The Romanian Mass Media and Cultural Development

David Berry

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2017
• Topic: Politics & International Relations
• eBook ISBN:
  9781351882460
• Subtopic: Democracy
• Index: Politics & International Relations

This compelling book assesses the development of the mass media since the Romanian Revolution in December 1989 and the media's impact on cultural development, the public sphere, civil society and democracy. It controversially claims that Romania's failure to experience a thoroughgoing enlightenment project in its entire history remains a major obstacle for producing democratic ownership of the media and democratic development of society. Analyzing both the print and broadcast media and their respective effects on development, the book also discusses the effects of Romanian law on media and societal development, ethics, and media responsibilities. It concludes, however, that far from having an absolutely negative impact on Romanian post-communism, the media has helped produce a contradictory empirical form that equally contains positive moments in terms of subjective cultural development.

Chapter 1

A History of Romanian Ideas

Introduction

It was stated in the introduction to this book that a major obstacle to democratic development post-1989 is due to the claim made that Romania has yet to pass through an enlightenment project. Reasons for this are based on the type of governing bodies that have controlled Romanian society in one form or another and the failure of an effective-collective opposition to prevailing dominant ideologies. Just looking ahead for one moment, the main objective of this book is to assess and frame the media’s impact on post-communist development and in order to do that we need to understand the ideas that have dominated Romanian society up till 1989 and their legacy and impact on post-communist Romania. In order to understand the meaning of enlightenment in the Romanian context, this chapter begins with an assessment of the Enlightenment in Western Europe and then proceeds to discuss and compare these findings with the period in eighteenth century Transylvania and what has been referred to as the Romanian Enlightenment. There is a short discussion on intellectual activity in the latter half of the nineteenth century and the role of intellectuals in early twentieth century Romania, particularly concerning the struggle between the ideas of modernity and traditionalism/nationalism in defining Romanian culture and even though there is evidence of progressive ideas during these periods they were not substantial enough to warrant an enlightenment project. The chapter ends with a discussion on the Stalinist state and the role of the media under Stalinism and its effect on the suppression of an enlightenment project.

The Enlightenment

Enlightenment is man’s emergence from his self-incurred immaturity. Immaturity is the inability to use one’s understanding without the guidance of another. This immaturity is self-incurred if its cause is not lack of understanding, but lack of resolution and courage to use it without the guidance of another. The motto of enlightenment is therefore: Sapere aude! Have courage to use your own understanding (from Reiss 1970, p.9).

Kant’s thoughts on enlightenment have a particular resonance for Romania considering the past size and influence of state control over human affairs. Enlightenment is central to the democratic process and this book is premised on the belief that Romania has yet to experience a thoroughgoing enlightenment project, and therefore the issue of concern is how that absence has affected the period we refer to as post-communism. It is also an assumption of this book that the media, in theory, and particularly the investigative aspect of journalism, is equally an essential part of enlightenment and democratic development.

Before we assess what Vlad Georgescu (1991) has referred to as the ‘Romanian Enlightenment’ in the following section, perhaps it is useful to briefly sketch some of the ideas surrounding the Enlightenment in some Western European countries and then apply our findings to the actual Romanian experience. Before we begin there are two very important points that must be outlined regarding enlightenment. The title of this section as you can see is ‘The Enlightenment’ and this represents the actual condition of what occurred mainly in France and Scotland that had effects on development in England, the low-countries, Germany and Italy. The Enlightenment existing as an actual condition and as a movement was as an amalgamation of ideas of the relationship between man [sic] and society. As Kant’s quote above demonstrates, the actual empirical condition of the Enlightenment with its many imperfections was distinct from ‘Enlightenment’ in its abstract form, formulated as an ideal-type. For example, consider the following question posed by Kant, which clearly demonstrates this distinction ‘… are we living in an enlightened age today?’ then answering ‘no: but… we are living in an Age of Enlightenment’.¹

Even though this statement reflected the imperfections of the actual condition, the Enlightenment nevertheless was a collection of different ideas and was significantly a period in which there was an attempt to produce a new way of thinking in qualitative terms. Above all else, the Enlightenment was a critique of traditional authority in which the chief object of that critique was the power of the Church over the determination of society. In this context the Enlightenment was about ridding society of intolerance, superstition, prejudice and ignorance and although it failed in the immediate sense to achieve these goals in full, it could be argued that this period laid the foundations for subsequent generations to build on.

So, even though the ideas in circulation during the Enlightenment were the product of and limited to a number of intellectuals and the educated class that never really involved nor neither filtered down to the masses, it nevertheless had significant long-term effects on development. For example, the attempt by the radical press in early nineteenth century Britain to produce an alternative news discourse for the working class can be viewed as a form of ‘working-class enlightenment’, and although it was defeated in the short term, it nevertheless was the precursor to the eventual development of the Independent Labour Party and the growth of the Trade Union movement later in the same century. Equally, words entering the English vernacular in the 1960s such as ‘racism’ and ‘sexism’ and discourses on racial equality and feminism are evidence of the long tradition of the Enlightenment and its influence on the relationship between humans and society.

Although the Enlightenment was a complex agenda for change, one important aspect of it, which was a direct result of the critique of traditional authority, was the deeply held belief in alternative sources of power; namely constitutional reform. By downgrading the importance of the Church and rethinking the relationship between man and society, a new mode of thought was developed representing a paradigmatic shift in ideas. The Enlightenment was clearly a ‘movement’ with a body of works, which had its apotheosis in the Encyclopèdie within which the ideas of individualism, freedom, secularism, questions on human nature, progress, the belief in science, empiricism born out of the ideas of the English philosopher John Locke a century earlier and reason rooted in empiricist thought, were all contained. There may not have been absolute agreement in all subject areas but surely what characterised the Enlightenment was the actual intellectual engagement with ideas regardless of a broad consensus.

What was really significant about the Enlightenment was the manner in which new ideas were communicated. Academic journals on science, art, theology, philosophy, law and the beginning of the social sciences through the works of Saint-Simon and Auguste Comte arose. A clear indication of enlightened thought was the production and consumption of books and journals. Equally, and this will feature significantly in our assessment on Romania, was the rise in news discourse and the role of the press in expanding a new informational space during the Enlightenment.

There are differences of opinion concerning the exact character of the Enlightenment, which amongst other theories, and despite its overt challenge to traditional authority and not its complete negation, was a combination of God, nature, reason and man (sic) synthesising into a world view that instigated revolutionary developments in arts, philosophy and politics. However, the overriding principle concerning the Enlightenment was the celebration of Reason.

Reason was based on the idea that individuals would be able to think for themselves. Truth could not simply come from books or the church, one had also to criticise existing authority, but certainly the printed press was an aid to guide criticism. Accordingly, intellectual activity was central to the idea of achieving an enlightened condition.

Kant during the 1780s, argued that the ‘Age of Enlightenment’ or the ‘Age of Reason’ was mankind’s escape from his self-imposed tutelage, that is to argue that mankind (sic) had wrapped himself up in a mental straightjacket which was a form of self-subjugation to a greater authority rather than the self-determination of one’s own thoughts. Enlightenment meant ‘growing-up’, bursting free from prior restraint, coming of age (maturity) and developing a sense of independent intellectual freedom. Individuals would need to be less dependent on higher authorities (Priests, Kings and Gods), or in Romania’s case, particularly in the Stalinist period the State, and perhaps more recently the Orthodox Church. Enlightenment meant man could now ‘think for himself (sic) without subservience to authority.

Although there were problems and contradictions within the Enlightenment such as the often crude, offensive and patronising view of the masses by key thinkers and the fact that tangibly extending the benefits of enlightened knowledge to those masses didn’t immediately occur, it was nevertheless, significant with regards to the power of intellectuals that they were ‘… large enough and powerful enough for the first time to challenge the clergy’ (Porter 1990, p.73); the sole source of power!

Some History on the ‘Romanian Enlightenment’

Enlightenment is a critical and revolutionising force that is central to movement, change and development. In this context enlightenment, or its negation, is a central part of the dialectic. Enlightenment is intrinsically linked to the notion of intellectual progress, the assumption of a positive shift in subjective cultural development. But progress or the assumption of progress can be misleading and it was widely believed that the 1989 revolution was responsible for dismantling centralised media control replacing it with a progressive liberalised media form; the question is then; how progressive was it?

Whilst there has been a dispersal in power and a growth in the number of publications and television stations, which in Romanian terms is a significant quantitative leap, it doesn’t necessarily follow that the quality of performance, i.e., standards and content are qualitatively beneficial for the cultivation of the mind. We have yet to establish the latter as fact, but it’s worth bearing in mind that there may be contradictions between numbers and quality, a matter that is central to a dialectical understanding. Although 1989 can be viewed as a continuation of history, it was however, perceived as a turning point in development, economically, politically, socially and culturally. That said, it wasn’t a quantum leap in development and this has meant that past traditions continue to cling and shape the present empirical form.

One academic who has discussed the issue of enlightenment in relation to Romanian history is Vlad Georgescu (1991) in his book The Romanians: A History. Georgescu raises some important questions concerning the intellectual climate in Romanian history, which in my opinion has a bearing for our understanding of the environment post-1989, because traditionally (and remember tradition is not easily dispelled) there has been a separation of intellectuals from the base of society that has affected the development of Romania from its inception to its contemporary empirical form.

Under the sub-title: ‘The Romanian Enlightenment’, Georgescu (1991, p. 111) states quite clearly that ‘… the first half of the eighteenth century was culturally unoriginal and impoverished, and virtually all Romanian contact with Europe … was cut off. Under Phanariat control, during the eighteenth century, the cultural climate certainly favoured Eastern cultural values rather than Western ones as Georgescu explains: ‘Phanariat rule was a cultural, political and social structure into which anyone could fit, who wanted to accept and respect a certain value system based on conservative orthodoxy …’and what’s more, based upon ‘anti-western traditionalism …’ (ibid, p.73). However, as Georgescu argues, Western cultural influences and ideas began to impact upon society and the second half of the century saw the Boyars study French, which gave them access to the works of Voltaire, Diderot and other French philosophers associated with the French Enlightenment.

Although the Boyars engaged with Western ideas, they nevertheless set themselves apart from the peasantry, and as Seton-Watson (1963, p. 130) argued, the Boyars main aim was ‘… directed towards rapid enrichment and this could only be attained at the expense of the peasants’. The separation of social groups was not simply based on financial differences concerning discrepancies between levels of wealth, but was equally true of the unequal distribution of knowledge as Seton-Watson states, ‘… the masses are sunk in ignorance and stupor’ (ibid, p. 127).

The main aim of the Phanariat rule was not the redistribution of knowledge and education as Georgescu (1991, p.78) states: ‘To the Phanariats governing meant feathering one’s own nest …’and during their reign a new word entered the vernacular ‘chiverniseată (getting rich)’ (ibid.). Consolidating one’s position in society was a priority and as Shafir (1985, p. 134) claims that during the Phanariat reign: ‘Rulers and ruled alike viewed the state as primarily an instrument for fulfilling their needs …’ which for the Boyars was a mixture of economic and cultural capital. Either way, the pursuit of these interests was to attain status and power primarily over the peasantry. The notion of sharing, welfare and social philanthropy was ominously missing from the vernacular.

Certainly the geographical position between East and West meant that the development of ideas and Romanian identity would be a result of the tensions and traditions between different ideological structures. Consider the following question posed by Georgescu (1991, p. 110):

Was this society set on the border between East and West, founded on the values generally held in the Age of Enlightenment? By what route did the ideas of the Enlightenment find their way into the principalities, and how deep did they penetrate? Can their effects be considered a part of the European Enlightenment?

Georgescu certainly believed that a form of enlightenment had indeed existed, which is demonstrated by the second question above, but acknowledges that culture was unevenly developed by claiming that ‘… the level of Romanian culture [in Transylvania] was superior to that on the other side of the mountains throughout the Age of Enlightenment’ (ibid, p. 114). This seems to answer the second part of Georgescu’s second question concerning how deeply enlightened thought penetrated society, with a stronger emphasis and impact in Transylvania, whilst in Wallachia and Moldavia, it was certainly more limited in scope. However, the real weakness in Georgescu’s argument concerning intellectual activity ‘… throughout the Age of Enlightenmentis that it’s not entirely clear what the level of cultural influence was from Western Europe and how it manifested itself as a Romanian product. For a more specific analysis on this topic we must turn to Hitchins (1969, p.58), particularly in chapter three headlined: ‘The Rumanians and the Enlightenment’, where the author states that:

In the second half of the eighteenth century the leavening effects of the Enlightenment began to be felt among the Rumanians of Transylvania. The Enlightenment there … was a curious blend of natural law, rationalism and optimism, which were drawn from the West, and nationalism, whose origins were in purely local conditions.

Hitchins states that during this period there were ‘… signs of a national awakening’ (ibid.) and that ‘… they applied the notion of “natural” civil equality between individuals …’ (ibid, pp.58-9). Furthermore, ‘… they accepted … the social contract as the foundation of society and as the guarantee of the rights of all those who composed it’ (ibid, p.59). Both ‘Uniate and Orthodox shared the same aspirations …’ who placed their ‘faith in education as the key to progress’ (ibid.).

No doubt that the attempt to educate the masses was partly, if not primarily based on the desire to consolidate the moral authority of both the Uniate and Orthodox Church, but it would be a mistake to solely perceive it in these simplistic terms. There was a genuine desire to wrest the people from cultural backwardness and ignorance, and to enrich their world of ideas. In light of this Hitchins argues that both Churches were:

Deeply concerned with the moral and intellectual development of the common people, they were not content merely to write for the masses, but, as priests and teachers, they brought their message directly to the pulpit and the classroom (ibid, p.60).

Jointly, this movement was referred to as the ‘Transylvanian School’ (ibid.), a collective of scholars whose objective was not to replace its Eastern cultural heritage in its entirety with Western cultural and scientific values, but to fuse elements of the two in order to produce a new system of thought. The means by which education would be established was through the introduction of elementary schools, which had tangible results. However, there were strict limitations on the process of learning which hindered the development of enlightenment.

Although there was a genuine attempt to eradicate an embedded superstition, ‘… irrationality and ignorance …’ (ibid, p.82) during this period, there were, nevertheless, obstacles to development, one of which was the assertion of nationalism that has persisted in various forms to the present day. Equally, the system of rights was restricted to a chosen few, namely the educators, who worked on behalf of Emperor Joseph II of the Habsburg Empire.

As Hitchins states, this was a form of: ‘Enlightened despotism’ of which: ‘The embodiment of these principles was … Joseph II’ (ibid, p.67). Ideas were not only imposed as a form of morality and a guide to learning for greater understanding, but they were the only legitimate ideas. Any organisation opposing and resisting the right of the Church as the only true moral authority to administer the teachings, and who sought to educate themselves independently from the Church’s sphere of influence, were subsequently frowned upon. This clearly departs from one of the central tenets of the Enlightenment in Western systems discussed in the previous section that for enlightenment to gain some semblance of authenticity one must challenge traditional authority, particularly that of the Church, rather than the Church dictating objectives, as was the case in Romanian history.

There were three main problems with this situation, which undoubtedly affected the future development of the emerging Romanian society. First, the Emperor, according to this logic, was perceived as a Leviathan figure, the sovereign body to which all society is subjected too. Secondly, as Hitchins quite rightly s...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Half Title
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Dedication
• Table of Contents
• Acknowledgements
• Introduction
• 1. A History of Romanian Ideas
• 2. The Romanian Revolution
• 3. The Print Industry: Impacts on Culture
• 4. Romanian Law and Journalism
• 5. Ethics and Responsibilities
• 6. The Broadcast Media: Impacts on Culture
• 7. The Media, Public Sphere and Civil Society
• 8. Conclusion: Romanian Post-Communism and Transition
• Bibliography
• Index