marilena murariu, despre elena În general @ galeria simeza

M A R I L E N A M U R A R I U


ELENA D E S P R E E L E N A Î N G E N E R A L M A I 2 0 1 1 M A R I L E N A M U R A R I U P I C T U R ~ D E S P R E E L E N A Î N G E N E R A L M A I 2 0 1 1 M A R I L E N A M U R A R I U P I C T U R ~

EXEMPLAR NR.

•PICTURI DE MARILENA MURARIU

TEXT: MARIAN CONSTANTIN, VLAD MORARIU

FOTOGRAFII: PAULA CRAIOVEANU © 2011 MARILENA MURARIU

•ACEST CATALOG S-A TIP~RIT |N 500

DE EXEMPLARE, NUMEROTATE {I SEMNATE DE AUTOR DE LA 1–100.

DESPRE ELENA |N GENERAL


1DESPRE ELENA ÎN GENERAL

ABOUT (MARI) ELENA IN PARTICULARAfter 1990, Marilena's Murariu painting mainly evolved in two apparently divergent directions having clear recovering intentions. Her "Wings" from the 90s targeted, without consistently de-claring so, the regaining of a spiritual universe through the affective probing of the self. Conver-sely, her Balcic paintings made after 2000 were intended as the expression of an inner journey un-dertaken in the rediscovering of the exotic lands-capes of the Silver Coast with which the renowned interwar artistic colony familiarized the public.

The two perspectives proved to be in part illu-sory and the results contradicted temporary ex-pectations to the point of opposing the estimates. Being developed from the start through exclu-ding all Byzantine iconographic suggestions, but without associating expressive elements foreign to auteurial expression, the "Wings" confi gured themselves under the guise of a self-suffi cient geometry in which faint echos of a diamond-like poetry can be distinguished but which can hardly be pinpointed subsequent to a possible introspection. On the other hand the painter followed the inverted route, from the concrete to-wards the inner. Considering that the consecrated isolated and sunny image of the past Balcic has been irremediably compromised - the small town

al Coastei de Argint, relevat nou` de renumita „colonie” artistic` interbelic`.

Cele dou` perspective s-au dovedit a fi par]ial iluzorii iar rezultatele i-au contrazis a[tept`rile momentane pân` la a deveni opusul celor scon-tate. Astfel, elaborate din pornire prin exluderea oric`rei sugestii iconografice bizantiniste dar [i f`r` a-[i asocia continu]istic elemente ale unor expresii str`ine exprim`rii de sine auctoriale, „ari-pile” au sfâr[it prin a se configura \n grani]ele unui

DESPRE (MARI) ELENA |N SPECIALDup` 1990 pictura Marilenei Murariu a evoluat grosso–modo \nspre dou` direc]ii aparent diver-gente, ambele \ns` cu v`dite inten]ii recuperatorii. „Aripile” sale din anii 90 vizau, poate nu \ntot-deauna m`rturisit, redobândirea unui univers spi-ritual prin sondarea mai mult sau mai pu]in afec-tiv` a sinelui. Dimpotriv`, „Balcicurile” de dup` 2000 se doreau expresia unui demers exterior, de redescoperire avântat` a exotismului peisagistic

Natur` moart` cu omagiu

ulei pe pânz`, 140/150 cm

Still Life with Homage

oil on canvas, 140/150 cm


2 DESPRE ELENA ÎN GENERAL



Prin gratii de fier

ulei pe pânz`, 140/150 cm,

detaliu \n drepta

Trought Iron Bars

oil on canvas, 140/150 cm,

detail on the right side page





|n general, jurnalist


In general, a journalist


Am \nvins!


We've won!


geometrism suficient sie[i, \n care, desigur, ecouri difuze ale unei poezii diamantine sunt decelabile dar unde cu greu mai pot fi sesizate urmele unei posibile introspec]ii. De cealalt` parte, pictori]a a urmat parcursul invers, dinspre concret spre intro-vert. Imaginea consacrat a Balcicului de alt dat`, izolat` [i solar`, fiind iremediabil compromis` – mica localitate maritim` s-a transformat \ntre timp radical sub imperativele „urbanismului” – resursele compensatorii ale oniricului s-au dovedit mai su-

radically transformed itself under the pressures of urban development - the compensating resour-ces of dreaming proved to be more suggestive. Marilena exploited them with voluptuousness so as to imagine a "nocturnal and secret Balcic" populated by mysterious and playful beings - in extremis she reserved an entire exhibition to the cats of Balcic.

"About Elena in General" marks a new and fundamentally different stage in her creation. The withdrawn, meditating and escapist attitude is completely abandoned in favor of a engaged and activist expression.

The reason for this change of direction is quite concrete: the aberrant development of the Romani-an society after the end of communism (noticeable especially in the case of political power) and the anxiety generated thereby on the background of powerlessness and alienation. This type of motiva-tion is not new and has determined many similar positions in the last two decades, especially amongst young artists who have promptly recorded such social "commotions". However, the artist's perspec-tive on the subject seems innovative - particularly

gestive. Marilena le-a exploatat cu voluptate pen-tru a \nchipui un „Balcic nocturn [i secret”, populat de misterioase [i ludice fiin]e – in extremis ea a dedicat o \ntreag` expozi]ie pisicilor din Balcic.

„Despre Elena \n general” marcheaz` o nou` etap`, fundamental opus` \n crea]ia sa.Atitudinea retractil`, meditativ` [i escapist` este tran[ant abandonat` \n favoarea unei exprim`ri angajate, a unui activism asumat.

Temeiul acestui demers se adevere[te cât se





poate de concret: direc]ia aberant pe care a luat-o societatea româneasc` dup` ie[irea din comunism (resim]it` \ndeosebi la nivelul puterii politice), an-xietatea pe care aceasta a generat-o pe fondul de neputin]` [i alienare existen]iale. Acest tip de de-terminare nu este nou, el motivând nu pu]ine „lu`ri de pozi]ie” \nrudite \n ultimile dou` decenii, mai ales \n arta tinerilor, a c`ror promptitudine \n \n-registrarea „seismelor” de orice fel este atestat`. Novatoare ne par pozi]ionarea artistului fa]` de subiect – de o incisivitate aparte, mergând de la ironia [`galnic` la vulgaritatea expres` – [i, de ce nu, perspectiva asupra modelului inspirator.

Laitmotivul expozi]iei \l reprezint` efigia Elenei Ceau[escu \ns`, cum lesne deducem, nu „ilustra fi-gur a savantei de renume mondial”, nici „tovar`[a de via]` a Geniului Carpa]ilor” – de[i aluzii rizibile ale acestor ipostaze „consacrate” ale ei nu lipsesc pe alocuri – ci un personaj n`ucitor, inspirat de diabolizarea sa postcomunist`: Elena desfrânata, cea despre care, de pild`, fra]ii lui Ceau[escu au afirmat c` \n timpul r`zboiului \[i oferea gra]iile solda]ilor germani (sic).

Dealtfel, acest episod al biografiei informale a Elenei a insuflat con]inutul primului tablou rea-lizat, intitulat „Prin gratii de fier”, relevant \n-trucâtva, prin datele sale definitorii, pentru toate celelalte lucr`ri ale seriei. El apare ca o parodie a celebrului cântecel revolu]ionar care l-a inspirat dar, de fapt, se dovede[te o satir` a actualit`]ii politice. |n lucrare sunt \nf`]i[a]i Elena [i un ofi]er german \ntr-un interior modest. Ea, a[ezat` pe un pat de fier, savureaz` satisf`cut` o ]igar`, \n timp ce militarul se redreseaz`. Pe perete, deasupra patului, atârn` o cunoscut` fotografie din tinere-]e a lui Ceau[escu, acesta l`sând impresia c` asist` la scena care tocmai s-a consumat.

Imaginea ar r`mâne un simplu calambur vizual dac` \n figura ofi]erului neam] nu ar fi recognosci-bile tr`s`turile unui politician contemporan care s-a exhibat pe sine [i progenitura sa pe un podium de mod`, defilând \n uniform` nazist`. Proiectat` \n prezent nara]iunea cap`t` o cu totul alt` sem-nifica]ie prin demascarea desfrâului politic actual.

incisive, ranging from playful irony to express vul-garity - alongside her view on the inspiring model.

The motif of the exhibition is Elena Ceausescu's effi gy. However, as can be easily deduced, it did not showcase "the illustrious fi gure of the globally renowned scientist", nor the "life companion of the Carpathians' Genius" - although there are ironic allusions to such classical stances - but a harro-wing character inspired by its post-communist demonization: the debauched Elena which, ac-cording to Ceausescu's brothers, would offer sexual advances to German soldiers during the war (sic).

In fact, this episode of Elena's unoffi cial bio-graphy inspired the content of the fi rst painting which is entitled "Through Iron Bars" and which becomes relevant, by its defi ning data, to all the other works included in the series. It seems to be a parody of the well-known revolutionary song which inspired it but in the end it turn into a satire of present politics. The work shows Elena and a German offi cer in a modest interior. Sitting on an iron bed, she savors a cigarette, while the offi cer recomposes himself. Above the bed there is a photograph of Ceausescu as a young man, leaving the impression that he has assisted to the scene that has just ended.

This image would remain a simple visual pun if the face of the German offi cer would not resemble a contemporary politician who, together with his child, paraded on a catwalk in a Nazi uniform. Being linked with the present, the narrative gains a completely different signifi cance through reve-aling the current political debauchery. Beyond his precise identity, the character in uniform, associated to the phrase "in general" from the title, indicates another possible protagonist of the

Am \nvins!

ulei pe pânz`, detaliu

We've Won!

oil on canvas, detail




9

Dincolo de individualitatea sa precis`, personajul \n uniform`, asociat mintal sintagmei „\n general” din titlu, indic` alt posibil „erou” al expozi]iei. Mesajul lucr`rii, prin unele am`nunte, transcende percep]ia nemijlocit`.Trimiterea la „voaiorismul” lui Ceau[escu vizeaz` f`r` doar [i poate perversi-tatea ca atare, \ns`, nu mai pu]in, „perversitatea” imaginii, capacitatea acesteia de a isca conexiunile cele mai nea[teptate.

Mizând pe remanen]a memoriei colective, au-toarea face trimitere la câteva segmente notorii ale momentului „decembrist” din biografia Elenei, pentru a inversa \n chip grotesc circumstan]e-le. |ntr-una din pânze, pe fundalul atmosferei s`rb`tore[ti, se desf`[oar` un dans \nfocat, \n vâltoarea c`ruia sunt cuprin[i Elena [i generalul r`mas \n istorie pentru iscusita folosin]` a ip-sosului. Prezen]a amuzatului lider politic care-i acompaniaz` are menirea de a sublinia detestabila fars` \n derulare [i, prin extensie, nesfâr[ita fars` politic` \n care ne complacem. |n alt tablou Elena de]ine rolul expansivei dame de companie a celor care-i joac` destinul la c`r]i. Ambiguitatea este sporit` de intruziunea lui Ceau[escu \n grupul „c l ilor”, semn al \mp`rt`[irii unui mental comun.

De la echivocul situa]iilor la echivocul limbajului, artista folose[te de fapt mijloacele „confuziei” pentru a explicita ironia. |ntr-o lucrare \n care eroina noastr` r`sfoie[te \ncântat` opera Marchi-zului de Sade, discursul auctorial se concentreaz`, pare-se, pe depravarea \n sine, \ns` un ochi atent va dibui printre accesorii referin]ele la actualita-te. De obicei, proiectarea \n contemporaneitate este deductibil` din asocierea \n imagine a unor persoane tangente cu biografia Elenei.Una dintre acestea este Oracolul din D`m`roaia care, se [tie,

Dama de pic`


The Queen of Spades


a juct un rol fundamental \n sfâr[itul Ceau[e[tilor. Fostul stalinist invederat, convertit subit la capita-lism, este reprezentat ca pictor narcisist, desf`tat de propria-i „oper`”. Ochiadele complice pe care cele dou` personaje le arunc` privitorului divulg` depravarea modelului prognozat.

Cu toate c` nu se constituie \ntr-o regul`, vom observa c` \n subiectele cu nuan]` retrospectiv` pictori]a oscileaz` \ntre o manier` geometrizat` – aici suprafe]ele sunt u[or frac]ionate, \n felul trat`rii expresioniste a formelor – [i un realism burlesc, vizibil \n construc]ia unor anatomii, cu prec`dere \n corpolen]a dizgra]ioas` a Elenei. Pe m`sur` ce \[i focalizeaz` tot mai deslu[it expu-nerea pe timpul prezent Marilena pare a \nclina stilistic \n favoarea verismului provacator, cu riscul de a-[i reprima pe alocuri efectele râvnite ale picturalit`]ii. Carnalitatea dezagreabil`, goliciunea excesiv` din unele pânze (c`rora le aplic` titluri voit ireveren]ioase) sunt arme ale exasper`rii [i demasc`rii r`spicate. La fel ca \n cultura popular`, urâ]enia [i vulgaritatea fizic` denun]` tarele mora-le ale personajelor, cum ar fi impostura [i nesim-]irea ca forme ale prostitu]iei politice.

F`r` de a fi rupte din contextul stilistic al an-samblului, trei scene anume, prin \nsemn`tatea acordat` fundalurilor „ecranate”, inspirate de ima-ginile de tip cinematografic sau televizat, dezv luie corela]ii cu media contemporane – eficace mij-loace de manipulare \n mas`. |n „Am \nvins !”, un „remake” insolit al cunoscutului episod din decembrie 89, imaginea este construit` pe dou` registre: de[i \n plan secund („virtual”) ac]iunea se focalizeaz` \n jurul exaltatelor chipuri ale Poe-tului [i Actorului, prim planul („real”) este copios dominat de silueta protagonistei noastre, a c`rei vivacitate exploziv` nu las` nici un dubiu asupra veritabililor \nving`tori. Unii dintre ace[tia, poate cei mai cunoscu]i, figureaz` \n ipostaze joviale \n „dimensiunea televizat`” a tabloului, subliniind \nc` o dat` ideea de manevrare ideologic`, subver-siv \ntruchipat` de Elena.

Cumetria ce transcende principiile partinice, sfi-darea cras` pe care o afi[ez` cei ce ne conduc sunt

dezavuate \n scene de grup \n care amuzamentul corifeilor atinge apogeul. |ntr-una dintre acestea, proiectat` panoramatic pe o suprafa]` acroma-tic`, o important` tem` politic` este coborât` \n derizoriu prin ambientul lumesc al amplas`rii dezbaterii [i persiflarea semanticii originare a ri-tualului invocat. Un alt savuros „pamflet” i-a fost inspirat pictori]ei de personalitatea provocatoare a lui Marilyn Monroe. Lucrarea, al c`rui subiect \[i are obâr[ia \n versurile unui cântec din filmul „Gentlemen prefer blondes” \i reune[te admirativ pe cei trei [efi de stat postdecembri[ti \n jurul str`lucitoarei blonde, metamorfozat` conjunctu-ral \n Elena. Conexiunea cu un alt celebru [lag`r dedicat pe calea undelor de Marilyn lui J.F.K. este str`vezie [i indic`, transpus` \n mediul autohton, o nou` ridiculizare a identific`rii cu un model per-vers. Show-ul mediatic de prost gust, histrionismul politic pot fi in egal` m`sur` sugerate, dat fiind poza „glamoroas`” a actorilor.

Desigur, semnifica]ia ilariantelor scene este deschis` interpret`rilor iar tratarea lor oximoro-nic` urm`re[te dep`[irea simplei contradic]ii din antinomia „râsu-plânsu”, cea dintâi care ne vine \n minte \n contact direct cu pictura.Titlul expozi-]iei \nsu[i, datorit` ambiguit`]ii sale, sugerez` c` „\n special” \n expozi]ie ar fi vorba despre alt-cineva, poate despre oricare dintre noi – un po-sibil r`spuns s-ar afla \n „anonimele” portrete \n uniform` care completeaz` „modelele criante” de pe suprafe]ele mari.

Dincolo de posibile alte t lm`ciri credem c impor-tant` r`mâne determinarea artistei de a \nc`lca tabuuri. Nu \n sensul abaterii de la normele consa-crate ale artei \n sine –cel mult dep`[irea iner]iilor propriei arte – cât violarea unor conven]ii sociale, a unor credin]e \nr`d`cinate ale publicului, pe care \l invit` acum la o „dezbatere” neconven]ional` asupra con[tiin]ei individuale. |ntre un explicit al reprezent`rii [i o ambivalen]` a exprim`rii, pictura de azi a Marilenei Murariu sper` s` contrazic`, fie [i par]ial, mai vechiul dicton: „Auqun art politique n’est convaincant, sauf l’art totalitaire”.

Marian Constantin

DESPRE ELENA ÎN GENERAL


10



Счастливого Рождества Feerie decembrist`


Счастливого Рождества December Fairy Tale


visible in the construction of the bodies, such as the unappealing physicality of Elena. As she increasin-gly focuses on the present, Marilena tends to sty-listically incline towards provocative realism with the risk of occasionally repressing desired pictorial effects. The displeasing corporeality, the excessive nakedness in some canvases (with deliberately irreverent titles) are weapons of exasperation and overt exposure. As it is the case with folk culture, physical ugliness and vulgarity disclose the moral faults of the characters, namely imposture and carelessness as forms of political prostitution.

Without being taken out of the general stylistic context, three particular scenes, through the im-portance granted to the cinematic screen-like back-grounds, reveal connections with the contemporary media as useful mass manipulation means. In "We Won!" an unusual remake of the well-known episode of December 89, the image is built on two levels: although in the ("virtual") background the action centers. around the enthusiastic faces of the Poet and of the Actor, the ("real") foreground is fully dominated by the fi gure of our protagonist whose explosive vivacity casts no doubt on the actual winners. Perhaps the most well-known of these are featured in cheerful stances in the "broadcast dimension" of the painting, once more representing the idea of ideological manipulation, subversively embodied by Elena.

The liaison which transcends party guidelines and the sheer defi ance exhibited by our leaders are disavowed in group scenes in which the amu-sement of the chorus leaders reaches a climax. One of these scenes which is projected like a pan-orama on an achromatic surface, features a an important political theme that is downgraded by its placement in the worldly atmosphere of the debate and by the bantering of the original signifi cance of the invoked ritual. Another de-licious pamphlet was inspired to the painter by the provocative personality of Marilyn Monroe. The work the subject of which is traced to the lyrics of a song from "Gentlemen Prefer Blondes", reunites with admiration the three presidents

exhibition. According to certain details, the mes-sage of the work transcends naked perception. Suggesting Ceausescu's voyeurism undoubtedly targets perversity as such, but also the perversity of the image, its capacity of bearing the most unexpected connections.

Relying on the persistence of collective memory, the author makes references to several notorious episodes of the 89 revolution period of Elena's bio-graphy, in order to invert the circumstances with grotesque effects. In one of the canvases, a passio-nate dance takes place in a festive atmosphere and includes Elena and the general who is remembered in history for his crafty use of plaster. The presence of the political leader who accompanies them has the purpose of outlining the horrendous develo-ping farce and, by extension, the endless political farce in which we all indulge. Another painting depicts Elena as a cheerful escort for gamblers. The ambiguity is heightened by the insertion of Ceausescu in the "executioners" group, as a sign of shared mentality.

From ambiguous situations to ambiguous lan-guage, the artist uses the means of "confusion" for making irony clear. In a work showing our protagonist browsing with delight through the oeuvre of the Marquis de Sade, the author's dis-course seemingly concentrated on debauchery in itself, but a more experienced eye will also identify references to the present. The connection with the current times is deductible through the presence of individuals with tangential roles in Elena's life. One of these is the Oracle of Damaroaia who is known to have played a fundamental role in the death of the Ceausescu spouses. The former Stalinist hardliner who suddenly converted to capitalism, is represented as narcissist painter, delighted by his own work. The conspiring glances exchanged with the viewer by the two characters disclose the debauchery of the forecast model.

Although not as a rule, the works with re-membrance undertones oscillate between a geo-metric style - slightly fragmented surfaces with expressionist infl uences - and burlesque realism,

who took offi ce after December 89, around the glamorous blonde transformed in Elena. The connection with another hit song dedicated on radio by Marilyn to J.F.K. is transparent and indicates in the Romanian context a new ridicule of the identifi cation with a perverted model. The shabby media show and the political histrionism can be equally suggested by the glamorous pose of the actors.

Of course, the signifi cance of these hilarious sce-nes is open to interpretation and the paradoxical treatment thereof aims at going beyond the simple contradiction of the antinomy between laughter and weeping. The latter comes immediately to mind when we look at the painting. The title of the exhibit itself, due to its ambiguity, suggests that the exhibit might allude to someone else, perhaps to any of us. A possible answer could be provided by the anonymous portraits in uniform which complete the striking models on the large surfaces.

Leaving aside other possible interpretations, I believe that the artist's decision to tackle taboo subjects remains important. Such taboos do not refer to deviating from the usual rules of art - overcoming the inertia of one's art at the most - but to infringing on social conventions and deep-rooted beliefs of the public who is thus invited to an unconventional debate on individual aware-ness. Oscillating between explicit representation and ambivalent expression, the current painting of Marilena Murariu hopes to contradict, if only in part, the old saying: "Auqun art politique n'est convaincant, sauf l'art totalitaire"

Marian Constantin





13

Profetul [i modelul Helene


The Prophet and the Model Helene


vizibil-imediatul rupturilor produse de c`tre tehnici-le artistice c`tre invizibilul incon[tient politic ce-[i las amprenta asupra \ntregului display artistic.

DESPRE SPECTACOLUL (POST-)POLITIC “Imaginile, care s-au desprins de fiecare aspect al vie]ii, fuzioneaz` \ntr-un curs comun, \n care unitatea acestei vie]i nu mai poate fi restabilit`. Realitatea luat` \n considerare \n mod par]ial se manifest` \n propria unitate general` ca pseudo-lume aparte, obiect destinat doar contempl`rii. Specializarea imaginilor despre lume se reg`se[te, des`vâr[it`, \n lumea imaginii autonomizate, \n care mincinosul s-a min]it pe el \nsu[i. Specta-colul \n general, ca inversiune concret` a vie]ii, este mi[carea autonom` a neviului.” (Guy Debord, Societatea spactacolui, Teza 2, trad. Ciprian Mihali [i Radu Stoenescu, EST, 2001)

Ne hazard`m oare dac` invoc`m, pentru \nce-put, aceste rânduri din Guy Debord? Ceea ce pentru Marx constituia misterul feti[ismului m`rfurilor, \ntr-o teorie care ar`ta c` \n capitalism rela]iile dintre oameni sunt asemeni celor dintre obiecte, \n Societatea spectacolului ia forma unei critici a feti[ismului imaginii, a reprezent`rii, [i a spectaco-lului sus]inut de industriile mass-media, definitorii pentru capitalismul avansat. Personajele ce popu-leaz` gr`dina zoologic` a Marilenei Murariu exist` \n primul rând pentru c` rezult` dintr-un spectacol media al c`rui punct zero poate fi localizat undeva pe drumul \ntre ultimul Telejurnal din socialism [i suspect de conving`torul „Am \nvins!” (Mircea f`-te c` lucrezi!). Andrei Ujic` [i Harun Farocky ar`taser` \nc` din 1992, \n binecunoscuta lucrare video “Videograme ale unei Revolu]ii”, efectul devastator al acelui emo]ionant “Am \nvins!” pen-tru publicul din fa]a terminalului TV. |n pictura Marilenei Murariu revolu]ia televizat`, spectacolul revolu]iei este spectacolul prin excelen]`, pentru c` ceva din aceast` compunere ciudat` de \n[elare [i auto-\n[elare, optimism studiat, dispre] [i rânjet sardonic se vor reg`si \n toate celelalte scene. Pu-tem observa c ceva din spectacolul revolu]iei trece \n mod necesar prin profe]iile brucaniene despre

ROMÂNIA – FIN DE SIÈCLESAU DESPRE TENTA}IA |NCEPUTURILORProiectul „Elena” aduce cu sine ceva nelini[titor. Avem, \ntr-adev`r, de-a face cu expozi]ie politizat`, dar artistul pare s` fi uitat s`-[i mai ia m`suri de precau]ie. Cel pu]in aceasta este impresia pe care o creeaz` saltul de la „Balcicul nocturn” sau de la „Kâtz” la „Elena”, c`ruia nimic nu \i garanteaz ate-rizarea pe o pern` de aer. Depist`m un mod radical de a indica, de a viza, de a expune, ce produce o pictur oximoronic`, inspirând fascina]ie [i repulsie \n acela[i timp. Nu [tim ce s` facem cu personajele centrale ale acestei puneri \n scen`, atâta vreme cât ele ne apar drept extrem de familiare dar [i inco-mensurabil strìne. Exist`, apoi, o tenta]ie – aceea de a cùta motivele care au determinat-o pe artist` s` execute acest salt. Vom rezista acestei tenta]ii dintr-un singur motiv: oricare ar fi ra]iunile acestei expozi]ii-manifest, devine cople[itoare semnifica-]ia unui \ntreg fundal social, politic [i ideologic, care concur` al`turi de alegerile con[tiente ale artistei la producerea efectului final al lucr`rilor. Astfel arta Marilenei Murariu reu[e[te s` fie cu adev`rat politic-critic` tocmai pentru c` opereaz` disruptiv asupra acestui fundal al nara]iunilor ideologice \n care trìm cu to]ii. Efectul fascina-]ie-repulsie are de-a face cu aceast` ruptur` [i, mai ales, are de-a face cu o confruntare a noastr` cu noi \n[ine, cu lucrurile \n care credem. Din acest punct de vedere, putem spune c lucr`rile Marilenei Murariu amintesc, mai mult decât de orice altceva, de avangarda istoric`, de tehnicile rupturilor de sens, de strategiile expunerii rela]iilor invizibile din lumea cultural-politic`. |n rândurile urm`toare \mi propun s discut manierele de articulare ale acestei suite de rupturi de sens, procedând \n cercuri, de la

trecut, prin mar[ul nazist pe un podium de mod`, printr-un imaginar can-can de emancipare politic-feminist` [i, nu \n cele din urm`, printr-un „Happy Birthday Mister President!” al concordiei sociale.

Ceea ce vrea s` \nsemne c` trìm \n specta-col, prin spectacol [i pentru spectacol [i c` nu gre[im dând credit lui Debord atunci când scrie c` spectacolul este o inversare a vie]ii trìte. |n lucr`rile Marilena Murariu \ntr-adev`r, nimic nu trìe[te, de[i exist` iluzia vie]ii mimate. Ea rezult` din asamblajul decadent al culorilor [i gesturilor, configura]ie care ne-ar aminti de expresionismul german dac` nu am fi siguri c` aici nimic nu res-pir`, c` aici nici o emo]ie nu este exprimat`. Iar aceast` senza]ie de stranietate este completat` de poza personajelor, ca [i cum un teleobiectiv invizibil le-ar urm`ri, ca [i cum suprafa]a bidi-mensional` a pânzei s-ar constitui \ntr-un ecran TV. Pentru c` spectacolul ca rela]ie este abstract, reprezentarea sa nu poate fi decât \nghe]at`: dar \n cazul lucr`rilor artistei avem de-a face cu o dubl` abstrac]ie, o combinatoric` ma[inal` al c`rei efect este o eliberare fa]` de (crono)logica istoric-concret` a spectacolului post-decembrist. Dac` artele spectacolului \ncearc` s` p`streze iluzia viului (coloratului, eclatantului, senza]ionalului, urgentului), dubla abstrac]ie a Marilenei Murariu nu numai c` este moart`, dar \[i asum` [i opereaz` ma[inal aceast` moarte. Iat` de ce pictura este artificial` adic` bricolat`, compus`, montat` [i iat`, ce sub\n]elege coinciden]a fascina]iei [i a re-pulsiei! Acolo unde ma[inalul \nlocuie[te umanul, exist` semnele unei pieiri iminente al c`rei mister ne \mpiedic` inexplicabil fuga.

Dar mai exist` un sens \n care putem spune c` ceea ce privim constituie „o societate a spectacolu-lui”. Vom observa c`, de[i sunt doar dou`sprezece tablouri mimat-vivante, impresia l`sat` este c` nimic nu r`mâne pe dinafar`, c` actul artistic este totalizator, c` ceea ce este vizibil spune ceva [i despre ceea ce r`mâne invizibil. Acest efect care, asemeni gùrilor negre atrage orice c`tre sine, rezult` din operarea subtil` a unei omologi imaginare, \n urma c`reia dispar diferen]ele dintre






|n general, vecin


In general, a neighbour


|n general, artist


In general, an artist


|n general, om de afaceri


In general, a business man


|n general, prea cuvios


In general, a devout person



16



La barre de la justice


La barre de la justice


ABOUT THE (POST-)POLITIC SPECTACLE“The images detached from every aspect of life fuse in a common stream in which the unity of this life can no longer be reestablished. Reality considered partially unfolds, in its own general unity, as a pseudo-world apart, an object of mere contempla-tion. The specialization of images of the world is completed in the world of the autonomous image, where the liar has lied to himself. The spectacle in general, as the concrete inversion of life, is the auto-nomous movement of the non-living. (Guy Debord, Society of the Spectacle(1967),Second Thesis, www.marxists.org/reference/archive/debord/society.htm, trans. Black&Redd, 1977)

Are we misplacing our stakes if we start by conjure up this paragraph from Guy Debord? What Marx critically described as the mystery of commodity fetishism, in a theory which showed that in capita-lism relations between human beings emulate those between objects, in Society of the Spectacle becomes a critique of the fetishism of the image, representation, and the spectacle which are supported by the media industries in advanced capitalism. The characters which fi ll Marilena Murariu's Zoo exist, fi rst and foremost, because they are the results of a media spectacle whose zero point could be located some-where on the path between the last socialist “News Journal” and the incredibly convincing “We Won!” (Mircea pretend you're working!). Andrei Ujic` and Harun Farocky had already shown in 1992, in their famous “Videogramme einer Revolution”, the devastating effect of that emotional “We won!” for the public in front of the TV screen. In Marilena Murariu's paintings, the televised revolution, the spectacle of the revolution is the spectacle per se, because something out of this strange composition of delusion, self-delusion, studied optimism, con-tempt and sardonic grin are to be found in the rest of the depicted scenes. We observe, therefore, that something from the spectacle of the revolution passes necessarily through Brucan's prophecies about the past, through a Nazi March upon a cat-walk, through an imaginary can-can of political-feminist emancipation and, not in the least, through a “Hap-

ROMANIA – FIN DE SIÈCLE OR THE TEMPTATION OF A NEW BEGINNIGThere is something uncomfortable about the “Ele-na” project. We are, indeed, dealing with a poli-ticized exhibition, though one in which the artist seems to have forgotten to take precautionary measures. At least this is the impression that the leap from the “Nocturnal Balcic” or “Kaatz” to “Elena” creates, and nothing guarantees a landing on an air pillow. One spots here a radical man-ner of indicating, of showing, of exposing, which produces an oxymoron, inspiring fascination and repulsion at the same time.

We don't know what we are supposed to do with the characters of this mise-en-scène, as long as they appear both as extremely familiar and incommensurately unusual. There is, then, a temptation – that of looking for the motives that determined the artist to execute this leap. We will resist this temptation for one reason: whatever the reasons determining the artist to produce this exhibition-manifest, the signifi cance of a whole so-cial, political and ideological background becomes crucial, and it is this background which concurs to the production of the works' fi nal effects. Thus Marilena Murariu's art manages to be truly po-litical and critical because it operates disruptively upon this background of ideological narrations in which we all live. The fascination-repulsion effect has something to do with this rupture and, mo-reover, it points to a confrontation with ourselves and with the things in which we believe.

In this context we can say that Marilena Murariu's works remind us, more than anything else, of the historical avant-garde, of the tech-niques of rupture, of the strategies of exposing invisible relations from the cultural and political world. In the following lines I will discuss the manners in which this array of breaks in meaning are articulated, developing the argument in circles, from the visible and concrete rupture produced by artistic techniques, to the invisible political unconscious which imprints the whole artistic display.

py Birthday Mister President!” of social concord.But then, all these mean that we are living in

the spectacle, through the spectacle and for the spectacle, and that we are not mistaken by giving credit to Debord when he writes that the spectacle is an inversion of lived life. In Marilena Murariu's works, indeed, nothing lives, though there is the illusion of living in the mimicry of life. It results from the decadent assemblage of colors and gestures, a confi guration which would remind us of German expressionism if we weren't sure that here nothing breathes, that here there is no trace of emotional expressions. And this sensation of the strange is completed by the manner in which the characters pose, as if the invisible lens of a video-camera is always following them, as if the bi-dimensional surface of the canvas would become a TV screen. Because spectacle as a relation is abstract, its re-presentation cannot be but frozen: but in the case of the artist's works we are dealing with a double abstraction, a machinic aggregation whose effect is an act of liberation from the chrono-logic of the post-December history. If the arts of the spectacle are trying to keep the illusion of life (in the color, in the sparkle, in the sensational, in what becomes urgent), Marilena Murariu's double abstraction is not only dead, but it machinically assumes this death. Hence the painting becomes artifi cial, bri-colage: it is composed and mounted, underpinning the coincidence of fascination and repulsion. Where the machine replaces the human, one sees the signs of a forthcoming death whose mystery impedes one's escape.

But there is another sense in which we can say that what we see constitutes “a society of the spec-tacle”. We will observe that, although there are only 12 pieces miming life, the impression they





19

toate aceste personaje expuse. Ele se vor deta[a de acum \nainte \ntr-un grup, o familie, o specie, o „societate” din care conven]iile picturii exclud \n mod obligatoriu privitorul. Un fel de „ei cu ei, noi cu noi” care \n cazul de fa]` devine un comentariu vizavi de societatea post-politic`, un spectacol care vrea s` \ntre]in` iluzia unui presupus rol politic pe care fiecare dintre noi l-ar mai avea.

Prin post-politic \n]eleg \ngustarea sferei con-ceptului de politic`, prevalarea concep]iei c singu-ra manier de a tr i politic este cea de a participa la vot. Post-politicul este criza modurilor de articulare a reprezent`rii politice, eviden]a minciunii aces-tei reprezent`ri. Suntem descuraja]i [i deprima]i percepând pr`p`stia care se casc` din ce \n ce mai adânc \ntre corpul guvern`rii [i aparatul guvern`rii. Dar chiar recunoa[terea acestui fapt – tradus` \n absenteismul din preajma urnelor de vot – [i con[tientizarea urgen]ei regândirii modurilor de a participa la via]a politic` este sortit` s` intre \ntr-un joc al ascunderilor [i al deturn`rilor, \n care industriile mass-media au, f`r` \ndoial`, un rol covâr[itor. Un pre[edinte plânge al`turi de o societate care nu mai crede \n lacrimi: [i chiar posibilitatea acestei conjunc]ii introduce dispera-rea gândului c` politica nu ne mai apar]ine. Dac` privirea st`ruie[te pe suprafa]a pânzelor Marilenei Murariu, aceasta se \ntâmpl` tocmai pentru c` realitatea acestei sfâ[ieri este expus` f`r` mena-jamente. Marilena Murariu expune post-politicul. [i o face ma[inal, \ntr-un bric-à-brac ce scoate din starea de ascundere rela]ii pe care le-am fi intuit, dar niciodat` perceput. Iat` ce o apropie pe artist` de mo[tenirea avangardei [i nu ne hazard`m dac` sus]inem c` maniera \n care acest spectacol este montat, bricolat, ne aminte[te de tehnicile de alienare ale lui Bertolt Brecht. Dac` post-politicul

este \n sine alienant, pentru c` ne \ndep`rteaz` de modul de fiin]are politic, pictura Marilenei Mu-rariu este dublu de-familiarizant`, introducând o alienare pozitiv`, care d` [ansa privitorului s` chestioneze critic formele sale de via]`.

INTERMEZZO DESPRE ALIENARE „Ceea ce e implicat aici (\n efectul de alienare) este, pe scurt, o tehnic de a \nf ]i[a [i eticheta incidentele sociale umane \ntr-o manier nea[teptat`, care ce-re o explica]ie, [i al c`rei mesaj este c acele eveni-mente nu trebuie acceptate ca atare, ca fapte natu-rale. Obiectivul acestui „efect” este acela de a da spec-tatorului posibilitatea de a critica constructiv a-doptând un punct de vedere social. (Bertolt Brecht, Brecht on Theatre, ed. John Willet, Hill and Want, New York, 1992, p. 125) (...) O reprezentare care alieneaz` este o reprezentare care ne permite s` \i recunoa[tem subiectul, dar care \n acela[i timp \l face s par lipsit de familiaritate” (ibidem, p. 192)

Plecând de la rândurile de mai sus putem arti-cula mai temeinic teza prefigurat` \n paragrafele anterioare, [i anume c` expunerea Marilenei Mura-riu indic` moartea noastr` social` \n spectacolul muribund al post-politicii. Ne afl`m \n eroare dac` vom \ncerca s` identific`m vreo presupus` formul` magic` prin care artista ar \ncerca s`-[i \nchid` spectatorul \ntr-o iluzie emo]ional-empatic`. Dim-potriv`, artistul lucreaz` clinic, rece, ma[inic, iar posibilit`]ile sale tehnice sunt puse \n slujba unui proiect de alienare pozitiv` a spectatorului. Un aspect, aparent minor, vine s` confirme aceast` tez`. Obi[nui]i cu paleta coloristic` a Marilenei Murariu, tindem s` trecem cu vederea un fapt care, \n contextul de fa]`, devine semnificativ: lipsesc umbrele umane. S` preciz`m gândul acesta [i mai bine. |n spa]iul u[or geometrizat al tablou-lui, exist` \n mod evident un dialog al luminilor [i umbrelor. Sânii fac umbr`, articula]iile membrelor fac umbr`, faldurile hainelor fac umbr`. |ns` \n bestiarul spectacular pe care \l avem \n fa]a ochilor, corpurile pline nu mai arunc` umbr`. Corpul plin este delimitat de spa]iul pe care \l ocup`, separat de tot ceea ce \l \nconjoar`, ca [i cum corpurile \n

sine s-ar feri de iminen]a unei contagiuni. Asociem aceast` descoperire cu o poveste care emerge din curentul romantic (Adalbert von Chamisso, Peter Schlemihl), [i \n al c`rei personaj central comite o eroare capital`: \[i vinde umbra diavolului pentru un portofel fermecat din care pot fi extrase cantit`]i infinite de bani. Peter Schlemihl va constata curând c` percep]ia social` a lipsei umbrei activeaz` auto-mat un fundal incon[tient de credin]e, care deter-min pe cei ce interac]ioneaz cu el s \l ocoleasc`. Schlemihl se va auto-izola, verificând proverbul c` „banii nu aduc fericirea”. |[i mai poate \ntâlni se-menii numai dup` ce construie[te un imens aparat generator de iluzii optice, func]ionând sub pav`za nop]ii, [i care s` \i poate ascunde deficien]a. Ceva din povestea omului care \[i vinde umbra (sufletul) pentru bani transpare [i \n pictura Marilenei Mura-riu, de[i conexiunea poate r`mâne necunoscut` artistei. Aceast` panoplie a oamenilor care, de[i sunt pu[i \n lumina reflectoarelor, nu au umbr`, \nstr`ineaz` privitorul. Absen]a umbrei, despre care intuim c` apare printr-o alian]` ilegitim` cu capitalul (banii, ochiul dracului), func]ioneaz` \n acela[i ordin al disruptivului, al rupturii empatice. Lucr`rile Marilenei Murariu reu[esc s ne fac aten]i asupra acestui fapt, caz \n care privirea survolatoare asupra zâmbetul \nghe]at, plin de sub\n]elesuri, ale personajelor ce compun aceast` veritabil` poz` de familie, e \nc`rcat` cu semnifica]ii noi. |n povestea lui Chamisso, Peter Schlemihl p`c`tuie[te doar pe jum`tate, pentru c refuz ultima tenta]ie, aceea de a-[i târgui sufletul \n schimbul retroced`rii umbrei sale. Umbra este, a[adar, doar vehicului sufletului. Dar privind cu [i de la distan]` pictura Marilenei Murariu, ne \ntreb`m, poate pe bun` dreptate, dac` nu cumva am trecut de poarta umbrei, [i dac` nu cumva scenele cu care avem de-a face fac deja parte din scenariul dr`cesc al unui Ivan Turbinc` post-modern-post-socialist.

DESPRE ELENA CA OBIECT EROTIC R`mâne, totu[i, o \ntrebare: de ce este Elena prile-jul erotic-voluptuos al \ntreg acestui scenariu? S` ne amintim c`, aproape f`r excep]ie, \n imaginarul

|n general, politician


In general, a politician




20



leave is that nothing is left behind, that the artistic gesture is total, that what is visible says a lot about an invisible, underground world as well. This effect which, like black stars, attracts everything unto itself, results from the subtle operation of an imaginary homology, in which the presupposed differences between all these characters disappear. They will detach themselves, from now on, in a group, a fa-mily, a species, a “society” from which pictorial conventions will necessarily exclude the viewer. This radical separation becomes a commentary on the post-politic society, whose spectacle's purpose is that of keeping the illusion of a presupposed political role that we would still have.

Through post-politics I understand the shrinking of the concept of politics, the domination of the view that the only manner in which we live politically is by participating in the electoral process. The post-politics is the crisis of the modes in which one articu-lates political representation, the evidence that it has become false. We are discouraged and depressed by perceiving the increasing gap between the govern-mental corpus and the governmental apparatus. But even the recognition of this fact – translated in the perceived absence at the voting poles – which introduces the urgency of rethinking the manners of participation in the political life is doomed to collude in a play of hide and seek, a play of detours and masks, in which media industries play a mo-mentous role. A president cries alongside a society that no longer believes in tears: the very possibility of this conjunction introduces the depressing thought that politics no longer belongs to us. If the gaze insists on Marilena Murariu's works, this happens because the reality of this break is frontally exposed. The artist exhibits the post-political. The choice of a pictorial bric-à-brac pulls out of its hiding state relations that we would have guessed, but never perceived as such. This is what brings the artist closer to the heritage of the avant-garde, and we are not mistaken if we argue that the manner in which this spectacle is mounted sends us to the alienation techniques of Bertolt Brecht. If post-politics is in itself alienating, because it keeps us far away from

the political modes of being, Marilena Murariu's paining is doubly alienating, introducing a posi-tive alienation, which gives the viewer the chance of critically questioning the forms of his living.

INTERMEZZO ABOUT ALIENATION“What is involved here (in the alienation effect) is, briefl y, a technique of taking the human social in-cidents to be portrayed and labeling them as some-thing striking, something that calls for explanation, is not to be taken for granted, not just natural. The object of this “effect” is to allow the spectator to criticize constructively from a social point of view”. (Bertolt Brecht, Brecht on Theatre, ed. John Willet, Hill and Wang, New York, 1992, p. 125) (...) A representation that alienates is one which allows us to recognize its subject, but at the same time makes it seem unfamiliar” (ibidem, p. 192)

Leaving from the fragment above we can better articulate the thesis which has already been envi-saged in the preceding paragraphs, that Marilena Murariu's exposing indicates our social death in the dying spectacle of post-politics. We will be in error if we attempt to identify a presupposed magical formula through which the artist should enclose her spectator in an emotional-empathic illusion. On the contrary, the artist works clinically, coldly, and her technical possibilities are servicing a project of positive alienation of the spectator. An apparently minor aspect confi rms this thesis. Familiar with the color range of the artist, we tend to miss a fact that in the present context becomes important: human shadows are missing. Let's state this thought even better. In the slightly geometrical space of the painting, there is a clear dialogue of shadow and light. Breasts are making shadows, articulations of limbs make shadows, garments make shadows. But in the spectacular bestiary we perceive, full bodies cast shadows no more. The full body is delimited by the space they occupy, and is separated by everything surrounding it, as if bodies in themselves are struck by a sudden fear of contagion. We associate this with a tale emer-ging from Romanticism (Adalbert von Chamisso's

Peter Schlemihl), in which its central character makes the error of selling his shadow to the de-vil in exchange of a magic purse which produces infi nite quantities of money. Peter Schlemihl will soon realize that the social perception of the loss of shadow automatically activates an unconscious background of beliefs, which determine the people interacting with him to run away. Schlemihl will isolate himself, proving that the saying “money don't bring happiness” is true. The only way in which he could be accompanied by a human so-ciety is given by the construction of an impressive device which produces optical illusions, functioning under the spell of the moon, and which manages to hide his defi ciency. Something of the tale of the man who sells his shadow (soul) for money is to be found in Marilena Murariu's painting, although the connection could very well remain unknown to the artist. This series of people who, although appearing in light, cast no shadow, estranges the spectator. The absence of shadow, about which we can surmise that it appears as the result of an illegitimate alliance with capital (money are the devil's eyes) functions in the same order of the disruptive, of the empathic rupture. Marilena Murariu's works make us pay attention to this fact, in which case the gaze upon the frozen grin of the characters which compose this veritable family pic-ture receives new meanings. In Chamisso's story, Peter Schlemihl commits only a half-sin, since he refuses to be subjected by the last temptation, that of bargaining his soul in return of his lost shadow. The shadow is, we understand, only the gate of the soul. But looking from - and with - a distance at these paintings, we are asking ourselves whe-ther we have already passed the gates of the soul,

Frech Can-Can


Frech Can-Can







Originea Lumii Noi

ulei pe pânz`, 200/150 cm,

detaliu \n drepta

Origin of the New World

oil on canvas, 200/150 cm,

detail on the right side page


24


Presidents are Girl's Best Friend


Presidents are Girl's Best Friend


gagurilor politice inventate dup` 1990, cuplul dic-tatorial ia cina cu Hitler [i Stalin \n infern. Dar cred c` ne-am situa \ntr-o eroare dac` am interpreta lucr`rile Marilenei Murariu \ntr-o gril \n care Elena devine semnul purt`tor al vreunei „tenta]ii demo-nice”. Dac` lucrurile ar sta astfel, atunci artista nu ar face decât s` \nt`reasc` [i s` confirme vizi-unea tragic-fatalist` [i defetist`, ce bântuie spa]iul imaginar-simbolic al societ`]ii române[ti, [i \n care rezonan]ele numelui Elena sunt amplificate pân la inaudibil. Elena devine apelativul care mascheaz` o fals` auto-percep]ie – c` neputin]a noastr` are cauze exterioare, \ntr-un blestem cu care românii iau cuno[tin]` la intervale repetate \n istorie. |n aceast imagine inversat`, lucrurile s-ar a[eza altfel pentru noi dac` societatea, economia [i politica ar fi l`sat` pe mâinile „b`rba]ilor politici”, dac` anumite Elene, „femmes fatales” nu s-ar amesteca [i deturna „destinul acestui popor” de la calea sa cea dreapt`. Nu ne putem pronun]a \ndeajuns de categoric dezacordul cu aceast` concep]ie pe care o socotim \ntrutotul mincinoas`, fie doar [i pentru c` ne plaseaz` \n pozi]ia celui ce-[i plânge singur de mil`. Prefer`m s` invoc`m „complexul Elena” de fiecare dat` când rat`m obiective, amânând, deplasând sau ascunzând confruntarea direct` cu r`d`cinile sl biciunilor noastre. Atunci, \n ce rela]ie se g`se[te pictura pe care o propune Marilena Mura-riu cu „problema Elena”? A[ dori s` \ncerc o inter-pretare care, poate surprinz`tor, ne va scoate din spa]iul imaginar al artistului, a[a cum este reprodus el pe pânz`: vreau s` abat aten]ia cititorului spre un episod care, \n economia problemelor pe care le abord`m aici (erotismul inexplicabil al Elenei dar [i influen]a sa malign`), s-ar putea dovedi esen]i-al. Pasul urm`tor abordeaz`, a[adar, „complexul Elena” din perspectiva impenetrabilit`]ii lui, despre care credem c` are de-a face cu maniera de organi-zarea a unei \ntregi ma[in`rii incon[tiente, politice [i sociale. A[ dori s` investighez, prin urmare, cum a fost mutat` Elena \n orizontul incon[tientului nostru, acolo unde organizeaz` un aparat defensiv impenetrabil vizavi de mijloacele noastre analitice: Elena plute[te fantomatic, asemeni unui monstru

pl`smuit de „somnul na]iunii (ra]iunii)”. |n sala unit`]ii militare unde are loc „tribunalul

poporului” reunit s` judece cuplul dictatorial, \n zilele lui decembrie 1989, camera de luat vederi ne face cuno[tint` cu o singur` femeie: Elena Ceau[escu. Procesul Ceau[e[tilor apare ca lupt` nud` pentru putere, o lupt` \ntre dou` for]e aflate \n evident dezechilibru, [i a c`rui expresie concret` este controversa asupra legitimit`]ii completului de judecat`. Prin urmare, ceea ce apare \n prin plan este mai pu]in o confruntare \ntre oameni, \ntre acuzatori [i acuza]i, cât mai ales o confruntare \n-tre reprezentan]ii unor institu]ii diferite, [i implicit a institu]iilor \ntre ele. Trecerea de la structurile „vechiului regim” la cele ale „noii democra]ii” se face obligatoriu prin Târgovi[te. La momentul ace-stui spectacol televizat \ns`, delimit`rile sunt \n-s` vagi, neclare, lucru care, a[a cum vom vedea, va deturna sensul acestui proces. Deocamdat` \n-s`, s` spunem c` ceea ce se \ntâmpl` \n aceast` camer vrea s p`streze aparen]ele unui proces real [i legitim, iar Elena \ns`[i intr \n aceast \nscenare cu un rol bine definit. Ea \ncorporeaz` statutul, rolul [i imaginea pe care ideologia ultimilor ani de socialism românesc i-o consacr`, aceea a unui tehnocrat, patron al [tiin]elor [i al cercet`rii, „sa-vant de renume mondial”*1 [i, f`r` doar [i poate, p`rta[ al deciziilor politice ale lui Nicolae. Ar fi in-structiv, \n acest moment, s` ne amintim filmul lui Andrei Ujic` (Autobiografia lui Nicolae Ceau[escu), pentru c` pe urmele sale \n]elegem cum are loc evolu]ia imaginii Elenei Ceau[escu, ascensiunea sa fulminant`: de la un personaj obscur, mam [i so]i-e aflat` \n umbra Secretarului General al Partidului Comunist Român, la unul care c`tre sfâr[itul anilor '80 articuleaz contraponderea for]ei gravita]ionale pe care Nicolae Ceau[escu \nsu[i o reprezint`. Dar ce putem spune despre „look-ul” Elena Ceau[escu? Ce putem spune despre toate acele detalii care transform` imaginea ar`tat` celorla]i \n vehiculul energiilor libidinale? Vizita, de exemplu, a cuplului dictatorial f`cut reginei Marii Britanii ne aminte[te de o Elen` modest` care, vizavi de personalitatea radiant` a Elisabetei a II-a, se plaseaz` \ntr-o clar`

pozi]ie de inferioritate. Cu anumite precau]ii, pu-tem spune c` imaginea Elenei Ceau[escu are poate mai mult de-a face cu cea a Anei Pauker decât cu cea a Raisei Gorbaciova. Pare s` func]ioneze aici un aparat represiv a tot ceea ce face parte din trucurile cochet`riei, a tot ceea ce ar putea-o transforma \n obiectul fascina]iei sexuale a unei \ntregi na]iuni (ceea ce ast`zi am numi o div`). M-a[ hazarda s` pun existen]a acestuia pe seama unui corp ideologic specific, mai bine spus, pe seama unei etici a muncii [i a modestiei cu origini \n ariile rurale române[ti, de unde cuplul dictatorial provenea. Dimpotriv`, imaginea pe care Elena o promoveaz` este, \ndeosebi c`tre sfâr[itul anilor '70 [i de-a lungul anilor '80, a[a cum spuneam, cea al tehnocratului, a omului muncii \n taiorul de lucru. Exist` f`r` doar [i poate un mesaj public, specific coordonatelor social-istorice ale societ`]ii române[ti: mesajul este acela c` prima doamn` a ]`rii \[i dep`[e[te condi]ia de so]ie [i mam`, condi-]ia de femeie aflat` mereu \n umbra b`rba]ilor fa-miliei, cadrul conceptual \n care societatea tradi]io-nal româneasc gânde[te femeia. Imaginea Elenei Ceau[escu poart` cu sine mesajul feminist al unei emancip`ri a genului. Revenind la proces, despre care spuneam c \ncepe prin a fi o confruntare \ntre institu]ii [i reprezentan]ii acestora, Elena r`mâne consecvent` imaginii sale de tehnocrat, invocând chiar, la un moment dat, distinc]iile primite din partea academiilor din str in`tate (moment \n care este amarnic ironizat`). Nicolae Ceau[escu r`mâne actorul principal al acestui spectacol televizat: cele mai multe \ntreb`ri \i sunt adresate lui, el este cel care formuleaz` argumentele ilegitimit`]ii comple-tului de judecat` [i adesea sa mâna sa o opre[te discret pe Elena atunci când aceasta \ncearc` s`

*1 INTERESANT ESTE TEXTUL CRISTINEI LIANA OLTEANU, CULTUL ELENEI CEAU{ESCU ÎN ANII '80, HTTP://EBOOKS.UNIBUC.RO/ISTORIE/CIUPALA/ CULTULENECEAUSESCU.HTM DE{I ANALIZA ÎN SINE LAS~ LOC DE MAI BINE, MAI ALES ÎN CEEA CE PRIVE{TE P~RTINIREA IDEOLOGIC~ A TEXTULUI





27

Hai s` ne lustr`m

sâmb`t` sear`, iar`


Let's Lustrate Ourselves

on Saturday Night, again


whether the scenes we are dealing with here are already a part of a post-modern-post-socialist Ivan Turbinc` *2 devilish plot.

ELENA AS EROTIC OBJECTThere remains, though, a question: why does Elena become the erotic centrifugal point of this whole script? Let us remember that in the imaginary space of the political jokes invented after 1990, the dictatorial couple has dinner with Hitler and Stalin in Inferno. But I think we would commit an error if we interpreted Marilena Murariu's works through a recipe in which Elena becomes the carrier of a “demonic temptation”. If things were so, then the artist would only strengthen and confi rm the tragic-fatalist and defeatist vision which haunts the imaginary-symbolic realm of the Romanian society, in which the name “Elena” acquire inau-dible resonances. Elena becomes the name which masks a false self-perception – that our impotence is caused by exterior forces, by some curse with which Romanians have to deal at repeated in-tervals in history. In this reverted image, things would be better if society, economy and politics would be left alone in the hands of true “political men”, if some Elenas, “femmes fatales” wouldn't mingle in and detour the “destiny of the people” from its right way. We can't stress enough our disapproval with this conception that we consider entirely mendacious, if only because it is only a consolatory device which only postpones a resolu-tion. We prefer to bring into discussion the “Elena complex” every time we miss objectives, deferring, shifting or hiding the direct confrontation with the roots of our weaknesses. But then, in what relation is Marilena Murariu's painting with the “Elena Problem”? I would like to try an interpretation which, maybe surprisingly, will pull us out of the artist's pictorial performances: I would like to de-tour the reader's attention upon an episode which, in the economy of the problems we are dealing with here (Elena's unexpected eroticism but also her malign infl uence), could prove to be essential. The next step approaches, therefore, the “Elena

intervin` \n discu]ie. |ns` rolurile treptat se in-verseaz`. Sunt ultimile momente de tensiune ale acestei puneri \n scen`, unde presim]irea sentin]ei irevocabile transpare cel mai bine pe chipul Elenei Ceau[escu. |ntreg acest complex masculinizat [i militarizat - toate uniformele din sal` nu semnific` decât un singur lucru, c armata [i revolu]ia sunt de gen masculin – se repliaz dup toate regulile artei unei societ`]i patriarhale. Firul narativ dezvolt` o intrig`, un moment culminant [i un deznod`mânt a[teptat de \ntreg poporul aflat \n fa]a televizorului, \n spa]iul privat al propriilor case. Dar lovit de refu-zul lui Ceau[escu de a r`spunde - „r`spund conform Constitu]iei doar \n fa]a Marii Adun`ri Na]ionale” - natura completului de judecat` este expus`, dez-v luit`, desconspirat`. Acest proces apare drept un dispozitiv de subiectivare, \mpachetat \ntr-un spec-tacol televizat, \n care publicului i se ofer` nu doar violen]a fizic` a unui deznod`mânt pe care cu to]ii \l intuiesc [i a[teapt` – moartea cuplului (de unde ambiguitatea scenei execu]iei unde, doar pentru camer`, s-au \mpu[cat cadavre [i nu oamenii vii); publicului i se ofer` mai ales promisiunea specta-colului unei violen]e simbolice. Este spectacolul do-rin]ei incon[tiente de r`zbunare a unui \ntreg popor care, neputând s` participe \n mod concret-fizic la lapidarea cuplului dictatorial, trebuie s` se mul]u-measc` cu pl`cerea spectacolului patimilor sim-bolice. Aceast` „impunere a unei recunoa[teri” (a genocidului, \nfomet`rii, represiunii, etc), func]io-neaz` cel mai bine \n cazul Elenei. Dar aici acest proces ia turnuri nea[teptate: pentru c` \n cazul ei, violen]a simbolic` produs` echivaleaz` cu decon-struc]ia tehnocratului Elena Ceau[escu [i cu re\n-chiderea \n limitele propriului sex. Aceast` punere a Elenei „la locul ei”, care \n familia satului româ-nesc ar fi putut avea loc mult mai devreme, ia forma unei regresii psihologice: sfâr[e[te prin a accepta nu ceea ce tribunalul \i cere la nivelul propozi]iilor rostite - crimele regimului, pe care le va contesta pân` la moarte – ci ceea ce tribunalul \i cere s` accepte la nivelul discursului nerostit, acceptarea cli[eului feminin, re-plasarea sa pe pozi]iile „sexu-lui slab”. Mai \ntâi, Elena redevine so]ie, cerând

*2 ROMANIAN TALE WRITTEN BY THE 19TH CENTURY WRITER ION CREANG~, IN WHICH GOD BLESSES THE MAIN CHARACTER, THE RETIRED RUSSIAN SOLDIER IVAN TURBINC~, WITH A MAGICAL BAG. WITH THE HELP OF THIS BAG IVAN PLAYS TRICKS ON DEATH AND THE DEVIL.


28



Hai s` ne lustr`m sâmb`t` sear`, iar`


Let's Lustrate Ourselves on Saturday Night, again


character who, towards the end of the 80s, articu-lates the counter-weight of the gravitational force that Nicolae Ceau[escu represents. But what can we say about Elena's „look”? What can we say about all those details which transform the image shown to the others in the vehicle of libidinal ener-gies? The visit, for example, that the couple makes to the Queen of United Kingdom reminds us of a modest Elena which, against the radiant persona-lity of Elisabeth the IInd, is placed in a clear inferi-or position. With some precautions, we can say that Elena Ceau[escu's image has more to do with Ana Pauker's image,*4 than with that of Raisa Gorba-chova. A conscious repression seems to function here, a repression of all that which makes a part of the coquetry tricks, of everything which could trans-form her in the object of sexual phantasies of the whole nation (what today we would call a diva). I would hypothesize that this repressive mechanism is based on an ideological corpus, better said, on a specifi c ethics of work and modesty which origina-tes from the rural areas of Romania, from where the presidential couple was coming. On the contra-ry, the image that Elena promotes is, especially towards the end of the 70s and along the 80s, as already said, that of the technocrat, that of the working woman in her coat-and-skirt. There exists, we are sure, a public message, which becomes specifi c to the social and historical coordinates of the Romanian society: the message is that the fi rst lady exceeds her “natural condition” of being a wife and a mother, the condition of the women oversha-dowed by their husbands, the conceptual setting in which a traditional Romanian society thinks of women. In other words, Elena's image carries the feminist message of an emancipation of the sex. Coming back to the process, about which I said that it starts by being a confrontation between institu-tions and their representatives, Elena stays true to her technocrat image, reminding the tribunal, at times, about the academic distinctions she had received abroad (she is severely patronized). Nico-lae Ceau[escu remains the main actor of this tele-vised spectacle: most of the questions are addressed

complex” from the perspective of its impenetrabi-lity, about which we believe that it has something to do with the structures of a whole political and social machinery which remains in the background of our consciousness. I would like to investigate, therefore, how Elena was moved in the horizon of our unconscious, which organizes an impenetrable defensive apparatus, against our analytic means: Elena fl oats like a phantom, a monster created by the “sleep of the nation (reason)”.

In the chamber of the military unit where the “people's tribunal” met to accuse and to decide upon the fate of the presidential couple, in the days of December 1989, the video camera shows us only one woman: Elena Ceau[escu. The Ceau[escu trial appears as a bare struggle for power, a struggle between two unbalanced forces: its expression is the controversy over the legitimacy of the tribunal itself. What appears in the foreground is less a confron-tation between people, between those who accuse and those being accused, but rather a confrontation between representatives of different institutions, and implicitly between institutions themselves. The passage between the structures of “the old regime” towards those of “the new democracy” intersects Târgovi[te. At the time of this televised spectacle, the demarcations are vague, unclear, a thing which, as we shall see, will detour the sense of this whole trial. For the moment, let us say that what happens in this room tries to keep the appearances of a real and legitimate trial, Elena herself entering into this mise-en-scène with a well defi ned role. She exhibits the status, role and image consecrated in the ideo-logy of the last years of socialism, that of a techno-crat, patron of sciences and research, “a world-wide renowned scholar” *3 and, undoubtedly, re-sponsible alongside her husband for political deci-sions. It would be instructive, now, to remember Andrei Ujic`'s fi lm (The Autobiography of Nicolae Ceau[escu's) because it makes us understand the evolution of Elena Ceau[escu's image, her rapid ascension to power: from a petty character, a mo-ther and a wife overshadowed by the General Se-cretary of the Romanian Communist Party, to that

to him, he is the one who formulates the arguments of the illegitimacy of the accusing committee. His hand discretely tries to stop Elena when she is at-tempting to intervene in the discussion. But pro-gressively the roles reverse. These are the last mo-ments of tension, in which the anticipation of the inevitability of the sentence clearly becomes visible on Elena's face. This whole masculine-military complex – all the uniforms in the room signify only one thing, that the army and the revolution are, in this case, of male genus – functions according to the principles and rules of a patriarchal society. The specifi c narrative here develops an intrigue, a cli-max and a denouement, which the whole people is waiting in front of the TV screen, in the privacy of their homes. But struck with Ceau[escu's refusal to respond - “I answer, accordingly to the Constituti-on, only to the Questions that the Great National Assembly will address to me!” - the nature of the judging committee is exposed, unveiled, and re-vealed. This trial appears as an apparatus of sub-jection, packed in the shape of a TV spectacle, in which the public is offered not only the physical violence of a denouement that everybody anticipa-tes and waits – the death of the couple (from here stems the ambiguity of the execution scene, where, only for the video-camera, the soldiers shot the corpses, not the living couple); the public is offered above all the promise of the spectacle of a symbolic violence. This is the spectacle of the unconscious desire for revenge of an entire people that, having no possibility of concretely participating at the la-pidation of the couple, it has to satisfy with the pleasures of symbolic passions. This “imposition of an admittance” (of the genocide, of the conscious starvation of the people, of the repression, etc.)

hot`rât s moar \mpreun cu so]ul s`u. Apoi, spre deosebire de Nicolae, sufer` un atac de panic` cu tonalit`]i isterice, \n momentul \n care solda]ii se apropie [i vor s` \i lege mâinile. Coinciden]` sau nu, solda]ii o trag c`tre prim-planul camerei de luat vederi, [i telespectatorii \i pot consuma zbaterile inutile, pr`bu[irea omului de stat Elena Ceau[escu pe ruinele femeii Elena Ceau[escu, pe care solda]ii o trateaz` brutal, lipsi]i de delicate]e, violent. |n timp ce Nicolae dispare \n spatele solda]ilor, Elena

confirm`, \n cele din urm`, stereotipul „caracterului slab, emotiv” [i recurge la ultimul s`u colac de salvare. Aproape blestemând, exclam` “E ru[ine, v-am crescut ca o mam`!” Nu am nici o rezerv` \n a crede c` Elena Ceau[escu spera c` aceste cuvinte vor avea un anumit efect asupra solda]ilor. Sunt cuvinte care ne trimit, pe de o parte, la ideologia cuplului dictatorial ca p`rin]i ai poporului; pe de alt` parte aceste cuvinte ridic` [i un semn de \n-trebare vizavi de modul \n care ideologia func]io-

neaz`. Dac \mi ve]i \mp`rt`[i punctul de vedere c` ideologia nu este pur [i simplu „fals` con[tiin]`” ci, mai degrab`, „rela]ia imaginar` a subiec]ilor cu condi]iile lor de existen]`”, a[a cum spune Althus-ser (ceea ce implic o rela]ie profund \ntre condi]i-ile de existen]` [i dorin]`, [i un \ntreg corpus structural-conceptual care opereaz` direct asupra incon[tientului nostru), atunci ve]i recunoa[te \m-preun` cu mine c` avem de-a face cu o situa]ie curioas \n care se recompune triada mami-tati-eu, Oedipul psihanalitic, cu rezerva c` „eu”, \n spe]` noi, e[u`m s` ne dorim posesia sexual` a mamei, ucigând-o \mpreun` cu tat`l.

|n psihanaliza freudo-lacanian`, cauza dorin]ei (libidinale) rezid \n diferen]a introdus de Cel lalt, un „petit objet a”, obiectul intangibil al dorin]ei. Pentru c` Cel`lalt nu este Eu, dorin]a de Cel`lalt se articuleaz` ca lips`, ca absen]`. |n Oedip, copilul dore[te s`-[i ucid` tat`l pentru c` dore[te posesia total` a mamei (de care este desp`r]it). De unde anxietatea castr`rii [i represia acestor dorin]e in-cestuoase, trimiterea lor \n zona incon[tientului. Elena a evitat transformarea sa \n obiectul fantezi-ilor libidinale ale \ntregii na]iuni: atunci, de unde aceast` resexualizare a Elenei produs` \n prea-labilul mor]ii sale violente? Devine clar c` nu mai avem de-a face cu scenariul oedipaliz`rii clasice, ci mai degrab` cu spectacolul [tirilor de la ora 5 \n care urma[ul p`storului mioritic \[i violeaz` mama dup` care o love[te cu toporul \n moalele capului. R`mâne s` ne \ntreb`m, ce semnifica]ie are acest scenariu pentru pictura Marilenei Murariu?

S` observ`m c` picturile Marilenei Murariu au un efect ciudat asupra privitorului: este prima dat` când imagina]ia cuiva (artistul \nsu[i sau, mai de-grab`, artistul ca purt`tor de cuvânt [i imagine?) pl`smuie[te o erotic` Elen`. Iconografia socialist` a construit o singur` realitate a Elenei Ceau[escu, o singur` imagine, aceea a tehnocratului. Ima-ginarea sa ca obiect al dorin]ei libidinale a c`zut mereu \n afara normei. Elena Ceau[escu a devenit tabu, mutat \n subsolurile subcon[tientului nostru unde, ne spune Freud, avea o semnifica]ie ambiva-lent`: Elena a fost sacr` [i impur` \n acela[i timp,

*3 FROM THIS POINT OF VIEW, INTERESTING IS CRISTINA LIANA OLTEANU'S CULTUL ELENEI CEAU{ESCU ÎN ANII '80, HTTP://EBOOKS.UNIBUC.RO/ISTORIE/ CIUPALA/CULTULENECEAUSESCU.HTM, THOUGH THE ANALYSIS, WE BELIEVE, SUFFERS FROM AN IDEOLOGICAL BIAS.

*4 HIGHER RANK PARTY MEMBER AT THE END OF THE 40S AND BEGINNING OF THE 50S WHOSE NICKNAME WAS “STALIN IN SKIRT”DESPRE ELENA ÎN GENERAL


30



Dar aste decora]ii, cum, cine ]i le-a dat?


What about these medals? Who gave them to you?


functions especially in Elena's case. But here this process takes unexpected routes: because here the symbolic violence is equivalent with the deconstruc-tion of the technocrat and with the closure in the limits of her own sex. This casting of Elena back in “her proper place”, a process which in the family of the Romanian village would have taken place long before, occurs as a psychological regression: she fi -nishes by accepting not what the tribunal asks her at the level of uttered sentences – the crimes of the regime which she still contests – but what the tri-bunal asks her at the level of the unspoken sen-tences, the acceptance of the feminine stereotype, her re-placing on the positions of the “weak sex”. She fi rst becomes a wife, as she asks to die together with her husband. Then, unlike Nicolae, she suffers from a panic attack with tones of hysteria, when the soldiers approach her in order to tie her hands up. Coincidentally, the soldiers are dragging her towards the foreground, so that the fi lming camera captures her whole futile struggle. The spectators are thus consuming the fall of the state-woman Elena on the ruins of the woman Elena, which the soldiers are treating with lack of delicacy, violently. As Nicolae disappears behind the soldiers, Elena fi nally confi rms the truism of the “emotional and weak”; she uses her last escape. Almost cursing she cries “Shame on you, I raised you as a mother!”. I have no reserves in believing that Elena hoped that this words will have a certain effect upon the sol-diers. These are words which send us, on the one hand, to the ideology of the presidential couple as parents of the people; on the other hand, these words raise a question about the manners in which ideology functions. If you will acquiesce to the opinion that ideology is not sim-ply “false cons-ciousness” but, on the contrary, “the imaginary relation of the subjects with their conditions of existence” as Althusser says (which implies a pro-found relationship between existential conditions and desire, a whole structural and conceptual corpus which operates directly on our unconscious) then you will admit that we have to deal with a strange situation in which the mummy-daddy-me

triad is recomposed, the psychoanalytic Oedip, with the only reserve that “me”, us, fail to desire the sexual possession of the mother, and kill her alongside with the father.

In the Freudo-Lacanian psychoanalysis, the cause of the libidinal desire stems from the diffe-rence residing in the Other, a “petit objet a”, the intangible object of desire. Because the Other is not an Ego, the desire for the Other is articulated as a lack, as an absence. In Oedip, the child wants to kill the father because he desires the total possession of his mother (from which he is kept apart). Hence the anxiety of castration and the repression of these incestuous desires towards zones of the uncons-cious. Elena tried to stay away from her becoming the drive of a nation's libidinal energies: but then, from where emerges this re-sexualization closely preceding her violent death? It is clear that we are dealing no more with a classic oedipalization, but rather with the spectacle of the 5 o'clock news in which the nephews of the patriarchal shepherd rapes the mother, after which he smashes her head with an ax. It remains to ask ourselves, what is the signifi cance of all these considerations for Marilena Murariu's painting?

Let us not forget that Marilena Murariu's pain-ting has a strange effect upon the viewer: this is the fi rst time when somebody's imagination (the artist herself or, rather, the artist as carrier of message?) creates an erotic Elena. The socialist iconography has constructed a single reality for Elena, a single image, that of the technocrat, her imagining as an object of libidinal desire falling outside norm. Then, we can say that Elena became taboo, moved in the basement of our unconscious, where, says Freud, she achieves a two-fold signifi cance: she was sacred and impure at the same time, equally determining fascination and repulsion. Should we suppose, then, that what the artist does is a sort of therapy mediated by the artistic exercise of exposing a taboo? Is the artist highlighting an unknown truth, that we, children of the revolution, desire the sexual possession of our unique mother? I would advise to precaution if we want to go

further on the paths of this interpretation, at least for one reason: such an interpretation only trans-lates in different terms the thesis of the implacable curse that Elena allegedly brings. In Marilena Murariu's painting, the exposing of a taboo is only the fi rst moment of a transgression, which means, also the stressing of failure. Blood will not rush into our veins because our sensorial apparatus will detect nothing “hot” in Elena, even if the venereal Elena Udrea and Elena B`sescu are brave compa-nions. The supposedly erotic meeting between the viewer and the character of the painting remains frozen, cold, extremely ugly, alienating. In other words, it is our looks which, again, are raping Elena: because one could not love Elena like one would love other women, because with Elena one cannot make love, because she is impenetrable, one rapes her before killing her. How well is this explai-ned by that terrifying image of the privileged noble woman being raped by the peasants, that Rebrea-nu constructs so well in R`scoala (The Mutiny): it shows that class struggle and power struggle al-ways pass through the remnants of a shredded va-gina. Marilena Murariu reveals, then, something else: not the fact that we suffer from a presupposed implacable and fatal “Elena complex”, but the fact that in the Romanian post-politics the characters spinning around Elena including us, those who look, repeat infi nitely her violent tearing apart. Elena's grin is her revenge: and from the Inferno where she dines with Hitler and Stalin, an erotic Elena points to our paranoia, towards the walls that we erect so that we could better self-enclose us. Elena must not be hated, or (as woman) loved, but simply left to rest in peace.

Vlad Morariu




Dar aste decora]ii, cum, cine ]i le-a dat?


What about these medals? Who gave them to you?


a determinat concomitent fascina]ie [i repulsie. S` presupunem, atunci, c` ceea ce Marilena Mu-rariu face \n expozi]ia sa este un fel de terapie mijlocit` de exerci]iul artistic prin care expune un tabu? Scoate artistul la iveal` din subsolurile incon[tientului nostru propozi]ia c noi, copiii revo-lu]iei, dorim posesia sexual` a mamei? A[ \ndemna la precau]ie dac` vrem s` continu`m pe c`ile aces-tei interpret`ri, cel pu]in dintr-un motiv: o astfel de interpretare traduce doar \n termeni diferi]i teza fatidicului blestem elenic. |n pictura Marilenei Murariu, expunerea tabuului nu este decât primul moment al unei transgresii, care \nseamn`, la fel de bine, [i poten]area unui e[ec. Sângele nu va \nfier-bânta arterele pentru c` aparatul nostru senzorial nu detecteaz nimic „fierbinte” \n Elena, chiar dac` genitalele Elena Udrea [i Elena B`sescu o \nso]esc. |ntâlnirea presupus erotic` dintre privitor [i perso-najul tabloului râmâne rece, hidoas` [i alienant`. Cu alte cuvinte, e vorba de chiar privirile noastre care, din nou [i din nou, o violeaz pe Elena: pentru c` pe Elena, asemeni altor femei, nu putem s` o iubim, pentru c`, \mpreun cu Elena nu putem face dragoste, pentru c` r`mâne a[a cum a fost mereu, inaccesibil`, pe Elena r`mâne doar s` o viol`m \-nainte de a o ucide. Cât de bine este explicat lucrul aceste de teribila imagine a privilegiatei boieroaice violat` de ]`ranii r`scula]i, pe care Rebreanu o construie[te \n R`scoala: ea ne arat` c` lupta de clas` [i lupta pentru putere mar[eaz` mereu prin r`m`[i]ele vaginurilor sfârtecate. Pictura Marilenei Murariu relev`, atunci, altceva: nu faptul c suferim de un presupus, implacabil, fatidic „complex al Elenei”, ci c` \n post-politica româneasc`, atât personajele care graviteaz` \n jurul Elenei, cât [i noi cei ce le privim, nu facem decât sa repet`m la infinit sfâ[ierea Elenei. Rânjetul Elenei e r`zbunarea ei: [i din infernul unde ia cina cu Hitler [i Stalin, o Elena erotizat` ne arat` paranoia noastr`, pere]ii pe care singuri \i ridic`m pentru a ne \nchide mai bine. Pe Elena nu trebuie, a[adar, s` o urâm, sau (ca femeie) s` o iubim, ci pur si simplu s` o l`s`m s` se odihneasc` \n pace.

Vlad Morariu

marilena murariu, despre elena În general @ galeria simeza

Documents