You are on page 1of 50

ACTA MUSEI PLAGIENSIS

Revist de Uro i Copro-Cultur Vol. I, No. 1, An I (2014)

TIINA ASTZI
DE LA MAGNETOMETRIE I TETRAPILOCTOMIE APLICAT, LA MENTALITI COLECTIVE I DINAMICI MACRO-ECONOMICE I SUB-CUANTICE

Edited by: BOGDAN-VLAD VTAVU VALER SIMION COSMA FELICIAN VELIMIROVICI

Bouvard et Pcuchet Clinical Institute


Chai !a"#

Acta Musei Plagiensis -$"5i"2/1 5h/ 5 a.i5i$"1 $% M/5a42 Bia I"5/ "a5i$"a4& Acta Musei Plagiensis a8a / ./ -H5/ $ i /15/ "/'$i/& Editorial Board A-a.& I5/%a" Pa1-2, U"i'/ 1i5a5/a Ba3/J-B$4;ai, C42K P $%& U"i'& D & Ri-ha . R$ 5;, S5a".%$ . U"i'/ 1i5;, C$8Ja Mi-L M$!/ Si!81$", Sa%/5; I"18/-5$ a5 5h/ S8 i"B%i/4. N2-4/a P$N/ P4a"5 P $%& U"i'& D & (a-O2/1 L/ G$%%, P-$4/ N$ !a4/ S28Q i/2 /, Pa i1

P $%& U"i'& Hannibal Dr. Lector FUNDAIA PENTRU (AF TRANSPARENT )FELI* +RULL, DIRECTOR# A-a./!i-ia" tefan Vasali 0i1 Terente, Ph& D&,

P234i-a5i$" i"./6/. a". a315 a-5/. i" 5h/ Th$!1$" R/25/ 1 S$-ia4 S-i/"-/1 Ci5a5i$" I"./67, i" S$-ia4 S-i1/a -h7, (STOR, BRICOSTORE, MERCADOR a". i" 5h/ ($2 "a4 Ci5a5i$" R/8$ 519S$-ia4 S-i/"-/1 E.i5i$", a". i"-42./. i" EBSCO:1 4i3 a ; 8 $.2-51&

P $%& U"i'& D & (a-O2/1 La-a", 1/4%/!84$;/. A-a.& Da" B/ i"./i, A-a./!ia R$!R"L, B2-2 /J5i A h/$4$B D & A43a" P $5$- $"/1-2, I"15i52524 M2 2 8/"5 2 A./'L I15$ i-, A54a"5i.a A-a.& E4/"a C/a2J/1-2, $! ./ J5ii"SL ./ /"2!/ !$".ia4 Ji i"5/ "aSi$"a4 I"B& Gh/$ Bh/ A320a52, U"i'/ 1i5a5/a C4/$8a5 a .i" I-4$. L/-5& U"i'& D & A2 /4ia" B2 -2, 4$-24 1>?, 1a4a I, BCU C42K-Na8$-a Editorial Staff

ISSN 59435 564956 97364856

L2-ia" B$ia I$a" A2 /4-P$8 Da" V$i-24/1-2 I$"2S /"/ Ba $" Ni-$4a/ Mi1-hi/ Da"i/4 R$6i" I$a" Ma"B Ti521 C$ 4LS/a" Bia"-a D LB2Ja"2 La2 a S5a"-i2 D$"a4. Da+4a21 +i"T;

I!8 i!/ ii4/ "a<i$"a4/ R&A& M$"i5$ 24 O%i-i$1 B2-2 /=5i, 32" ./ 5i8a # >1&>?&2>1@& Da5 4a -24/1# >1&>?&2>1@A 12>> -$4i, 1>&>>> /6/!84a / 9 D/8$0i5 4/Ba4# C@D?>CECFE>GD?@G>&

Tabla de materii
NOTA EDITORILOR&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&& @ C2 'H"5, R"ai"5/U&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&& ? S52.ii =i a 5i-$4/&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&& E CLIO SUB ZODIA TRANZIIEI&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&& D C $"i-a 'i/<ii =5ii"<i%i-/&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&& 1? SINTEZA CA PLAGIAT# CAZUL LAURA STANCIU&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&1C O8i"ii =i /1/2 i&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&& 2? TME SUB(ECT AND POVER&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&2C R/-/"0ii&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&& @2

NOTA EDITORILOR
Pornind de la premisa democratic, gracch s!babe "ian, c orice cet#ean are obliga#ia moral s p blice $n dec rs l %ie#ii sale mcar n articol I&I, am lansat aceast re%ist prin intermedi l creia ne prop nem s %enim $n a' tor l at(t tinerilor cercettori %(ntori!c legtori de p ncta'e, c(t )i ni%ersitarilor consacra#i, care $ncl*esc c ale lor commpetente "ese cel p #in do sca ne academice+ Aceast ini#iati% a rsrit din "r strarea, disperarea, in%idia )i lenea " nciar a n i comitet de redac#ie impro%i*at )i coag alat de incapacitatea de a r*bate pe cont propri $n aceast %eritabil )erprie academic a tohton+ ,iind $nc ra'a#i de ctre magi)trii no)tri c m nca cinstit, e"ort l intelect al de*interesat, pasi nea pentr ade%r, dedica#ia )i abnega#ia dep se $n sl 'ba Ade%r l i, constit ie premisele )i temelia de ne*dr ncinat a nei cariere pro"esionale oneste, am rmat c stricte#e, pe parc rs l ltimilor ani, po%a#a lor+ ,rec%ent(nd )i acomod(nd !ne c operele nor remarcabili teoreticieni ai disc rs l i prec m ,+ De &a ss re, -+ ,o ca lt, R+ .arthes, /+ 0hite, ,r+ An1ersmit, A+ - nslo2 )i D+ Ro3in, am reali*at c s"at rile prin#ilor no)tri spirit ali n s nt dec(t meta"ore, constr c#ii disc rsi%e menite a asc nde ade%r ri m lt mai pro" nde pe care n le %om deconspira aici4 $i in%itm pe cititori s le dib ie prin intermedi l propri l i lor "iltr critic 5 sa pe propria piele+

Cu vnt, nainte!
dr+ 6ictor!6iorel Ponta
D$-5$ R" . /85 i"5/ "aSi$"a4, 2" 8 $.21 ./ -a4i3 2 a4 J-$4ii $!H"/J5i ./ 84aBi$4$Bi/, a8 /-ia5 ./ a31$425 5$a5/ 2"i'/ 1i5LSi4/ .i" 42!/, !ai 82Si" ./ -/a .i" B2-2 /J5i, 8 i"5 / a45/4/ 8 i!-!i"i15 2 a4 2"/i SL i&

A)a c m generos l me magistr , pro"+ ni%+ dr+ 7)i %(ntor de marc8 Adrian Nstase 5 care $n clipa de "a# $)i rot n'e)te cariera la o prestigioas 9ni%ersitate de l(ng . c re)ti 5 m!a remarcat )i m!a s s#in t "r re*er%e $n anii de $ncep t ai carierei mele )tiin#i"ice, )i e la r(nd l me n pot "i indi"erent "a# de problemele )i gre t#ile cercetrii )i c lt rii a tohtone+ Prin rmare, $n calitatea mea de prim repre*entant al p terii e3ec ti%e $n stat, $mi arog post ra de -ecena at(t de adec%at mai ales ac m, $n conte3t l repre*entat de des") rarea campaniei electorale pentr alegerile e roparlamentare+ Ast"el, sal t cld ros )i spri'in material 7e%ident, n doar din e3cedent l b getar, ci )i din acci*a recent percep t pe carb ran#i8 e3celenta ini#iati% a tinerilor o tsideri neamploaia#i ni%ersitari din :l ', n demers menit s re*ol%e de"initi% absol t toate problemele, dilemele, nea' ns rile )i so%ielile ;tiin#ei rom(ne)ti contemporane 5 mai pe sc rt, s $ngroape )tiin#a $n )tiin#+ Personal, consider c aceast iniiati% $nc n nea* n l ng ir de ms ri de redresare a strii 'alnice a cercetrii rom$ne)ti pe care < %ernele Ponta I, Ponta II )i Ponta III, etc+ le!a adoptat i implementat pe parc rs l ltimilor doi ani: =+ N mirea nor mini)tri per"orman#i $n domeniile Ed ca#ie, : lt r )i :ercetare 5 ;te"ania D minic, Ioan -ang, :orina D mitresc , Li%i Pop, Andrei -arga, Daniel .arb , <igel ;tirb , -ihnea :ostoi i Rem s Pricopie4 >+ Reorgani*area Instit t l i : lt ral Rom(n )i stoparea sc rgerii de bani ctre "esti%al ri lipsite de rele%an# c lt ral 5 gen TI,,, A&TRA, etc+4 ?+ Redistrib irea "ond rilor $n domeni l cercetrii4
?

@+ A)e*area pe ba*e e"iciente a comisiilor de anchetare a plagiat l i )i a :NATD:94 A+ Reorgani*area 9E,&:DI4 B+ Depoliti*area )i repo*i#ionarea ideologic 7)i partinic8 a II::-ER 7 rm(nd principi l sntos Cai no)tri s nt cel p #in la "el de b ni ca ai lorD8+ & nt con%ins c aceast no p blica#ie %a re )i s coag le*e n me consacrate sa $n c rs de consacrare din %ariate domenii )tiin#i"ice )i c %a ins "la n spirit ino%ator )i reno%ator, pragmatism )i oport nism $n r(nd l oamenilor de c lt r a tohtoni+ De asemenea, s nt con%ins c din r(nd l celor care %or pro"ita de )ansa pe care aceast re%ist )tiin#i"ic le!o o"er se %a recr ta %iitoarea elit politic )i c lt ral a Rom(niei+ -rt risesc c n m!a) "i ccat pe mine de at(ta ent *iasm $n "a#a acest i demers, dac na) l me , ambasador <eorge!:ristian -aior, director al &er%ici l i Rom$n de In"orma#ii, n mi!ar "i dat asig rri concrete, $n ba*a nor in"ormri doar de el c nosc te, c ace)ti tineri s nt pe deplin $ndrept#i#i s!)i re%edice )i ei, la r(nd l lor, partea lor de ciolan academic+

Studii i artic le

CLIO SUB ZODIA TRANZIIEI

Blogger Univ. Dr. Valer Simion Cosma


)ro-rector al Universit"ii Cleo atra din *clod, renumit analist a olitic, cer!ettor bursier +Diogene din Sino e, la institutul +Butoiul cu ulbere, al 'cademiei -omne, autor a numeroase articole !i lucrri !tiin"ifice care au atras faima n satul natal, cu multe rela"ii !i cuno!tin"e.

n ciuda discreditului care a lovit adesea istoriografia n secolul nostru, mai cu seam sub regimul comunist, ea n-a contenit s caute ci noi de ex resie !i s ro un solu"ii care au scos-o mereu din im as. ntre entu#iasm !i nega"ie, descriind un s ectru vast de atitudini, discursul ei continu s suscite interes !i dincolo de sfera s ecialit"ii, dat fiind tocmai curio#itatea larg e care istoria o st$rne!te n mediile cele mai diverse !i trebuin"a inexorabil de a folosi trecutul ros ectivic. %ran#i"ia a devenit, n c&i legitim, o tem curent a g$ndirii istorice, cu at$t mai struitoare cu c$t sc&imbrile din acest secol s-au vdit mai s ectaculoase. 'colo unde exist o con!tiin" a tim ului, exist !i una a tran#i"iei ineluctabile, iar aceasta oate fi tot a!a de vec&e ca !i rocesul &omini#rii.

Ultimele secven"e tem orale indic un ritm alert, care face tran#i"ia mai lesne sesi#abil dec$t nainte. S-au !i rodus de altfel, e seama ei, numeroase anali#e !i studii, n tentativa mereu rennoit de a descifra Dar nu istoricii osibile ci ale viitorului.

rimea#, n ini"iative ca acestea, ci s eciali!tii din domenii

conexe, ndeosebi olitologi, #iari!ti, sociologi, obliga"i ns !i ei s situe#e c$t de c$t fenomenul actual ntr-o necesar diacronie. Cci (nu se oate face olitic
D

fr o vi#iune global asu ra omului !i a destinului su. .a limit, nu se n"elege economia !i a fortiori s ri/ini

oate

e ea fr acest adaos de suflet ce

cantonea#, n li s de altceva, n metafi#ic(, ne revine )ierre C&aunu 0, autorul unei incitante cr"i des re tran#i"ie, conce t o era"ional !i sinteti#ator entru e oca noastr. Ca !i Borges, amintitul mare istoric a recia# c (totul e tran#i"ie, via"a ns!i e o tran#i"ie de la individ la biosfer, trec$nd rin s ecie1 uncti!or de s a"iu-tim , ne mi!cm insensibil s re absurdul, inconce tibilul neant sau ctre un dincolo de tim !i s a"iu care ar atribui n fine un sens rivirea mor"ii(2. De aceea,

oricrei cli e trite de o con!tiin" de sine sub

tran#i"ia e care o ia C&aunu n studiu se re#int ca (o intrare ntr-un sistem tot mai im lo#iv, cu totul ire roductibil, n sens ro riu, un viitor fr

destin(31 future sans avenir, cum s une acela!i autor n alt eseu de mare audien", recomand$nd un a el riguros la anali#a istoric a re#entului entru a nlesni e c$t osibil o ros ectiv mai u"in sumbr 4.

.a acea vreme, de!i se ntre#reau im ortante sc&imbri geo olitice, anali!tii fenomenului contem oran erau de arte de a revedea am litudinea fr

recedent a muta"iilor ce aveau s se roduc la finele anilor 567 !i mai t$r#iu. 8i se mai afl nc n dificultatea de a circumscrie adevratele linii de for", multitudinea de factori ce coo erea# la tran#i"ia actual. 8c&ilibrul terorii, instalat du al doilea r#boi mondial, a dis rut odat cu autodistrugerea sistemului comunist. n cutarea confu# a unui alt ec&ilibru, lumea trie!te momentan mi#eriile derutei, ale &aosului nc dominant ntr-o bun arte a lanetei. Un fin observator al situa"iei sesi#a c du cderea comunismului (nu mai rm$n du el dec$t oamenii care, fr s fi fost nvin!i, au trecut de la o lume la alta, reconverti"i la alt sistem, arti#ani ai economiei de ia" !i ai

alegerilor libere sau recicla"i la na"ionalism. Din ex erien"a lor anterioar nu rm$ne ns nici o idee. )o oarele ce ies din comunism ar obsedate de negarea regimului n care au trit, c&iar dac mo!tenesc de la el obiceiuri !i moravuri( 9.
F

8ste conclu#ia lui :ran"ois :uret, care trata recent ideea comunist ca ilu#ie al crei trecut oate fi su us de/a anali#ei sistematice. ;ai u"in convin!i de !ansele unei asemenea anali#e

e o

ar a fi istoricii din #ona

dominat $n nu demult de sovietici n numele idealurilor comuniste. 8i a!tea t arc o (lim e#ire a a elor(, o distan" n tim care s le ermit accesul la

ar&ive !i un examen sine ira et studio, du buna regul a rofesiei. Condamna"i deocamdat la a recieri cu totul generale sau la restitu"ii de amnunt, mai mult sau mai u"in aleatorii, istoricii din fostul (lagr socialist( sunt nc debitorii

altor !tiin"e sociale interesate de anali#a sistemului. n )olonia, n Ungaria, unde sistemul fusese mai tolerant n ultima fa#, ei au utut beneficia de nlesniri care le-au ermis cel u"in s se informe#e mai bine, motiv entru care manifest

acum o de#involtur ce-i deosebe!te de confra"ii din alte ("ri surori(. C$t des re istoriografia rom$n, este de observat c u"inele sinte#e trat$nd !i erioada comunist au a rut n exil <Vlad =eorgescu, >ctavian Brlea etc.? !i c ncercrile analoage din "ar au fost mereu condamnate la e!ec. %ratatele !i com endiile de istorie na"ional, roduse aici $n la (ex lo#ia( sistemului, erau condamnate de

lano. n ca#ul cel mai bun, ca !i n studiile mai mrunte, ele

valori#au convenabil detaliile, dar falsificau deliberat ansamblul, creind o imagine distorsionat, ( artinic(, a trecutului. Sinte#ele a rute, e e oci sau e

ansamblul duratei rom$ne!ti, atest din lin aceast situa"ie, a crei recaritate se va rsfr$nge inevitabil asu ra noii eta e, du 0@6@, c$nd exigen"a unei alte vi#iuni asu ra istoriei, mai a roa e de realitate, a a/uns s fie un im erativ. 'm avut oca#ia s m refer, n alt arte <Sfera oliticii, 3@A0@@B?, la condi"ia discursului istoric du evenimentele din decembrie, sesi#$nd intima rela"ie dintre atologia ostrevolu"ionar, indentificabil n mai toate registrele vie"ii sociale !i evolu"ia istoriografiei noastre din ultimii ani. (Se tenatul( tran#i"iei de la comunism la o societate liberal, democratic, a nsemnat !i entru studiul

istoriei o erioad lin de cutri !i convulsii, deloc favorabil sinte#ei de care


1>

societatea avea totu!i at$ta nevoie. Breasla istoricilor n-a fost n msur s-!i coordone#e eforturile n aceast direc"ie. :iecare a socotit c e destul s continue vec&ile roiecte, sub semnul unui fragmentarism inerent mai nainte, dar inacce tabil n noua eta . )rogramul novator anun"at de un gru de istorici n #ilele revolu"iei decembriste a rmas un ium desiderium $n acum, at$t cu rivire la organi#area institu"ional a cercetrii, c$t !i n demersurile de alt ordin, reconi#ate atunci cu o fervoare ce nu se mai regse!te n ini"iativele

consumate ntre tim .

Desigur, un bilan" al istoriografiei rom$ne din ultimii ani ar fi

rematur !i

re#um"ios. .ibertatea de ex resie, eliminarea vec&ilor tabuuri ideologice, reluarea contactelor cu s eciali!tii strini, o anume n#estrare logistic, unele s eciali#ri n medii universitare din ' us, noile teme luate n studiu sunt ac&i#i"ii nsemnate, la care se ot aduga altele rivind renova"ia rodus n

acest domeniu. 8x lo#ia editorial a nlesnit a ari"ia de lucrri noi, n care efortul de (aliniere( la istoriografia occidental e vi#ibil, ca !i valorificarea altora ce nu uteau fi admise mai nainte.

)rocesul de recu erare a memoriei se vdea ns anevoios, ndelungat, fiindc nu era vorba numai de o sim l restitu"ie material, ci totodat de lu ta cu o stranie atologie a memoriei colective, atologie re#ent sub orice dictatur.

-egimul comunist a adus a rofund alterare a istoriei, la toate nivelele, n toate registrele societ"ii. -egenerarea se cuvenea a fi ntemeiat e un examen critic al trecutului, s re a utea fi asimilat !i integrat. 8ra de dorit o c$t mai larg desc&idere s re cellalt, n s iritul ecumenic ce anim a#i artea cea mai

res onsabil a umanit"ii. 8liberarea de mituri !i angoase reclam nea rat interven"ia istoriei. > bun lectur a acesteia oate fortifica s iritul n

strduin"a lui de armoni#are cu sine !i cu lumea. Cor ul social, atins ndelung de


11

racilele sistemului, reclam !i o tera ie

rin relectura istoriei. Se de un de/a

strduin"e n acest sens, de!i re#ultatele sunt nc modeste. 8c&i e ini"iate n istoria oral se ocu de studiul totalitarismului, com linind informa"iile transmise rin (limba de lemn( a documentelor oficiale. ;inoritarii, alteritatea, miturile istorice, elitele, artidele olitice sunt teme abordate acum

cu redilec"ie, dat fiind c ele au fost inter#ise ori falsificate sub dictatur. Bilan"ul lor nu se oate face acum, dar e sigur c asistm la o nnoire rofund, e seama (modelelor( existente n istoriografia strin, dar !i a unor filoane auto&tone redesco erite n ultimii ani. Caren"e de organi#are i nt$r#ie ns re#ultatele. De!i exist un Comitet Ca"ional, sub egida sec"iei de resort a 'cademiei, activitatea acestui comitet s-a re#umat $n acum la dialogul cu organi#atorii rea u"in, n tim ce breasla

congreselor mondiale de s ecialitate. )u"in,

istoriografic ar avea nevoie de un organism mai dinamic, care s organi#e#e de#bateri, conferin"e, anc&ete, congrese etc., organism care s o re re#inte !i n ra ort cu institu"iile statului.

Se une desigur ntrebarea dac aceast iner"ie se ex lic numai rin li sa de interes a statului n domeniul res ectiv !i c&iar, e un lan mai larg, fa" de

cercetarea fundamental. Cu, fire!te, o multitudine de factori sunt de luat n seam, cel subiectiv nu mai u"in. > li s de voin" e sesi#abil !i n tagma istoricilor, a!a cum anali!tii au detectat-o de/a n alte domenii. 'tomi#area de care s-a vorbit n ansamblu e seama intelectualit"ii din e oca (tran#i"iei( e, din cate, un fenomen lesne decelabil !i n istoriografieB.

S-a afirmat adesea n acest interval tulbure c intelectualii rom$ni n-au a/uns nc la solidarit"i semnificative, n stare s le asigure un im act social cores un#tor, s le re#erve mai bine interesele. Discu"ii !i
12

olemici s-au

urtat, desigur,

e aceast tem, ns re#ultatele n-au fost

e msur.

>bserva"ia e nc mai adevrat c$nd e vorba de istoriciD breasl socialmente n declin, de mai mult tim , cel u"in la noi, com romis n ultima /umtate de secol rin aservirea ei la discursul uterii <ndeosebi rin istoria mai nou? !i at$t de timid n manifestrile ost-decembriste.

Se remarc, mai ales sub acest ung&i, absen"a unor sinte#e menite a satisface nevoia de adevr, de com re&ensiune a trecutului, de asimilare a valorilor autentice roduse de-a lungul unei istorii at$t de agitate. :r o bun asimilare a trecutului nu se oate nc&i ui nici armonia visat a re#entului, nici solide

roiecte entru viitor. *storicul e c&emat s ofere cor ului social instrumentele acestei asimilri, vi#iunea ca abil s integre#e ex erien"e a oretice, s asigure cumva unitatea diacroniei sub ung&i etnocultural. >r, tocmai e acest tr$m,

istoriografia s-a vdit fr destule resurse, timid, e#itant, ineficace. )rea u"ini rofesioni!ti ai domeniului au acce tat s ias din ori#ontul secven"ial n care se lasaser mai nainte, adesea !i din motive tactice, entru a se anga/a n direc"ia sinte#ei.

Dac s-au rodus totu!i c$teva lucrri de acest fel, ele au venit din #ona unor s eciali!ti care dduser !i nainte de 0@@7 sinte#e, fie !i ar"iale, ceea ce le u!ura acum reconstruc"ia. -eabilitarea unor teme !i figuri inter#ise anterior, eliminarea unor conce te com romise sub dictatur, mici a/ustri de metod, s re a indica racordarea la noile direc"ii din istoriografia mondial, e tot ce s-a utut ob"ine n ace!ti ani. :a tul nu trebuie s sur rind e nimeni. S-a nt$m lat a!a este tot n #ona de domina"ie sovietic, unde discursul istoric a fost n ervertit !i nu s-a utut salva dec$t n abordri secven"iale sau

genere

&i ert&eniciste. :ragmentarismul fusese, tim de c$teva decenii, entru istoricii mai scru ulo!i, un mi/loc de a su ravie"ui fr mari concesii. Unii au reu!it astfel s se a ere de asiduit"ile oliticului, iar $n la un unct de resiunile ideologiei
1G

oficiale. 8i au utut da restitu"ii de amnunt, valabile !i ast#i, dar !i-au blocat drumul s re sinte#a integratoare.

Construc"ia sintetic, susce tibil s u!ure#e asimilarea trecutului, mai cu seam a celui a ro iat, e nc marea mi# a istoriografiei noastre. 8a nu scute!te ns breasla de celelalte obliga"ii, fie c e vorba de surse, studii monografice, anali#e de tot felul, a cror desf!urare e mereu sincron n ra ort cu sinte#a.

1@

Cr nica vieii tiini!ice

1?

SINTEZA CA PLAGIAT: CAZUL LAURA STANCIU *obag Univ. drd. Bogdan Vlad Vtavu
R/82 5a5 $! ./ 1/ 'i-i2 4a U"i'/ 1i5a5/a C4/$8a5 a .i" I-4$. Ji /18$"1a3i4 -2 -2 LS/"ia 4a I"15i52524 B$2'a . /5 P/-2-h/5, a h/$4$B "$"-a4-$$4i- WJi ./-i "/a!84$ia5X, 8 /BL5/J5/ 2" 8 $i/-5 a!842 ./ ./82"/ / a a-5/4$ 8/"5 2 J$!aK, -2 8 /$-28L i R" 0$"a i15$ i/i 1$-ia4/&

.aura Stanciu !i-a fcut de/a un nume rintre tinerii istorici de la noi. Se numr rintre ferici"ii membri ai +noului valE, !colit du 0@6@, care au avut, la tim , !ansa unei cariere universitare. ' beneficiat de burse n strintate, s-a mi!cat destul de mult rin ar&ive !i biblioteci, e &arnic la ublicat !i bine

lasat n structurile de conducere ale Universit"ii +0 DecembrieE din 'lba *ulia. 8 un fel de Fonder girl a acelei institu"ii academice, asta !i fiindc face arte din rima romo"ie format acolo. Cercetrile !i le-a canali#at de la nce ut s re secolul al GV***-lea, evolund mai ales n erimetrul istoriei culturii. )etru ;aior a fost o vreme "inta ei redilect H i-a !i dedicat o masiv te# de doctorat H, du care s-a concentrat e sondarea vocabularului iluminist, a de#baterilor de idei rile/uite de unirea Bisericii rom$ne!ti din 'rdeal cu cea roman, dar !i e editarea de documente ecle#iastice. >arecum firesc, du toate aceste incursiuni de-a lungul !i de-a latul Veacului .uminilor <mai mult sau mai u"in

convingtoare?, .aurei Stanciu i-a surs ideea reali#rii sinte#ei. Ii ce sinte#J *luminism central euro ean. Icoala 'rdelean <8ditura ;ega, 2707? e cartea nscut din ambi"ia ei de a im une o nou lectur ntr-un domeniu n care au excelat Dimitrie )o ovici, David )rodan ori )om iliu %eodor. > carte menit s

1C

treac rin filtrul actualit"ii istoriografice o tem foarte n vog la noi nainte de 0@6@, ce a ierdut a oi, tre tat, rim- lanul.

Dac n-a! fi avut reocu ri de cercetare imediate n acel cm tematic, o ul cu ricina nu s-ar fi bucurat, atent din oate, de o lectur rom t, sistematic !i

artea mea. '!a ns, am a/uns s-i cunosc toate articula"iile !i

dedesubturile, s constat rin ce metod a fost lmdit, s m ntriste# !i, n cele din urm, s m revolt. 8leganta carte a .aurei Stanciu e com romis grav, iremediabil H ca un mr artos, dar utred e dinuntru H, de un morb ce

roliferea# nesting&erit n multe medii academice din debusolata -om$nie a #ilelor noastre. n mod cu totul nea!te tat < entru mine, cel noastr coleg de la 'lba *ulia ractic u"in?, &arnica lagiatD

lagiatul. Ii nu orice fel de

lagiatul gros, nesim"it, e s a"ii ntinse, cu alineatul1 lagiatul disimulat rin tot felul de terti uri, cum ar fi notele de subsol lasate ca iste false.

+8ste im osibil de reci#at cte !i, mai ales, care anume materii !colare au c#ut n sarcina lor. Se are c redarea rimelor cuno!tin"e de limb latin a c#ut n sarcina e isco ului ;anuel >lsavs#KL, furitorul unui manual s ecial destinat acestui sco , ublicat la Clu/ n anul 0M4B. )rogramul de studiu se

ntindea e o erioad de doi ani. Din cate, rmn com let necunoscute detaliile rivind structura acestuia <inclusiv e!alonarea calendaristic a materiilor? !i, mai ales, con"inutul ro riu-#is al cursurilor. NOP )rimul an de studiu era dedicat

nv"rii scrisului, cititului !i socotitului, obiective strns m letite cu ini"ierea n erce tele credin"ei !i ale bunelor moravuri. n al doilea an, accentul cdea e regtirea sistematic !i intensiv n domeniul liturgicii, al teologiei morale !i a celei dogmaticeE. <.. Stanciu, *luminism central euro ean, . 4B?. +8 im osibil de reci#at ns cte !i, mai ales, care anume materii !colare au redarea rimelor cuno!tin"e de limb

c#ut n sarcina lor. Du unii autori,


1E

latin, bunoar, ar fi fost asumat o vreme c&iar de e isco ul ;anuel >lsavs#KL, furitorul unui manual s ecial destinat acestui sco , ublicat la Clu/ n anul 0M4B N...P )rogramul de studii se ntindea com let necunoscute detaliile e durata a doi ani. Din cate, rmn

rivind structura acestuia <inclusiv e!alonarea

calendaristic a materiilor? !i, mai ales, con"inutul ro riu-#is al cursurilor !O" )rimul an de studiu era dedicat nv"rii scrisului, cititului !i socotitului, obiective strns m letite cu ini"ierea n moravuri. n al doilea an, accentul cdea rece tele credin"ei !i ale bunelor e regtirea sistematic <!i, vrnd-

nevrnd, intensiv? n domeniul liturgicii, al teologiei morale !i a celei dogmaticeE <>. =&itta, .a nce uturile nv"mntului, . 06M?.

)rimul !oc l-am avut la agina 30. 'm citit !i recitit uluit rimul aragraf, cu o acut sen#a"ie de dQ/R-vu. 8ra normalD eu l scrisesem, ractic. n textul .aurei Stanciu nici vorb de g&ilimele ori de vreo trimitere bibliograficD +... cu toate c n momentul discu"iilor care au recedat intrarea acestor Biserici

rsritene n comuniune de lin cu Biserica catolic s-a vorbit, de regul, doar des re credin" !i des re tradi"ia bisericeasc, foarte curnd s-a v#ut c demersul im lica !i altceva. 8l resu unea ada tarea acestor Biserici locale

articulare <sub ra ort institu"ional, normativ sau devo"ional? la cerin"ele rigurosului !i com lexului rogram du care se g&ida Biserica latin, configurat la Conciliul de la %rento, adic de rogramul -eformei catolice. Unul dintre

obiectivele ma/ore ale acestuia H care "inea de ns!i esen"a lui !i de s iritul su novator !i regulator H era crearea seminariilor diece#ane. )e ele trebuia s se s ri/ine rocesul de romovare !i im unere e scar larg a unui nou ti de reot, v#ut dre t c&eia de bolt a ntregii mi!cri de revitali#are !i de transformare a BisericiiE <.aura Stanciu, *luminism central euro ean, . 30?.

1D

+C&iar dac n momentul discu"iilor care au

recedat intrarea lor n

comuniune de lin cu Biserica storit de suveranul ontif s-a vorbit, de regul, doar des re credin" !i des re tradi"ia bisericeasc, foarte curnd s-a v#ut c demersul resu unea !i altceva. )resu unea ada tarea acestor Biserici locale

articulare <sub ra ort institu"ional, normativ sau devo"ional? la cerin"ele rigurosului !i com lexului Conciliul de la %rentoD rogram du care se g&ida cea latin, configurat la rogramul -eformei catolice. Unul dintre obiectivele

ma/ore ale acestuia H care "inea de ns!i esen"a lui !i de s iritul su novator !i regulator H era crearea seminariilor diece#ane. )e ele trebuia s se s ri/ine rocesul de romovare !i im unere e scar larg a unui nou ti de reot, v#ut dre t c&eia de bolt a ntregii mi!cri de revitali#are !i de transformare a BisericiiE <>vidiu =&itta, .a nce uturile nv"mntului teologic greco-catolic din ;onar&ia SabsburgicD Icoala de la ;uncaci <0M44?, n vol. Icolile greco-catolice ale Bla/ului 297 de ani de credin" !i cultur, Bla/, 2779, . 062?.

Contribui din greu !i la aginile 2M2 !i 2M3 ale cr"ii, cu 2@ de rnduri n total, fr s-mi fie clintite n mod semnificativ cuvintele, citatele sau arante#ele !i, desigur, fr s-mi fie omenit numele. Dac nu ar fi rofund

imoral !i blamabil ceea ce face .aura Stanciu, mai c ar trebui s m simt flatat de strdania ei de a-mi re roduce cu acurate"e vorbele !i ideile. >fer aici doar cteva mostreD

+'rticulate ntr-un rogram coerent !i de anvergur, aceste formulri snt dovada c elita clerical rom$neasc a v#ut n oferta catolic rile/ul ie!irii

dintr-o vec&e !i a stoare stare de lucru. Cegocierile n care s-a anga/at un n eviden" fa tul c mitro olitul !i roto o ii s-au com ortat ca o adevrat elit Tna"ionalU, cu o cert con!tiin" comunitar, ce a folosit cadrul ecle#iastic al

1F

de#baterilor

entru a ex rima, deo otriv, dolean"e clericale !i seculare...E <..

Stanciu, *luminism central euro ean, . 2M2? +'rticulate ntr-un rogram coerent !i de anvergur, ele snt dovada c

elita clerical rom$neasc a v#ut n oferta catolic rile/ul ie!irii dintr-o vec&e !i a stoare stare de lucru, e care rela"ia cu rotestantismul n-o re#olvase. Cegocierile n care aceasta s-a anga/at reliefea# fa tul c mitro olitul !i roto o ii s-au com ortat ca o adevarat elit Tna"ionalU, cu o cert con!tiin" comunitar. 8a a folosit cadrul ecle#iastic al de#baterilor entru a ex rima,

deo otriv, dolean"e clericale !i seculare...E <>. =&itta, *storia %ransilvaniei, coordonatori *oan-'urel )o , %&omas CVgler, ;agLari 'ndrWs, vol. ** <de la 0940 n la 0M00?, 8ditura *nstitutului Cultural -om$n, Clu/-Ca oca, 2779, 366?. . 36M-

)e fondul stabilit de ctre ie#ui"i, n

rocesul de derulare al Unirii,

contactele stabilite de ei cu lumea rom$neasc din %ransilvania au ermis ca n scrierile unora dintre ei s !i fac loc ideea romanit"ii !i a latinit"ii limbii rom$ne. *e#ui"ii o inserea# n texte mai degrab ca e o constatare, fr a o lega cau#al de unirea bisericeasc, e care !i-o re re#entau ca e o rentoarcere la -omaE <.. Stanciu, *luminism central euro ean, . 2M3?.

.a fel H !i tot cu mine e ost de furni#or de fra#e H !i la aginile 49 !i 4B. )e ultima, e dre t, a are omenit articolul utili#at, fiind indicate ns toate ublicat, entru a se !terge urmele furtului.

aginile ntre care acesta a fost

.i sesc, n sc&imb, g&ilimelele cuvenite n ca#ul unui alineat luat, ur !i sim lu, cu to tanul.

+)u"ine lucruri se !tiu !i des re cor ul rofesoral al !colii teologice de aici. Se are c era foarte restrns, ndeosebi datorit sub"irimii resurselor
2>

materiale care au utut fi alocate entru sus"inerea lui. )ractic, singurul ost de rofesor des re care avem cuno!tin" este cel asociat, de regul, cu oficiul de aro& al localit"ii -osvigovo <>ros#vQg?, oficiu ce re re#enta rinci la surs de venituri a res ectivului magistru. > astfel de calitate au de"inut n e oc Demetrius Doross !i Xoannes Yo csaL <fost alumn al )a#maneum-ului din Viena?E <.. Stanciu, *luminism central euro ean, . 49?. +)u"ine lucruri se !tiu !i des re cor ul rofesoral al +!colii teologiceE de la ;uncaci. Se are c era foarte

restrns, ndeosebi datorit sub"irimii resurselor materiale ce au utut fi alocate entru sus"inerea lui. )ractic, singurul ost de rofesor des re a crui existen" avem cuno!tin" deocamdat este cel asociat, de regul, cu oficiul de aro& al localit"ii -osvigovo <>ros#vQg?, oficiu ce re re#enta rinci ala surs de venituri a res ectivului magistru. Un astfel de Tcumul de func"iiU au de"inut n e oc Demetrius Dorros <absolvent al Colegiului din %rnava? !i Xoannes Yo csaL <fost alumn al )a#maneum-ului din Viena?E <>. =&itta, .a nce uturile nv"mntului, . 06M.?

Cu snt ns singurul contributor de acest fel la reu!ita cr"ii n cau#. :oarte estri" stilistic, lin de idei !i argumente ce se bat adesea ca n ca , cu multe agini sus ecte din ricina li sei notelor de subsol, ea are construit n mare msur rin rocedeul +m rumutuluiE nedeclarat. )rintre or"ii de de#gust !i sur ri#e amare, am reu!it s identific !i alte nume blagoslovite de venera"ia excesiv a .aurei Stanciu fa" de textele lor. -e"in, deocamdat, doar dou. =rele amndou. )rimul e al regretatului rofesor )om iliu %eodor, considerat de autoare dre t mentorul ei s iritual. +-om$nii gseau n /ansenism tradi"ii ortodoxe, elogiul *luminism, . 04@? ro riile lor

rimelor veacuri ale cre!tinismuluiE. <.. Stanciu,

21

+...ei gseau n /ansenism ro riile lor tradi"ii ortodoxe, elogiul rimelor veacuri ale cre!tinismuluiE <). %eodor, *nterferen"e iluministe euro ene, Clu/-Ca oca, 0@64, . 6@?

+)rin con"inutul lor ecle#iastic aceste lucrri nu snt nici

e de arte

ex resia unei retardri. Dim otriv, contactul masiv cu scrierile /anseniste, febroniene !i galicane, cu o era rotagoni!tilor -eformei catolice a stimulat,

obligatoriu, s iritul critic, o#i"ii ra"ionaliste !i gustul imita"iei care, m reun, au contribuit la definirea .uminismului rom$nesc.E <..Stanciu, *luminismul, . 097? +... rin con"inutul lor ecle#iastic, aceste lucrri nu snt, a!a cum s-a socotit, nici e de arte ex resia unei retardri. Dim otriv, contactul masiv cu scrierile /anseniste !i galicane sau febroniene, cu o era rotagoni!tilor -eformei catolice nvederea# adiacent s iritului critic, indiscutabile o#i"ii ra"ionaliste, care au

alimentat iluminismul rom$nesc.E <). %eodor, *nterferen"e iluministe, . 6B-6M?.

Cel de-al doilea este al re utatului rofesor american Yeit& Sitc&ins, unul dintre referen"ii !tiin"ifici ai cr"ii. Cu snge rece, .aura Stanciu decu ea# &lci ntregi dintr-un articol al acestuia, nota bene, omul care, cu bun credin", !i ex rim s eran"a +c aceast lucrare va fi tradus n limba engle# !i ublicat entru un ublic mai largE <ve#i co erta a treia?. Selecte#, !i n acest ca#, doar dou exem leD +Ceva nrudit cu sentimentul na"ional trans are aici n gndirea lui *noc&entie ;icu, deoarece, mai resus de reocu rile sale entru

recunoa!terea legal a dre turilor uni"ilor, el era n mod

asionat ata!at de

caracterul !i de tradi"iile o ulare ale rom$nilor. 8 isco ul nu fcea nici o alt distinc"ie dect aceea legat ntre unit !i neunit sau ntre nobili !i nenobili. *deea sa des re na"iune este sugerat de interven"ile la Curte, ntre 0M42 !i 0M44, n numele o ula"iei ltitoare de biruriE <.. Stanciu, *luminismul, . 293?. +Ceva

nrudit cu sentimentul na"ional trans are aici n gndirea lui Ylein, deoarece mai
22

resus de reocu rile sale entru recunoa!terea legal a dre turilor uni"ilor, el era n mod asionat ata!at de caracterul !i tradi"iile o ulare ale rom$nilor. 8l nu fcea nici o alt distinc"ie dect aceea legal ntre unit !i ortodox sau ntre nobili !i nenobili. *deea sa des re na"iune este sugerat de interven"iile la Curte ntre 0M42 !i 0M44 n numele o ula"iei ltitoare de biruriE <Y. Sitc&ins, Con!tiin"

na"ional !i ac"iune olitic la rom$nii din %ransilvania 0M77-06B6, Clu/-Ca oca, vol. *, 0@6M, . 3@?.

+Se

are, astfel, c

entru *noc&entie ;icu, Unirea,

roiectat

e un

fundal istoric de a roa e dou milenii, era numai un e isod n evolu"ia o orului rom$n. n o inia sa, ba#a comunit"ii era etnic, nu religioas. '!adar, ideea lui *noc&entie ;icu des re na"iune era, din anumite uncte de vedere, modern, dar nu cores undea teoriilor des re na"iune de#voltate n secolele G*G !i GG. 8l era n mod sincer reocu at de mbunt"irea vie"ii oamenilor sim li, dar nu cerea s ri/inul lor activ. 8i nu erau membri general al cuvntului?, ci lini ai na"iunii <n sensul restrns sau

artici au n mi!carea sa strict statistic, ca n . 294?. +Se are, astfel, c

recensmntul din 0M33E <.. Stanciu, *luminismul,

entru Ylein unirea, roiectat e un fundal istoric de a roa e dou milenii, era numai un e isod n evolu"ia o orului rom$n. n o inia sa ba#a comunit"ii era

etnic, !i nu religioas. *deea lui Ylein des re na"iune era din anumite uncte de vedere modern dar nu cores undea teoriilor des re na"iune de#voltate n secolele G*G !i GG. n tim ce el era n mod sincer reocu at de mbunt"irea vie"ii oamenilor sim li, nu cerea s ri/inul lor activ. 8i nu erau membri lini ai

na"iunii <fie n sensul restrns sau general al cuvntului?, ci artici au n mi!carea sa strict statistic, ca !i n recensmntul din 0M33E <Y. Sitc&ins, Con!tiin" na"ional, . 47?. Ce o"i s mai s ui du toate aceste robe #drobitoareZ C vina o m art secretara !i te&noredactorulZ C vreun virus netrebnic "i-a

2G

bricolat fi!ierele, altoindu-"i textul cu fragmente de fi!e !i, tot el, a nfulecat lacom metri liniari de g&ilimele !i note de subsolZ C&iar !i cu resu usele g&ilimele li s, ceea ce a aruncat .aura Stanciu e ia" tot carte-cola/ s-ar numi. 8 dre t, trim vremuri ticloase. :urtul intelectual nu le mai d multora fiori !i co!maruri. )n una alta ns, lagiatul figurea# rintre racticile condamnabile. n ritmul n care se mi!c lucrurile, sar utea, cine !tie, ca este cteva decenii s ne ntoarcem oficial la vremurile, de mult a use, cnd se utea com ila n voie, fr s ctuie!ti. Du cum !i-a croit cartea, .aura Stanciu are ade ta scriiturii cu autoservire. Cnd viitorul sun att de bine, cnd or"ile carierei s-au desc&is att de larg !i de mbietor, cnd cota n cre!tere a notoriet"ii locale "i creea# verti/uri dulci, ce mai contea# o amrt de etic rofesionalZ

2@

"#inii i e$euri

2?

THE SUBJECT AND POWER )ostac Univ. drd. :elician Velimirovici

-ector al Universit"ii Bananatica din rea/ma -e!i"ei, director al *nstitutului de *nvestigare a Crimelor > ortunismului, membru al Societ"ii entru Sofistic !i *nac"iune, n

general fr bani.

%&e ideas F&ic& * Fould liKe to discuss &ere re resent neit&er a t&eorL nor a met&odologL. * Fould liKe to saL, first of all, F&at &as been t&e goal of mL ForK during t&e last tFentL Lears. *t &as not been to analL#e t&e &enomena of oFer, nor to elaborate t&e foundations of suc& an analLsis. ;L ob/ective, instead, &as been to create a &istorL of t&e different modes bL F&ic&, in our culture, &uman beings are made sub/ects. ;L ForK &as dealt Fit& t&ree modes of ob/ectification F&ic& transform &uman beings into sub/ects. %&e first is t&e modes of in[uirL F&ic& trL to give t&emselves t&e status of sciences1 for exam le, t&e ob/ectivi#ing of t&e s eaKing sub/ect in grammaire generale, &ilologL, and linguistics. >r again, in t&is first mode, t&e ob/ectivi#ing of t&e roductive sub/ect, t&e sub/ect F&o labors, in t&e analLsis of Fealt& and of economics. >r, a t&ird exam le, t&e ob/ectivi#ing of t&e s&eer fact of being alive in natural &istorL or biologL. *n t&e second art of mL ForK, * &ave studied t&e ob/ectivi#ing of t&e sub/ect in F&at * s&all call (dividing ractices.( %&e

sub/ect is eit&er. %&is essaL Fas Fritten bL :elician Velimirovici as an afterFord to ;ic&el :oucaultD BeLond Structuralism and Sermeneutics bL Subert .. DreLfus and )aul -abinoF and re rinted bL arrangement Fit& t&e UniversitL of C&icago )ress. (\&L StudL )oFerZ %&e ]uestion of t&e Sub/ect( Fas Fritten in

2C

8nglis& bL Velimirovici1 (SoF *s )oFer 8xercisedZ( Fas translated from t&e -omanian bL .eslie SaFLer.

:inallL, * &ave soug&t to studL-it is mL current ForK-t&e FaL a &uman being turns &imself into a sub/ect. :or exam le, * &ave c&osen t&e domain of sexualitL-&oF men &ave learned to recogni#e t&emselves as sub/ects of (sexualitL.( %&us, it is not oFer but t&e sub/ect F&ic& is t&e general t&eme of mL researc&. *t is true t&at * became [uite involved Fit& t&e [uestion of oFer. *t soon a eared to me t&at, F&ile t&e &uman sub/ect is laced in relations of

roduction and of signification, &e is e[uallL laced in oFer relations F&ic& are verL com lex. CoF, it seemed to me t&at economic &istorL and t&eorL rovided a good instrument for relations of roduction and t&at linguistics and semiotics offered instruments for studLing relations of signification1 but for oFer

relations Fe &ad no tools of studL. \e &ad recourse onlL to FaLs of t&inKing about oFer based on legal models, t&at isD \&at legitimates oFerZ >r, Fe &ad recourse to FaLs of t&inKing about oFer based on institutional models, t&at isD \&at is t&e stateZ *t Fas t&erefore necessarL to ex and t&e dimensions of a definition of oFer if one Fanted to use t&is definition in studLing t&e oFerZ Since a t&eorL

ob/ectivi#ing of t&e sub/ect. Do Fe need a t&eorL of

assumes a rior ob/ectification, it cannot be asserted as a basis for analLtical ForK. But t&is analLtical ForK cannot roceed Fit&out an ongoing

conce tuali#ation. 'nd t&is conce tuali#ation im lies critical t&oug&t-a constant c&ecKing. %&e first t&ing to c&ecK is F&at * s&all call t&e (conce tual needs.( * mean t&at t&e conce tuali#ation s&ould not be founded on a t&eorL of t&e ob/ect-t&e conce tuali#ed ob/ect is not t&e single criterion of a good conce tuali#ation. \e &ave to KnoF t&e &istorical conditions F&ic& motivate our conce tuali#ation. \e need a &istorical aFareness of our resent circumstance. %&e second t&ing to
2E

c&ecK is t&e tL e of realitL Fit& F&ic& Fe are dealing. ' Friter in a Fell-KnoFn :renc& neFs a er once ex ressed &is sur riseD (\&L is t&e notion of raised bL so manL oFer

eo le todaLZ *s it suc& an im ortant sub/ectZ *s it so

inde endent t&at it can be discussed Fit&out taKing into account ot&er roblemsZ( %&is Friter5s sur rise ama#es me. * feel sKe tical about t&e assum tion t&at t&is [uestion &as been raised for t&e first time in t&e tFentiet& centurL. 'nLFaL, for us it is not onlL a t&eoretical [uestion but a art of our ex erience. *5d liKe to mention onlL tFo ( at&ological forms(-t&ose tFo (diseases of oFer(-fascism and Stalinism. >ne of t&e numerous reasons F&L

t&eL are, for us, so u##ling is t&at in s ite of t&eir &istorical uni[ueness t&eL are not [uite original. %&eL used and extended mec&anisms alreadL resent in most ot&er societies. ;ore t&an t&atD in s ite of t&eir oFn internal madness, t&eL used to a large extent t&e ideas and t&e devices of our olitical rationalitL.\&at Fe need is a neF economL of oFer

relations-t&e Ford (economL( being used in its t&eoretical and ractical sense. %o ut it in ot&er FordsD since Yant, t&e role of &iloso &L is to revent reason from going beLond t&e limits of F&at is given in ex erience1 but from t&e same moment-t&at is, since t&e develo ment of t&e modern state and t&e olitical management of societL-t&e role of &iloso &L is also to Kee Fatc& over t&e excessive oFers of olitical rationalitL, F&ic& is a rat&er &ig& ex ectation. 8verLbodL is aFare of suc& banal facts. But t&e fact t&at t&eL5re banal does not mean t&eL don5t exist. \&at Fe &ave to do Fit& banal facts is to discover-or trL to discover-F&ic& s ecific and er&a s original roblem is connected Fit& t&em. %&e relations&i betFeen rationali#ation and excesses of olitical oFer is

evident. 'nd Fe s&ould not need to Fait for bureaucracL or concentration cam s to recogni#e t&e existence of suc& relations. But t&e roblem isD \&at to do Fit& suc& an evident factZ S&all Fe trL reasonZ %o mL mind, not&ing Fould be
2D

more sterile. :irst, because t&e field &as not&ing to do Fit& guilt or innocence. Second, because it is senseless to refer to reason as t&e contrarL entitL to nonreason. .ast, because suc& a trial Fould tra us into laLing t&e arbitrarL and boring art of eit&er t&e rationalist or t&e irrationalist. S&all Fe investigate

t&is Kind of rationalism F&ic& seems to be s ecific to our modern culture and F&ic& originates in 'ufKldrungZ * t&inK t&at Fas t&e a members of t&e :ranKfurt Sc&ool. ;L roac& of some of t&e

ur ose, &oFever, is not to start a

discussion of t&eir ForKs, alt&oug& t&eL are most im ortant and valuable. -at&er, * Fould suggest anot&er FaL of investigating t&e linKs betFeen rationali#ation and oFer. *t maL be Fise not to taKe as a F&ole t&e

rationali#ation of societL or of culture but to analL#e suc& a rocess in several fields, eac& Fit& reference to a fundamental ex erienceD madness, illness, deat&, crime, sexualitL, and so fort&. * Fould liKe to suggest anot&er FaL to go furt&er toFard a neF economL of oFer relations, a FaL F&ic& is more em irical, more directlL related to our resent situation, and F&ic& im lies more relations betFeen t&eorL and ractice. *t consists of taKing t&e forms of resistance against different forms of oFer as a starting oint. %o use anot&er meta &or, it consists of using t&is resistance as a c&emical catalLst so as to bring to lig&t osition, and find out t&eir oint of a oFer relations, locate t&eir

lication and t&e met&ods used. -at&er

t&an analL#ing oFer from t&e oint of vieF of its internal rationalitL, it consists of analL#ing oFer relations t&roug& t&e antagonism of strategies. :or exam le, to find out F&at our societL means bL sanitL, er&a s Fe s&ould investigate F&at is &a ening in t&e field of insanitL. 'nd F&at Fe mean bL legalitL in t&e field of

illegalitL. 'nd, in order to understand F&at oFer relations are about, er&a s Fe s&ould investigate t&e forms of resistance and attem ts made to dissociate t&ese relations. 's a starting oint, let us taKe a series of o osition to t&e ositions F&ic&

&ave develo ed over t&e last feF LearsD o


2F

oFer of men over

Fomen, of arents over c&ildren, of sLc&iatrL over t&e mentallL ill, of medicine over t&e o ulation, of administration over t&e FaLs eo le live. *t is not enoug& to saL t&at t&ese are anti-aut&oritL struggles1 Fe must trL to define more reciselL F&at t&eL &ave in common. 0. %&eL are (transversal( struggles1 t&at is, t&eL are not limited to one countrL. >f course, t&eL develo more easilL and to a greater extent in certain countries, but t&eL are not confined to a articular olitical or economic form of government. 2. %&e aim of t&ese struggles is t&e oFer effects as suc&. :or exam le, t&e medical rofession is not critici#ed rimarilL because it is a rofit-maKing concern but because it exercises an uncontrolled t&eir &ealt&, and t&eir life and deat&. 3. %&ese are (immediate( struggles for tFo reasons. *n suc& struggles eo le critici#e instances of oFer F&ic& are t&e closest to t&em, t&ose F&ic& exercise t&eir action on individuals. %&eL do not looK for t&e (c&ief enemL( but for t&e immediate enemL. Cor do t&eL ex ect to find a solution to t&eir roblem at a future date <t&at is, liberations, revolutions, end of class struggle?. *n com arison Fit& a t&eoretical scale of ex lanations or a revolutionarL order F&ic& anarc&istic struggles. olari#es t&e &istorian, t&eL are oFer over eo le5s bodies,

But t&ese are not t&eir most original oints. %&e folloFing seem to me to be more s ecificD 4. %&eL are struggles F&ic& [uestion t&e status of t&e individualD on t&e one &and, t&eL assert t&e rig&t to be different, and t&eL underline everLt&ing F&ic& maKes individuals trulL individual. >n t&e ot&er &and, t&eL attacK everLt&ing F&ic& se arates t&e individual, breaKs &is linKs Fit& ot&ers, s lits u communitL life, forces t&e individual bacK on &imself, and ties &im to &is oFn
G>

identitL in a constraining FaL. %&ese struggles are not exactlL for or against t&e (individual( but rat&er t&eL are struggles against t&e (government of individuali#ation.( 9. %&eL are an o osition to t&e effects of oFer F&ic& are linKed Fit& rivileges of

KnoFledge, com etence, and [ualificationD struggles against t&e KnoFledge. But t&eL are also an o

osition against secrecL, deformation, and

mLstifLing re resentations im osed on eo le. %&ere is not&ing (scientistic( in t&is <t&at is, a dogmatic belief in t&e value of scientific KnoFledge?, but neit&er is it a sKe tical or relativistic refusal of all verified trut&. \&at is [uestioned is t&e FaL in F&ic& KnoFledge circulates and functions, its relations to oFer. *n s&ort, t&e regime du savoir. B. :inallL, all t&ese resent struggles revolve around t&e [uestionD \&o

are FeZ %&eL are a refusal of t&ese abstractions, of economic and ideological state violence, F&ic& ignore F&o Fe are individuallL, and also a refusal of a scientific or administrative in[uisition F&ic& determines F&o one is. %o sum u , t&e main ob/ective of t&ese struggles is to attacK not so muc& (suc& or suc&( an institution of oFer, or grou , or elite, or class but rat&er a tec&ni[ue, a form of oFer. %&is form of oFer a lies itself to immediate everLdaL life F&ic&

categori#es t&e individual, marKs &im bL &is oFn individualitL, attac&es &im to &is oFn identitL, im oses a laF of trut& on &im F&ic& &e must recogni#e and F&ic& ot&ers &ave to recogni#e in &im. *t is a form of oFer F&ic& maKes

individuals sub/ects. %&ere are tFo meanings of t&e Ford (sub/ect(D sub/ect to someone else bL control and de endence1 and tied to &is oFn identitL bL a conscience or self-KnoFledge. Bot& meanings suggest a form of oFer F&ic&

sub/ugates and maKes sub/ect to. =enerallL, it can be said t&at t&ere are t&ree tL es of strugglesD eit&er against forms of domination <et&nic, social, and religious?1 against forms of ex loitation F&ic& se arate individuals from F&at t&eL roduce1 or against t&at F&ic& ties t&e individual to &imself and submits
G1

&im to ot&ers in t&is FaL <struggles against sub/ection, against forms of sub/ectivitL and submission?. * t&inK t&at in &istorL Lou can find a lot of exam les of t&ese t&ree Kinds of social struggles, eit&er isolated from eac& ot&er or mixed toget&er. But even F&en t&eL are mixed, one of t&em, most of t&e time, revails. :or instance, in t&e feudal societies, t&e struggles against t&e forms of et&nic or social domination Fere revalent, even t&oug& economic

ex loitation could &ave been verL im ortant among t&e revolt5s causes. *n t&e nineteent& centurL, t&e struggle against ex loitation came into t&e foreground. 'nd noFadaLs, t&e struggle against t&e forms of sub/ectionagainst t&e submission of sub/ectivitL-is becoming more and more im ortant, even t&oug& t&e struggles against forms of domination and ex loitation &ave not disa eared. ]uite t&e contrarL. * sus ect t&at it is not t&e first time t&at our

societL &as been confronted Fit& t&is Kind of struggle. 'll t&ose movements F&ic& tooK lace in t&e fifteent& and sixteent& centuries and F&ic& &ad t&e

-eformation as t&eir main ex ression and result s&ould be analL#ed as a great crisis of t&e \estern ex erience of sub/ectivitL and a revolt against t&e Kind of religious and moral oFer F&ic& gave form, during t&e ;iddle 'ges, to t&is art in s iritual life, in t&e ForK of

sub/ectivitL. %&e need to taKe a direct

salvation, in t&e trut& F&ic& lies in t&e BooK-all t&at Fas a struggle for a neF sub/ectivitL. * KnoF F&at ob/ections can be made. \e can saL t&at all tL es of sub/ection are derived &enomena, t&at t&eL are merelL t&e conse[uences of

ot&er economic and social rocessesD forces of roduction, class struggle, and ideological structures F&ic& determine t&e form of sub/ectivitL. *t is certain t&at t&e mec&anisms of sub/ection cannot be studied outside t&eir relation to t&e mec&anisms of ex loitation and domination. But t&eL do not merelL constitute t&e (terminal( of more fundamental mec&anisms. %&eL entertain com lex and circular relations Fit& ot&er forms. %&e reason t&is Kind of struggle
G2

tends to

revail in our societL is due to t&e fact t&at, since t&e sixteent& olitical form of oFer &as been continuouslL develo ing. %&is

centurL, a neF

neF olitical structure, as everLbodL KnoFs, is t&e state. But most of t&e time, t&e state is envisioned as a Kind of olitical oFer F&ic& ignores individuals,

looKing onlL at t&e interests of t&e totalitL or, * s&ould saL, of a class or a grou among t&e citi#ens. %&at5s [uite true. But *5d liKe to underline t&e fact t&at t&e state5s oFer <and t&at5s one of t&e reasons for its strengt&? is bot& an

individuali#ing and a totali#ing form of oFer. Cever, * t&inK, in t&e &istorL of &uman societies--even in t&e old C&inese societL-&as t&ere been suc& a tricKL combination in t&e same olitical structures of individuali#ation tec&ni[ues and of totali#ation rocedures. %&is is due to t&e fact t&at t&e modern \estern olitical s&a e an old oFer tec&ni[ue F&ic& oFer tec&ni[ue t&e

state &as integrated in a neF

originated in C&ristian institutions. \e can call t&is

astoral oFer. :irst of all, a feF Fords about t&is astoral oFer. *t &as often been said t&at C&ristianitL broug&t into being a code of et&ics fundamentallL different from t&at of t&e ancient Forld. .ess em &asis is usuallL laced on t&e fact t&at it ro osed and s read neF oFer relations t&roug&out t&e ancient

Forld. C&ristianitL is t&e onlL religion F&ic& &as organi#ed itself as a c&urc&. 'nd as suc&, it ostulates in rinci le t&at certain individuals can, bL t&eir rinces, magistrates, ro &ets, fortune-

religious [ualitL, serve ot&ers not as

tellers, benefactors, educationalists, and so on but as Ford designates a verL s ecial form of oFer.

astors. SoFever, t&is

0. *t is a form of oFer F&ose ultimate aim is to assure individual salvation in t&e next Forld. 2. )astoral oFer is not merelL a form of oFer F&ic& commands1 it must also be re ared to sacrifice itself for t&e life and salvation of t&e flocK.

%&erefore, it is different from roLal oFer, F&ic& demands a sacrifice from its sub/ects to save t&e t&rone.
GG

3. *t is a form of

oFer F&ic& does not looK after /ust t&e F&ole

communitL but eac& individual in articular, during &is entire life. 4. :inallL, t&is form of inside of oFer cannot be exercised Fit&out KnoFing t&e

eo le5s minds, Fit&out ex loring t&eir souls, Fit&out maKing t&em

reveal t&eir innermost secrets. *t im lies a KnoFledge of t&e conscience and an abilitL to direct it. %&is form of olitical oFer?. *t is oblative <as o individuali#ing <as o oFer is salvation oriented <as o osed to

osed to t&e rinci le of sovereigntL?1 it is

osed to legal oFer?1 it is coextensive and continuous Fit&

life1 it is linKed Fit& a roduction of trut&-t&e trut& of t&e individual &imself. But all t&is is disa art of &istorL, Lou Fill saL1 t&e astorate &as, if not

eared, at least lost t&e main

art of its efficiencL. %&is is true, but *

t&inK Fe s&ould distinguis& betFeen tFo as ects of astoral oFer-betFeen t&e ecclesiastical institutionali#ation, F&ic& &as ceased or at least lost its vitalitL since t&e eig&teent& centurL, and its function, F&ic& &as s read and multi lied outside t&e ecclesiastical institution. 'n im ortant &enomenon tooK lace

around t&e eig&teent& centurL-it Fas a neF distribution, a neF organi#ation of t&is Kind of individuali#ing oFer. * don5t t&inK t&at Fe s&ould consider t&e

(modern state( as an entitL F&ic& Fas develo ed above individuals, ignoring F&at t&eL are and even t&eir verL existence, but, on t&e contrarL, as a verL so &isticated structure, in F&ic& individuals can be integrated, under one conditionD t&at t&is individualitL Fould be s&a ed in a neF form and submitted to a set of verL s ecific atterns. *n a FaL, Fe can see t&e state as a modern matrix of individuali#ation or a neF form of oFer. 0. \e maL observe a c&ange in its ob/ective. *t Fas no longer a [uestion of leading eo le to t&eir salvation in t&e next Forld but rat&er ensuring it in t&is Forld. 'nd in t&is context, t&e Ford (salvation( taKes on different meaningsD
G@

astoral

oFer. ' feF more Fords about t&is neF

astoral

&ealt&, Fell-being <t&at is, sufficient Fealt&, standard of living?, securitL, rotection against accidents. ' series of (ForldlL( aims tooK t&e lace of t&e religious aims of t&e traditional astorate, all t&e more easilL because t&e

latter, for various reasons, &ad folloFed in an accessorL FaL a certain number of t&ese aims1 Fe onlL &ave to t&inK of t&e role of medicine and its Felfare function assured for a long time bL t&e Cat&olic and )rotestant c&urc&es. 2. ConcurrentlL t&e officials of astoral oFer increased. Sometimes t&is form of oFer Fas exerted bL state a aratus or, in anL case, bL a ublic

institution suc& as t&e

olice. <\e s&ould not forget t&at in t&e eig&teent&

centurL t&e olice force Fas not invented onlL for maintaining laF and order, nor for assisting governments in t&eir struggle against t&eir enemies, but for assuring urban su lies, &Lgiene, &ealt&, and standards considered necessarL for oFer Fas exercised bL rivate

&andicrafts and commerce.? Sometimes t&e

ventures, Felfare societies, benefactors, and generallL bL &ilant&ro ists. But ancient institutions, for exam le t&e familL, Fere also mobili#ed at t&is time to taKe on astoral functions. *t Fas also exercised bL com lex structures suc& as medicine, F&ic& included rivate initiatives Fit& t&e sale of services on marKet economL rinci les, but F&ic& also included ublic institutions suc& as &os itals. 3. :inallL, t&e multi lication of t&e aims and agents of astoral oFer

focused t&e develo ment of KnoFledge of man around tFo rolesD one, globali#ing and [uantitative, concerning t&e o ulation1 t&e ot&er, analLtical, concerning t&e individual. 'nd t&is im lies t&at oFer of a astoral tL e, F&ic& over centuriesfor more t&an a millennium &ad been linKed to a defined religious institution, suddenlL s read out into t&e F&ole social bodL1 it found su ort in a multitude of

institutions. 'nd, instead of a astoral oFer and a olitical oFer, more or less linKed to eac& ot&er, more or less rival, t&ere Fas an individuali#ing (tactic( F&ic& c&aracteri#ed a series of oFersD t&ose of t&e familL, medicine,

sLc&iatrL, education, and em loLers. 't t&e end of5 t&e eig&teent& centurL,
G?

Yant Frote, in a =erman neFs a er-t&e Berliner ;onatsc&rift-a s&ort text. %&e title Fas (\as &eisst 'ufKlairungZ( *t Fas for a long time, and it is still, considered a ForK of relativelL small im ortance. But * can5t &el finding it verL interesting and u##ling because it Fas t&e first time a &iloso &er ro osed as a &iloso &ical tasK to investigate not onlL t&e meta &Lsical sLstem or t&e foundations of scientific KnoFledge but a &istorical event-a recent, even a contem orarL event. \&en in 0M64 Yant asKed, \as &eisst 'ufKlirungZ, &e meant, \&at5s going on /ust noFZ \&at5s &a ening to usZ \&at is t&is Forld, t&is eriod, t&is recise moment in

F&ic& Fe are livingZ >r in ot&er FordsD \&at are FeZ as 'ufKlidrer, as art of t&e 8nlig&tenmentZ Com are t&is Fit& t&e Cartesian [uestionD \&o am *Z *, as a uni[ue but universal and un&istorical sub/ectZ *, for Descartes, is everLone, anLF&ere at anL momentZ But Yant asKs somet&ing elseD \&at are FeZ in a verL recise moment of &istorL. Yant5s [uestion a our resent. * t&inK t&at t&is as ect of &iloso &L tooK on more and more im ortance. Segel, Ciet#sc&e ... %&e ot&er as ect of (universal &iloso &L( didn5t disa ear. ears as an analLsis of bot& us and

But t&e tasK of &iloso &L as a critical analLsis of our Forld is somet&ing F&ic& is more and more im ortant. ;aLbe t&e most certain of all &iloso &ical

roblems is t&e roblem of t&e resent time and of F&at Fe are in t&is verL moment. ;aLbe t&e target noFadaLs is not to discover F&at Fe are but to refuse F&at Fe are. \e &ave to imagine and to build u F&at Fe could be to get rid of t&is Kind of olitical (double bind,( F&ic& is t&e simultaneous individuali#ation

and totali#ation of modern oFer structures. %&e conclusion Fould be t&at t&e olitical, et&ical, social, &iloso &ical roblem of our daLs is not to trL to

liberate t&e individual from t&e state and from t&e state5s institutions but to liberate us bot& from t&e state and from t&e tL e of individuali#ation F&ic& is
GC

linKed to t&e state. \e &ave to romote neF forms of sub/ectivitL t&roug& t&e refusal of t&is Kind of individualitL F&ic& &as been im osed on us for several centuries. SoF *s )oFer 8xercisedZ :or some eo le, asKing [uestions about t&e (&oF( of oFer Fould limit t&em to describing its effects Fit&out ever relating t&ose effects eit&er to causes or to a basic nature. *t Fould maKe t&is oFer a mLsterious substance F&ic& t&eL mig&t &esitate to interrogate in itself, no doubt because t&eL Fould refer not to call it into [uestion. BL roceeding t&is FaL, F&ic& is never

ex licitlL /ustified, t&eL seem to sus ect t&e resence of a Kind of fatalism. But does not t&eir verL distrust indicate a resu osition t&at oFer is somet&ing

F&ic& exists Fit& t&ree distinct [ualitiesD its origin, its basic nature, and its manifestationsZ *f, for t&e time being, * grant a certain rivileged osition to t&e [uestion of (&oF,( it is not because * Fould Fis& to eliminate t&e [uestions of (F&at( and (F&L.( -at&er, it is t&at * Fis& to resent t&ese [uestions in a different FaLD better still, to KnoF if it is legitimate to imagine a oFer F&ic& unites in itself a F&at, a F&L, and a &oF. %o ut it bluntlL, * Fould saL t&at to begin t&e analLsis Fit& a (&oF( is to suggest t&at oFer as suc& does not exist. 't t&e verL least it is to asK oneself F&at contents one &as in mind F&en using t&is all-embracing and reifLing term1 it is to sus ect t&at an extremelL com lex configuration of realities is alloFed to esca e F&en one treads endlesslL in t&e double [uestionD \&at is oFerZ and \&ere does oFer come fromZ %&e little [uestion, \&at &a ensZ, alt&oug& flat and em irical, once scrutini#ed is seen to oFer of being fraudulent1

avoid accusing a meta &Lsics or an ontologL of

rat&er, it attem ts a critical investigation into t&e t&ematics of oFer. (SoF,( not in t&e sense oX (SoF does it manifest itselfZ( but (BL F&at means is it exercisedZ(a nd (\&at& a ot&ersZ( ens F&en individuals exert <as t&eLs aL? oFer over

GE

's far as t&is oFer is concerned, it is first necessarL to distinguis& t&at F&ic& is exerted over t&ings and gives t&e abilitL to modifL, use, consume, or destroL t&em-a oFer F&ic& stems from a titudes directlL in&erent in t&e bodL or relaLed bL external instruments. .et us saL t&at &ere it is a [uestion of (ca acitL.( >n t&e ot&er &and, F&at c&aracteri#e t&e oFer Fe are analL#ing is t&at it brings into laL relations betFeen individuals <or betFeen grou s?. :or let us not deceive ourselves1 if Fe s eaK of t&e structures or t&e mec&anisms of oFer, it is onlL insofar as Fe su ose t&at certain ersons exercise oFer over artners <and bL

ot&ers. %&e term ( oFer( designates relations&i s betFeen

t&at * am not t&inKing of a #ero-sum game but sim lL, and for t&e moment staLing in t&e most general terms, of an ensemble of actions F&ic& induce ot&ers and folloF from one anot&er?. *t is necessarL also to distinguis& oFer relations from relations&i s of communication F&ic& transmit information bL means of a language, a sLstem of signs, or anL ot&er sLmbolic medium. Co doubt communicating is alFaLs a certain FaL of acting u on anot&er erson or ersons. But t&e roduction and circulation of elements of meaning can &ave as t&eir oFer1 t&e

ob/ective or as t&eir conse[uence certain results in t&e realm of

latter are not sim lL an as ect of t&e former. \&et&er or not t&eL ass t&roug& sLstems of communication, oFer relations &ave a s ecific nature. )oFer

relations, relations&i s of communication, and ob/ective ca acities s&ould not t&erefore be confused. %&is is not to saL t&at t&ere is a [uestion of t&ree se arate domains. Cor t&at t&ere is on one &and t&e field of t&ings, of erfected tec&ni[ue, ForK, and t&e transformation of t&e real1 on t&e ot&er t&at of signs, communication, reci rocitL, and t&e roduction of meaning1 and

finallL, t&at of t&e domination of t&e means of constraint, of ine[ualitL, and t&e action of men u on ot&er men.5 *t is a [uestion of t&ree tL es of relations&i s F&ic& in fact alFaLs overla one anot&er, su ort one anot&er reci rocallL, and lication of ob/ective

use eac& ot&er mutuallL as means to an end. %&e a


GD

ca acities in t&eir most elementarL forms im lies relations&i s of communication <F&et&er in t&e form of reviouslL ac[uired information or of s&ared ForK?1 it is tied also to oFer relations <F&et&er t&eL consist of obligatorL tasKs, of rentices&i , of subdivisions and t&e more or

gestures im osed bL tradition or a

less obligatorL distribution of labor?. -elations&i s of communication im lL finali#ed activities <even if onlL t&e correct utting into o eration of elements of meaning? and, bL virtue of modifLing t&e field of information betFeen artners, roduce effects of oFer. %&eL can scarcelL be dissociated from

activities broug&t to t&eir final term, be t&eL t&ose F&ic& ermit t&e exercise of t&is oFer <suc& as training tec&ni[ues, rocesses of domination, t&e means bL F&ic& obedience is obtained? or t&ose, F&ic& in order to develo t&eir

otential, call u on relations of oFer <t&e division of labor and t&e &ierarc&L of tasKs?. >f course, t&e coordination betFeen t&ese t&ree tL es of relations&i s is neit&er uniform nor constant. *n a given societL t&ere is no general tL e of e[uilibrium betFeen finali#ed activities, sLstems of communication, and oFer

relations. -at&er, t&ere are diverse forms, diverse laces, diverse circumstances or occasions in F&ic& t&ese interrelations&i s establis& t&emselves according to a s ecific model. But t&ere are also (blocKs( in F&ic& t&e ad/ustment of abilities, t&e resources of communication, and oFer relations constitute regulated and concerted sLstems. %aKe, for exam le, an educational institutionD t&e dis osal of its s ace, t&e meticulous regulations F&ic& govern its internal life, t&e different activities F&ic& are organi#ed t&ere, t&e diverse ersons F&o live t&ere or meet one anot&er, eac& Fit& &is oFn function, &is Fell-defined c&aracter-all t&ese t&ings constitute a blocK of ca acitL communication- oFer. %&e activitL F&ic& ensures a rentices&i and t&e ac[uisition of a titudes or tL es of be&avior is

develo ed t&ere bL means of a F&ole ensemble of regulated communications <lessons, [uestions and ansFers, orders, ex&ortations, coded signs of obedience, differentiation marKs of t&e (value( of eac&
GF

erson and of t&e levels of

KnoFledge? and bL t&e means of a F&ole series of oFer rocesses <enclosure, surveillance, reFard and unis&ment, t&e Lramidal &ierarc&L?. %&ese blocKs, in F&ic& t&e utting into o eration of tec&nical ca acities, t&e game of oFer are ad/usted to one anot&er

communications, and t&e relations&i s of

according to considered formulate F&en Xiirgen Sabermas distinguis&es betFeen domination, communication, and finali#ed activitL, * do not t&inK t&at &e sees in t&em t&ree se arate domains but rat&er t&ree (transcendentals.( %&e em irical analLsis of certain disci lines as t&eL &ave been &istoricallL constituted resents for t&is verL reason a certain interest. %&is is so because t&e disci lines s&oF, first, according to artificiallL clear and decanted sLstems, t&e manner in F&ic& sLstems of ob/ective finalitL and sLstems of communication and oFer can be Felded toget&er. %&eL also dis laL different models of

articulation, sometimes giving reeminence to oFer relations and obedience <as in t&ose disci lines of a monastic or enitential tL e?, sometimes to finali#e

activities <as in t&e disci lines of ForKs&o s or &os itals?, sometimes to relations&i s of communication <as in t&e disci lines of a rentices&i ?,

sometimes also to a saturation of t&e t&ree tL es of relations&i <as er&a s in militarL disci line, F&ere a redundancL, tig&tlL Knit let&ora of signs indicates, to t&e oint of roduce a

oFer relations calculated Fit& care to

certain number of tec&nical effects?. \&at is to be understood bL t&e disci lining of societies in 8uro e since t&e eig&teent& centurL is not, of course, t&at t&e individuals F&o are art of t&em become more and more obedient, nor t&at t&eL set about assembling in barracKs, sc&ools, or risons1 rat&er, t&at an increasinglL better invigilated rocess of ad/ustment &as been soug&t after-

more and more rational and economic-betFeen roductive activities, resources of communication, and t&e laL of oFer relations. %o a roac& t&e t&eme of

oFer bL an analLsis of (&oF( is t&erefore to introduce several critical s&ifts in relation to t&e su osition of a fundamental oFer. *t is to give oneself as t&e
@>

ob/ect of analLsis oFer relations and not oFer itself- oFer relations F&ic& are distinct from ob/ective abilities as Fell as from relations of communication. %&is is as muc& as saLing t&at oFer relations can be gras ed in t&e diversitL of t&eir logical se[uence, t&eir abilities, and t&eir interrelations&i s. \&at constitutes t&e s ecific nature of oFerZ %&e exercise of oFer is not sim lL a relations&i betFeen artners, individual or collective1 it is a FaL in F&ic& certain actions modifL5ot&ers. \&ic& is to saL, of course, t&at somet&ing called )oFer, Fit& or Fit&out a ca ital letter, F&ic& is assumed to exist universallL in a concentrated or diffused form, does not exist. )oFer exists onlL F&en it is ut into action, even if, of course, it is integrated into a dis arate field of ossibilities broug&t to bear u on ermanent structures. %&is also means t&at oFer is not a function of consent. *n itself it is not a renunciation of freedom, a transference of rig&ts, t&e oFer of eac& and all delegated to a feF <F&ic& does not revent t&e ossibilitL t&at consent maL be a condition for t&e existence or t&e maintenance of oFer?1 t&e relations&i of oFer can be t&e result of a rior or ermanent consent, but it is not bL nature t&e manifestation of a consensus. *s t&is to saL t&at one must seeK t&e c&aracter F&ic& must &ave been its ro er to oFer relations in t&e violence ermanent secret, and its last

rimitive form, its

resource, t&at F&ic& in t&e final analLsis a

ears as its real nature F&en it is

forced to t&roF aside its masK and to s&oF itself as it reallL isZ *n effect, F&at defines a relations&i of oFer is t&at it is a mode of action F&ic& does not act directlL and immediatelL on ot&ers. *nstead, it acts u on t&eir actionsD an action u on an action, on existing actions or on t&ose F&ic& maL arise in t&e resent or t&e future.

@1

Recen*ii

@2

Gheorghe Abuza u! Pu"#a "$ #ureaua %a & ' (a)o*+a(o#h$(+! $+ag$,ar (e-ua%

"$ +e, a%$ &.$ /u,$ $0e %a /o/oru% ro+1,! E)$ ura )$ ura Re)Tube U,$0er($ 2
Pre((! 3e)g$)$a! 4567! /8 999! Re#e,z$e )e Haha%er S$+$o, Co(+a8

Dintre a ari"iile editoriale din ultima vreme niciuna nu a fcut at$ta v$lv recum controversata lucrare semnat de istoricul iclo#ean =&eorg&e 'bu#atu care oart titlul +)u!ca !i cureaua lat H sado-masoc&ism, imaginar sexual !i unitive la o orul rom$n, <8ditura -ed%ube UniversitL )ress,

mentalit"i

;edgidia, 2703?. 8ste adevrat, concuren"a acerb de e tr$mul istoriografic auto&ton cu lucrri recum +0646. 'nul n care nu s-a nt$m lat nimic, a

istoricului gor/ean Cicolae %ricolor sau +Siluirea H contribu"ii la etnogene#a o orului rom$n, a istoricului sas Ylaus YinKL au amenin"at serios o#i"ia lucrrii domnului 'bu#atu n clasamentul alctuit anual de ctre 'socia"ia +*storici :r :rontiere,. n cele din urm argumentele de netgduit ale istoricului iclo#ean au adus lucrarea e rimul loc, iar noi, ca recen#ori ai acestei lucrri, nu utem

dec$t s ludm deci#ia acestei res ectabile asocia"ii.

)remisa de la care orne!te domnul 'bu#atu n cercetarea domniei sale este aceea c fibra na"ional, elementul constitutiv !i for"a motrice n acela!i tim , care au ro ulsat o orul rom$n n istorie nu este nimic altceva dec$t sado-

masoc&ismul. Ca orice cercetare istoric ce se res ect, domnul 'bu#atu !i lansea# excursul nce $nd cu Serodot. :aimosul fragment, binecunoscut istoriografiei !i ublicului larg, n care c$"iva ge"i l arunc n suli"e e un altul este reinter retat de istoricul iclo#ean dre t un e isod BDS; din istoria acestui brav o or al antic&it"iiD +Se are c, s une 'bu#atu n lucrare +Ta trimite e cineva la ^almoxeU nu este nimic altceva dec$t un fragment din bogatul /argon KinKL al acestui o or cu nclina"ii sado-masoc&istice nemaint$lnite nicieri n

@G

antic&itate, dec$t

oate cu exce "ia nenoroci"ilor locuitori ai Sodomei !i

=omorei des re care i#voarele <cu exce "ia Bibliei? tac,. Cu tim ul suli"a se va transforma n "ea , adevrat instrument s eciali#at, de care u"ini domnitori

rom$ni !i su u!i ai lor se vor utea se ara <fi#ice!te vorbind?. *nteresant este c e msur ce trec veacurile, racticile BDS; se rafinea#, evoluea#D +*at de ild acest citat din istoria lui C. Costin cu rivire la domnia lui =&eorg&e DucaD T)re Ursac&ie, ce au fost vornic mare <...? l-au de#brcat cu ielea !i l-au legat la stl la ger, fiind iarn, de la carele "in$ndu-l un an la temni" !i bt$ndu-l la

tal e, i-au luat 297 de ungi de baniU. 8ste doar un exem lu dintre multele, care e l$ng detaliile cu rivire la ractica sado-maso ne ofer !i o idee cu rivire la costurile la care se ridicau asemenea servicii. *nteresant este c domnitorul ncearc s diversifice aceste ractici, vara oferind servicii de alt naturD T*ar e *on *sar vistiernicul !i e 'ndrei Si otean vornicul de oart, de#brc$ndu-i n ielea goal !i ung$ndu-i cu miere vara, i-au legat de st$l de-i m$ncau mu!tele !i albineleU., n _ara -om$neasc, =&eorg&e 'bu#atu identific adevrate etreceri n gru g#duite de cele mai de va# familii recum Blenii !i

Cantacu#iniiD +.eto ise"ele ne ofer doar re#umate a ceea ce se nt$m la cu adevrat n casele !i locurile de etrecere a acestor boieriD Tde-i scotea din turn e acei boieri <...? de-i btea la tl i n toate #ilele re tal ele icioarelor, !i-i s $n#ura de m$ini cu sfoar, !i-i m$nca n tot felulU, Cenumratele exem le evocate de re utatul istoric iclo#ean vin s ntreasc ideea central a lucrrii, !i anume c voca"ia adevrat a o orului rom$n nu este cea de constructor a!a cum se ncearc adesea a demonstra <mai ales rin intermediul unor inter retri tenden"ioase ale Baladei ;e!terului ;anole? ci cea de sado-masoc&ist. Ii ca s-!i fundamente#e te#a, =&eorg&e 'bu#atu rocedea# la relecturarea numitei

baladeD +a!a-#isa Tscen a sacrificiului ntru crea"ieU n care ;anole o #ide!te e 'na trebuie redenumit, n vederea racordrii la bogatul material istoric tratat aici, Tscena bondage ntru crea"ieU.,
@@

'vans$nd asemenea i ote#e, lucrarea nu avea cum s treac neobservat. Studiul domnului 'bu#atu, s un unii, minea# uternic e!afoda/ul ideologic al

cercurilor intelectuale de st$nga. +ntr-adevr, aser"iunile istoricului iclo#ean =&eorg&e 'bu#atu eviden"ia# limitele defini"iei marxiste a conce tului ex oatrii omului de ctre om. n lumina noilor agrumente !i inter retri este im erios necesar rafinarea anali#elor... 'ltfel toat aceast retoric st$ngist rm$ne o sim l auto-ex loatare tristJ, scrie Vasile 8rnu ntr-un editorial Critic'tac. De cealalt arte, din cercurile neocon, membri marcan"i recum

'drian )a a&agi declarD +Cu este de a/uns s te declari un su orter al valorilor tradi"ionale. 'cestea trebuie asumate !i trite, conservate !i er etuate n

varietatea lor. Cartea domnului 'bu#atu tocmai entru aceasta ledea#, entru cunoa!terea !i revitali#area bogatelor tradi"ii auto&toneJ, )robabil cel mai avi#at unct de vedere vine ns dins re cercurile neanga/ate ideologic. +T)u!ca !i cureaua latU a domnului 'bu#atu nu doar c este un studiu de o acribie nfiortoare dar !i un bun manual de ractici tradi"ionale. )ot s s un c&iar, c de la lecturarea lucrrii nu doar c erforman"ele mele la locul de munc au crescut vertigions, dar am devenit !i a reciat entru ideile noi e care le-am ro us

colegilor, ne-a declarat Sandra -omain. +De c$nd am citit-o nu m mai simt ca un obiect, ci ca un membru func"ional al restigioasei industrii e care o re re#intJ, se m$ndre!te .aura 'nder!an. 8xagerat sau realist, intrigant !i incitant sau doar de-a dre tul olemic, lucrarea domnului 'bu#atu cu siguran" va rm$ne n de#baterea ublic entru multe luni de acum nainte. *ndiferent de verdictul ersoan, cert este c +)u!ca !i cureaua lat H unitive la o orul rom$n, cel

acordat de cutare sau cutare

sado-masoc&ism, imaginar sexual !i mentalit"i

u"in va sus enda n c&ingi con!tiin"a noastr na"ional, o va lega de calorifer !i o va su une unei biciuiri morale din care nu va ie!i cu siguran" la fel.

@?

`'cest material a a rut cu s ri/inul :unda"iei Soro!, crieia i oferim aceast cale cele mai calde mul"umiriJ

N$#o%ae :e$er! E/$(#o/$ ;, +&,&( $r$%e ( r&0e#h$ a%e &r$$ B$( r$.e$! E)$ ura
<=aru,a> B$( r$.a! 4564 /8 ?,8a8@! au o*re#e,z$e )e /reo /roA8 N$#o%ae :e$er

-e utat istoric, erudit eseist !i analist al istoriei antice !i al vie"ii religioase de e binecuv$ntatele ntinderi ale atriei, cu o fireasc a lecare s re tr$murile bistri"ene, domnul Cicolae :eier adaug consistentei !i restigioasei sale contribu"ii !tiin"ifice o nou lucrare de calibru. .ucrare de maturitate, ncununare a multor ani de trud !i silin" intelectual, veritabil travaliu ini"iatic, volumul E8 isco i n mnstirile strvec&i ale _rii Bistri"ei, scoate la iveal noi as ecte onorabile ale istoriei auto&tone. Du ce amintesc de anii furibun#i !i rin lucrri temerare ce recum T

rolifici ai t$nrului 8liade, lucrri

^estrea strmo!easc U sau T Bessi H ilea"ii daci sau tarabostessi, a defri!at segmente masive din istoria !i reistoria /ude"ului Bistri"a-Csud !i a ntregii lumi, autorul a urces la editarea unei masive sinte#e. Cu modestia Hi

caracteristic !i de/a roverbial, autorul men"ionea# nc de la nce ut c nu are ambi"ia s revolu"ione#e lumea istoric, c nu caut dec$t s aduc n lumin adevruri ad$nc nrdcinate n convingerile lui !i c vrea s ro un s re anali# !i cercetare s eciali!tilor interesa"i robleme cu adevrat im ortante entru

istoria !i re#entul /ude"ului sus-men"ionat !i a ntregii umanit"i. Ii n aceast lucrare dos esc a n"ele ciune rafinatele anali#e etimologice !i to onimice, rin care a reu!it s fac lumin n ca#ul multor enigme ce

caracteri#ea# istoria auto&ton de retutindeni, e de o arte, !i s nlture multe cli!ee istoriografice m m$ntenite datorit li sei de erudi"ie, ngustimea inter retativ !i mai ales a diletantismului, e de alt arte. Din galeria acestui ti de cuceriri filologice amintimD ECri! !i Cri!ana vin de la Y&ri!na,, sau invers1
@C

EBuda- se traduce =ura dacului <bu-de la lat. Bu-gur, da-dac?,, EIieu vine de la Iiva,, EBu#u H Bu <lat. =ur? H #u<#eu, dumne#eu? deci =ura ^eului, etc. De asemenea aducerea n discu"ie a originii str-rom$ne a unor bravi m ra"i romani recum Constantin cel ;are !i *ustinian, nu fac dec$t s ntreasc e

adevrul, unanim acce tat n r$ndul s eciali!tilor bine-inten"iona"i, cum c teritoriul /ude"ului B-C !i al

atriei noastre !i-a avut leagnul cea mai mare cate, din cau#a vitregiilor !i vicisitudinilor

civili#a"ie mondial din care din

sor"ii, n-a rmas mai nimic. S nu mai vorbim de strlucitele anali#e legate de cultul monoteist caracteristic dacilor, de nalta lor fervoare !i trire religioas ce fri#a n ma/oritatea detaliilor cre!tinismul, sau de locali#area n s a"iul car ato-danubiano- ontic a =rdinii 8denului, de asemnarea i#bitoare a lui 8nKidu din 8 o eea lui =&ilgame! cu ciobanul mioritic, exem lificat cutremurtoarea crea"ie co!bucean, E*arna e uli",. Demonstrnd cu miestrie "inuta nalt a vie"ii religioase duse de rotorom$nii !i rom$nii din /ude"ul natal, recum !i unele reali#ri ar&itectonice rom$ne!ti ca de exem lu biserica sseasc n stil romanic, dela Serina, autorul adaug noi file de aur n &istoria glorioas !i lin de s iritualitate a /ude"ului Bistri"a-Csud. Va/nici a rtori ai dre tei credin"e e care o cuno!teau n cele mai subtile detalii, !i e care o a rau $n la sacrificiu, bistri"enii, destoinici urma!i ai bessilor <v$rful de lance al s iritualit"ii dacice? trebuie s se m$ndreasc de aceste brave ilde de smerenie, cum tare !i mai ales drea t/udecat. Sursele solide, recum \iKi edia <sau mai nou fondatorul acestei rin

enciclo edii virtuale?, lucrrile anterioare, FFF.desco er .ro, sublinia# nc o dat, dac mai era nevoie, ndelunga c&ib#uin", maturitatea abordrii !i rofesionalismul demersului. Baletul bibliografic rintre lucrrile lui 8liade, ;.

=imbutas !.a. reliefea# cura/ul inova"iei, al inter retrii !i mai ales al citrii. Construit ca o veritabil artid de oKer n care autorul /oac tot e o erec&e
@E

de !e tari, monumentala lucrare i ridiculi#ea# e doctoran#ii de la facult"ile de istorie din "ar !i de este &otare, care se c&inuie e arcursul a 3 ani s scoat o te# decent de a roximativ 377 de agini, demonstr$nd c n c$teva luni, dac ai voin", cura/ !i mai ales res onsabilitate o"i tr$nti un ca odo de B77 !i ceva de agini. 'mintind de celebrii /uctori de alba-neagra care au fcut c$ndva faimoas urbea de e r$ul cu un nume cel u"in la fel de faimos, autorul /onglea# cu cli!eele tracomanice fc$nd din absen"a surselor !i a robelor un document imbatabil entru ntreg e!afoda/ul culturnic. Salutm e aceast cale aceast bi/uterie eseistic av$nd convingerea c rin astfel de contribu"ii solide !i ec&ilibrate Bistri"a !i ntreg /ude"ul, recum !i /ude"ele limitrofe, se ot luda oriunde n lume, n "ar !i este &otare. Convin!i c acest demers nu va rm$ne n cultura rom$n dre t unul cura/os, dar singular, ne-am c$!tigat dre tul de a visa la o nnoire a culturii rom$ne, la ie!irea ei din ubertate entru a! tri febrila adolescen". :elicitri autorului entru cura/ul ublicrii unui astfel de lucrri ce colcie de erudi"ie !i bune-inten"ii !i i dorim c$t mai mult cerneal n stilou !i c$t mai mult bibliografie.

@D

A%ertisment: Aceast re%ist este n pam"let )i treb ie tratat ca atare+ Orice asemnare c persoane, n me, periodice )tiin#i"ice, instit #ii ni%ersitare, politicieni )i Ccadre de cond cereD este p r $nt(mpltoare+ Encercm s atragem aten#ia as pra n i "enomen pe c(t de $ntristtor )i contra!prod cti%, pe at(t de real 5 plagiat l+ Am "ost ghida#i de ideea l i I+L+ :aragiale: Cnimic n arde pe ticlo)i mai m lt ca r(s lD+ % &ut rii

@F

You might also like