An Infamous Past: E.M. Cioran and the Rise of Fascism in Romania Hardcover – Sep 15 2005
Customers Who Bought This Item Also Bought
No Kindle device required. Download one of the Free Kindle apps to start reading Kindle books on your smartphone, tablet, and computer.
To get the free app, enter your e-mail address or mobile phone number.
From Publishers Weekly
Romanian poet, philosopher and editor Petreu shows in this dense but fresh work that many Romanian intellectuals were seduced by fascist ideology during the interwar years—and that philosopher Cioran, an "aphorist of humorous despair," was haunted by this legacy for the rest of his life. Petreu details the ultranationalist, pro-Christian ideology of the Legion of the Archangel Michael, a movement of intellectuals that gained prominence in Romania after WWI. As with many ideologies of the era, Petreu writes, anti-Semitism lay at the movement's core. Cioran's own ideology, rooted in the wish to turn Romania's "depressing present into a grandiose future," included a more complex view of Jews, outlined in his 1936 The Transfiguration of Romania. He envied what he saw as Jewish productivity in government, business and the arts. But Petreu shows how his outlook, adapted from Spengler, also necessitated hostility toward Jews and other non-Romanians. Cioran left Romania after WWII and became ashamed of his earlier fascism, but Petreu mines his life for lessons to be learned today about how good intentions can lead to extremism. (Nov. 4)
Copyright © Reed Business Information, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
An enormous contribution to our understanding not only of Romania's tormented past, but also of European intellectual history. (Marci Shore, Indiana University Slavic and East European Journal)
Represents the most thorough analysis of Cioran's inter-war fascination with fascism and nationalism…thought-provoking read. (Patterns Of Prejudice)
A thorough and vivid portrait of a Romanian gifted fascist thinker, who dreamed about ‘a Romania with the population of China and the destiny of France.’ Like his legionary colleagues, Emil Cioran admired Hitler, justified his crimes and believed that capitalism was ‘immoral, Judaic and anti-Christian.’ Unlike other Iron Guard ideologists, Cioran praised Lenin and envisioned a modern Romania driven by industrialization and urban values. Like his comrades, Cioran advocated a fascist dictatorship and cultivated Corneliu Zelea Codreanu, the criminal führer of the Iron Guard. But unlike his friend and fellow Iron Guard ideologist, Mircea Eliade, who did not show any willingness to part with his totalitarian past, Cioran had the decency, in his productive French exile, to regret his fascist youth and break with it. (Radu Ioanid)
Dense but fresh work. (Publishers Weekly)
A vivid social and political memoir. (Diane C. Donovan, editor, Midwest Book Review Midwest Book Review)
A sure and unobtrusive guide to the fevered, alienated milieu that turned Cioran...into a passionate partisan of Hitler. (Robert Legvold Foreign Affairs)
Excellent.... Marta Petreu's biography is a well-documented account of everything shameful that Cioran ever wrote. (Zbigniew Janowski First Things)
Brilliantly thorough. (Carlin Romano The Chronicle of Higher Education)
From now on, I’ll never read Cioran with as much appreciation. (Eric Rasmussen University Of Illinois, Chicago)
Most Helpful Customer Reviews on Amazon.com (beta)
Petreu is intimately familar with Cioran's writings, and quotes from them liberally. That alone would make this book an important source for readers of Cioran who cannot read Romanian. She has also troubled to read his 1930s journalism and his correspondence (some of which she has collected and published in Cluj), texts unavailable in English. There is some repetitiveness, but with good reason.
Petreu also is a student of history and is able to place Cioran's "lyrical philosophy" and praise of fascism (and of Hitler) in the context of Romanian politics. This by no means excuses Cioran. Rather, Petreu shows how and why fascism appealed to him in his twenties, when his literary ambitions, his dismay at European contempt for Romania, and his faith in destiny converged in opportunistic rant. Later in life, Cioran bitterly regretted these years. Petreu provides the ugly details, showing how much he had to regret.
Finally, her discussion of the Iron Guard, the blackshirts of Romania, who murdered and marauded in the name of pure Christianity, is a frightening reminder of what militant Christian politics can do.
Petreu writes that Cioran's "fundamental nature--decadent, amoral, aesthetic" (p. 182) was a fertile ground for his commitment to Romanian fascism. Cioran's current fame as a writer and a philosopher rests on the books he published in Paris after World War II. Petreu's book provides vital background for his Parisian career, showing how his fascist years continued to affect his later work, sometimes with hints, often with suppression, and always with fear and revulsion.
While the book is excellent, and Marta Petreu has performed both impressive research and drawn reasonable conclusions, the translation by Bogdan Aldea (who incorrectly translates "Totul Pentru Tara" as "Everything for the Fatherland" (the word "patria" means fatherland while the word "tara" means country), and the failure to acknowledge Codreanu's eventual abandonment of antisemitism and violence as a means (both actions which perpetuate a distortion of Romanian history), earn this book a one star demerit.
So, eventually I came across Marta Petreu's book and decided to check it out.
On the one hand, this book certainly points out Cioran's right-wing affinities. However, the author constantly fails to really get what the essence of nationalism, fascism, or anti-Semitism is about. Instead, one gets these tepid attempts to claim that Cioran was "subtle" and "not really an anti-Semite." The killer evidence is that, to paraphrase, "Cioran, even though he says negative things about jews, also says positive things." Positive racism is still racism. On his death bed, Cioran says, "I...am...not...anti-Semitic!" The same kind of thing goes on with Nationalism: the author acts as if disappointed nationalists who only say negative things about their nation are somehow still not nationalists. On the other hand, the author points to where Cioran had affinities with "left-wingers." So, Cioran liked Lenin and the fact that the soviets pursued "social equality." He goes on about how he supports the permanent-revolution, but it has to be national. The book just goes around in circles comparing Cioran's positions to others in an endless commentary, attempting to show how Cioran didn't exactly fit in with the fascists, but was oh-so original.
I suspect behind all the confusion lies these obnoxious thesis about left and right extremism going in a circle, both meeting, and how both are totalitarian. Of course, being totalitarian, they "aren't democracy." With this brilliant observation, one learns nothing about fascism, communism, or democracy. I absolutely hate when she talks about Marxism. It's just totally ignorant, but then so is Cioran's conceptions of Marxism which are all filtered through far-right sources. That's all irritating. The book really should have been edited down to about 150 pages. As someone else noted, Cioran really is a broken record.
The author did a great job of trying to present his one-track exposition (though he changed trains of thought in his later life). Actually, the best summary of Cioran's youthful, radical philosophy was given near the end of the book, when Marta organized his words into his "confession."
In spite of its drawbacks (Cioran was, after all, only a "bit player" in the generation of 1927 compared to Mircea Eliade or even professor Nae Ionescu), it's a book that's worth reading. I especially enjoyed Chapter 10 ("Cioran and the Ideologies of His Time"), which compared the thoughts of others in his generation to those of Cioran.
Before I read the book, I had no positive or negative thoughts about Cioran. After I read the book, I grew to dislike the guy who sponged off of others, refusing to work, pretending to be an intellectual. But I guess these were the kind of people who made a difference in inter-war Romania. And worth reading for that reason.
also a bunch of fanatic hooligans who lived under some kind of illusion that Roumania would one day be pure, free of any other foreign elements. They were assisted by a great number of Roumanian intellectuals,and among those Emil Cioran was one of them. An early admirer of Hitler and a rabid anti-Semite,he develpoed a philosophy of his own which preached for the advancement of Roumanian history through industrialization,while constantly preaching in his writings about the indolence and stupidity of his Roumanian comrades and his own people. On this point he was right,since the Roumanians are to this day lazy,corrupt and hope for their salvation by some deus ex-machina. The period discussed in this book is mainly about Roumanian fascism,religious fanaticism and anti-modernism. These motifs were spread by other fanatical philosophers such as the known anti-Semitic and notious historian of religions Mircea Eliade,Nae Ionescu and other gutter-writers who sold their soul to the devil. Some of them, including Cioran regretted their shameful past after World War Two,though one cannot be sure whether they had really done so honestly or just for the sake of their wish to be remembered as the good fellows who finally realized their mistakes of being friends with the dark forces, such as Codreanu,the Iron Guards and Hitler.
According to Codreanu and Marin,the Jews were responsible for the misfortunes which fell upon Roumania. In fact,Cioran had some kind of different opinion and he believed thaat Roumanians and not the foreigners were to blame for past failures,although he himself remained ambivalent on this point and thus he cannot be excused in any way for is support of the Fascists .Even his infamous sentence that had he been a Jew,he would have committed suicide cannot be forgotten.
Cioran was not only an antisemite, but also took an anti-Hungarian stance which reflected his resentment toward his former masters of his country. He preached for a dictatorship-a dream which had materialized in the horror system devised by Ceausescu and his cronies. This because the Legionary doctrine was anti-democratic and anti-liberal.
Most of Cioran's writings are and will remain destructive and and so will their messages.
This book is excellent and should be read by those who think that dictatorships are the answer to the evils of any society. The memory of Cioran will always be one of infamy,despite his efforts to recant and expunge his past.