga_i_cerchitii http://www.romlit.ro/actualitatea1111111111113 http://www.romlit.ro/e._lovinescu_cealalt_fa_a_lunii http://www.romlit.ro/povestea_progresului http://www.romlit.ro/revizuirile_critice http://www.romlit.ro/s_se_revizuiasc_primesc.. http://www.romlit.ro/constantin_ciopraga_nonagenar_eseu_lexicografic http://www.romlit.ro/ion_petrovici_-_probe_la_un_dosar_neglijat http://www.romlit.ro/maturitatea_criticului http://www.romlit.ro/eugen_simion2 http://www.romlit.ro/e._lovinescu_-_proze_uitate http://www.romlit.ro/confesiuni_incomode http://www.romlit.ro/critica_nemuritoare_a_detaliului http://www.romlit.ro/o_combinaie_rar http://www.romlit.ro/o_figur_din_insectarul_lui_e._lovinescu http://www.romlit.ro/ce_nseamn_plumb__ii http://www.romlit.ro/istoria_unei_antipatii__e._lovinescu_i_gala_galaction http://www.romlit.ro/tradiia_cerchist http://www.romlit.ro/un_eveniment_editorial2 http://www.romlit.ro/avangarda_i_politizarea_literaturii http://www.romlit.ro/literatura_oportunist_ii http://www.romlit.ro/horia_lovinescu http://www.romlit.ro/caragiale_ntre_oglinzi_paralele_i http://www.revistatribuna.ro/doc_db_site/tribuna/4bea5a3198934183_183.pdf http://www.revistatribuna.ro/doc_db_site/tribuna/4bfb77685c566184_184-01.pdf http://www.zf.ro/ziarul-de-duminica/colectii-studiile-junimiste-ale-lui-lovinescu-publicate-integral-dupa-70-de-ani-5789414 http://www.zf.ro/ziarul-de-duminica/pacatele-tineretilor-3648679/ http://www.zf.ro/ziarul-de-duminica/o-iubire-interzisa-3103235 http://www.zf.ro/ziarul-de-duminica/romanii-si-functiunea-lui-ren-gu-non-de-marius-vasileanu-7867464 http://www.zf.ro/ziarul-de-duminica/vitralii-neamul-si-babilonia-4610137/ http://www.zf.ro/ziarul-de-duminica/din-istoria-universala-a-spionajului-vi-romania-de-dr-alexandru-popescu-8287236/ http://www.zf.ro/ziarul-de-duminica/iasii-lui-patras-eu-unul-prefer-bucuria-4121006/ http://www.zf.ro/ziarul-de-duminica/cronica-literara-nicolae-manolescu-public-si-privat-5776900/ http://www.zf.ro/ziarul-de-duminica/iasii-lui-patras-razbunarea-lui-calinescu-4673387/ http://www.zf.ro/ziarul-de-duminica/fotografi-din-romania-interbelica-3104263/ http://www.zf.ro/ziarul-de-duminica/un-diletant-superior-al-i-odobescu-de-antonio-patras-8200863 http://www.zf.ro/ziarul-de-duminica/iasii-lui-patras-est-etica-si-literatura-cazul-ion-d-sirbu-7044519 http://www.zf.ro/ziarul-de-duminica/interviu-tiberiu-avramescu-despre-cum-s-a-nascut-si-de-ce-a-murit-o-mare-colectie-biblioteca-pentru-toti-5732982 http://www.zf.ro/ziarul-de-duminica/un-fel-de-jurnal-3097010/ http://www.zf.ro/ziarul-de-duminica/pentru-un-alt-modernism-6473129/ http://www.zf.ro/ziarul-de-duminica/o-societate-democratica-nu-are-nevoie-de-cultura-umanista-3094520/ http://www.zf.ro/ziarul-de-duminica/panglica-de-cuvinte-2874087/ http://www.zf.ro/ziarul-de-duminica/in-curtea-cu-pavajul-gri-3028730/ http://www.zf.ro/ziarul-de-duminica/critica-dreapta-3004175/ http://www.zf.ro/ziarul-de-duminica/mitul-drepturilor-de-autor-3060364 http://www.zf.ro/ziarul-de-duminica/un-lovinescian-ardelean-ion-simut-7384875/ http://www.zf.ro/ziarul-de-duminica/psihanaliza-are-azi-un-drum-comun-cu-viata-religioasa-3060318 http://www.zf.ro/ziarul-de-duminica/dupa-douazeci-de-ani-3078503 http://ebooks.unibuc.ro/Sociologie/henri/11.htm http://documente.bcucluj.ro/web/bibdigit/altedoc/docbcu/philobiblon/philobiblon%20vol.XII-2007.pdf http://digital-library.ulbsibiu.ro/dspace/handle/123456789/59 http://documente.bcucluj.ro/web/bibdigit/periodice/luceafarul/1941/BCUCLUJ_FP_280091_1941_001_007.pdf http://documente.bcucluj.ro/web/bibdigit/periodice/transilvania/1945/BCUCLUJ_FP_279996_1945_076_001_002.pdf http://documente.bcucluj.ro/web/bibdigit/periodice/gandirea/1930/BCUCLUJ_FP_279479_1930_010_003.pdf http://documente.bcucluj.ro/web/bibdigit/periodice/curierulcrestin/1938/BCUCLUJ_FP_279482_1938_020_005.pdf http://documente.bcucluj.ro/web/bibdigit/periodice/transilvania/1920/BCUCLUJ_FP_279996_1920_051_002.pdf http://documente.bcucluj.ro/web/bibdigit/periodice/gandirea/1924-1925/BCUCLUJ_FP_279479_1924_1925_004_008.pdf http://documente.bcucluj.ro/web/bibdigit/periodice/societateademaine/pdf/BCUCLUJ_FP_279802_1935_012_002.pdf http://documente.bcucluj.ro/web/bibdigit/periodice/taranoastra/1938/BCUCLUJ_FP_451581_1938_017_006.pdf http://documente.bcucluj.ro/web/bibdigit/periodice/luceafarul/1912/BCUCLUJ_FP_280091_1912_011_003.pdf http://documente.bcucluj.ro/web/bibdigit/periodice/gandromanesc/1937/BCUCLUJ_FP_BALP73_1937_005_011_012.pdf http://documente.bcucluj.ro/web/bibdigit/periodice/gandirea/1928/BCUCLUJ_FP_279479_1928_008_008_009.pdf http://documente.bcucluj.ro/web/bibdigit/periodice/gandirea/1942/BCUCLUJ_FP_279479_1942_021_002.pdf http://dspace.bcucluj.ro/jspui/bitstream/123456789/19002/1/BCUCLUJ_FP_P3441_1940_049_0029.pdf http://www.unibuc.ro/CLASSICA/istoriacivromane/index.htm http://web.archive.org/web/20120227035746/http://www.cuvantul.ro/articol/?artID=12&nr=351 http://web.archive.org/web/20120402110841/http://www.cuvantul.ro/articol/?artID=20&nr=373 http://web.archive.org/web/20120402110848/http://www.cuvantul.ro/articol/?artID=17&nr=362 http://web.archive.org/web/20120402110852/http://www.cuvantul.ro/articol/?artID=8&nr=302 http://web.archive.org/web/20120402110904/http://www.cuvantul.ro/articol/?artID=11&nr=332 http://web.archive.org/web/20120227035004/http://www.cuvantul.ro/articol/?artID=5&nr=382 http://web.archive.org/web/20120402110915/http://www.cuvantul.ro/articol/?artID=2&nr=339 http://web.archive.org/web/20120316143252/http://www.cuvantul.ro/articol/?artID=2&nr=381 http://web.archive.org/web/20120402110927/http://www.cuvantul.ro/articol/?artID=22&nr=296 http://web.archive.org/web/20120402111126/http://www.cuvantul.ro/stiri/?id=326 http://web.archive.org/web/20120402111132/http://www.cuvantul.ro/articol/?artID=9&nr=380 http://web.archive.org/web/20120402111142/http://www.cuvantul.ro/articol/?artID=19&nr=349 http://web.archive.org/web/20120402111147/http://www.cuvantul.ro/articol/?artID=9&nr=301 http://web.archive.org/web/20120402111202/http://www.cuvantul.ro/articol/?artID=11&nr=299 http://web.archive.org/web/20120316143259/http://www.cuvantul.ro/articol/?artID=2&nr=376 http://web.archive.org/web/20120316143140/http://www.cuvantul.ro/articol/?artID=7&nr=382 http://web.archive.org/web/20120402111316/http://www.cuvantul.ro/articol/?artID=4&nr=373

Eugen Lovinescu (, also known as Eugeniu Lovinescu or Eugène Lovinesco; October 31, 1881 – July 15, 1943), was a Romanian historian of culture, literary theorist and critic, especially known as the founder of Sburătorul review and as a supporter of Romanian liberalism. From nationalist beginnings and a traditionalist outlook before World War I, Lovinescu made a move toward classical and economic liberalism, which permeated his scholarship and his public stances. While rejecting the assumptions of political conservatism, he adhered to the cultural outlook of conservative author Titu Maiorescu, and carried into the interwar period the legacy of Maiorescu's cultural society Junimea. In front of nationalist and conservative critics, Lovinescu supported the steady Westernization of Romanian society, arguing in favor of "synchronism" between Romania and the West.

As author and literary promoter, Lovinescu cherished "Impressionist" criticism—unorthodox, non-academic and subjective. At Sburătorul, he lent his support to the cause of modernism, and became recognized as the doyen of mainstream modernity in Romanian literature. He discovered some of Romania's leading 20th-century writers, from Hortensia Papadat-Bengescu to Camil Petrescu, from Felix Aderca to Liviu Rebreanu. Lovinescu is credited with having thus "synchronized" Romanian and European modernism, even though he always was ambivalent toward the "extremist" avant-garde. His own work as a novelist, retelling the sentimental life of national poet Mihai Eminescu from an Impressionist perspective, has created controversy ever since its publication.

Lovinescu's influence as a critic and liberal theorist touched several generations, despite his work being obfuscated by successive totalitarian regimes. Among his better-known disciples are Perpessicius, Tudor Vianu, Șerban Cioculescu, Vladimir Streinu, Ion Negoițescu, Eugen Simion and Nicolae Manolescu. His daughter was Monica Lovinescu, the anti-communist essayist and journalist; nephews Anton Holban, Vasile Lovinescu and Horia Lovinescu all had careers in letters, representing a wide range of political opinions and literary styles.

Eugen Lovinescu was native of Romania's eastern region, Moldavia. His hometown was Fălticeni: the future critic was born in the Alecu Donici School building, where his family owned a private room. His father was Vasile T. Lovinescu, a teacher at the Donici gymnasium, and later at the Alexandru Ioan School; his mother Profira Manoliu was a homemaker. Later, they moved to a house on Sucevei Street (near the locally famous pond called Nada Florilor), where the other Lovinescus and the Holbans also owned buildings. Eugen was the fourth of seven children born to the couple; a sister of his married officer Gheorghe Holban and gave birth to Anton Holban.

Young Lovinescu was a a student at the Cuza gymnasium. As he recalled in 1934, one of his teachers there was Miron Pompiliu, best known for having been a friend of the poet Eminescu. Lovinescu sought to please Pompiliu with a paper on Eminescu's poetry. The failing grade it earned made him reticent about approaching Eminescian scholarship in the following decades: as Lovinescu himself noted, he feared the shadow of his personal hero. Until about 1930, Lovinescu was primarily an anti-Eminescian, condemning Eminescu for his rhetorical violence and political stances. Lovinescu was schoolmates with two future literati: the raconteur I. Dragoslav and the novelist Mihail Sadoveanu. Sadoveanu, who was to become Lovinescu's friend and foe, preserved the memory of an effete, bookish Lovinescu, who only ate cake and did not enjoy playing outdoors. The critic acknowledged his frailty as a child, noting that it planted in him, forever, the premonition of timely death.

Lovinescu completed his secondary studies in the Moldavian cultural center of Iași, graduating in 1899. A passionate student of the classics, fluent in Latin, he then applied for the for the University of Iași to study Philology, but soon changed his mind and enlisted at the University of Bucharest Faculty of Letters and Philosophy. As he explained in his memoirs, he preferred life in modern Bucharest, but only because he risked "failure" in Moldavia. Among his colleagues in Bucharest was I. M. Marinescu (later known as a classicist), who remembered Lovinescu as "misanthropic and withdrawn". The two young men were part of a graduating class which also gave Romania three other distinguished intellectuals: historian Vasile Pârvan, critic D. Caracostea, and philosopher Ion Petrovici.

At university, Lovinescu had among his professors the historians and culture critics Titu Maiorescu and Nicolae Iorga, who were both his models and, in later decades, his ideological adversaries. Lovinescu recalled being unimpressed by Iorga's teaching style: "not only didn't he attract us [students] with the offer of personal seductiveness or a university handout, but, quite the contrary, he used irony and invectives as his weapons". Lovinescu also had an ominous conflict with Pârvan, the Thracologist. As he claimed, Pârvan was coaxing Iorga's "easy to conquer vanity": "it fell on Pârvan to carry around [Iorga's] book-filled bag". Pursuing his own path to graduation, Lovinescu earned his diploma in 1903, with a thesis on Latin grammar. That year, he made his debut as literary chronicler in the cultural pages of Adevărul daily. It was the beginning of a concistent activity in cultural journalism, with articles he signed with his name or with initials and pseudonyms: E. L., E. Lov., Delmonte.

Young Lovinescu had genuine admiration for Iorga and Maiorescu—but, as researcher Lucian Nastasă suggests, he could hardly reconcile his "strong independence" with any mentorship. Iorga's mixing of Maiorescu's skeptical conservatism into ethnic nationalism was an early inspiration, and Lovinescu, it seems, was genuinely moved by Iorga's traditionalist critique of modern institutions. Iorga would not reciprocate: in 1904, when Lovinescu submitted an essay for Sămănătorul journal (of which Iorga was manager), Iorga rejected it. The piece, he argued, was quite elitist. Lovinescu persevered and, in March 1906, he congratulated Iorga for his attack on cultural diglossia.

In his collection of essays, published that year as Pași pe nisip ("Steps over Sand"), Lovinescu proceeds to question the moral ideals of patriotic and didactic art. However, he still celebrates the greats of traditionalist poetry, and most of all the young nationalist Octavian Goga. Lovinescu also tried his hand at writing for the stage, with De peste prag ("From the Other Side of the Threshold"). A collection of Lovinescu's own stories and novellas (Nuvele) saw print in 1907. He found employment at a Ploiești high school, but was also a columnist for Epoca daily, which was put out by Conservative Party cadres. According to Lovinescu, Iorga tried to censor him, but Maiorescu stepped in: "the old man could not even conceive of an attempt against the freedom of thought."

Over the next twenty years, Lovinescu and Iorga moved into diametrically opposite stances: Lovinescu discovered in himself a cosmopolitan and a Francophile. He simply dismissed Iorga's philosophy as "a cultural and economic protectionism taken to the edge of phobia". As Nastasă writes: "virtually everything would separate the two—unequal as they were in age and social standing, in formulas and means of public expression, [and] particularly so in matters of ideology and aesthetic taste".

Lovinescu's drift was already noticeable in his writings. He moved close to the moderate wing of Maiorescu's school, as represented by Mihail Dragomirescu and Convorbiri Critice review. This liberal conservative minority had split with the main Maiorescu club, Junimea, whose traditionalism Dragomirescu found indigestible. In 1908, Convorbiri Critice put out Lovinescu's his first attack on Eminescu and the Junimea traditionalists. The critique was more aethetic than ideological: Eminescu the novelist, Lovinescu claimed, was a "naked emperor". Lovinescu also challenged Ion Luca Caragiale, the Junimist comedic writer. Against the emerging consensus, according to which Caragiale was the most memorable conservative critic of the Romanian establishment, Lovinescu prophesized that, "in fifty years", with social and economic maturity, Caragiale would be entirely incomprehensible to the average Romanian reader.

From 1906, Lovinescu was furthering his studies abroad, in France. His research, and subject of his Ph. D. dissertation, was the late writer Jean-Jacques Weiss. Under the Francized name Eugène Lovinesco, Lovinescu published his thesis with Renouard, as Jean-Jacques Weiss et son œuvre littéraire ("Jean-Jacques Weiss and His Literary Work"). It carried a preface by the literary historian and biographer Émile Faguet, but failed to convince other reviewers, who dismissed Lovinescu's work as "superficial". Lovinescu's other study, on French Philhellene literature, became Les voyageurs français en Grèce au XIXe siècle ("French Travelers to Greece in the 19th Century", H. Jouvre publishers, 1909). It came with a forward by Gustave Fougères, the archeologist.

Lovinescu was soon inducted into the leadership board of Sadoveanu's Romanian Writers' Society, with which he toured the provinces. He published a two-volume collection, Critice ("Critical Essays", 1909-1910), followed by a 1910 monograph on fabulist Grigore Alexandrescu. Lovinescu was still unemployable at university, but recognized a Docent (1910) and appointed lecturer in Contemporary Prose at the "open and tuition-free" courses, Bucharest Faculty of Letters. His opening lecture was taken up by Maiorescu's Convorbiri Literare review, as Critica și istoria literară ("Literary Criticism and History").

Lovinescu mainly supported himself from his work as professor at Matei Basarab High School, but was still an active cultural journalist, his chronicles featured in papers of diverse backgrounds: Convorbiri Literare, Convorbiri Critice, Viața Românească etc. He soon entered the competition for a substitute chair at the University of Iași. His application was registered, but he faced opposition from the senior staff, who favored a local scholar, Garabet Ibrăileanu. Since Ibrăileanu had not received his Ph. D., and was therefore technically unqualified, Lovinescu was eventually appointed to the chair by Education Minister Constantin C. Arion. This was a blow to the cultural establishment of Iași, who consequently mobilized to help Ibrăileanu with his degree, and then voted Lovinescu out of office (June 1912).

This was Lovinescu's first clash with the Moldavian Poporanists (or left-wing traditionalists from Moldavia). His rivalry with Ibrăileanu also placed him at odds with Viața Românească writers, Sadoveanu included. Lovinescu made his return to Bucharest, musing: "We [Romanians] lack even the modicum of a sense of solidarity. [...] At some point one loses the sense of reality, of humanity and abandons himself to impressions or to the interests that come together or fall apart." For some two years, Eugen Lovinescu substituted Professor Pompiliu Eliade's French Literature course at Bucharest University. After putting out a sketch story collection (Scenete și fantezii), he debuted as a novelist, with the 1913 Aripa morții ("The Wing of Death"). Also in 1913, he published a biographical sketch of 19th-century novelist Costache Negruzzi.

He began courting Ecaterina Bălăcioiu, a French-language teacher. The daughter of landowner G. G. Bălăcioiu, she married Lovinescu in 1915, bringing him a large dowry. The young couple moved into a new home on Câmpineanu Street, downtown Bucharest.

After the start of World War I, Lovinescu channeled his nationalist and Francophile politics into open support for the Entente Powers. From 1914 to 1916, as Romania maintained its neutrality, the critic became known as one of the prominent "Ententist" and interventionist opinion makers (see Romania in World War I).

Especially supportive of Romanians trapped in Austria-Hungary, Lovinescu and poet Ion Minulescu represented the interventionist section of the Writers' Society. They were opposed there by "Germanophiles", neutralists, and Poporanists; the organization virtually split along these lines during autumn 1915. There was another such confrontation between Lovinescu and Ion Vinea, a cultural reviewer spoke with socialist sympathies. Through Vinea, Lovinescu was attacked by the left-leaning circles of Romanian Symbolism: "a young man, already bourgeois, already fat and quite naturally soft", was Vinea's description of Lovinescu.

As Romania joined the Entente in summer 1916, Lovinescu celebrated war in his articles for the Ententist press. He volunteered for active service in the Romanian Land Forces, but was assigned to reservist duties, as a military censor. He was still troubled by nationalist excesses: writing for Flacăra, he criticized Eminescu's version of patriotism.

Then, as the armies of the Central Powers stormed into Bucharest and the government escaped to Moldavia, Lovinescu joined the exodus: he was teacher at the Fălticeni gymnasium, and, in 1917, opened a private high school for refugee children.

separate peace of 1918

Greater Romania

Transylvania and Bessarabia

Shortly after the victory celebrations, Lovinescu published a long series of articles, exposing Germanophilia or collaborationism within the writers' community. An early target was the Poporanist George Topîrceanu, a former prisoner of war; in turn, he accused Lovinescu of having led a sheltered life during the war.

Lovinescu's academic prospects were still vague. In 1918 and 1919, he returned to Bucharest a substitute professor of comparative literature, taking over for Charles Drouhet. He tried his hand at publishing a literary review, Lectura pentru Toți ("Reading for All"). In 1921, he made a new attempt at academic writing, with a monograph on Moldavian classic Gheorghe Asachi.

The period witnessed the inconspicuous start of Lovinescu's main contribution as publicist: Sburătorul magazine. It was the voice of tame modernism, equally adverse to traditionalism and to the burgeoning avant-garde. Its manifesto called for re-sensitizing "love and art", for replanting "the flower of common sense".

A literary society, also called Sburătorul, was formed around Lovinescu's townhouse. It became a second home for scores of aspiring or established authors. Lovinescu was personally involved in their careers, giving them directions and following their daily evolution for the remainder of his life. Here was the nucleus for a new school of literary criticism, whose members were more or less Lovinescu's proteges. In Lovinescu's own words, they were the "third post-Maiorescu generation": George Călinescu, Șerban Cioculescu, Pompiliu Constantinescu, Perpessicius, Vladimir Streinu, Tudor Vianu. The club was even open to the former disciples of Dragomirescu, while others, such as Benjamin Fondane, were fiercely independent Symbolists.

The new club was also highly successful at recruiting members from various cultural environments, from the Transylvanian Liviu Rebreanu (originally a Sburătorul editorial secretary)

to the left-wing writers Felix Aderca

and Victor Eftimiu,

and Italian academic Ramiro Ortiz.

A while after, Sburătorul found itself a main asset: the person of modernist poet Ion Barbu. Lovinescu regarded Barbu with consideration, trying to get him published, but was distressed by Barbu's cocaine and ether addiction.

Although popular with the literati, Sburătorul had little commercial success. It only existed as a weekly from April 1919 to May 1921, and again from September to December 1921, returning as a monthly in March 1926, and ultimately disappearing in June 1927. Powerless against such financing problems, Lovinescu switched to keeping a handwritten record of all his literary sessions, later released under the title Memorii ("Memoirs"). Meanwhile, his essays were taken up by some other periodicals, including Ramiro Ortiz's academic journal, Roma, and modernist or semi-modernist papers: Noua Revistă Română, Rampa, Falanga, Flacăra, Viața Literară.

Lovinescu's leading contribution to cultural history came out in 1924–1925, as the three volumes of Istoria civilizației române moderne ("The History of Modern Romanian Civilization"), published with Editura Ancora. The books' defense of Westernization and capitalism was an in-depth response to traditionalist and Poporanist theses, and, in time, came to be considered fundamental for Romania's great cultural debate.

By that moment, Lovinescu's support for modernization met younger adversaries, most of whom were in the process of joining far right movements. One early critic was Nichifor Crainic, a poet and thinker who supplemented Iorga's national conservatism with a distinctly national Orthodox ethos. Taking over as editor at the formerly modernist Gândirea, he attacked Lovinescu in his 1926 mission statement, A doua neatârnare ("The Second Independence"). Among the other anti-Lovinescians was philosopher Nae Ionescu; he also looked back to Orthodox nationalism and expressed admiration for Romania's oriental spirituality (originally a Symbolist, Ionescu had written his first anti-Lovinescu piece in 1912).

The interwar ushered in changes to Lovinescu's professional life: in 1928, he left Matei Basarab High School to take up employment as a Latin teacher at Mihai Viteazul National College.

Adevărul

His daughter Monica made an early debut in prose with Adevărul's children's supplement Dimineața Copiilor.

As biographer, Lovinescu was coming to revise his stances on Eminescu and Maiorescu. He took several trips back to Moldavia, with the explicit purpose of retracing Eminescu's steps. Upon his return, he put out two biographical novels: Mite (1934), Bălăuca (1935). They were received with astonishment by Lovinescu's contemporaries. Commentators were quick to describe both books as sentimentalist failures and unreliable documents. Among the negative responses were those coming from two of Lovinescu's erstwhile friends: Călinescu and Cioculescu.

Still graver accusations came from within traditionalism, which described Lovinescu as not just an iconoclast, but also a "pornographer". The far right and antisemitic circles profited from the resulting scandal, propagating the claim that Lovinescu was in the pay of Jewish interests, which sought to undermine Eminescu's patriotic legacy. Iorga and his Neamul Românesc gazette joined in, as did Convorbiri Literare.

Lovinescu first responded in December 1935, with a Facla article. Undeterred, he also put out the essay Eminesciana and his replies to Convorbiri editor Alexandru Tzigara-Samurcaș, all of them with Adevărul. They were countercritiques of Eminescu's personality cult, and a general defense of artistic license.

The conflict peaked late in 1936, when Lovinescu was refused for membership into the Romanian Academy. The traditionalists maneuvered to elect one of their own, the antisemitic ideologue A. C. Cuza, while Lovinescu was opposed by both Iorga and Crainic. Theirs was an anti-modernist coalition of "extreme and mainstream nationalism", in which Iorga had the key role (as documented in later years by literary historians).

Lovinescu was also failing at captivating the minds of a younger generation of intellectuals. Occasionally grouped under the label of Trăirism, these authors idealized anti-liberalism and counterrevolutions, paying homage to Nae Ionescu. According to scholar Irina Livezeanu, "it is the autochthonist Nae Ionescu who is widely considered the 'mentor of the «new generation,»' and not the modernist Eugen Lovinescu." Lovinescu was perplexed by this intellectual fashion, but felt compelled to ignore it; the modernist counteroffensive was mounted by Cioculescu, whom Lovinescu praised as the natural enemy of "mystagogues". Lovinescu was generally ignored by the "new generation" polemicists, but the new wave of Trăirist mysticism had an unexpected influence on Lovinescu's intimate circle. In 1929, his own nephew Vasile turned to esotericism. As a student of Julius Evola and René Guénon, he took for himself the pen name Geticus.

Lovinescianism was not only at odds with the neo-mystics, but also with "new generation" centrists or leftists, such as Americanist Petru Comarnescu, poet Sandu Tudor and sociologist Henri H. Stahl.

but Ionesco's vocal anti-fascism drew them closer in the 1940s.

Although isolated in this manner, Lovinescu could still count on new arrivals at Sburătorul. This was the age when Anton Holban, Lovinescu's favorite nephew, debuted as a novelist. Holban arrived to the scene at roughly the same time as new Sburătorul affiliates: Sorana Gurian

The group included a number of young essayists who sided with Lovinescu on theoretical grounds—foremost among them, the liberal conservative journalist Nicolae Steinhardt.

radicalization into fascism, under the guidance of Ionescu and Crainic. The Iron Guard, a successful fascist movement, was absorbing the "new generation" into its ranks, while taking over the campaign against Lovinescu's liberal modernism.

Lovinescu publicly responded to this new threat: like other members of the conservative and liberal elite (Ibrăileanu, Constantin Rădulescu-Motru, P. P. Negulescu), he openly condemned the Guard's racism, and in the process exposed himself to the risk of assassination. Guardist papers such as Sfarmă-Piatră, Porunca Vremii and Vestitorii published a number of lampoons, attacking "the scoundrel" Lovinescu as the apostle of degenerate art and "Semitic" literature etc.

Lovinescu was unimpressed by the diatribes, noting: "They shan't be able to impose imbecility over our country's literature, not even if they should start putting up gallows in Theater Square." However, even the Lovinescu family had split along political lines. Early on, the Iron Guard received the allegiance of Horia Lovinescu. Vasile Lovinescu was also close to the Guard, mediating between its leader Corneliu Zelea Codreanu and a network of esotericist fascists.

Lovinescu was living in separation from Ecaterina, and she eventually obtained a divorce. In March 1934, the court ruled that Lovinescu had "deserted his conjugal home"; Monica's custody was granted to Ecaterina. The critic was residing at a new apartment near the Cișmigiu Gardens, at 95 Elisabeta Blvd., to be known as Casa Lovinescu. By 1937, he was complaining about health problems, and feared that paralysis would prevent him from writing. He was consulted by a friend, the writer and general practitioner Virgiliu Moscovici-Monda, and later by specialists such as Ion T. Niculescu. Their diagnosis was inconclusive, with some reports suggesting that Lovinescu was a hypochondriac. A year later, Lovinescu ended his career in teaching, with an early retirement on health grounds. He worked mainly on translating The Odyssey and The Aeneid, in updated versions with modernized language, later criticized by Romanian classicists.

World War II

Carol II, who inaugurated Romania's first totalitarian experiments (see Romania during World War II). Controversially, Lovinescu was one of several intellectuals who voluntarily joined the ranks of Carol's quasi-fascist mono-party—the National Renaissance Front. He was made a Knight of Meritul Cultural Order.

In 1940, Lovinescu published the definitive biography of Maiorescu, with the official press Editura Fundațiilor Regale. In Lovinescu's own words, this took "enormous" work, received with reluctance by his editors. This reassessment of Maiorescu's work as a relevant asset was also the final act of his dispute with Iorga. The nationalist lobby that had been blocking Lovinescu's university access also prevented him from receiving the Academy's Hamangiu Award. The advent of fascism and traditionalism also meant that Lovinescu was being marginalized from all walks of public life, even to the astonishment of Lovinescu's adversaries. Lovinescu, meanwhile, was becoming jaded, less interested in welcoming young writers—dismissive, for instance, of the adventure novelist Radu Tudoran.

During the "Phony War", Lovinescu cheered for the Allies, confessing his bewilderment at the fall of France. He was even more shocked by the events of summer 1940, when the Soviet takeover of Bessarabia. The news left him in tears, and even made him reconsider his lifelong Francophilia. Privately, Lovinescu regarded the rapprochement between Romania and Nazi Germany as a necessary shield against further Soviet threats.

Lovinescu broke with old friends, such as pro-communist poet Victor Eftimiu, whose unreciprocated flirtation with the Iron Guard is caustically mentioned in Lovinescu's notes. They also record, minutely, the fascization of other Lovinescians. For instance, Ion Barbu, with his "insane", "odious" and "beastly" interventions. Barbu never interrupted his visits to Casa Lovinescu, haranguing his colleagues with antisemitic remarks, eulogizing Iron Guard leaders, and donning the Guard' green-shirted uniform. Lovinescu was at the time close to, and probably romantically involved with, the poetess Ștefania Zottoviceanu. As another sign that Lovinescu's liberal views were becoming unfashionable, Ștefania appeared at one of Sburătorul sessions to praise his arch-rival, Nae Ionescu.

Lovinescu was then shocked by Romania's withdrawal from Northern Transylvania (the Second Vienna Award), particularly since it introduced political instability at home, fueling the Iron Guard's revolutionary zeal. In short while, the Guard managed to topple Carol, proclaiming the "National Legionary State" (during which Vasile Lovinescu served as Mayor of Fălticeni).

For his part, Lovinescu remained an increasingly isolated opponent, horrified by the Jilava murders of anti-Guard politicians, and deploring his rival Iorga's execution-style killing. Shortly after the Iorga murder, the Guard was ousted from power by its more conservative military partner, Ion Antonescu. This battle, thereafter known as the "Legionary Rebellion", had Barbu as active participant on the the Guard's side.

In June 1941, on Antonescu's command, Romania joined in the German invasion of the Soviet Union. Lovinescu returned to publishing with a biography of Maiorescu's political ally, Petre P. Carp: P. P. Carp, critic literar și literat ("P. P. Carp, the Literary Critic and Man of Letters"). It contains Lovinescu's explicit endorsement of anti-Russian policies. Nevertheless, Lovinescu endured a vocal critic of Antonescu's antisemitic policies, disturbed by the religious persecution and the Jewish deportations to Transnistria (see Holocaust in Romania). He was a conspicuous host to marginalized Jewish authors: old Sburătorul contributors, alongside younger proteges (Nina Cassian, Alfred Margul-Sperber), but also maintained contacts with Gurian, turned Jewish collaborationist. With old traditionalist rivals Ion Pillat and Vasile Voiculescu, Lovinescu planned a show a protest against the pending deportation of Margul-Sperber. On such grounds, Antonescu's Special Intelligence opened a file on Lovinescu. As the Eastern campaign broke down into stalemate, then panic, Lovinescu was carefully recording evidence of Antonescu's deceitful self-assurance.

Lovinescu's subsequent work was a book of memoirs and polemics, Aqua forte. Well received by the cultural press, it failed to register much success with the public. Such news contributed to Lovinescu's depression, but he was still active in promoting Romania's modernist writers wherever possible. He arranged for Slovak academic Jindra Hušková to translate Radu Tudoran's debut novel. His circle was frequented by a new generation of modernist poets, including Constant Tonegaru, Mihail Crama, and Dimitrie Stelaru. In 1942, Editura Vremea issued a Festschrift edited by Cioculescu, Vianu and the other core disciples—Lovinescu himself contributed, as Anonymus notarius.

A more significant event in Lovinescu's career, described by some as a final vindication, occurred in 1943: an informal group of Transylvanian modernists, the Sibiu Literary Circle, made a public show of support for Lovinescianism. Its core cell comprised Nicolae Balotă, Ion Dezideriu Sîrbu, Ion Negoițescu, Radu Stanca, Cornel Regman, Ștefan Augustin Doinaș, Eugen Todoran, and Victor Iancu. Their open letter of support was met with indignation by the radical right newspapers.

Those months saw a steady decline of Lovinescu's health, attributable to a liver disease. Described as "very weak, very pale", he was eventually interned in Colentina Hospital under Nicolae Lupu's supervision, but released after tests: his "post-hepatic jaundice and cholangitis" was found to be untreatable. These were supposedly the symptoms of either terminal cirrhosis or liver cancer. Lovinescu's final months were largely spent in uncharacteristic isolation, including separation from Ioana Postelnicu. As he wrote in his agendas, Ioana's jealous and "impertinent" husband had been pestering him. He was probably never informed of his impending death, and maintained an optimistic attitude. Looking back on over a hundred published works of criticism and literature, he concluded: "I have honored this signature of mine!" His last notebook entry, for July 12, 1943, looks forward to a liver biopsy.

The Sburătorul founder died in his home, on July 15, some time after having conversed with his chambermaid. A day later, his body was cremated, with a farewell ceremony and the music of Ludwig van Beethoven. His final two works were in print, and were issued, later that year, as T. Maiorescu și contemporanii lui ("T. Maiorescu and His Contemporaries") and T. Maiorescu și posteritatea lui critică ("T. Maiorescu and His Critical Posterity").

Traditionalist and Impressionist
As a young traditionalist, Lovinescu supported the expression of patriotic sentiment in art, and was in particular fascinated by Transylvanian poet-activists: even in later years, he described Octavian Goga as the embodiment of "the movement to reawaken our national energy". Cultural historians disagree on the implications of Lovinescu's interventionist activity in the first years of World War I. Maria Bucur sees him as "one of the few balanced thinkers" of the day, "weary of the nationalist fanfare", distancing himself from the strong anti-Germanism of other Francophile Romanians. Contrarily, Lucian Boia includes him among the "hot-heads" of nationalist theory. Lovinescu, he notes, went so far as to propose concentration camps for the "accursed race" of foreign troublemakers. Briefly, Lovinescu even chided Iorga for not being nationalist enough. He described Poporanist intellectual Constantin Stere as a mere publicity agent for "Mitteleuropa". However, as he explained later, he regarded Germanophiles as anti-modernizers, incapable of adapting themselves to the future.

Lovinescu's nationalism was soon tempered by his cultivation of Impressionism. He announced his transition in the late 1910s: "We are [...] the slaves of our schoolbooks and our teachers. [...] Even in literature, values change". Respectful of artistic intuition and unwelcoming of scientism, he did not view himself as a literary historian, but always as a critic and militant journalist. Criticism, he claimed, was the new art, stemming out of literature. Against scientism, Lovinescu maintained that literature itself was "an organized body which grows": any critic had only to look at the seemingly "haphazard" changes to uncover some "deep foundations".

In the 1920s, with Sburătorul, Lovinescu merged his Impressionistic criticism into the larger stream of literary and political modernism. Although his writing after that date is increasingly theoretical, he reamined an Impressionist at heart, and doubted the explanatory powers of theoretical thinking. Lovinescu's critique of traditionalist worldviews, made explicit with Istoria civilizației..., survives as his foremost contribution to social philosophy, the sociology of culture, and Romanian philosophy. As comparatist Mariana Boca writes, here is the the natural result of interwar clashes: Lovinescu repressed his traditionalist sensibilities to support an elusive renaissance of liberalism. Boca writes: "in a very young modern Romania, with an entirely fresh and frail nation state, an incipient and vulnerable democracy, a barely legitimized and virulently contested liberal capitalism, Eugen Lovinescu had no alternative."

For Lovinescu, nation-building was necessarily derivative: "the younger countries [...] are left to accept the social and political ideology of the countries with an older civilization." The long-term effect of "synchronism" (Lovinescu's working term) was the integration of Romania with the culturally homogenous world of the future. Lovinescu was adamant that such a trajectory was inescapable, no matter how intense the traditionalists' opposition.

Such ideas echoed earlier debates between liberals and conservatives, primarily that between the Wallachian "1848ers", who first issued a modernizing program, and the mid-19th-century "reactionaries". Lovinescu saw the former as champions of a Western ideology, defending them against conservative interpretation of history. He wrote in detail, and with sympathy, about the enthusiasm of aristocratic Romantics, who spent their energies on connecting Romanian culture to the West. The legacy of such groups was a Romanian liberal elite and, in time, the National Liberal Party (PNL). Consequently, and although he never formalized his membership to the PNL, Lovinescu is a times regarded as a National Liberal apologist, and his work as an illustration of National Liberal historiography.

Lovinescu's defense of liberalism was in consonance with tracts written by Ștefan Zeletin, a PNL ideologist, who had described Romania's destiny as dependent on fast modernization. Zeletin, whose approach to social theory was a likely influence on Lovinescu, even adapted the assumptions of historical materialism to verify his claim that laissez-faire and Europeanism were always in Romania's best interest. According to political scientist Victor Rizescu, Lovinescu even replicated Marxist jargon, the vehicular language of Romanian sociology, without being truly influenced by Marx.

Although receptive to such influence, Lovinescu remained entirely an opponent of Marxist literary criticism, as represented in Romania by Constantin Dobrogeanu-Gherea. He described Gherea's work as a politicized "deformation". Lovinescu borrowed critically from Marx, ignoring core ideas about superstructure or collectivism, and generally balancing him out against liberal thinkers. The result of such diverse influences has been paralleled to the theories of a 1940s development economist, Alexander Gerschenkron.

Overall, Lovinescu's determinism was social rather than economic: he believed that a conscious action of committed individuals was generally more important than the economic environment in ensuring social, political or cultural change. He was somewhat skeptical of evolutionism (the gradualist alternative to revolution) and described it as rather inefficient in Romania's case. With that, Lovinescu saw all positive development as effected by "revolutions"—not popular revolts, but rather engineered "social revolutions", "ideological revolutions", or "revolutions from the top". His case study was the French Revolution, the mother of all modern political principles and freedoms. In Romania, capitalism and Europeanism were the result of a later political shock: the Treaty of Adrianople (1829), under which residents of the two Danubian Principalities were allowed to trade abroad, forming an early, Western-minded, middle class.

Titu Maiorescu

Maiorescu, an evolutionist, leading adversary of liberal nation-building, and founder of the conservative club Junimea, had introduced to Romanian social science the paradigm known as "forms without concept". According to Maiorescu, the repetitive borrowings from Western "forms" needed to be critically reassessed or even reduced, until such time as Romania could absorb them naturally into her "concept". Lovinescu revolutionized this perspective, reading into it the possibility of an optimistic determinism. His view was that "forms" would naturally fit in with the context with time, and that the way forward was through more, not less, borrowings. In his books, Lovinescu still described a (non-dogmatic) role for national specificity in art, but argued that this could only emerge from a prolonged Westernization, and the relative assimilation of its alien influences. He even describes Romanians as already prepared for Westernization by their "Latin" roots (see Origin of the Romanians). That connection, he writes, was rediscovered after centuries of isolation, making Romania an "outpost" of European civilization.

Lovinescu borrowed Maiorescu's perspective, but compared them with The Laws of Imitation, by French sociologist Gabriel Tarde. For his part, Tarde had explained all historical development as caused by emulation and acculturation. Lovinescu also built on similar arguments made by the 19th-century scholars A. D. Xenopol and Pompiliu Eliade, both of whom had advised against Maiorescu's skepticism. At core, Lovinescu was a student of G. W. F. Hegel. Not persuaded by the Kantianism of many other liberals, and indifferent to their anti-ideological discourse, he remained heavily influenced by the main concepts of Hegelianism.

Maiorescian but ambivalent, Lovinescu offered a peculiar narrative as to the genesis and historical role of mainstream conservatism. Namely, he suggested that any illiberal model in Romanian history was paradoxically indebted to the spread of acculturation. Junimea took over for the evolutionist ideologies preached in Germanic-speaking countries, while the concerned "Moldavian" liberals (Mihail Kogălniceanu to Garabet Ibrăileanu) were retrograde leftovers of such Westernization. The Romantic nationalism of Junimea, he assessed, was always an anti-progressive affair. This ambivalence shows up in Lovinescu's ultimate verdict on Eminescu: he was both a major "reactionary" figure and "a genius".

With his anti-conservative analysis, Lovinescu was also critiquing the 20th-century religious revivals. He laughed off all Marxian attacks on religion, but, for his own part, promoted a secularist modernity, incompatible with the modern mythology of Nietzscheism. Against the religious traditionalists Nae Ionescu and Nichifor Crainic, he saw the Romanian Orthodox Church as, at best, a marginal contributor to Romania's identity. Orthodoxy, Lovinescu argued, was guilty of "Orientalizing" Romania and of importing Slavic customs; the non-Latin church itself was an "obscurantist" structure. In an oft-quoted remark from Istoria..., Lovinescu even justifies his defense of secularism through Russophobia: "behind the Byzantine cross lurks the Russian."

Lovinescu spoke with reverence about how Roman Catholics and the Protestant Reformation had helped set up a truly Romanian written culture; whereas Orthodoxy favored cultural isolation: "Enclosed in our dogmas, nothing that was happening in Europe could reach our territory." Moreover Lovinescu irritated the proponents of ethnic nationalism by postulating "racial" differences between the Romanians of Moldavia (in the northeast) and those of Wallachia (in the south); the former were "contemplative" or "poetic", the latter "mobile" and "practical".

Traditionalists and nationalists were contributing their own, diametrically opposite, versions of Romanian cultural history. They implicitly or explicitly attacked Lovinescu's theses, in particular his "flaccid" judgment about the inescapability of imitation; according to Crainic's 1926 manifesto: "Mr. Lovinescu [would want us] to get rid of our history—and thus of our ancestors—and to get rid of orthodoxism—thus of our spirit—in order to move [us] somewhere to the classic land of Latinity." Also targeted was Lovinescu's conviction that revolution (attacked by Gândirea theologian Dumitru Stăniloae as essentially un-Romanian) was a natural solution to the nation's problems.

Lovinescu's anti-reactionary stance eventually brought him into contact with the reformed Poporanists at Viața Românească, including social columnist Mihai Ralea and by art promoter Eugen Filotti. Lovinescu ridiculed this group in several instances, and admonished the left-wing agrarianism of Ralea's National Peasants' Party. However, he agreed with Ralea that Romania was fundamentally an agrarian economy, and, in fact, a budding "rural democracy". Any further collaboration between Lovinescu and the left was hampered by Lovinescu's support for the PNL. To the agrarians and socialists, the National Liberals were a semi-dictatorial, self-serving clique.

Beyond traditionalist reactions, Istoria civilizației... has been criticized as an insufficient or inaccurate explanation of historical developments. Rizescu notes that Lovinescu was never thought of as a professional sociologist by his contemporaries. Istoria..., he writes, was justly attacked "for sociological amateurism and naïveté, as well as for arbitrary intellectual syncretism and emphatic juxtaposition of theories, ideas, and schools of thought." Rizescu adds: "Eugen Lovinescu and Ștefan Zeletin have induced us [...] into subscribing to false sociologies of modernization and to wrong assessments of the historical forces at work on the course of Romanian social transformations. [...] they blocked our access to any intellectual attitude that could not be ascribed a role on their seductive historical pictures." Nonetheless, other historians defend Lovinescu's intuitive commentary on Romanian acculturation. Lucian Nastasă finds it to be "always valid".

Also up for debate, is Lovinescu's answer to Maiorescu. Neoconservative philosopher Horia-Roman Patapievici finds it superficial and illusory (Patapievici is criticized in turn for displaying the hurt pride of an anti-modernist). According to Patapievici, Lovinescu gave credence to bankrupt "forms", including those imports which never did find their "concept". Political scientist Mihaela Czobor-Lupp suggests that, like nationalist insularity, Lovinescu's program remains a "false option": "[it creates] a free-floating layer of values and meaning for which the Romanian cultural soil might have no echo, no concrete anchorage." She also argues that Lovinescu's praise for social revolution was irresponsibly "utopian". Contrarily, Mariana Boca writes that Lovinescu's narrative had a "fundamental contradiction": although idealizing revolution as a voluntary break with the past, it refused to endorse anything other than moderate reforms and steady imitation.

On communism and fascism
Eugen Lovinescu defied the far right and the far left alike with his strong critique of totalitarianism.

Additionally, Lovinescu's worldview was in sharp contrast with the Guard's version of history, which placed the Dacians, and not their Romanized descendants, at the root of Romanian ethogenesis.

His own enlistment into the National Renaissance Front, obliquely mentioned in his private notebooks, did not necessarily bring an endorsement of Carol II's para-fascism: as noted by the literary historian Valeriu Râpeanu, Lovinescu made a point of not contributing to Carol's personality cult.

Lovinescu believed that the National Legionary State was the creation of "loafers", "the unleashing of [their] hatreds".

Lovinescu stated his anti-communism in the 1920s and '30s, when he noted that the Great Depression had made "nine out of ten youths" dream of a planned economy. In his 1941 study of Petre P. Carp, Lovinescu described the Soviet Union and "Bolshevik imperialism" as natural enemies of Romania. Carp's Russophobia, he concluded, was entirely justified given the subsequent developments. Further, Lovinescu argued that Tsarist autocracy had only been enhanced by communism, "a social fanaticism for which there is no precedent and [its] military preparation on a huge scale".

Lovinescu as racist
Lovinescu's cosmopolitan outlook and his condemnation of the far right produced statements of support for the Romanian Jews, and remarks about racial tolerance: "Let us look upon each other to understand who we are, to enjoy the human nature that we all share." Nevertheless, he himself displayed the racialist prejudice of his generation, and occasionally vented them in his essays. According to Maria Bucur, his very definition of Romanians as a "race", although vague, is a clue that "he was familiar and comfortable with notions of biological determinism."

Various of Lovinescu's comments may also indicate that, privately at least, he was also an antisemite. His memoirs describe a childhood shaped by antisemitic mentors, but also describe Lovinescu's "soundest friendships" with Jewish intellectuals. Emil Dorian, a Jewish writer, was one upset by Lovinescu's habit of airing his antisemitic views, "amicably", to his Jewish proteges. One of these, George Radu Bogdan, noted that such episodes were few and far between, and that Lovinescu could restrain himself. Vague echoes of this casual antisemitism exist in Lovinescu's scholarly works: although he commended Jewish participation in cultural life, he proclaimed the racial divide to be forever unassailable. He referred to Maiorescu's similar views, which equally discouraged either Jewish assimilation or pogroms.

Lovinescu's notebooks provide more violent glimpses on Lovinescu's antisemitic feelings, and in particular his casual use of the ethnic slurs jidan ("kike") or jifcă (for "Jewess"). Lovinescu was much interested in recording the racial origins of his guests, singling out the Jews: Nina Cassian was "the Hebrew virgin", Sorana Gurian "the little Jewess from Iași, with her legs broken".

During World War II, Lovinescu declared himself against racial policies, writing that the marginalization of Romanian Jews had been "a bomb". He even provided unemployable Jews with financial support, but still credited antisemitic propaganda—according to which Jews had rejoiced at the fall of Bessarabia.

While committing to writing his "synchronist" and modernist agenda, Lovinescu willingly detached himself from nationalist literature, revisited his take on Germanophile writers, and gave exposure to talent in whatever form of expression. A critic, he wrote, needed to perform his craft with "sympathy" for the writers discussed, and in so doing to prolong the shelf life of all good books. According to author Alex. Cistelecan, his concept of periodical "revision" turned into "self-revision". Yet, as argued by critic Antonio Patraș, Lovinescu put on an "Apollonian" mask, which allowed him to promote "a rather abstract and grandiloquent discourse on personality, one that would spare him the efforts of introspection." At core, Patraș writes, Lovinescu was an "obsessive personalist".

The "revisions" became in time a structured theory about aesthetic relativism, or "autonomy in art". Lovinescu theorized that this guideline, when coupled with a critic's moral independence, would inevitably produce an honest and objective, if unscientific, perspective on the literary phenomenon. As a determinist, he also theorized the "mutation of values", whereby each generation creates its own cultural canon. The interplay of historicism and individual achievement was a key factor, about which Lovinescu wrote: "civilization is not a positive gain, a progress, unless it registers a simultaneous intensification of spiritual and artistic life [...]. An advanced civilization does not [necessarily] presume a cultural identity". The regulating factors in such a mutation, Lovinescu trusted, were the saeculum and the "spirit of the age".

Although non-dogmatic, Lovinescian "autonomy" could not imply a complete lack of political subjectivity. It was in fact a Junimist concept, borrowed from Maiorescu. According to Rizescu: "Lovinescu and his disciples [...] dissociated [the notion of 'autonomy in art'] from any conservative ideological leanings and infused it with the political values of liberalism and democracy." Moreover, "synchronism" described art and literature as interdependent with social and political evolutions. As Boca writes, "autonomy in art" primarily meant weighing a work of art against its particular context. Beyond the political controversy, Lovinescu gave more weight to urban culture because he personally found the city more worthy of interest than the village, and cosmopolitanism more inspiring than age-old patriarchy.

When it came to applied aesthetics, Lovinescu saw himself as anti-Maiorescu: Junimist literary theory, as Lovinescu saw it, was dispassionate and anachronistic. According to scholar Z. Ornea noted, Lovinescu was not "a hagiographer", but rather Maiorescu's first "modern interpreter".

Lovinescu discovered Liviu Rebreanu, praising him as a quintessential Transylvanian novelist

For Lovinescu, Rebreanu's war-themed Forest of the Hanged was not worthy as a patriotic story, but rather as a "granite-like" epic with a captivating anti-hero.

The complex nature of Lovinescu's relativism showed up in various instances. He referred to Radu Tudoran as "a scoundrel", but found his Harbor in the East to be "exceptional". He also admitted that rival Petru Comarnescu had written good introductions to American theater.

Lovinescu did not respond in kind to the avant-garde's attack on his work, and was rather open to self-criticism. As he put, the older the critic, the more "reactionary" his criticism. Despite being ridiculed by Ion Vinea and in conflict with Contimporanul, Lovinescu reviewed them with interest and even deference, praising Vinea's "talent and mobility."

Instead, the aging Lovinescu made a point of replying to traditionalist attacks. He called Iorga a "pontiff of indecency and insult", reviewing Sămănătorul as "the cemetery of Romanian poetry".

Although irritated by the neotraditionalists, Lovinescu applied his "mutation of values" lens to the prose and poetry of some conservative writers. Usually, this occurred whenever Lovinescu detected an echo from international modernism in their conventional works. He reviewed with sympathy Crainic's pastoral poetry, highlighting its debt to Francis Jammes and Rainer Maria Rilke. Although Trăirism was at odds with Lovinescian liberalism, its critique of rationalism was not fundamentally incompatible with the aesthetic relativism of Sburătorul.

Lovinescu vs. Călinescu
A peculiar relationship developed between Eugen Lovinescu and the younger critic George Călinescu, alternating shows of mutual respect with displays of rancor.

Lovinescu was consumed by the fear that he, unlike Călinescu, would never have a substantial contribution to the study of Eminescu's poetic work.

Nevertheless, Călinescu is often classified as a Lovinescian disciple.

Novels
Although least known as a writer of fiction, Lovinescu was a tireless novelist: his still-unpublished magnum opus, Mălurenii, comprises 15 volumes of prose. After unpromising debuts (critic Liviu Grăsoiu describes Aripa morții as "justly forgotten"), Lovinescu became, with Cezar Petrescu, one of the first novelists inspired by Eminescu's life. He stands alone in having documented Eminescu's awkward and sordid lifestyle, down to his failing personal hygiene. Mite and Bălăuca focus each on one love affair in the national poet's life. The former is about the relationship between Eminescu and poetess Mite Kremnitz, loosely based on accounts by Kremnitz and George Călinescu. Lovinescu saw Mite as a psychological, "purely Freudian", novel. In fact, he had registered Călinescu's study as a provocation, noting: "When my Eminescu will enter through the door, [Călinescu's] will jump out through the window." The second work, Bălăuca, is about Eminescu's return to his first love, Veronica Micle, and, according to critic Marcel Cornis-Pope, is "skillfully" written around "vivid flashbacks". It was hotly debated for those episodes where Lovinescu seems to be identifying himself with Eminescu.

The scandal took Lovinescu by surprise, and led him to consider himself "a victim of Eminescu". Deterred from completing the series with one final chapter of the Eminescu–Micle relationship, he still defended his two books; these, he cautioned, were not to be read as accurate biographies, but rather with "the hallucinatory vividness of [Eminescu's] spiritual existence, the dream world in which he lived". He also confessed: "true, I did not settle for jut the facts but, based on some irrefutable documents, I aimed to determine Eminescu's erotic psychology, taking a definitive stand in the confrontation of critics and psychoanalysts."

Despite Lovinescu's ridicule of Eminescu's personality cult and supposedly "transcendent power", Eminescu expert Ioana Both argued in 2002 that both novels work to consolidate a mythical image, that of the tragic, morbid, "Romantic genius". Lovinescu editor Gabriela Omăt also writes that the idea "of romanticizing Eminescu's biography" was "quite uninspired". The autofictional element, she believes, is "abhorrent".

Lovinescu's autofictional narratives, comprising Bizu, but also Firu'n patru ("Splitting Hairs"), Diana, Mili, and Acord final ("Final Chord"),

Legacy
Despite competing with traditionalist rhetoric and losing momentum even in Lovinescu's lifetime, "synchronism" endures as a paradigm in Romanian society and culture. Lovinescu has been called "the most influential literary critic of [his] time", his narrative a watershed of Romanian historiography.

Communist Romania

communist censors

His work, reduced to a sample of bourgeois idealism, was attacked and played down by communist literati such as Ion Vitner and Paul Georgescu.

Ecaterina Bălăcioiu became a political prisoner: sentenced to 18 years, she died at Văcărești prison, on June 7, 1960. The Lovinescu home in Fălticeni was nationalized and made into a school annex. The regime also cracked down on Sburătorul affiliates, who served prison terms in the Romanian version of the Gulag; among others: Streinu, Tonegaru and Steinhardt. Negoițescu and other members of the Sibiu cell were also imprisoned at various intervals.

Monica Lovinescu and her future husband, Virgil Ierunca, both left Romania in 1947, with the very last student grants afforded by Western institutions. Unusually, Horia Lovinescu was recovered by the communist establishment, reinventing himself as official playwright of socialist realism with plays which satirized his own family environment.

In 1963, the regime announced a relaxation of censorship, and a limited "reconsideration" of Lovinescu's contribution to literary culture.

national communism of Nicolae Ceaușescu and a nationalist cultural establishment

According to Victor Rizescu, the result was striking: as traditionalism and far-right isolationism mutated into, and identified with, the social doctrines of national communism, the cultural field, still infiltrated by Lovinescu's disciples, shed light on Lovinescu's social science. In the process, they ignored evidence that Lovinescu was an amateur sociologist, and, unofficially, recommended him as a leading social theorist. The regime was tolerant of this current, describing Lovinescu as one of the more acceptable bourgeois theorists.

Istoria civilizației... was given imprimatur in 1972. However, all of Lovinescu's comparatism between left- and right-wing totalitarianism was censored out, as was his tribute to liberal democracy. These were necessary concessions on the part of the editor, Z. Ornea; privately, Ornea was discarding Marxism, becoming one of Lovinescu's prominent disciples in cultural sociology.

Other literary historians regarded Lovinescu as a mentor, and came to defend synchronism against "protochronist" ideologues favored by the regime, such as Edgar Papu. They include survivors of the Sibiu circle such as Balotă, I. D. Sîrbu and Negoițescu, joined by Constantin Ciopraga, Dumitru Micu, Alexandru Paleologu, Lucian Raicu, Eugen Simion and Nicolae Manolescu. The cultural debates attracted, on Lovinescu's side, philosophers and historians of ideas, including Alexandru Duțu, Solomon Marcus, and Adrian Marino. Joining them was Ovid Crohmălniceanu, originally a Marxist-Leninist, alarmed by the nationalist resurgence.

Despite sharing a political interface, the synchronists were criticized later for using the "autonomy in art" principle as an escapist option. Aesthetic relativism, it was argued, allowed them not to engage the communist system directly. This practice was questioned by another Lovinescu follower, Ileana Vrancea, whose had been marginalized by the regime for bringing up Lovinescu's liberalism.

Monica Lovinescu

The communist regime preserved a grudge against her: it recognized her 1981 sale of Eugen Lovinescu's house to private owners, but forced them to share this property with another family, ignoring it historical value.

Romanian Revolution of 1989

Lovinescu, who endures as a main feature of the literature textbooks and the Baccalaureate study guide,

The recovery and republication of Lovinescian texts was taken up by Editura Minerva. In 1998, it re-released Aqua forte care of editor Gabriela Omăt.

In 2000, Casa Lovinescu was donated by daughter Monica to the Humanitas Aqua-Forte Foundation, and became host to an Eugen Lovinescu Literary Club. The Fălticeni home has a problematic legal status, which prevented it from being turned into a museum.

Between 1993 and 2003, Minerva and later the Academy's Călinescu Institute published the full collection of Lovinescu's daily notes, as reviewed by Monica Lovinescu, Gabriela Omăt, Margareta Feraru and Alexandru George. These texts, grouped under the working title Agende ("Agendas"), were welcomed as the ultimate document of Lovinescu's politics and personal life, clarifying some aspects that had puzzled his commentators and his disciples.

Lovinescu's Europeanist stance and his liberal critique of tradition have been expanded, after the Revolution, by figures such as Lucian Boia, economic historian Bogdan Murgescu and political essayist Cristian Preda. The issue of whether Lovinescu's liberalism has been carried on, either politically or intellectually, by any new faction of post-Revolution Romania, remains contentious. Rizescu suggests that the two opposing sides should be thought of as liberals (those who endorse Lovinescu) and protectionists (those who dismiss him). In reference to the post-1989 democracy, historian Adrian Cioroianu noted that those modernists who support Lovinescu's thesis, and who are "the ferment of transformation in Romanian society", tend to be opposed by a seemingly more numerous group of intellectuals who return to Maiorescu's pure "forms without concept" skepticism. According to Boca, Lovinescu's vocabulary in particular had to be, and was, relearned by the post-1989 intellectuals.

Lovinescu is still described by some as an accurate reader of cultural and social evolution, even into the globalization age; others disagree. In 2001, philosopher Marin Aiftincă proposed that "to a great extent [Lovinescu's synchronism] remains valid today", as modern communication "accelerates and amplifies the process of values transmission". Scholar Mihaela Pop contrarily asserts that the economic trends in Romania took precedence over "mentality": Romania's renewed push for modernization was wealth-based, not intellectualist.