No. 8 / July 2019
Mihai Plămădeală, art critic – article based on the 2017 ICR Beijing Conference – “Romanian Graphics of the Last Half Century. Four Generations of Artists”
The scene of Romanian visual arts was dominated in the interwar period (1918 – 1940) either by the modernist movements or the avant-garde, especially Dada, all in an attempt to recover, align and setup an original local school. Constantin Brancusi, considered to be the father of modern sculpture, Tristan Tzara, Marcel Iancu and Victor Brauner are just a few of the interwar exemplary artists. Tradition was programmatically eluded in this endeavor with cultural anthropological connotations, except to a certain point only Brancusi’s creation, but which is not subject to discussion. Only after the Second World War, specifically after 1950, when the country began to overcome economic and social shock, laid the foundation for modern art education, whose determinants are found so far in indigenous creation.

The contemporary graphics school, school both in a general term and institutionally – the two directions are converging in Romania, has therefore a direct history of no more than seven decades and translates roughly into four distinct generations of creators, the last three with representatives still alive. As a side note, the graphic exhibition proposed by the Romanian Cultural Institute in Beijing in March 2017 marks the continuity between the last three generations, through the criterion of parentage and master-disciple relationship. The main Romanian centers of artistic education are in Bucharest, Cluj, Iasi and Timisoara. Looking at the Romanian map, we find their cardinal axial distribution. One can talk about a multi-valent artistic movement and about a stimulating competition between centers.

With regret that most things will remain unspoken, assuming my subjective criterion regarding this exposure, I will outline the Romanian graphics of the last half century through the creation of only seven graphic designers without any pretense of completeness. Artists worth speaking about are far more numerous, but beyond that time does not allow wide development of the subject, I do not want to load the presentation with information impossible to grasp as a whole. So I preferred a subjective selection to an exposure made within art history perspective. Interpolation is inevitable in such an endeavor. The clew is related to undertook reasons, which are only valid in this context. Of the seven artists that I will present (by minimal biographical and critical considerations), with three I have professionally collaborated. I will report to them through direct experience; for the other four I will call the critical texts carefully selected. I preferred an essay formula to a specialized one because focusing on names, sizes and technics would turn this lecture into a technical monologue.
As previously stated, Romanian graphics is not limited to the proposed case studies. I mention that in Romania, beyond many undeniably creative and original graphic designers, there is an amount of graphics annual and biennial, such as Bucharest International Print Biennial, the International Experimental Engraving Biennial (arrived 2016 at the VIIth edition), Biennials in Târgovişte and Sfântu Gheorghe or annuals Tribuna Graphic – Cluj and Romanian Graphic Art – Bucharest. Also included are numerous personal and group exhibitions, thematic or retrospective. Union of Artists of Romania has a gallery in Bucharest ascribed to graphics (and sculpture – according to an internal organization), Simeza Gallery. It is about a coherent and cursive artistic movement, permanently anchored in the present.
New media, from tools, I refer in particular to digital, to material determines new possibilities of expression today. Although classic and modern are equally represented directions at a morphological level on the Romanian graphics stage, whether it’s aqaforte, aquatinta, ink, pencil, graphite, foil stamping & embossing, tempera and pastel, the scales are tipped towards the area of classical dominated by skill and materiality. Manual paper, cardboard and wood are preferred by most Romanian artists, which consider traditional techniques as immutable values. A work performed on such coordinates may like or not, depending on the time horizon of the beholder, but if done well, will not go unnoticed.
Not the same thing happens with experimental graphics, from which the public in Romania keeps, at least for now, a safe distance. Book illustration is, however, a center of attention, due to the editorial policies of the 60s – 80s, when great artists of the period tried their creative power in this area. As a conclusion to the above, the level of graphics Romanian modernity folds on tradition.
