Toată problema prepoporanistă a lui Alecu Russo, problema specificului românesc, a formelor goale ale culturii, teoria pseudomorfozelor culturii, a simbolismului ce revelează el singur adevăratul nostru spirit: cel latin, a sămănătorismului ce revelează el singur adevăratul nostru spirit: cel rural, a ortodoxismului ce revelează el singur adevăratul nostru spirit: cel slav, şi alte bâjbâieli, îmi aminteşte povestea aceluia care nu ştia dacă el sau frate-său mai e viu pentru că unul din ei — nu se ştie care — s-a înecat în baie.

Obositul ins

Cineva rupea din el
cîte puțintel.

L-a lăsat decolorat
și cutremurat,

Mirat s-a pipăit
dar nu s-a regăsit.

Din el o forța rea
creștea și-l cuprindea.

Obositul ins
se lăsă cuprins.

The most implacable enemies of culture — Rimbaud, Lautréamont, dadaism, surrealism — end up being assimilated and absorbed by it. They all wanted to destroy culture, at least organized culture, and now they’re part of our heritage. It’s culture and not the bourgeoisie, as has been alleged, that is capable of absorbing everything for its own nourishment. As for the oneiric element, that is due partly to surrealism, but to a larger extent due to personal taste and to Romanian folklore — werewolves and magical practices. For example, when someone is dying, women surround him and chant, “Be careful! Don’t tarry on the way! Don’t be afraid of the wolf; it is not a real wolf!”—exactly as in Exit the King. They do that so the dead man won’t stay in infernal regions.

The purpose of the Collège was the demolition of culture, even of surrealism, which they considered too organized. But make no mistake, these people were graduates of the Ecole Normale Supérieure and highly cultured. Their method was based on puns and practical jokes—le canular. There is a great tradition of puns in Anglo-Saxon literature — Shakespeare, Alice in Wonderland — but not in French. So they adopted it. They believed that the science of sciences is the pataphysique and its dogma, le canular.

إنه يكتب لأنه يتساءل عن ماهية العالم, أو لأنه يريد أن يبرر وجوده, أو لأنه يرغب فى تأدية رسالة أخلاقية أو سياسية.. ولكنها كلها علل وأعذار تخفى وراءها باعثا أعمق لا يستطيع الفكر إدراك كنهه. وربما لم يكن هذا الباعث سوى شهوة الخلق.

But even if I know what governs their trajectory, if I know the rules of the movement of things and how things are organized and how certain mutations, transformations, gestations take place, even if I know all that, I shall only have learnt how to get along after a fashion in the enormous gaol, the oppressive prison in which I am held. What a farce, what a snare, what a booby-trap. We were born cheated. For if we are not to know, if there is nothing to know, why do we have this longing to know?

I found ancestors, like Shakespeare, who said, in Macbeth, that the world is full of sound and fury, a tale told by an idiot, signifying nothing. Macbeth is a victim of fate. So is Oedipus. But what happens to them is not absurd in the eyes of destiny, because destiny, or fate, has its own norms, its own morality, its own laws, which cannot be flouted with impunity. Oedipus sleeps with his Mummy, kills his Daddy, and breaks the laws of fate. He must pay for it by suffering. It is tragic and absurd, but at the same time it’s reassuring and comforting, since the idea is that if we don’t break destiny’s laws, we should be all right. Not so with our characters. They have no metaphysics, no order, no law. They are miserable and they don’t know why. They are puppets, undone. In short, they represent modern man. Their situation is not tragic, since it has no relation to a higher order. Instead, it’s ridiculous, laughable, and derisory.