Perioada postbelic n literatura romn este considerat dup anul 1947 pn n zilele noastre,

fiind cunoscut i sub numele de "perioad contemporan". Generaia rzboiului, reprezentnd

intervalul dintre anii 1940-1947 s-a remarcat printr-o diversitate a formulelor estetice, de la
ahordarea unui simbolism decadent, la "resurecia baladei". Un reprezentant de valoare al
generaiei rzboiului a fost Geo Dumitrescu (1920-2006), a crei creaie se distinge prin atitudea
de revolt, de rzvrtire mpotriva formelor, prin spiritul plin de verv: "Suntem o generaie fr
dascli i fr prini spirituali [...] Ne caracterizeaz revolta, ura mpotriva formelor,
negativismul. Detestm, umr la umr, literatura i manualele de istorie naional". Poemul
"Libertatea de a trage cu puca" din 1943 constituie o emblem a protestului, a revoltei lui Geo
Dumitrescu mpotriva rzboiului, care nu este dect un mcel mondial.
Dup 1947 se poate vorbi despre o "literatur angajat" politic, care s serveasc la rspndirea
ideologiei i s sprijine evenimentele prin creaii elogioase aduse conductorilor, partidului,
aadar o literatur cu un rol bine determinat n propaganda comunist. Poeziile aprute n
perioada 1947-1960 proslvesc oamenii politici ai vremii, mai ales rui, care cptaser statut
patern i fa de care trebuia exprimat recunotina profund pentru nvturile i beneficiile
comunismului. Astfel, era necesar s-i iubiesc pe "ttucul" Stalin i pe Lenin, principalii
ideologi ai marxism-leninismului: "-Cui zmbeti, tovare Stalin?/ Oare ei? Chiar ei, pe ct se
pare!.../ i cu|m trece ulia ncet,/ singur se-ntreab i nu tie:/ Cui zmbea ttucul din portret?/
.... Surdea Republicii, Mrie!..," (Dan Deliu, "Ce gndea Mria Tomii cnd lucra n schimbul
de onoare"). Literatura proletcultist a omagiat Partidul Comunist, pe conductori, a promovat o
fals valoare, iar criteriul artistic a atins ridicolul.

Dintre marii scriitori interbelici, niciunul nu i-a continuat carierea literar, suportnd
persecuiile regimului comunist. Lucian Blaga a fost exclus din Academia Romn i destituit
din nvmntul universitar pentru c, n cursul su de filozofie, nu a reuit s predea nvtura
marxist-leninis, "noua religie" a romnilor. Nu i s-a mai publicat nimic pn n 1962, dect
traduceri. Ion Barbu se ocup numai de matematic i renun definitiv la statutul de poet. Tudor
Arghezi, dup ce suport o vreme ostilitatea autoritilor, reuete s se reafirme prin publicarea
unor volume care nu slvete comunismul, ci scrie o poezie de revolt social n registru
pamfletar ("1907-Peizaje", 1955) sau o adevrat sociogonie, n care parcurge n imagini artistice

evoluia omului de-a lungul devenirii sale, pn la omagiul adus pentru descoperirile realizate
("Cntare omului", 1956). Lui Vasile Voiculescu i se nsceneaz uri proces politic ("Rugul
aprins") n urma cruia este condamnat i nu mai are voie s publice nimic. Abia n 1964 apare,
postum, volumul "Ultimele sonete nchipuite ale lui Shakespeare n traducere imaginar de
Vasile Voiculescu".
Poezia generaiei 1960 marcheaz o evoluie cert n estetica liricii romneti, iniiatori fiind
Nichita Stnescu, Marin Sorescu i Cezar Baltag, aparinnd noului curent cultural, cunoscut sub
numele neomodemism. Primul i cel mai important pas ctre literatur n adevratul sens al
cuvntului a fost "revenirea la estetic", rentoiarcerea la "modernismul precomunist" (Ion
Bogdan Lefter). Neomodernitii se formaser spiritual la coala marilor valori interbelice,
modele interzise n comunism, de aceea principala lor nzuin este s refac tocmai aceste
formule estetice. Rennoind tradiia liricii moderne, se conecteaz la modelele admirate, att n
spiritul liricii lui Lucian Blaga, dar i a ermetismului barbilian. Nichita Stnescu inoveaz un
limbaj poetic ocant, iar Marin Sorescu se remarc printr-o poezie parodic, unde ironia i
umorul se manifest ntr-un limbaj simplu, firesc, apropiindu-1 oarecum de lirica lui Ion
Minulescu. Ana Blandiana i Ioan Alexandru exceleaz printr-o creaie plin se sensibilitate: n
lirica poetei strlucete metafora surprinztoare i cald a iubirii i a eticii, iar la cellalt,
tematica evolueaz spre o poezie religioas, n aceeai generaie neomodernist se nscriu:
A.fi.Baconsky, Cezar Baltag, Constana Buzea, Florin Mugur, Adrian Punescu.
Neomodernist al anilor 1970, Leonid Dimov promoveaz n poezie mitul oniric ntr-o formul
estetic inconfundabil, construiete cu luciditate o lume n care visele i confer deplin litertate
pentru a ilustra cele mai absurde ntmplri i cele mai ciudate viziuni. Din aceast grupare liric
mai fac parte: Ileana Mlciosiu, erban Foar, Emil
Brumam, Mircea Dinescu.
Poeii generaiei 1980, cunoscui ca "optzeciti", se grupeaz n curentul numit postmodernism i
se raporteaz polemic la neomodemism, ns acord o atenie special cotidianului, concretului
imediat, miznd pe o complexitate a limbajului, apelnd la textualitate. Constatarea c tot ceea ce
este important n existen s-a spus deja, postmodernitii apeleaz la texte celebre pentru
substana ideii i iau de acolo cuvintele care exprim ceea ce i ei ar dori s transmit. Umberto
Eco a exprimat foarte clar concepia postmodernist: 'Trecutul ne condiioneaz, ne apas umerii,
ne antajeaz. [....] Ironie, joc metalingvistic, enun la ptrat". Radu eposu a considerat c
postmodernitii "triesc cultura ca o natur", iar poezia lor "face din actul poeticii un joc
contient, un artificiu ironic", cu efect de ingenuitate pierdut. Atitudinea ironic a
postmodernitilor poate prea o atitudine neserioas, o persiflare a valorilor, dar lirica lor nu face
altceva dect s ia "n posesie realitatea", sfidnd iluzia i nevoie de utopie. Un exponent al
postmodernitilor este Mircea Crtrescu, n creaia cruia se poate remarca o atitudine de ironie
tandr fa de realitatea banal i experiena personal: "Ce simt, ce vd, ce gndesc n
mprejurrile obinuite ale vieii mele de om obinuit formeaz coninutul poeziei, care devine
preponderent ca importan fa de form". Ali poei care dezvolt o liric postmodernist "care
coboar n strad", remercabil prin ironie i autoironie, imaginativ ludic i procedee textualiste
sunt: Florin Iaru, Alexandru Muina, Mariana Marin, Simona Popescu, Caius Dobrescu, Traian
T.Coovei etc.


2. Blaga's epistemology
In the same manner the Romanian philosopher Lucian Blaga, (1895-1961) realized that science
is unstable, an instability brought about by the very historical relativity of cultural creations of
which science is a part. Science is obviously influenced by the categories of styles, by the force-
lines of a stylistic field (matrix). The value guiding man to knowledge is truth. The definition of
truth itself as a positive adequacy of a content of knowledge to reality is actually only a desire,
notes Blaga. He criticizes the theories of science, which reduce all knowledge to what he calls,
'Paradisiac knowledge' in which certain invariant categories are applied in perception and
representational cognition. Science also requires 'Luciferian knowledge' which applies deeper
categories, stylistic ones, relating to man's existence within the horizon of mystery.
Empirical observations, maintained Blaga, obviously go hand in hand with certain
interpretations. Interpretations, in their turn, are marked not only by theoretical perspectives, but
by psycho-sociological frameworks, too. The numerous interpretations that cumulate in the body
of science as pure and available material are far too often imbued with 'theory': and moreover,
the same material of simple observation is in reality contaminated by the 'stylistic' orientations of
the human mind. 'We Europeans since a Leonardo da Vince, a Galileo, a Newton laid the
foundation of sciences, since a Descartes, Leibniz, Locke and Kant legitimized the possibility of
science, have lived with the belief that it is a perennial intangible and superhistorical entity.
We had to experience shocks like those caused by the theory of relativity and wave mechanics to realize, in a lucid
manner, that science is unstable, an instability brought about by the very historical relativity of spiritual creations
of which science is a part.
Science comprises a constructional part in which occur theoretical constructions obviously
influenced by style. Science, therefore, is not superhistorical: it is born in a field of socio-cultural
force-lines that shape it. As a matter of fact, the results of science are brewed also on the
intellectual horizon of the human being and they emerge as 'values'-alike to those produced in the
ethical field and on the aesthetic plane.
For the sake of man's self preservation, the philosophy of science has reduced science to a type
of empirical knowledge. But for science, empirical data are but a threshold: one must go beyond
them and interpret them in the light of theoretical stances. Scientific fictions do not appear only
on a biological and pragmatic level technical contrivances do; they are the outcome of a specific
intellectual purpose. Blaga's stylistic studies of science demonstrate that anthropology and the
study of culture are capable of shedding light on the philosophical problematic of science
especially by elucidating the nature of creative factors in the history of thinking. He claims: It is
worth observing that, due to the quantum theory, modern physics affirms the antinomic structure
of light: the phenomenon of light is perceived as being an 'undulation' as well as something
'corpuscular', which is a logically incomprehensible paradox. Still, some experiences necessarily
demand this antinomic solution. This is why modern physics is subject to a crisis, Blaga believes
that he was succeeded in demonstrating that this undular-corpuscular theory of light's nature is
actually a part of a sui-generis type of knowledge, that he called 'minus-knowledge'. 'It is not a
crisis of modern physics but a new type of knowledge that we're dealing with'. We already know
that Kant built a theory of knowledge that was actually meant philosophically to justify Newton's
classical physics. Thus the necessity for philosophically justifying new constructions in physics
by means of a new theory of knowledge is imperative. This is, essentially, what Blaga tried to
archive in The Dogmatic Aeon and Luciferian Knowledge especially, by providing the theory of
knowledge with the concept of 'direction'. Knowledge has not, the belief is since Kant, a unique
direction (plus), i.e. to 'attenuate' mysteries, by means of a infinite theoretical process;
knowledge has two opposite directions that, is, plus and minus. And there are circumstances
when the 'minus' direction is required that does not attenuate a mystery, but, on the contrary,
intensifies and radicalizes it, rendering it in formulas exclusively antinomic.
Thus, the new idea appears as a 'bridge towards the cryptic' (as an apprehension of essences) in a
theoric (paradigmatic) kind of thinking. The mechanistic and the relativist ideas, Blaga says, are
the theoric ideas by which Newton and Einstein, respectively, opened the horizon of a mystery,
proposing theoretical construction of the open mystery. More over the theoretic idea carries
weight in the structural joints of Luciferian knowledge even when it is dismissed later on (see the
idea of phlogiston). The theoric (paradigmatic) function can be fulfilled by a principle, a law, a
category, a concept a scheme. The achievability of theoric is one of the problems mentioned by
Blaga that represents something similar to the capacity of scientific paradigms and their scope of
applicability as imagined by Kuhn. Luciferian knowledge is very often achieved through Minus-
cognition which means neither a lack of knowledge nor a harmless label stuck on all the mistakes
of cognition, but instead, a type of cognition conducted in a direction somehow contrary to the
usual one, a cognition capable of progress and motion ahead. The minus-cognition formulas go
from a minimum of incomprehensibility to a maximum of incomprehensibility, which is seen as
an abstract build-up, with no correspondence in the factual world. Minus cognition is not anti-
logic but meta-logic; is does not deny, but, on the contrary, it delineates perceptions through new
logic. It expands the unknown by defining it, by formulas, therefore, this kind of condition is
properly named minus-cognition, as against the plus-cognition which curtails the unknown.