An Emotion Rejected by Modernity? Notes on “Duioșie” (Tenderheartedness)
An Emotion Rejected by Modernity? Notes on “Duioșie” (Tenderheartedness)

Summary/Abstract: In this study, we started from the observation that tenderheartedness (“duioșie”) was considered an anachronistic attitude in relation to modern sensibility, being attributed either to the popular rhapsodist or to traditionalist writers. In the interwar period, Eugen Lovinescu used the term tenderheartedness as a discrediting aesthetic qualifier, through which he sanctioned Mihail Sadoveanu’s literature in particular and traditionalist literature in general. His perspective enforced a radical modernism, reducible to the strictly formalist, stylistic-expressive dimension of art, and to rather simplistic aesthetic principles (imitation, synchronism, evolution from rural to urban and from subjective to objective literature, “mysticism of genres,” etc.). The community ethos is thus replaced by an individualistic, liberal one, modern society being shaped by the competitive spirit of capitalism, which values the original personality and encourages a combative attitude and creative selfishness. Starting from the considerations of George Călinescu, who saw tenderheartedness as a distinctive feature of Ioan Al. Brătescu-Voinești’s literary creation, albeit characteristic of an amateurish literature of merely didactic utility, we presented the opinions of critics and essayists such as Garabet Ibrăileanu, Mihai Ralea, Nicolae Steinhardt, and Dumitru Caracostea, who rehabilitated tenderheartedness as a key element of a humanistic vision, rooted in the stoic-contemplative philosophy of the ballad Miorița, aesthetically configured in proximity to the tragic, and politically mobilized as an emotion that ensures social justice.

• Details
• Contents