The most outstanding Romanian woman sculptor of the
\n20th century, and also a prominent painter, Mili\u0163a Petrascu was born
\nin 1892 in Chishinau (on the territory of today’s Republic of Moldova).
\nAttracted to fine arts since early childhood, Milita Petrascu later studied in
\nTsarist Russia and shortly after WWI she left for Paris, where she furthered
\nher studies under the guidance of Constantin Brancusi. <\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Her professional route
\nwill take her close to the European avant-garde, although she truly embraced
\nthose movements only when she settled in Bucharest, in 1925. Here, she joined
\nthe group affiliated to Contimporanul magazine, which, just like most
\navant-garde movements, promoted left-leaning political ideas. In Milita
\nPetrascu’s case, these ideas became apparent as early as 1925, when Ana Pauker,
\nthe future foreign minister of the country in the first three years after the
\ninstatement of communism, was photographed in the artist’s studio. <\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
So in 1948,
\nwhen the communists seized power in Romania, Milita Petrascu should have been a
\nprivileged artist in the circles of the new political power. But reality was
\ndifferent. Her career after the war had many ups and downs, as she was either flooded
\nwith honours and orders, or criticised by the communist party for the slips in
\nher aesthetic doctrine. <\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Historian Cristian Vasile tells us more about the
<\/p>\n
One of these artists was, in a first stage, Milita
<\/p>\n
Mili\u0163a Petra\u015fcu died in 1976. Her best-known work remains the mosaic on
<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" The most outstanding Romanian woman sculptor of the 20th century, and also a prominent painter, Mili\u0163a Petrascu was born in 1892 in Chishinau (on the territory of today’s Republic of Moldova).<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[45210],"tags":[29963,37782],"coauthors":[],"class_list":["post-168845","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-rri-encyclopaedia","tag-constantin-brancusi","tag-milita-petrascu"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\n
\ncultural and political context in which Milita Petrascu continued her career
\nafter the war: The official rhetoric after
\n1948, reinforced by the newly set up Fine Artists Union, insisted on the idea
\nthat there no longer were such things as a system that exploited artists or a
\ndistorted arts market controlled by oppressive financiers. On the contrary,
\nthere was a socialist state in place, which fostered and guaranteed gender
\nequality, which made rational investment in art, which made no discrimination
\nin terms of orders and the purchase of art objects. There was a period of
\nadjustment with the system, and this period started with prestigious painters
\nand sculptors from the old generations of artists being lured into accepting the
\nnew artistic and ideological order. This involved, among other things, public
\nhonors, orders, housing and material benefits.<\/span><\/p>\n
\n
<\/p>\n
\nPetrascu, an artist already established and well promoted in the inter-war
\nyears. But paradoxically enough, as early as the 1950s her career was shadowed
\nby her close ties with Ana Pauker, a communist leader ousted by her own party
\nfellows, in the good Stalinist tradition. This was not the only stain in Milita
\nPetrascu’s file, as Cristian Vasile tells us: There have been some controversial
\nworks by Milita Petrascu, which hardly brought her professional glory. An
\ninteresting fact, for instance, is that the monographs on Milita Petrascu’s
\nworks published during those times did not include the half-nude bust of
\nactress Elvira Godeanu, which fuelled the rumours regarding the actress’s
\naffair with the communist leader Gheorghe Gheorghiu-Dej. Another cause of
\nPetrascu’s fall from grace was also, apparently, a portrait of the collector
\nConstantin Doncea. Doncea had become some sort of Nemesis, the arch-enemy of
\nthe then head of state Gheorghe Gheorghiu-Dej. Why was that? Because Doncea,
\njust like Gheorghiu Dej, was also very attached to the Grivita railway works
\nand the 1933 riots of the Grivita workers, which was an iconic moment for Dej,
\nfor his rise as a leader of the proletariat. In 1958, the Institute of the
\nRomanian Communist Party History invited inter-war communist party members to
\nrecord testimonials related to the 1933 Grivita strike. Doncea also made a
\nstatement, but in June 1958 Gheorghiu-Dej launched a crackdown on him and other
\ncommunist leaders who, he thought, had defied him. Milita Petrascu, who had
\npainted Doncea’s portrait, was caught in the middle of this political row. In
\nApril 1959 she was the target of a showdown at the Aula Magna of the Bucharest Law
\nSchool, where workers and secret police agents had been brought in to expose
\nthe artists who departed from the party line. But even after the 1959 incident,
\nin the following decades Milita Petrascu would nevertheless retain her nonconformist
\nspirit, to the point of defining herself as a materialist person, imbued with
\nmysticism.<\/span><\/p>\n
\n
<\/p>\n
\nthe Miorita Fountain, placed at the northern exit of Bucharest, and created in
\nthe mid-1930s.<\/p>\n