Ion Creangă

Ion Creangă (; also known as Nică al lui Ștefan a Petrei, Ion Torcălău and Ioan Ștefănescu; March 1, 1837 – December 31, 1889) was a Moldavian, later Romanian writer, raconteur and schoolteacher. A main figure in 19th-century Romanian literature, he is best known for his '' Childhood Memories'' volume, his novellas and short stories, and his many anecdotes. Creangă's main contribution to fantasy and children's literature includes narratives structured around eponymous protagonists (" Harap Alb", " Ivan Turbincă", " Dănilă Prepeleac", " Stan Pățitul"), as well as fairy tales indebted to conventional forms (" The Story of the Pig", " The Goat and Her Three Kids", " The Mother with Three Daughters-in-Law", " The Old Man's Daughter and the Old Woman's Daughter"). Widely seen as masterpieces of the Romanian language and local humor, his writings occupy the middle ground between a collection of folkloric sources and an original contribution to a literary realism of rural inspiration. They are accompanied by a set of contributions to erotic literature, collectively known as his "corrosives".

A defrocked Romanian Orthodox priest with an unconventional lifestyle, Creangă made an early impact as an innovative educator and textbook author, while pursuing a short career in nationalist politics with the Free and Independent Faction. His literary debut came late in life, closely following the start of his close friendship with Romania's national poet Mihai Eminescu and their common affiliation with the influential conservative literary society ''Junimea''. Although viewed with reserve by many of his colleagues there, and primarily appreciated for his records of oral tradition, Creangă helped propagate the group's cultural guidelines in an accessible form. Later critics have often described him, alongside Eminescu, Ion Luca Caragiale and Ioan Slavici, as one of the most accomplished representatives of ''Junimist'' literature.

Ion Creangă was posthumously granted several honors, and is commemorated by a number of institutions in both Romania and neighboring Moldova. These include the '' Bojdeuca'' building in Iași, which, in 1918, was opened as the first memorial house in Romania. His direct descendants include Horia Creangă, one of the leading Romanian architects during the interwar period.

Biography

Background and family

Ion Creangă was born in Humulești in the Principality of Moldavia, a former village which has since been incorporated into Târgu Neamț city, the son of Orthodox trader Ștefan sin Petre Ciubotariul and his wife Smaranda. His native area, bordering on heavily forested areas,Călinescu, p. 477 was in the Eastern Carpathian foothills, and included into what was then the Principality of Moldavia. The surrounding region's population preserved an archaic way of life, dominated by shepherding, textile manufacturing and related occupations, and noted for preserving the older forms of local folklore. Another characteristic of the area, which left an impression on Creangă's family history, was related to the practice of transhumance and the links between ethnic Romanian communities on both sides of the mountains, in Moldavia and Transylvania: on his maternal side, the writer descended from Maramureș-born peasants, while, according to literary historian George Călinescu, his father's origin may have been further southwest, in Transylvania-proper.

The family had reached a significant position within their community: Ștefan sin Petre had made a steady income from his itinerant trade in wool, while his wife was the descendant of the Creangăs of Pipirig, a family of community leaders. The latter's members included Moldavian Metropolitan Iacob Stamati, as well as Smaranda's father, ''Vornic'' David, and her uncle Ciubuc Clopotarul, a monk at Neamț Monastery.Călinescu, p. 477, 478 Proud of this tradition, she insisted that her son pursue a career in the Church. According to his own recollection, the future writer was born on March 1, 1837—a date which has since been challenged. Creangă's other statements mention March 2, 1837, or an unknown date in 1836.Călinescu, p. 478 The exactitude of other accounts is equally unreliable: community registers from the period gave the date of June 10, 1839, and mention another child of the same name being born to his parents on February 4, 1842 (the more probable birth date of Creangă's younger brother Zahei). The imprecision also touches other aspects of his family life: noting the resulting conflicts in data, Călinescu decided that it was not possible for one to know if the writer's parents were married to each other (and, if so, if they were on their first marriage), nor how many children they had together. At a time when family names were not legally required, and people were primarily known by various nicknames and patronymics, the boy was known to the community as ''Nică'', a hypocorism formed from ''Ion'', or more formally as ''Nică al lui Ștefan a Petrei'' ("Nică of Ștefan of Petru", occasionally ''Nic-a lui Ștefan a Petrei'').

Childhood, youth and ordination

After an idyllic period, which is recounted in the first section of his '' Childhood Memories'', Ion Creangă was sent to primary school, an institution then in the care of Orthodox Church authorities, where he became noted for his rebellious attitude and appetite for truancy. Among his colleagues was a female student, Smărăndița popii (known later as Smaranda Posea), for whom he developed an affection which lasted into his adult life, over decades in which the two no longer saw each other. Luminița Marcu
"O monografie spectaculoasă"
, in ''România Literară'', Nr. 21/2000 He was taught reading and writing in Cyrillic alphabet through peer tutoring techniques, before the overseeing teacher, Vasile Ilioaiei, was lassoed off the street and conscripted by the Moldavian military at some point before 1848. After another teacher, whom the ''Memories'' portray as a drunk, died from cholera in late 1848, David Creangă withdrew his grandson from the local school and took him to a similar establishment in Broșteni, handing him into the care of a middle-aged woman, Irinuca. Ion Creangă spent several months at Irinuca's remote house on the Bistrița River, before the proximity of goats resulted in a scabies infection and his hastened departure for Pipirig, where he cured himself using birch extract, a folk remedy mastered by his maternal grandmother Nastasia.

After returning to school between late 1849 and early 1850, Creangă was pulled out by his financially struggling father, spent the following period working in wool-spinning, and became known by the occupational nickname ''Torcălău'' ("Spinster"). He only returned in third grade some four years later, having been sent to the Târgu Neamț public school, newly founded by Moldavian Prince Grigore Alexandru Ghica as part of the ''Regulamentul Organic'' string of reforms. A colleague of future philosopher Vasile Conta in the class of priest and theologian Isaia "Popa Duhu" Teodorescu, Creangă was sent to the Fălticeni seminary in 1854. After having been registered as ''Ioan Ștefănescu'' (a variant of his given name and a family name based on his patronymic), the adolescent student eventually adopted his maternal surname of ''Creangă''. According to Călinescu, this was done either "for aesthetic reasons" (as his new name, literally meaning "branch" or "bough", "sounds good") or because of a likely discovery that Ștefan was not his real father. Dan Grădinaru, a researcher of Creangă's work, believes that the writer had a special preference for the variant ''Ioan'', generally used in more learned circles, instead of the variant ''Ion'' that was consecrated by his biographers.

Having witnessed, according to his own claim, the indifference and mundane preoccupations of his peers, Creangă admitted to having taken little care in his training, submitting to the drinking culture, playing practical jokes on his colleagues, and even shoplifting, while pursuing an affair with the daughter of a local priest. According to his own statement, he was a philanderer who, early in his youth, had already "caught the scent" of the ''catrință'' (the skirt in traditional costumes). Gabriela Ursachi
"Decembrie"
, in ''România Literară'', Nr. 50/2004 In August 1855, circumstances again forced him to change schools: confronted with the closure of his Fălticeni school, Creangă left for the Central Seminary attached to Socola Monastery, in Moldavia's capital of Iași. Ștefan sin Petre's 1858 death left him without means of support, and he requested being directly ordained, but, not being of the necessary age, was instead handed a certificate to attest his school attendance. He was soon after married, after a brief courtship, to the 15-year-old Ileana, daughter of Priest Ioan Grigoriu from the church of the Forty Saints, where he is believed to have been in training as a schoolteacher. The ceremony took place in August 1859, several months after the personal union between Moldavia and its southern neighbor Wallachia, effected by the election of Alexandru Ioan Cuza as ''Domnitor''. Having been employed as a cantor by his father in law's church, he was ordained in December of the same year, assigned to the position of deacon in Holy Trinity Church, and, in May 1860, returned to Forty Saints.

Relations between Creangă and Grigoriu were exceptionally tense. Only weeks after his wedding, the groom, who had probably agreed to marriage only because it could facilitate succeeding Grigoriu, Z. Ornea
"Nonconformisme celebre (1997)"
, in ''Dilema Veche'', Vol. V, Nr. 26, January 2008 signed a complaint addressed to Metropolitan Sofronie Miclescu, denouncing his father in law as "a killer", claiming to have been mistreated by him and cheated out of his wife's dowry, and demanding to be allowed a divorce. The response to this request was contrary to his wishes: he was ordered into isolation by the ''Dicasterie'', the supreme ecclesiastical court, being allowed to go free only on promise to reconcile with Grigoriu.

Beginnings as schoolteacher and clash with the Orthodox Church

In 1860, Creangă enlisted at the Faculty of Theology, part of the newly founded University of Iași, and, in December 1860, fathered a son, Constantin. His life still lacked in stability, and he decided to move out of Grigoriu's supervision and into Bărboi Church, before his position as deacon was cut out of the budget and his belongings were evicted out of his temporary lodging in 1864. He contemplated leaving the city, and even officially requested a new assignment in the more remote Bolgrad. Since January 1864, when the Faculty of Theology had been closed down, he had been attending Iași's Trei Ierarhi Monastery normal school (''Trisfetite'' or ''Trei Sfetite''), where he first met the young cultural figure Titu Maiorescu, who served as his teacher and supervisor, and whence he graduated as the first in his class (June 1865). Embittered by his own experience with the education system, Creangă became an enthusiastic promoter of Maiorescu's ideas on education reform and modernization, and in particular of the new methods of teaching reading and writing. During and after completing normal school, he was assigned to teaching positions at Trisfetite. While there, he earned the reputation of a demanding teacher (notably by accompanying his reports on individual students with characterizations such as "idiot", "impertinent" or "envious").Călinescu, p. 479 Accounts from the period state that he made use of corporal punishment in disciplining his pupils, and even surpassed the standards of violence accepted at the time.

In parallel, he was beginning his activities in support of education reform. By 1864, he and several others, among them schoolteacher V. Răceanu,Vianu, Vol. II, p. 208 were working on a new primer, which saw print in 1868 under the title ''Metodă nouă de scriere și cetire pentru uzul clasei I primară'' ("A New Method of Writing and Reading for the Use of 1st Grade Primary Course Students"). It mainly addressed the issues posed by the new Romanian alphabetical standard, a Romanization replacing Cyrillic spelling (which had been officially discarded in 1862). Adrian Pârvu
"Spațiul viral al geniului: o cameră și un ceardac"
, in ''Jurnalul Național'', December 20, 2005 Largely based on Maiorescu's principles, ''Metodă nouă ...'' became one the period's most circulated textbooks.Ornea (1998), p. 233–234 In addition to didactic texts, it also featured Creangă's isolated debut in lyric poetry, with a naïve piece titled ''Păsărica în timpul iernii'' ("The Little Bird in Wintertime"). The book was followed in 1871 by another such work, published as ''Învățătoriul copiilor'' ("The Children's Teacher") and co-authored by V. Răceanu.Ornea (1998), p. 234; Vianu, Vol. II, p. 208 It included several prose fables and a sketch story, "Human Stupidity", to which later editions added ''Poveste'' ("A Story") and ''Pâcală'' (a borrowing of the fictional folk character better known as ''Păcală'').

In February 1866, having briefly served at Iași's Pantelimon Church, he was welcomed by ''hegumen'' Isaia Vicol Dioclias into the service of Golia Monastery. Around 1867, his wife Ileana left him. After that moment, Creangă began losing interest in performing his duties in the clergy, and, while doing his best to hide that he was no longer living with his wife, took a mistress. The marriage's breakup was later attributed by Creangă himself to Ileana's adulterous affair with a Golia monk,Călinescu, p. 478–479 Constantin Coroiu
"Preoția lui Creangă"
in ''Convorbiri Literare'', December 2007 and rumors spread that Ileana's lover was a high-ranking official, the protopope of Iași. Creangă's accusations, Călinescu contends, are nevertheless dubious, because the deacon persisted in working for the same monastery after the alleged incident.

By the second half of the 1860s, the future writer was also pursuing an interest in politics, which eventually led him to rally with the more nationalist group within the Romanian liberal current, known as Free and Independent Faction. Cornelia Ștefănescu
"Mărturii despre Ion Creangă"
, in ''România Literară'', Nr. 15/2003 An agitator for his party, Creangă became commonly known under the nickname ''Popa Smântână'' ("Priest Sour Cream").Călinescu, p. 435; Ornea (1998), p. 231; Vianu, Vol. II, p. 207 In April 1866, shortly after ''Domnitor'' Cuza was toppled by a coup, and just before Carol I was selected to replace him, the Romanian Army intervened to quell a separatist riot in Iași, instigated by Moldavian Metropolitan Calinic Miclescu. It is likely that Creangă shared the outlook of other Factionalists, according to which secession was preferable to Carol's rule, and was probably among the rioters. At around the same time, he began circulating antisemitic tracts, and is said to have demanded that Christians boycott Jewish business.Oișteanu, p. 140 He is thought to have coined the expression ''Nici un ac de la jidani'' ("Not even a needle from the kikes"). He was eventually selected as one of the Factionalist candidates for an Iași seat in the Romanian Deputies' Chamber, as documented by the memoirs of his conservative rival, Iacob Negruzzi.Ornea (1998), p. 231 The episode is supposed to have taken place at the earliest during the 1871 suffrage.

By 1868, Creangă's rebellious stance was irritating his hierarchical superiors, and, according to Călinescu, his consecutive actions show that he was "going out of his way for scandal". He was initially punished for attending a Iași Theater performance, as well as for defiantly claiming that there was "nothing scandalous or demoralizing" in what he had seen, and reportedly further antagonized the monks by firing a gun to scare off the rooks nesting on his church. The latter incident, which some commentators believe fabricated by Creangă's detractors, was judged absurd by the ecclesiastical authorities, who had been further alarmed by negative reporting in the press. When told that no clergyman other than him had been seen using a gun, Creangă issued a reply deemed "Nasreddinesque" by George Călinescu, maintaining that, unlike others, he was not afraid of doing so. Confronted by Metropolitan Calinic himself, Creangă allegedly argued that he could think of no other way to eliminate rooks, being eventually pardoned by the prelate when it was ruled that he had not infringed on canon law.

Defrocking and the ''Bojdeuca'' years

Creangă eventually moved out of the monastery, but refused to relinquish his key to the church basement, and, in what was probably a modernizing intent, chopped off his long hair, one of the traditional marks of an Orthodox priest.Călinescu, p. 479; Vianu, Vol. II, p. 208 The latter gesture scandalized his superiors, particularly since Creangă explained himself using an ancient provision of canon law, which stipulated that priests were not supposed to grow their hair long. After some assessment, his superiors agreed not to regard this action as more than a minor disobedience. He was temporarily suspended in practice but, citing an ambiguity in the decision (which could be read as a banishment in perpetuity), Creangă considered himself defrocked. He relinquished his clerical clothing altogether and began wearing lay clothes everywhere, a matter which caused public outrage.

By then a teacher at the 1st School for Boys, on Română Street, Creangă was ordered out of his secular assignment in July 1872, when news of his status and attitude reached Education Minister Christian Tell. Upset by the circumstances, and objecting in writing on grounds that it did not refer to his teaching abilities, he fell back on income produced by a tobacconist's shop he had established shortly before being dismissed. This stage marked a final development in Creangă's conflict with the church hierarchy. Summoned to explain why he was living the life of a shopkeeper, he responded in writing by showing his unwillingness to apologize, and indicated that he would only agree to face secular courts.Vianu, Vol. II, p. 209 The virulent text notably accused the church officials of being his enemies on account of his "independence, sincerity, honesty" in supporting the cause of "human dignity". After the gesture of defiance, the court recommended his defrocking, its decision being soon after confirmed by the synod.

In the meantime, Creangă moved into what he called '' Bojdeuca'' (or ''Bujdeuca'', both being Moldavian regional speech for "tiny hut"), a small house located on the outskirts of Iași. Officially divorced in 1873,Călinescu, p. 479; Vianu, Vol. II, p. 209 he was living there with his lover Ecaterina "Tinca" Vartic."Muzeul Literaturii Române Iași"
hosted by '' Dacia Literară''; retrieved August 3, 2009 A former laundress who had earlier leased one of the ''Bojdeuca'' rooms, she shared Creangă's peasant-like existence. This lifestyle implied a number of eccentricities, such as the former deacon's practice of wearing loose shirts throughout summer and bathing in a natural pond. Gheorghe Grigurcu
"Ion Creangă între natură și cultură"
, in ''România Literară'', Nr. 44/2004 His voracious appetite, called "proverbial gluttony" by George Călinescu, was attested by contemporary accounts. These depict him consuming uninterrupted successions of whole meals on a daily basis. Șerban Anghelescu
"Poveștile cu poale-n brîu"
in ''Observator Cultural'', Nr. 462, February 2009

In May 1874, soon after taking over Minister of Education in the Conservative Party cabinet of Lascăr Catargiu, his friend Maiorescu granted Creangă the position of schoolteacher in the Iași area of Păcurari. During the same period, Ion Creangă met and became best friends with Mihai Eminescu, posthumously celebrated as Romania's national poet. This is said to have taken place in summer 1875, when Eminescu was working as an inspector for Maiorescu's Education Ministry, overseeing schools in Iași County: reportedly, Eminescu was fascinated with Creangă's talents as a raconteur, while the latter admired Eminescu for his erudition.

''Junimea'' reception

At around the same time, Creangă also began attending ''Junimea'', an upper class literary club presided upon by Maiorescu, whose cultural and political prestige was increasing. This event, literary historian Z. Ornea argued, followed a time of indecision: as a former Factionalist, Creangă was a natural adversary of the mainstream ''Junimist'' "cosmopolitan orientation", represented by both Maiorescu and Negruzzi, but was still fundamentally committed to Maiorescu's agenda in the field of education. Literary historians Carmen-Maria Mecu and Nicolae Mecu also argue that, after attending ''Junimea'', the author was able to assimilate some of its innovative teachings into his own style of pedagogy, and thus helped diffuse its message outside the purely academic environment.

The exact date of his reception is a mystery. According to Maiorescu's own recollections, written some decades after the event, Creangă was in attendance at a ''Junimea'' meeting of 1871, during which Gheorghe Costaforu proposed to transform the club into a political party. The information was considered dubious by Z. Ornea, who argued that the episode may have been entirely invented by the ''Junimist'' leader, and noted that it contradicted both Negruzzi's accounts and minutes kept by A. D. Xenopol. According to Ornea's assessment, with the exception of literary critic Vladimir Streinu, all of Creangă's biographers have come to dismiss Maiorescu's statement. Several sources mention that the future writer was introduced to the society by Eminescu, who was an active member around 1875. This and other details lead Ornea to conclude that membership was granted to Creangă only after the summer break of 1875.

Gradually or instantly,Ornea (1998), p. 236 Creangă made a positive impression by confirming with the ''Junimist'' ideal of authenticity. He also became treasured for his talkative and jocular nature, self-effacing references to himself as a "peasant", and eventually his debut works, which became subjects of his own public readings.Călinescu, p. 479–480 His storytelling soon earned him dedicated spectators, who deemed Creangă's fictional universe a "sack of wonders" at a time when the author himself had started casually using the pseudonym ''Ioan Vântură-Țară'' ("Ioan Gadabout"). Silvia Craus
"Balurile Junimii"
in '' Ieșeanul'', February 28, 2006 Although still in his forties, the newcomer was also becoming colloquially known to his colleagues as ''Moș Creangă'' ("Old Man Creangă" or "Father Creangă"), which was a sign of respect and sympathy.Constantinescu, p. 61 Among Ion Creangă's most dedicated promoters were Eminescu, his former political rival Iacob Negruzzi, Alexandru Lambrior and Vasile Pogor, as well as the so-called ''caracudă'' (roughly, "small game") section, which comprised ''Junimists'' who rarely took the floor during public debates, and who were avid listeners of his literary productions (it was to this latter gathering that Creangă later dedicated his erotic texts). In parallel to his diversified literary contribution, the former priest himself became a noted voice in ''Junimist'' politics, and, like his new friend Eminescu, voiced support for the group's nationalist faction, in disagreement with the more cosmopolitan and aristocratic segment led by Maiorescu and Petre P. Carp. By that the late 1870s, he was secretly redirecting political support from the former Factionalists to his new colleagues, as confirmed by an encrypted letter he addressed to Negruzzi in March 1877.

Literary consecration

Autumn 1875 is also often described as his actual debut in fiction prose, with " The Mother with Three Daughters-in-Law", a short story first publish in October by the club's magazine ''Convorbiri Literare''. In all, ''Convorbiri Literare'' would publish 15 works of fiction and the four existing parts of his '' Childhood Memories'' before Creangă's death.Vianu, Vol. II, p. 211 Reportedly, the decision to begin writing down his stories had been the direct result of Eminescu's persuasion. His talent for storytelling and its transformation into writing fascinated his new colleagues. Several among them, including poet Grigore Alexandrescu, tasked experimental psychologist Eduard Gruber with closely studying Creangă's methods, investigations which produced a report evidencing Creangă's laborious and physical approach to the creative process. The latter also involved his frequent exchanges of ideas with Vartic, in whom he found his primary audience. In addition to his fiction writing, the emerging author followed Maiorescu's suggestion and, in 1876, published a work of educational methodology and the phonemic orthography favored by ''Junimea'': ''Povățuitoriu la cetire prin scriere după sistema fonetică'' ("Guide to Reading by Writing in the Phonetic System"). It was supposed to become a standard textbook for the training of teachers, but was withdrawn from circulation soon afterward, when the Catargiu cabinet fell.

After losing his job as school inspector following the decisions of a hostile National Liberal executive, Mihai Eminescu spent much of his time in ''Bojdeuca'', where he was looked after by the couple. For five months after quarreling with Samson Bodnărescu, his fellow poet and previous landlord, Eminescu even moved inside the house, where he reputedly pursued his discreet love affair with woman writer Veronica Micle, and completed as many as 22 of his poems. Creangă introduced his younger friend to a circle of companions which included Zahei Creangă, who was by then a cantor, as well as Răceanu, priest Gheorghe Ienăchescu, and clerk Nicșoi (all of whom, Călinescu notes, had come to share the raconteur's lifestyle choices and his nationalist opinions).Călinescu, p. 480 Eminescu was especially attracted by their variant of simple life, the rudimentary setting of Creangă's house and the group's bohemian escapades. Circumstances drew the two friends apart: by 1877, Eminescu had relocated in Bucharest, the capital city, regularly receiving letters in which Creangă was asking him to return. He was however against Eminescu's plan to marry Veronica Micle, and made his objection known to the poet. In 1879, as a sign that he was formalizing his own affair with Tinca Vartic, Creangă purchased the ''Bojdeuca'' in her name, paying his former landlord 40 florins in exchange. That same year, he, Răceanu and Ienăchescu published the textbook ''Geografia județului Iași'' ("The Geography of Iași County"), followed soon after by a map of the same region, researched by Creangă and Răceanu. A final work in the area of education followed in 1880, as a schoolteacher's version of Maiorescu's study of Romanian grammar, ''Regulile limbei române'' ("Rules of the Romanian Language").

Illness and death

By the 1880s, Creangă had epilepsy with accelerated and debilitating episodes. He was also severely overweight, weighing some 120 kilograms (over 250 pounds), with a height of 1.85 meters (6 feet), and being teasingly nicknamed ''Burduhănosul'' ("Tubby") by his friends (although, according to testimonies by his son and daughter-in-law, he did not actually look his size).

Despite his activity being much reduced, he still kept himself informed about the polemics agitating Romania's cultural and political scene. He was also occasionally hosting Eminescu, witnessing his friend's struggle with mental disorder. The two failed to reconnect, and their relationship ended. After one of the meetings, he recorded that the delusional poet was carrying around a revolver with which to fend off unknown attackers—among the first in a series of episodes which ended with Eminescu's psychiatric confinement and death during June 1889. Around that time, Creangă, like other ''Junimists'', was involved in a clash of ideas with the emerging Romanian socialist and atheistic group, rallied around ''Contemporanul'' magazine. This occurred after ''Contemporanul'' founder Ioan Nădejde publicly ridiculed ''Învățătoriul copiilor'' over its take on creationism, quoting its claim that "the invisible hand of God" was what made seeds grow into plants.Călinescu, p. 545 Creangă replied with a measure of irony, stating that "had God not pierced the skin over our eyes, we would be unable to see each other's mistakes". Nevertheless, Călinescu argued, Nădejde's comments had shaken his adversary's religious sentiment, leading Creangă to question the immortality of the soul in a letter he addressed to one of his relatives in the clergy. According to other assessments, he was himself an atheist, albeit intimately so.

In 1887, the National Liberal Ministry of Dimitrie Sturdza removed Creangă from his schoolteacher's post, and he subsequently left for Bucharest in order to petition for his pension rights.Vianu, Vol. II, p. 212 Having hoped to be granted assistance by Maiorescu, he was disappointed when the ''Junimea'' leader would not respond to his request, and, during his final years, switched allegiance to the literary circle founded by Nicolae Beldiceanu (where he was introduced by Gruber). Among Creangă's last works was a fourth and final part of his ''Memories'', most likely written during 1888. The book remained unfinished, as did the story ''Făt-frumos, fiul iepei'' ("Făt-Frumos, Son of the Mare"). He died after an epileptic crisis, on the last day of 1889, his body being buried in Iași's Eternitatea Cemetery."Ansamblul funerar al scriitorului Ion Creangă"

"Bustul scriitorului Ion Creangă"

"Mormântul scriitorului Ion Creangă"
, entries i
''Patrimoniul istoric și arhitectural, Iași, România''
database; retrieved August 3, 2009 His funeral ceremony was attended by several of Iași's intellectuals ( Vasile Burlă, A. C. Cuza, Dumitru Evolceanu, Nicolae Iorga and Artur Stavri among them).

Work

Cultural context

The impact of Ion Creangă's work within its cultural context was originally secured by ''Junimea''. Seeking to revitalize Romanian literature by recovering authenticity, and reacting against those cultural imports it deemed excessive, the group notably encouraged individual creativity among peasants.Călinescu, p. 397 Reflecting back on Maiorescu's role in the process, George Călinescu wrote: "A literary salon where the personal merit would take the forefront did not exist efore ''Junimea''and, had Creangă been born two decades earlier, he would not have been able to present 'his peasant material' to anyone. Summoning the creativity of the peasant class and placing it in direct contact with the aristocrats is the work of ''Junimea''." His cogenerationist and fellow literary historian Tudor Vianu issued a similar verdict, commenting: "''Junimea'' is itself ... an aristocratic society. Nevertheless, it is through ''Junimea'' that surfaced the first gesture of transmitting a literary direction to some writers of rural extraction: a phenomenon of great importance, the neglect of which would render unexplainable the entire subsequent development of our literature."Vianu, Vol. II, p. 213 Also referring to cultural positioning within and outside the group, Carmen-Maria Mecu and Nicolae Mecu took the acceptance of "literate peasants" such as Creangă as exemplary proof of ''Junimist'' "diversity" and "tolerance".

Maiorescu is known to have had much appreciation for Creangă and other writers of peasant origin, such as Ion Popovici-Bănățeanu and Ioan Slavici. Late in life, he used this connection to challenge accusations of ''Junimist'' elitism in the face of criticism from more populist traditionalists. Nonetheless, ''Junimea'' members in general found Creangă more of an entertainer rather than a serious writer, and treasured him only to the measure where he illustrated their theories about the validity of rural literature as a source of inspiration for cultured authors. Therefore, Iacob Negruzzi sympathetically but controversially referred to his friend as "a primitive and uncouth talent". Maiorescu's critical texts also provide little individual coverage of Creangă's contributions, probably because these failed to comply exactly with his stratification of literary works into ''poporane'' ("popular", that is anonymous or collective) and otherwise. Tudor Vianu's theory defines Creangă as a prime representative of the "popular realism" guidelines (as sporadically recommended by the ''Junimist'' doyen himself), cautioning however that Creangă's example was never mentioned in such a context by Maiorescu personally.

Although he occasionally downplayed his own contribution to literature, Creangă himself was aware that his texts went beyond records of popular tradition, and made significant efforts to be recognized as an original author (by corresponding with fellow writers and willingly submitting his books to critical scrutiny). Vianu commented at length on the exact relationship between the narrative borrowed from oral tradition and Creangă's "somewhat surreptitious" method of blending his own style into the folkloric standard, likening it to the historical process whereby local painters improvised over the strict canons of Byzantine art. Creangă's complex take on individuality and the art of writing was attested by his own foreword to an edition of his collected stories, in which he addressed the reader directly: "You may have read many stupid things since you were put on this Earth. Please read these as well, and where it should be that they don't agree with you, take hold of a pen and come up with something better, for this is all I could see myself doing and did."

An exception among ''Junimea'' promoters was Eminescu, himself noted for expressing a dissenting social perspective which only partly mirrored Maiorescu's take on conservatism. According to historian Lucian Boia, the "authentic Moldavian peasant" that was Creangă also complemented Eminescu's own "more metaphysical" peasanthood.Lucian Boia, ''Romania: Borderland of Europe'', Reaktion Books, London, 2001, p. 247. Similarly, Z. Ornea notes that the poet used Creangă's positions to illustrate his own ethnonationalist take on Romanian culture, and in particular his claim that rural authenticity lay hidden by a "superimposed stratum" of urbanized ethnic minorities. 20th century critics have described Creangă as one of his generation's most accomplished figures, and a leading exponent of ''Junimist'' literature. This verdict is found in several of Vianu's texts, which uphold Creangă as a great exponent of his generation's literature, comparable to fellow ''Junimea'' members Eminescu, Slavici and Ion Luca Caragiale. This view complements George Călinescu's definition, placing the Moldavian author in the company of Slavici and Caragiale as one of the "great prose writers" of the 1880s. Lucian Boia, who noted that "the triad of Romanian classics" includes Creangă alongside Eminescu and Caragiale, also cautioned that, compared to the other two (with whom "the Romanians have said almost all there is to say about themselves"), Creangă has "a rather more limited register".

The frequent comparison between Creangă and Caragiale in particular is seen by Vianu as stemming from both their common "wide-ranging stylistic means" and their complementary positions in relations to two superimposed phenomenons, with Caragiale's depiction of the ''petite bourgeoisie'' as the rough equivalent of Creangă's interest in the peasantry. The same parallelism is explained by Ornea as a consequence of the two authors' social outlook: " heir workshave cemented aesthetically the portrayal of two worlds. Creangă's is the peasant world, Caragiale's the suburban and urban one. Two worlds which represent, in fact, two characteristic steps and two sociopolitical models in the evolution of Romanian structures which ... were confronting themselves in a process that would later prove decisive." According to the same commentator, the two plus Eminescu are their generation's great writers, with Slavici as one "in their immediate succession."Ornea (1998), p. 244 While listing what he believes are elements bridging the works of Creangă and Caragiale, other critics have described as strange the fact that the two never appear to have mentioned each other, and stressed that, although not unlikely, a direct encounter between them was never recorded in sources.

Narrative style and language

Highlighting Ion Creangă's recourse to the particularities of Moldavian regionalisms and archaisms, their accumulation making Creangă's work very difficult to translate, George Călinescu reacted against claims that the narratives reflected antiquating patterns. He concluded that, in effect, Creangă's written language was the equivalent of a " glossological museum", and even contrasted by the writer's more modern everyday parlance. Also discussing the impression that Creangă's work should be read with a Moldavian accent, noted for its "softness of sound" in relation to standard Romanian phonology, Călinescu cautioned against interpretative exaggerations, maintaining that the actual texts only offer faint suggestions of regional pronunciation. Contrasting Creangă with the traditions of literature produced by Wallachians in what became the standard literary language, Călinescu also argued in favor of a difference in mentality: the "balance" evidenced by Moldavian speech and illustrated in Ion Creangă's writings is contrasted by the "discoloration and roughness" of " Wallachianism". He also criticized those views according to which Creangă's variant of the literary language was "beautiful", since it failed to "please everyone on account of some acoustical beauty", and since readers from outside the writer's native area could confront it "with some irritation."Călinescu, p. 481 For Călinescu, the result nevertheless displays "an enormous capacity of authentic speech", also found in the works of Caragiale and, in the 20th century, Mihail Sadoveanu. According to the same commentator, the dialectical interventions formed a background to a lively vocabulary, a " hermetic" type of "argot", which contained "hilarious double entendres and indecent onomatopoeia", passing from "erudite beauty" to "obscene laughter".Călinescu, p. 488 Some of the expressions characteristic of Creangă's style are obscure in meaning, and some other, such as "drought made the snake scream inside the frog's mouth", appear to be spontaneous and nonsensical. Another specific trait of this language, commented upon by Vianu's and compared by him to the aesthetics of Classicism, sees much of Creangă's prose being set to a discreet poetic meter.

The recourse to oral literature schemes made it into his writings, where it became a defining trait. As part of this process, Călinescu assessed, "Creangă acts as all his characters in turn, for his stories are almost entirely spoken. ... When Creangă recounts, the composition is not extraordinary, but once his heroes begin talking, their gesticulation and wording reach a height in typical storytelling."Călinescu, p. 482 According to the critic, discovering this "fundamental" notion about Creangă's work was the merit of literary historian and ''Viața Românească'' editor Garabet Ibrăileanu, who had mentioned it as a main proof of affiliation to realism. The distinctive manner of characterization through "realistic dialogues" is seen by Vianu as a highly personal intervention and indicator of the Moldavian writer's originality. Both Vianu and Călinescu discussed this trait, together with the technique of imparting subjective narration in-between characters' replies, as creating other meeting points between Creangă and his counterpart Caragiale. Partly replicating in paper the essence of social gatherings, Ion Creangă often tried to transpose the particular effects of oral storytelling into writing. Among these characteristic touches were interrogations addressed to the readers as imaginary listeners, and pausing for effect with the visual aid of ellipsis. He also often interrupted his narratives with concise illustrations of his point, often in verse form, and usually introduced by ''vorba ceea'' (an expression literally meaning "that word", but covering the sense of "as word goes around").Călinescu, p. 480, 488 One example of this connects the notions of abundance and personal satisfaction:

In other cases, the short riddles relate to larger themes, such as divine justification for one's apparent fortune:

Creangă's specificity

Despite assuming the external form of traditional literature, Ion Creangă's interests and creative interventions, Călinescu noted, separated him from his roots: "peasants do not have isentirely cultured gifts. ... Too much 'atmosphere', too much dialogic 'humor', too much polychromy at the expense of linear epic movements. The peasant wants the bare epic and desires the unreal."Călinescu, p. 486 The commentator passed a similar judgment on the author's use of ancient sayings, concluding that, instead of crystallizing and validating local folklore, the accounts appeal to cultured tastes, having as the generation of comedy and volubility as their main purpose. According to Vianu's assessment Creangă was "a supreme artist" whose use of "typical sayings" attests "a man of the people, but not an anonymous and impersonal sample." These verdicts, directly contradicting ''Junimist'' theories, were mirrored by several other 20th century exegetes belonging to distinct schools of thought: Pompiliu Constantinescu, Benjamin Fondane and Ion Negoițescu. Writing during the second half of the century, critic Nicolae Manolescu passed a similar judgment, believing that Creangă was motivated by a "strictly intellectual sensuousness" and the notion that "pleasure arises from gratuitousness", while Manolescu's colleague Mircea Braga referred to "the great secret of the man who has managed to transfer unaltered the code of popular creativity into the immanence of the cultured one." In Braga's assessment, this synthesis managed "the impossible", but the difficulty of repeating it with each story also resulted in mediocre writings: "from among his few texts, even fewer are located on the relatively highest level of the relative aesthetic hierarchy".

Călinescu viewed such intellectual traits as shared by Creangă with his Wallachian counterpart Anton Pann, in turn linking both writers to the satirical component of Renaissance literature, and specifically to François Rabelais. Within local tradition, the literary historian saw a symbolic connection between Creangă and the early 18th century figure, Ion Neculce, one of Moldavia's leading chroniclers. While he made his own comparison between Creangă and Pann, Tudor Vianu concluded that the Moldavian writer was in fact superior, as well as being more relevant to literature than Petre Ispirescu, the prime collector of tales in 19th-century Wallachia. Also making use of the Rabelais analogy, literary chronicler Gabriela Ursachi found another analogy in local letters: Ion Budai-Deleanu, an early 19th-century representative of the Transylvanian School, whose style mixes erudite playfulness with popular tastes. These contextual traits, researchers assess, did not prevent Creangă's overall work from acquiring a universal aspect, particularly since various of his writings use narrative sequences common throughout world literature.

George Călinescu also assessed that these literary connections served to highlight the elevated nature of Creangă's style, his "erudite device", concluding: "Writers such as Creangă can only show up in places where the word is ancient and equivocal, and where experience has been condensed into unchanging formulas. It would have been more natural for such a prose writer to have emerged a few centuries later, into an era of Romanian humanism. Born much earlier, Creangă showed up where there exists an ancient tradition, and therefore a species of erudition, ... in a mountain village ... where the people is unmixed and keeping ith tradition" Outlining his own theory about the aspects of "national specificity" in Romanian letters, he expanded on these thoughts, listing Creangă and Eminescu as "core Romanians" who illustrated a "primordial note", complemented by the "southern" and "Balkan" group of Caragiale and others. Claiming that the "core" presence had "not primitive, but ancient" origins, perpetuated by "stereotyped wisdom" and "energetic fatalism", he asserted: "Creangă shows our civilization's contemporaneity with the world's oldest civilizations, our Asian age."Călinescu, p. 975 The alternating national and regional characteristics in Creangă's writings are related by historian Neagu Djuvara with the writer's place of birth, an affluent village in an isolated region, contrasting heavily with the 19th century Wallachian countryside: "if the mud hut villages of the Danube flood plain are to be taken into account, one finds himself in a different country." Ornea, who noted that Eminescu effectively shared Creangă's worldview, believed the latter to have been dominated by nostalgia for a world of independent landowning peasants, and argued that Creangă's literary and political outlook were both essentially conservative. Ornea commented: "One could say that it was through his form of nostalgiathat the writer debuted and that, within the space of his work it became, in its own right, an expression of the world that was about to vanish." Commenting on Creangă's "robust realism" and lack of "sentimentality", Vianu contrarily asserted: "Creangă's nostalgia ... has an individual, not social, sense."

The witty and playful side of Creangă's personality, which became notorious during his time at ''Junimea'' and constituted a significant part of his appeal, was reflected into a series of anecdotes. These accounts detail his playing the ignorant in front of fellow ''Junimists'' in order not to antagonize sides during literary debates (notably, by declaring himself "for against" during a two-option vote), his irony in reference to his own admirers (such as when he asked two of them to treasure the photograph of himself in the middle and the two of them on either side, while comparing it to the crucifixion scene and implicitly assigning them the role of thieves), and his recourse to puns and proverbs which he usually claimed to be citing from oral tradition and the roots of Romanian humor. The latter habit was notably illustrated by his answer to people who would ask him for money: "not since I born was I as poor as I was poor yesterday and the day before yesterday and last week and last week and throughout life". His joyfulness complemented his overall Epicureanism and his gourmand habits: his accounts are often marked by a special interest in describing acts related to food and drink.Simona Brânzaru
"Thoughts about a Possible History of Gaster's Presence in Romanian Literature"
in ''Plural Magazine'', Nr. 23/2004 Overall, Eduard Gruber's report contended, Creangă's writing relied on him being "a strong sensual and auditive type", and a "very emotional" person.

Ion Creangă's sense of humor was instrumental in forging the unprecedented characteristics of his work. American critic Ruth S. Lamb, the writer's style merges "the rich vocabulary of the Moldavian peasant" with "an original gaiety and gusto comparable to that of Rabelais." According to George Călinescu: " reangăgot the idea that he was a clever man, like all men of the people, and therefore used irony to make himself seem stupid." In Călinescu's view, the author's antics had earned him a status equivalent to that of his Wallachian ''Junimist'' counterpart Caragiale, with the exception that the latter found his inspiration in urban settings, matching "Nasreddinisms" with " Miticism". Z. Ornea sees the main protagonists in Creangă's comedic narratives as, in effect, "particularized incarnations of the same symbolic character", while the use of humor itself reflects the traditional mindset, "a survival through intelligence, that of a people with an old history, whose life experience has for centuries been concentrated into gestures and words."

Most prominent tales

Part of Ion Creangă's contribution to the short story, fantasy and children's literature genres involved collecting and transforming narratives circulating throughout his native region, which intertwine with his characteristic storytelling to the point where they become original contributions. According to Călinescu, the traditional praise for Ion Creangă as a creator of literary types is erroneous, since his characters primarily answered to ancient and linear narrative designs. The conclusion is partly shared by Braga, who links Creangă's tales to ethnological and anthropological takes on the themes and purposes of fairy tales, postulating the prevalence of three ancient and related narrative pretexts throughout his contributions: the preexistence of a "perturbing situation" (attributable to fatality), the plunging of the hero into a rite of passage-type challenge, a happy ending which brings the triumph of good over evil (often as a brutal and uncompromising act). Like their sources and predecessors in folklore, these accounts also carry transparent morals, ranging from the regulation of family life to meditations about destiny and lessons about tolerating the marginals. However, Swedish researcher Tom Sandqvist argues, they also illustrate the absurdist vein of some traditional narratives, by featuring "grotesqueries" and "illogical surprises".

With " The Goat and Her Three Kids", written mainly as a picturesque illustration of motherly love, Creangă produced a fable in prose, opposing the eponymous characters, caricatures of a garrulous but hard-working woman and her restless sons, to the sharp-toothed Big Bad Wolf, a satirical depiction of the cunning and immoral stranger. The plot shows the wolf making his way into the goat's house, where he eats the two older and less obedient kids, while the youngest one manages to escape by hiding up the chimney—the symbolism of which was psychoanalyzed by Dan Grădinaru, who claims it constitutes an allusion to Creangă's own childhood. The dénouement sees an inversion of the natural roles, an episode which, ethnologist Șerban Anghelescu notes, is dominated by "the culinary fire": the goat exercises her brutal revenge by trapping and slowly cooking the predator. This approach partly resonates with that of " The Mother with Three Daughters-in-Law", in which Creangă makes ample use of a traditional theme in Romanian humor, which portrays mothers-in-law as mean, stingy and oppressive characters. The embodiment of such offensive traits, she is also shown to be ingenious, pretending that she has a hidden third eye which always keeps things under watch. The narrator sides with the three young women in depicting their violent retribution, showing them capturing their oppressor, torturing her until she is left speech impaired, and leaving her on the brink of death. The mother-in-law's end turns into a farce: the eldest and most intelligent of the killers manipulates her victim's dying sounds into a testament partitioning her wealth, and a thin decorum is maintained at the funeral ceremony by the daughters' hypocritical sobbing.Constantinescu, p. 65

" The Story of the Pig" partly illustrates the notion that parental love subdues even physical repulsion, showing an elderly peasant couple cherishing their adopted porcine son, who, unbeknown to them, is enchanted. The creature instantly offsets his parents' sadness and immobility by his witty intelligence. Having applied his perseverance and spells to erect a magical bridge, the piglet fulfills the requirement for marrying the emperor's daughter, after which it is uncovered that he is a ''Făt-Frumos'' or Prince Charming character who assumes his real identity only by night.Călinescu, p. 483–484 Although the plot is supposed to deal with imperial magnificence in fairy tale fashion, the setting is still primarily rural, and the court itself is made to look like an elevated peasant community. According to researcher Marcu Beza, the text is, outside of its humorous context, a distant reworking of ancient legends such as ''Cupid and Psyche''. The story introduces three additional characters, old women who assess and reward the efforts of the virtuous: Holy Wednesday, Holy Friday and Holy Sunday. They represent a mix of Christian and pagan traditions, by being both personifications of the liturgical calendar and fairy-like patrons of the wilderness ('' zâne'').Constantinescu, p. 66–67

A similar perspective was favored by " The Old Man's Daughter and the Old Woman's Daughter". Here, the theme echoes ''Cinderella'', but, according to Călinescu, the rural setting provides a sharp contrast to the classical motif.Călinescu, p. 484 Persecuted by her stepmother and stepsister, the kind and loving daughter of the old man is forced into a position of servitude reflecting the plight of many peasant women in Creangă's lifetime. In this case, the old man is negatively depicted as cowardly and entirely dominated by his mean wife. The focal point of the narrative is the meeting between the good daughter and Holy Sunday. The latter notices and generously rewards the girl's helpful nature and mastery of cooking; in contrast, when her envious sister attempts the same and fails, she ends up being eaten by serpent-like creatures (''balauri''). The happy ending sees the good girl marrying not Prince Charming, but a simple man described as "kind and industrious"—this outcome, Călinescu assessed, did not in effect spare the old man's daughter from a life of intense labor. A story very similar to "The Old Man's Daughter ..." is "The Purse a' Tuppence", which teaches that greed can shatter families, while offering symbolic retribution to men who are unhappy in marriage. The old man's rooster, chased away by the old woman for being unproductive, ends up amassing a huge fortune, which he keeps inside his belly and regurgitates back into the courtyard; the jealous old woman ends up killing her favorite hen, who has failed in replicating the rooster's feat.

Devil-themed stories and "Harap Alb"

Several of Creangă's characteristic novellas are infused with themes from Christian mythology, fictionalizing God, Saint Peter and the army of devils, most often with the comedic intent of showing such personages behaving like regular people. A defining story in this series is " Dănilă Prepeleac", whose eponymous peasant hero is characterized by what Șerban Anghelescu calls "idiocy serving to initiate", or, according to Gabriela Ursachi, "complete, and therefore sublime, stupidity." The first part of the story shows Dănilă exchanging his oxen for an empty bag—a set of dialogues which, George Călinescu argued, is almost exactly like a comedy play. In what was described as a complete reversal in characterization, the hero uses intelligence and ruse to trick and frighten several devils. Contrarily, " Stan Pățitul" shows its hero fraternizing with a lesser demon. Following the opening episode, in which the latter accidentally eats a bit of ''mămăligă'' dedicated by Stan to those who honor God, Satan himself condemns his subordinate to service the peasant. Călinescu highlights the naturalness of exchanges between the two protagonists, the latter of whom assumes the endearing form of a frail boy, Chirică, who ends up moving in with Stan and entering his service. The writing was also noted for other realistic elements alluding to everyday life, such as the overtly colloquial exchange between Chirică and Satan, or the episodes in which the young devil helps Stan woo a peasant woman. Although relatively young, Stan himself is referred to as ''stătut'' ("frowzy" or "lacking in freshness"), and the wording reflects rural attitudes about men who fail to marry during a certain age interval.Constantinescu, p. 69 Toward the end, the story focuses on a corrupt old woman who tries to trick Stan's new wife into committing adultery, but fails and is banished to the remotest area of Hell. Viewed by Călinescu as Creangă's "most original manner of dealing with the fabulous", and paralleled by him with Caragiale's '' Kir Ianulea'' on account of its realist approach to the supernatural, "Stan Pățitul" is, according to Vianu, untraceable in its inspiration: " tsfolk origin could not be identified, but it is not dismissible".

Another account in this series is " Ivan Turbincă", whose protagonist, a Russian serviceman, is shown rebelling against Heaven and Hell, and ultimately accomplishing the human ideal of cheating Death