Ion Luca Caragiale

• Born: January 30, 1852
• Birthplace: Haimanale, Romania
• Died: July 9, 1912
• Place of death: Berlin, Germany

Other Literary Forms

Ion Luca Caragiale is best known throughout the world as a playwright, but he was also a writer of short fiction, an active journalist and pamphleteer, and a poet.

Achievements

From the time they were produced for the first time on the Romanian stage, Ion Luca Caragiale’s plays have maintained a preeminent position in the Romanian national repertory and have become established in the repertory of many other European theaters. Indeed, Caragiale has been seen as the founder of the modern Romanian theater, a significant influence on such famous Romanian expatriates such as Marcel Iancu, Tristan Tzara, and Eugène Ionesco.

Caragiale was a fine observer of human nature; he aimed his wit at many aspects of society, hoping to improve it through laughter by causing the public to recognize itself in his characters: “In him,” wrote Caragiale’s contemporary, journalist Raicu Ionescu-Rion, “we see man stumbling toward light, man suffocated by the present, seeking something better.” The poet Alexandru Vlahuţǎ, another contemporary, pointed out that one of the major sources for Caragiale’s greatness was his ability to re-create on the stage a series of typical characters such as the eternal idealist, the venal bureaucrat, the cynical journalist, the innocent citizen, and the spoiled brat. Caragiale showed ignorance parading itself as seriousness, dishonesty trying to pass for wit, and cynicism trying to be mistaken for independence of mind. The playwright hoped that his reader, sensitized by the satire, would say with renewed conscience, “I want to be a different person.”

Caragiale’s social criticism made for him many powerful enemies. He had been introduced by the poet Mihail Eminescu and by Ion Slavici to Titu Maiorescu’s influential circle, Junimea (the youth). He published many articles of drama criticism in the group’s journal Convorbiri literare. Yet his constant criticism offended some of the group’s members, and he was forced to break away from the circle after ten years. In spite of this disappointment, he did not change his independent attitude, staying away from ideologies and narrow nationalism. To dogmatic ideas, opinions, or systems, he was absolutely indifferent. From the beginning of his career to his last writings, he maintained a sharp eye, a pointed tongue, and an unfailing wit. His posthumous election to the Romanian Academy was a fitting tribute.

Biography

Ion Luca Caragiale’s life and work were closely related. The writer did not shun publicity and enjoyed success while it lasted. When the envy and moral turpitude of his contemporaries forced him to leave his native land, Caragiale did not completely divorce himself from society but became more philosophical about his expectations.

Caragiale was born in Haimanale (now Caragiale), a small village near the Romanian city of Ploieşti, on January 30, 1852. He was the son of Luca Caragiale and Ecaterina Caragiale, née Karaba. Interest in the theater was a family tradition: Before becoming administrator of an estate, an attorney, and a magistrate, Ion Luca’s father had been an actor. Two of his uncles, Costache Caragiale and Iorgu Caragiale, were actors, playwrights, and directors of their own theater companies.

Ion Luca Caragiale attended grammar school from 1860 to 1864, and the Ploieşti Gymnasium from 1864 to 1867. He also attended his uncle Costache’s recitation and mime courses at the Bucharest Drama Conservatory. After graduation, he held a number of menial jobs, such as serving as a copyist for the Prahova County Court House and a prompter for the Bucharest National Theatre. In 1873, he wrote his first article in the satiric magazine, Ghimpele (the thorn). He also became administrator and chief editor for a variety of publications, alone or in cooperation with other writers: Alegǎtorul liber (the free voter), Unirea democraticǎ (the democratic unity), Claponul (the capon), and Naţiunea Românǎ (the Romanian nation). Between 1878 and 1882, he served on the editorial board of the newspaper Timpul (the time).

As noted above, the famous Romanian poet Mihail Eminescu, with the short-story writer Ion Slavici, introduced Caragiale to the prestigious literary circle Junimea. For this group, in 1879, he read for the first time his plays A Stormy Night and Mr. Leonida and the Reactionaries. After leaving Timpul, Caragiale became a school inspector. During this time, he wrote the farceSoacrǎ-mea, Fifina (my mother-in-law, Fifina) and the comic opera Hatmanul Baltag (Chief Baltag). His best play, The Lost Letter, was written in 1884 and presented on the stage of the Bucharest National Theatre on November 13 of that same year. A year later, he presented Carnival Scenes. Caragiale became director of the Bucharest National Theatre in 1888, serving in this capacity for one year.

Also in 1888, he was married to Alexandrina Barelly. They had two children: Luca Ion, who became a writer, and Ecaterina. From an extramarital affair, he also had a legitimized son, Mateiu Caragiale, who became a very well-known writer in his own right.

After 1889, Caragiale became interested in tragedy and in psychological fiction. He wrote the short story “O fǎclie de Paşte” (1892; “The Easter Torch,” 1921). In it, he bitterly condemned anti-Semitism. He also wrote Nǎpasta (the curse), in 1890. In 1891, the Romanian Academy refused him an award for his work. Profoundly hurt by their decision and disillusioned, he moved away from the Junimea circle and began new literary associations. He finished Moftul român (the Romanian pretense) in 1893. During this period, he spent most of his time writing short fictional works: notes, literary fragments, sketches, and his famous Momente (1901; moments). These works were mostly published in the supplement to the newspaper Universul (the universe), between 1899 and 1901.

Publicly accused of plagiarism by an obscure newspaper reporter, Caragiale became the object of a campaign of calumny. Having inherited a large amount of money from one of his aunts and wanting to leave behind the bad feeling created by this unjustified charge, Caragiale became an expatriate in Germany, moving his entire family to Berlin in 1905. From Berlin, he continued to follow the events in his native country. Thus, during the violence of the peasant uprisings in 1907, Caragiale wrote a strong sociological commentary entitled 1907: Din primǎvarǎ pǎnǎ in toamna (1907: from spring to fall). He published it in the German magazine Die Zeit.

Caragiale died in Berlin on June 9, 1912. Initially buried in Berlin, his body was exhumed and returned to his native Romania.

Analysis

After a number of years spent publishing satiric pieces for various magazines, Ion Luca Caragiale asserted himself as an important playwright. He brought growth and innovation to the Romanian stage in the creation of characters, the development of themes, and the use of stylistic devices and sophisticated dramatic techniques. For example, Ziţa in A Stormy Night represents the end of a long line of evolution in the presentation of female characters in Romanian drama. Ziţa is also the culmination of a long line of mediocrities. Whereas in earlier Romanian plays the implications of the plays were mostly personal, the authors satirizing a bad marriage or a corrupt petty official, in Caragiale the author had become a surgeon whose work dissected society’s mores: Adultery, graft, blackmail, falsified elections, violence, paternalism, and many other evils were examined.

By 1880, when Caragiale’s plays were first performed, literary satire had already had a long tradition. In fables, vaudeville, and comic songs, playwrights amused audiences, poking fun at the 1848 bourgeoisie frightened by the threat of social unrest. The 1860’s saw a strong reaction against the 1840’s, especially among the more conservative audience that filled Bucharest’s summer gardens. Parliamentary debates offered endless opportunities for a writer such as Caragiale to collect pearls of malapropism and ignorance: “Gentlemen, I find myself like the sea traveller, in an oasis” or “We shall dissect this government with the chemist’s scalpel” did not escape him. Yet whereas before Caragiale, the humorous review and the amusing couplet had reflected social tendencies, Caragiale created a self-contained world of comic social types. Like Molière, he borrowed from a tradition in order to improve it.

Even allowing for potential discoveries of some new works—during the past ten years, for example, many articles by Caragiale have been discovered in old newspapers—the quantity of Caragiale’s drama is relatively limited. His small body of work is distinguished by its thematic and formal unity; all his characters, for example, are closely related. Thus, Titircǎ (A Stormy Night) and Leonida (Mr. Leonida and the Reactionaries) share an obsessive passion for their favorite newspaper and become mesmerized by the malapropisms, misnomers, mixed metaphors, and generally sloppy jargon that they find in its pages. The same style will be picked up by the characters in The Lost Letter, especially when ordinary citizens must communicate with their party leaders and other officials. Even the world of Carnival Scenes, a world of pimps, kept women, hairdressers, and small-time employees, is not immune to jargon.

Two major tendencies can be found in Caragiale’s plays: On one hand, his plays exhibit an almost classical propensity toward the unities of time, place, and action. All the misunderstandings in Carnival Scenes, for example, are created and solved during a single night. Events converge on the night preceding elections in The Lost Letter. In Nǎpasta, Dumitru’s murder, Ion’s mistrial, and Anca’s marriage to the man whom she suspects of being the real killer all occur on a single day. Furthermore, each play features a relatively small number of characters. On the other hand, however, Caragiale’s tendency toward classical concentration is opposed by the attention he pays to the process of individuation; the static vision stands against the historical vision. Hence, stage directions partake in characterization: In A Stormy Night the warden’s sword is decorated by ribbons; in Carnival Scenes, a ballroom is ready for a lower-class costume party. Visible, well in evidence, is the men’s room, in and out of which many events take place.

A Stormy Night

In his first play, A Stormy Night, Caragiale focused on the liberal bourgeoisie of the 1860’s. The central character, Dumitrache Titircǎ, is a carpenter, a man of property. A shrewd merchant, Titircǎ does not express his thoughts in public: “Well, as far as I can say, a businessman cannot wash his linen in public like a low life,” he declares. As far as he is concerned, if one is not a man of property, one is nothing, only a “paper pusher.” Only the masters of journalese impress him. He never ceases to be fascinated by the power of a jargon he cannot comprehend. One of the sources of the play’s conflict, Titircǎ’s jealousy, springs from his pride of ownership. He is vulgar and massive, but he acts with a certain gentleness toward his wife. Moreover, he never spells out his doubts to her. Even in his most doubting moments when he suspects that “his pride is gone,” he protects Veta from the brutality of words. He extends the same type of courtesy to his wife’s sister, Ziţa, the cause of the play’s major misunderstandings.

Although Titircǎ has reached a certain position in society, he still has far to go. Right behind him, Chiriac, his handyman, follows closely: He shares Titircǎ’s reverence for the newspaper The Past and the Future, saves money for his own business, makes love to Titircǎ’s wife, and is a sergeant in the national guard in which Titircǎ is a captain. Another character is Ricǎ Venturiano, a caricature of the aspiring poet: tall hat and glasses. An assistant clerk at the archives, a perennial law student, a beginning journalist, and a bad poet, Venturiano is a complete mediocrity. Nevertheless, he makes an impression on Veta’s divorced sister, Ziţa, an “emancipated” young woman who is in love with the symbolism of romance and has learned to suffer.

Mr. Leonida and the Reactionaries

Mr. Leonida and the Reactionaries is a one-act farce. Leonida, a retired bureaucrat, is a master at impressing his wife with his “ability” to interpret the news in the paper. After a heavy dinner, having spent too many hours reading the local paper, Leonida goes to bed but is soon awakened by the sound of repeated powerful explosions. Both he and his wife are convinced that the “reaction” is in the process of changing the government through a violent coup. Only in the morning, when the maid arrives with the milk, does Leonida discover that what he had taken for political violence had only been his neighbors celebrating a birthday and exploding firecrackers.

The Lost Letter

The plot in The Lost Letter, Caragiale’s best-known play, is also very simple: Representatives of two opposing political camps are at odds with each other, fight each other, then are reconciled and live in peace through a compromise. Reminding one of Titircǎ and Chiriac, the two powerful male characters in The Lost Letter, Tipǎtescu, the commissioner of police, and Trahanache, the banker, are united through legal and illicit business interests. They also share the same political party and make love to the same woman, Trahanache’s wife, Zoe. Like his friend Tipǎtescu, Trahanache identifies closely with his equals and looks down on those who have not yet made it to the top. When Caţavencu, the head of the opposition party, finds a love letter from Zoe to Tipǎtescu, he begins a campaign of blackmail and intimidation, requesting to be nominated commissioner in Tipǎtescu’s place. Unfortunately for him, however, Caţavencu also loses the letter, and a candidate “from the center,” Mr. Agamiţǎ Dandanache, is chosen: The characters are only slightly surprised to hear that Dandanache himself had obtained his candidacy by using a certain “important” citizen’s letter to another important citizen’s wife. Found by the only honest person present at the elections, the Tipsy Citizen, Zoe’s letter is finally returned to her, and with it normality returns.

Trahanache counteracts Tipǎtescu’s arrogance with a sugarcoated benevolence behind which lies the shrewdness of an experienced politician. Apparently trusting, even indulgent regarding his wife’s affair with Tipǎtescu, he seems to care more for his alliance with the latter than for his wife. Hence, he is the first to suggest that the letter is forged. A master of manipulation, Trahanache placates Caţavencu by using his own method: He blackmails him in turn.

Between the two, Zoe maintains a certain balance and at least the appearance of dignity. Through husband and lover, she literally owns the county; therefore, she wields much power. She is then entitled to offer Caţavencu the candidacy by guaranteeing him her vote and that of her husband. She can even afford to be merciful in the end when Caţavencu has lost. She knows the ropes, so she reminds him that this is not the last election in town. She also understandingly allows the petty arrangements of her lover’s deputy: She knows that he has a large family; therefore, he is expected to steal or receive kickbacks.

Unlike all the other characters in the play, Caţavencu is not associated with any specific mannerism. The reason is evident: Had he been thus characterized, Caţavencu would have been less of a plastic man, flexible and ready to adapt to any situation. He can always protect himself through the use of bombast. Like a cat, Caţavencu always lands on his feet.

It is interesting to note that Caragiale intended to write a play that portrayed some of the characters of the preceding plays with the changes that might have occurred to them during a period of twenty-five years. All characters would have ascended the social scale: Titircǎ would now be a senator; Caţavencu, a secretary; Ionescu and Popescu, inspectors in the area of Romanian history. Titircǎ would no longer attend garden shows but rather would be invited to garden parties. Veta and Ziţa would become Tante Liza and Tante Zoe. Dumitrache would have made a fortune in oil, and his wife would now address him as “mon cher.” The ladies would speak only French, but take English lessons. They would be at home on Thursday afternoons and reserve the Romanian language only for the servants.

Caragiale considered the ending of The Lost Letter to be a good example of surprise denouement. The last in a long line of blackmailers, Dandanache is also the most abject. He obtains his desired candidacy through the use of the letter and, were he not to lose it, would use it over and over again as insurance against bad times. As for Ionescu and Popescu, two shadowy characters always in attendance on Caţavencu, they represent the faithful supporters, the blind allies without whom Caţavencu’s successes would have been impossible.

A major source of humor in The Lost Letter is the lack of genuine commitment exhibited by all the characters. They are all survivors and masters of expedience. Thus, the politicians want the citizens to have their freedom, yet, if the citizens do not vote, they go to prison. At one moment, the representatives of the two parties insult each other and are ready to exchange blows; a moment later they are kissing and fraternizing. In fact, the ending of the play represents the quintessence of compromise: Caţavencu’s courage regained, he prompts everyone to be happy and to celebrate the “honest” fights that have taken place during the elections, to celebrate “the progress” brought by these changes. Candidates, winners, losers, all embrace and join the triumphant parade that ends the play.

Carnival Scenes

Although, in Carnival Scenes, Caragiale returns to the sordid world of the lower middle class, a class that slavishly imitates the manners and mores of the upper class, the play maintains the same sense of relativity. No one holds real principles. Everything is for sale or, at least, can be negotiated. Once again, anything that could threaten the status quo, compromise the equilibrium through which a hairdresser, Nae Girimea, has succeeded in keeping his two mistresses satisfied and, literally, out of each other’s hair, is fought tooth and nail by Nae and his trusted apprentice, Jordache. The petty world in which Miţa and Didina, the two principal female characters, succeed in misleading the older, wealthy men who support them, is placed under a microscope. Here, however, Caragiale’s satire does not even reach the scope and complexity which he achieved in A Stormy Night.

Nǎpasta

Seeking a source of inspiration that would allow him to present more complex individuals, in Nǎpasta, Caragiale turned to the world of the countryside. Under the evident inspiration of the great Russian realists, Caragiale portrays the struggle of a simple peasant woman, Anca, to avenge the murder of her beloved husband. To attain her goal, Anca marries Dragomir, the killer, and she waits for the right moment for revenge. Often criticized for its lack of originality, Nǎpasta can offer a glimpse into Caragiale’s tragic side, one that later became quite evident in short stories such as “The Easter Torch.”

Caragiale spent the rest of his days writing short stories, sketches, and other short fiction. In them, he continued to create an unforgettable gallery of types, portraits of individuals who must have populated his world. He continued to characterize his personages in the same manner as he had done in his drama: He focused with intensity on each character’s linguistic mannerisms or outstanding physical characteristics, seeking the telling detail. At the same time, however, his plays became increasingly popular and have long since become part of every Romanian citizen’s national heritage.

Bibliography

“Ion Luca Caragiale.” In Playwrights. Vol. 2 in International Dictionary of Theatre, edited by Mark Hawkins-Dady. Detroit, Mich.: St. James Press, 1994. A concise overview of the life and works of Caragiale.

Ionescu, Medeea. A Concise History of Theatre in Romania. Bucharest: Editura Stiintifica si Enciclopedica, 1981. This history of Romanian theater places Caragiale within the tradition.

Tappe, E. D. Ion Luca Caragiale. New York: Twayne, 1974. A basic biography of Caragiale that provides information on his life and works. Bibliography.