Totul este literatur\u0103.<\/p>\n
Asta vrea s\u0103 \u00eensemne, cel pu\u0163in pentru mine \u015fi cel pu\u0163in acum \u015fi aici, c\u0103 realitatea \u00een sine, p\u00e2n\u0103 \u00een cele mai ne\u00eensemnate detalii ale sale, a fost \u00eenregistrat\u0103, odat\u0103 sau cu alt\u0103 ocazie, \u00eentr-o carte: \u00eentr-o oper\u0103 literar\u0103. Asta vrea, deci, s\u0103 consemneze victoria paradoxal\u0103 a literaturii asupra realit\u0103\u0163ii. \u015ei nu m\u0103 refer la nicio inversare \u2013 aparent suprarealist\u0103 \u2013 de genul via\u0163a bate filmul<\/em>, unde via\u0163a (realitatea) \u00eenlocuie\u015fte filmul (literatura) din punctul de vedere al fic\u0163iunii, care este motorul sau materialul de baz\u0103 (atomic, sub-atomic \u015fi chiar mai departe \u00een sensul cobor\u00e2rii dante\u015fti \u00een lumea particulelor fizice) al am\u00e2ndurora. Nu: mimic astfel. Dimpotriv\u0103, m-a\u015f aventura s\u0103 zic. Victoria literaturii asupra realit\u0103\u0163ii pe care m-am gr\u0103bit s-o consemnez nu se afl\u0103 at\u00e2t de aproape de lumina reflectoarelor ca s\u0103 se ard\u0103: ca s\u0103-\u015fi pr\u0103jeasc\u0103 esen\u0163a \u00een por\u0163ia obi\u015fnuit\u0103 de popcorn<\/em> asortat\u0103 \u015fi asortabil\u0103 \u00een\u0163elegerii tocmai pomenite \u015fi abia comb\u0103tut\u0103. Cel pu\u0163in pentru mine \u015fi cel pu\u0163in acum \u015fi aici, literatura este totul, acapar\u00e2nd \u00eentreaga realitate, pentru c\u0103 a reu\u015fit s\u0103 \u00eei devin\u0103 cel mai fidel monitor: cel mai ascu\u0163it \u00een percep\u0163ie cronicar. Literatura este, dup\u0103 at\u00e2ta timp \u00een care s-a ocupat cu \u00eendosarierea tuturor detaliilor realit\u0103\u0163ii, grefierul ei absolut (ca perfec\u0163iune a meseriei). Asta vrea s\u0103 \u00eensemne, a\u015fadar, c\u0103 literatura este totul: c\u0103 i-a devenit realit\u0103\u0163ii istorie. \u015ei \u00eenc\u0103, a\u015f \u00eendr\u0103zni s\u0103 zic, cea mai bun\u0103 dintre toate. Cum s\u0103 formulez mai clar dec\u00e2t at\u00e2t? Probabil nu \u00eentr-o form\u0103 mascat pasiv\u0103: literatura este \u00eens\u0103\u015fi istoria realit\u0103\u0163ii<\/em>. \u015ei, dac\u0103 vreau \u015fi pu\u0163in\u0103 nuan\u0163are: literatura a devenit cea mai bun\u0103 istorie posibil\u0103 a realit\u0103\u0163ii. Asta, pentru c\u0103 am ales varianta cu cel mai ascu\u0163it \u00een percep\u0163ie cronicar. M-am oprit cu prec\u0103dere asupra primei variante, pentru c\u0103 este, spre deosebire de a doua, at\u00e2t pasiv\u0103, c\u00e2t \u015fi obiectiv\u0103. Cealalt\u0103 variant\u0103 reprezint\u0103, \u00een orice condi\u0163ie \u015fi sub orice pretext, un e\u015fec lamentabil. Cum s\u0103 faci din literatur\u0103 judec\u0103torul (de fapt, mai cinstit, parte a sistemului s\u0103u) realit\u0103\u0163ii \u00eense\u015fi? Cu alte cuvinte: cum s\u0103 transformi literatura, din ceva, \u00een orice caz, neagresiv \u015fi sincer (cite\u015fte: verosimil), \u00een ceva activ \u015fi subiectiv? Deci literatura nu trebuie s\u0103 cad\u0103 \u00een m\u00e2inile juridicului, care, imediat dup\u0103 aceea, i-ar intenta procese peste procese realit\u0103\u0163ii p\u00e2n\u0103 \u015fi pentru cele mai neimportante detalii din structura ei. Nu. Definitiv nu. Literatura nu trebuie s\u0103 se transforme \u00eentr-un agresor, fie \u015fi ascuns, al realit\u0103\u0163ii. Ea trebuie musai s\u0103 r\u0103m\u00e2n\u0103, \u00een cel mai recomandabil dintre cazuri, un martor t\u0103cut \u015fi onest al realit\u0103\u0163ii: cel mai ascu\u0163it \u00een percep\u0163ie cronicar al s\u0103u \u015fi, \u00een cel mai nerecomandat dintre cazuri, doar<\/em> \u00eens\u0103\u015fi istoria realit\u0103\u0163ii, dac\u0103 mai leibnizian dec\u00e2t at\u00e2t nu se poate. \u00cen fond, trebuie s\u0103 am dreptate \u015fi literatura, dac\u0103 mai tinde c\u0103tre totalitate, trebuie s\u0103 fie a\u015fa. Altfel, realitatea, intimidat\u0103, speriat\u0103, sc\u00e2rbit\u0103, se va retrage din literatur\u0103 \u015fi, odat\u0103 dus\u0103, manipulatorii literaturii nu vor mai prea avea ce s\u0103 pun\u0103 \u00een loc. Literatura, atunci \u015fi acolo, se va transforma \u00een cu totul altceva: literatura va deveni ireal\u0103, dar nu pentru c\u0103 ea este, prin for\u0163a lucrurilor, verosimil\u0103 (nu mai citi: sincer\u0103), ci pentru c\u0103 va ie\u015fi, singur\u0103, din istoria pe care realitatea o producea pentru ea ca s\u0103 fie, astfel, \u00eenregistrat\u0103 ca fiind deja produs\u0103. Mecanismul e complicat \u015fi, de aceea, m\u0103 voi opri \u00eenainte s\u0103 m\u0103 pierd iremediabil \u00een desi\u015ful din\u0163at al roti\u0163elor sale.<\/p>\n Dar revin la ideea de baz\u0103 c\u0103 literatura, pentru c\u0103 este totul, e \u00eens\u0103\u015fi istoria realit\u0103\u0163ii. N-a\u015f vrea, acum \u015fi aici, s\u0103 m\u0103 afund \u015fi mai tare dec\u00e2t at\u00e2t \u00een aceast\u0103 judecat\u0103 \u015fi s\u0103 caut s\u0103 v\u0103d dac\u0103 este una instrumental\u0103 (literatura este istoria realit\u0103\u0163ii pentru<\/em> c\u0103 este totul), condi\u0163ional\u0103 (dac\u0103<\/em> este totul, literatura este istoria realit\u0103\u0163ii) sau, \u00een fine (printre altele), cauzativ\u0103 (literatura este istoria realit\u0103\u0163ii din cauz\u0103 c\u0103<\/em> este totul). Astea nu-s dec\u00e2t fine\u0163uri mai degrab\u0103 sintactice, iar de a\u015fa ceva mu prea am timp s\u0103 z\u0103bovesc. Oricum, acum \u015fi aici, nu mi-am propus din start nici s\u0103 \u00eentocmesc o ierarhie conceptual\u0103, nici s\u0103-i construiesc, \u00een cazul \u00een care ar chiar exista, o cronologie logicizant\u0103. Departe de mine astfel de g\u00e2nduri. Voi r\u0103m\u00e2ne, deci, la prima variant\u0103, cea, m\u0103 rog, instrumental\u0103, potrivit c\u0103reia literatura este \u00eens\u0103\u015fi istoria realit\u0103\u0163ii precis<\/em> pentru c\u0103 este totul. \u015ei, conform acestui precept deja imuabil, literatura, dac\u0103 ea este totul pentru c\u0103 e chiar istoria realit\u0103\u0163ii \u00eense\u015fi, poate, \u00een egal\u0103 m\u0103sur\u0103, s\u0103 fie, din exact acela\u015fi motiv, \u015fi orice<\/em> (altceva). Fire\u015fte, pronumele nehot\u0103r\u00e2t din paranteze nu trebuie \u00een\u0163eles ca excluz\u00e2nd totalitatea proasp\u0103t afirmat\u0103 a literaturii (literatura este orice altceva dec\u00e2t<\/em> totul), ci, mai \u00een\u0163elept, ca incluz\u00e2nd totalitatea sa recent devenit\u0103 esen\u0163ial\u0103 (literatura este orice altceva din<\/em> tot ce e). \u00cen virtutea schimb\u0103rii de scar\u0103 pe care schimbarea pronominal\u0103 a determinat-o, literatura este totul<\/em> pentru c\u0103 orice<\/em> poate deveni literatur\u0103. Practic, chiar \u00een asta const\u0103 temperamentul s\u0103u mai degrab\u0103 istoric dec\u00e2t comportamental: doar a\u015fa literatura a putut s\u0103 se acomodeze la rolul s\u0103u esen\u0163ial de istorie (eventual cea mai bun\u0103 dintre toate) a realit\u0103\u0163ii \u00eense\u015fi. \u015ei, dac\u0103 totul este literatur\u0103 pentru c\u0103 orice poate deveni literatur\u0103, m\u0103 g\u00e2ndesc, \u00een condi\u0163ii at\u00e2t de favorabile, c\u0103, \u00eentr-adev\u0103r, literatura, fiind at\u00e2t de permisiv\u0103, chiar este cea mai bun\u0103 istorie a realit\u0103\u0163ii pe care ar putea s-o aib\u0103.<\/p>\n Chiar \u015fi iubirea de \u0163ar\u0103; chiar \u015fi patriotismul are, astfel, \u015fanse imense s\u0103 devin\u0103 literatur\u0103. \u015ei, nu mai \u00eencape nicio \u00eendoial\u0103, a \u015fi devenit de nenum\u0103rate ori. De\u015fi (ca s\u0103 fiu pe c\u00e2t de pasiv \u015fi de obiectiv ar trebui \u015fi literatura, \u00een cea mai bun\u0103 dintre versiunile sale, fi), \u00een majoritatea cazurilor, nu \u00eentr-o ipostaz\u0103 dintre cele mai bune. Patriotismul \u00een literatur\u0103 poate fi, chiar fiind astfel, \u015fi autentic. Iubirea de \u0163ar\u0103 este posibil s\u0103 fie, \u00eentr-adev\u0103r, un sentiment genuin \u015fi nepervertit (de nimic \u015fi de nimeni). O asemenea tr\u0103ire a fost \u015fi \u00eenc\u0103 va fi, pentru unii dintre noi, ideologic netrucat\u0103 \u015fi neviciat\u0103. \u015etiu, fire\u015fte, cov\u00e2r\u015fitorul model creat \u00een literatura rom\u00e2n\u0103 de Caragiale. \u0162\u0103ri\u015foara lui Ca\u0163avencu<\/em> este, \u015fi poate \u015fi fi, considerat un exemplu unic: de fapt, ar trebui tratat ca una dintre foarte rarele excep\u0163ii de la regula literaturii ca totalitate inclusiv\u0103. Academia Ca\u0163avencu<\/em> este \u015fi dovada c\u0103 literatura, de\u015fi este totul, nu este \u00eentotdeauna \u015fi un tot \u00een care doar se intr\u0103 f\u0103r\u0103 putin\u0163a de-a se mai \u015fi ie\u015fi. Dimpotriv\u0103. Modelul patriotismului creat de Caragiale \u015fi-a c\u00e2\u015ftigat libertatea s\u0103 intre \u015fi s\u0103 ias\u0103 \u00een \u015fi din literatur\u0103 dup\u0103 bunu-i plac. Dramaturgul, pe baza unui model, a b\u0103gat iubirea de \u0163ar\u0103 \u00een literatur\u0103 (ea fiind doar un orice din totul care este literatura), iar presa rom\u00e2neasc\u0103 proasp\u0103t post-decembrist\u0103 a scos-o din literatur\u0103, \u00een baza aceluia\u015fi model, \u015fi a l\u0103sat-o s\u0103 colinde liber\u0103 realitatea \u00een al c\u0103rei perimetru nu ar fi avut ce s\u0103 caute. Academia Ca\u0163avencu<\/em>, eliber\u00e2nd din literatur\u0103 modelul patriotismului rom\u00e2nesc, a creat un precedent grav pentru valabilitatea literaturii ca istorie a realit\u0103\u0163ii. Revista de umor a periclitat grav imuabilitatea acestui precept, pe care l-am preferat din start asupra celuilalt, care transform\u0103 literatura \u00een judec\u0103tor (m\u0103 rog, \u00een periferie sistemic\u0103 a lui) al realit\u0103\u0163ii. Ca\u0163avencu, \u00een afara literaturii, \u00een loc s\u0103 fi continuat doar s\u0103 \u00eenregistreze realitatea (\u015fi s\u0103-\u015fi fi oprit procesul de \u00eendosariere al realit\u0103\u0163ii la contemporaneitatea lui Caragiale), a \u00eenceput s\u0103 o judece, s\u0103pt\u0103m\u00e2nal, \u00een toate detaliile ei, \u00eensemnate sau nu. P\u0103strarea, men\u0163inerea \u015fi \u00eembog\u0103\u0163irea modelului caragialian al patriotismului \u00een afara literaturii a avut, a\u015fadar, dou\u0103 consecin\u0163e grave: \u00een primul r\u00e2nd, a subminat literatura ca istorie (eventual cea mai bun\u0103 dintre toate) a realit\u0103\u0163ii \u00eense\u015fi, iar, \u00een al doilea r\u00e2nd, a deturnat, probabil iremediabil, unul dintre cele mai importante sensuri pe care realitatea le are, disponibile, pentru a face parte din literatura care, odat\u0103 f\u0103c\u00e2nd parte din ea, le va \u00eenregistra \u00een istoria realit\u0103\u0163ii: iubirea de \u0163ar\u0103. (Cum am mai zis, complicat).<\/p>\n Dar patriotismul nu este pretutindeni \u00een literatur\u0103 compromis, foarte probabil, definitiv. Noroc c\u0103 literatura \u00een sine, de\u015fi este (o) istorie a realit\u0103\u0163ii \u2013 cel pu\u0163in una dintre multele posibile \u2013, nu este \u015fi o geografie a realit\u0103\u0163ii. Important c\u0103 literatura, de\u015fi se comunic\u0103 pe sine \u00een nenum\u0103rate limbi, ceea ce comunic\u0103 poate fi redus numai la c\u00e2\u0163iva invarian\u0163i antropologici. \u015ei unul dintre ei este \u015fi patriotismul. \u015ei, dac\u0103 pentru partea rom\u00e2neasc\u0103 a literaturii iubirea de \u0163ar\u0103 pare a fi fost compromis\u0103, cel pu\u0163in pentru mult\u0103 vreme \u015fi cel pu\u0163in din cauza modelului s\u0103u celui mai de succes, \u00een alte p\u0103r\u0163i ale literaturii iubirea de \u0163ar\u0103 pare s\u0103 fi r\u0103mas un sentiment, \u00een mare, genuin.<\/p>\n Iat\u0103 un exemplu, ales aproape la \u00eent\u00e2mplare, care verific\u0103 at\u00e2t autenticitatea patriotismului ca tr\u0103ire uman\u0103, c\u00e2t \u015fi exemplaritatea preceptual\u0103 a literaturii ca istorie a realit\u0103\u0163ii \u00eense\u015fi. S\u0103 cobor\u00e2m p\u00e2n\u0103 \u00een Anglia \u00eenc\u0103 relativ proasp\u0103t industrial\u0103, unde, \u00een 1826, se consum\u0103 povestea de dragoste, aparent agapic\u0103, dintre inten\u0163ionat \u00eentinerita Amy Dorrit \u015fi \u00eenadins \u00eemb\u0103tr\u00e2nitul Arthur Clennam. Ve\u0163i fi ghicit, probabil, c\u0103 m\u0103 refer la romanul, ap\u0103rut \u00een 1857, al lui Charles Dickens, Little Dorrit<\/em>, \u00een care iubirea de \u0163ar\u0103 cap\u0103t\u0103 at\u00e2tea forme variate \u015fi chiar, unele, incompatibile. Am s\u0103 trec extrem de repede peste, foarte posibil, cea mai relevant\u0103 form\u0103 de patriotism care se g\u0103se\u015fte, \u00een vaste cantit\u0103\u0163i \u015fi la scar\u0103 vast\u0103, \u00een roman: satira (\u015fi critica) acid\u0103 \u015fi, pe alocuri, crud\u0103 (dar \u00eentotdeauna constructiv\u0103) a sistemului juridic \u2013 niciun altul dec\u00e2t, subliniez pentru aducerea aminte a alternativei la literatur\u0103 ca istorie a realit\u0103\u0163ii, juridic<\/em> \u2013 din Anglia \u00eenceputului de secolul 19. \u015ei, expediind-o numai dintr-o fraz\u0103, am s\u0103 m\u0103 opresc, permanent, la un exemplu de patriotism complet marginal \u00een roman, dar care, a\u015fa cred, scoate exemplar \u00een eviden\u0163\u0103 sentimentul iubirii de \u0163ar\u0103 at\u00e2t \u00een ce are el mai autentic \u00een om, c\u00e2t \u015fi \u00een devenirea, ne\u00eentrerupt\u0103 \u015fi necenzurat\u0103, a omului din copil \u00een matur. Fericitul \u015fi autenticul patriot este Daniel Doyce, al c\u0103rui Bildungsroman<\/em> \u00een miniatur\u0103 i-l poveste\u015fte viitorului s\u0103u asociat \u00eentr-o pl\u0103cut\u0103 plimbare c\u0103tre ni\u015fte prieteni comuni. Pentru c\u0103 patriotismul acestui englez este exemplar, dar \u015fi pentru c\u0103 a func\u0163ionat, la fel de exemplar, toat\u0103 via\u0163a sa, m-am hot\u0103r\u00e2t s\u0103-l reproduc integral, f\u0103r\u0103 comentarii ulterioare, \u00een loc de \u00eencheiere a g\u00e2ndurilor mele despre iubirea de \u0163ar\u0103 \u015fi \u00een loc de quod erat demonstrandum<\/em> al literaturii ca istorie cea mai bun\u0103 a realit\u0103\u0163ii \u00eense\u015fi:<\/p>\n Then it appeared that he was the son of a north-country blacksmith, and had originally been apprenticed by his widowed mother to a lock-maker; that he had \u201cstruck out a few little things\u201d at the lock-maker\u2019s, which had led to his being released from his indentures with a present, which present had enabled him to gratify his ardent wish to bind himself to a working engineer, under whom he had laboured hard, learned hard, and lived hard, seven years. His time being out, he had \u201cworked in the shop\u201d at weekly wages seven or eight years more; and had then betaken himself to the banks of the Clyde, where he had studied, and filed, and hammered, and improved his knowledge, theoretical and practical, for six or seven years more. There he had had an offer to go to Lyons, which he had accepted; and from Lyons had been engaged to go to Germany, and in Germany had had an offer to go to St Petersburg, and there had done very well indeed \u2013 never better. However, he had naturally felt a preference for his own country, and a wish to gain distinction there, and to do whatever service he could do, there rather than elsewhere. And so he had come home. And so at home he had established himself in business, and had invented and executed, and worked his way on, until, after a dozen years of constant suit and service, he had been enrolled in the Great British Legion of Honour, the Legion of the Rebuffed of the Circumlocution Office, and had been decorated with the Great British Order of Merit, the Order of the Disorder of the Barnacles and Stiltstalkings. (Charles Dickens, Little Dorrit<\/em>, 1994: 189)\ufeff<\/p><\/blockquote>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Totul este literatur\u0103.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[295],"tags":[301,196],"class_list":["post-1109","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-jurnal-eidotomic","tag-jurnal-eidotomic","tag-patrick-calinescu"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/jurnaleidotomic.egophobia.ro\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1109","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/jurnaleidotomic.egophobia.ro\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/jurnaleidotomic.egophobia.ro\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/jurnaleidotomic.egophobia.ro\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/jurnaleidotomic.egophobia.ro\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=1109"}],"version-history":[{"count":6,"href":"https:\/\/jurnaleidotomic.egophobia.ro\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1109\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1112,"href":"https:\/\/jurnaleidotomic.egophobia.ro\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1109\/revisions\/1112"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/jurnaleidotomic.egophobia.ro\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=1109"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/jurnaleidotomic.egophobia.ro\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=1109"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/jurnaleidotomic.egophobia.ro\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=1109"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}