Tomorrow's avant-garde, between technique and image

"Is the avant-garde still a topical issue? Can this cultural leitmotiv of the last two hundred years still be the subject of reflection, retrospection or recovery, after everything seems to have been said about its content, so labile and capacious, so paradoxical and provocative?"¹

This is a rhetorical question that Magda Cârneci posed in 1994 in reference to the exhibition organized at the National Theatre in April-May 1993, under the title "Bucharest, 1920-1940, between avant-garde and modernism". As the title suggests, the exhibition conveyed the idea that, in Romania, the years 1920-1940 were enveloped by a movement suspended between avant-garde and modernism, without perfectly defined characteristics, but of particular value and importance in terms of the evolution of Romanian architecture.

Magda Cârneci admits that "only the direct cultural contact in recent years with the Western environment has been able to reveal to us how ignorant the Romanian avant-garde was and is, the only one that does not have behind it studies and international exhibitions, like the Polish, Hungarian, Czech or Yugoslav avant-garde"^.2

² Magda Cârneci, "București, anii 1920-1940, entre avangardă și modernism", Simetria Publishing House, Bucharest, 1994, p. 14

"Is avant-garde still a topical theme? Can this cultural leitmotif of the last two hundred years still be a subject of reflection, retrospection or recovery, after everything has apparently been told about its content, so volatile and comprehensive, so paradoxical and challenging?"¹

Is a rhetorical question asked by Magda Cârneci in 1994 with reference to the exhibition organized at the National Theater in April-May 1993, under the name "Bucharest, 1920-1940, between Avant-garde and Modernism". As the title suggests the exhibition toyed with the idea that the period between 1920 and 1940 was dominated in Romania by some sort of suspended movement, between avant-garde and modernism, imperfectly outlined, but with special value and importance for the evolution of Romanian architecture.

Magda Cârneci admits that "only the direct cultural contact with the Western ambiance, in the latest years, has been able to reveal how ignorant Romanian avant-garde was and still is, as the only one unsupported by studies and international exhibitions, as was the case with the Polish, Hungarian, Czech or Jugoslav avant-gardes."²

² Magda Cârneci, "București, anii 1920-1940, entre avangardă și modernism", Simetria Publishing House, Bucharest, 1994, p. 14