Haideti sa schimbam antrenorul!

Ma uit la situatia politica din tara asta si gasesc tot mai multe corespondente cu fotbalul romanesc. Aceleasi mizerii, aceleasi lupte de culise, declaratii murdare si, ce este cel mai important, aceeasi lipsa de eficienta. De ce Romania a pierdut startul in cursa tarilor postcomuniste spre dezvoltare si o economie de piata eficienta? Nu schimbam poate prea des antrenorul? In Polonia, Aleksander Kwaśniewski a fost presedinte/antrenor timp de zece ani, indeplinind doua mandate succesive (1995-2005). Cehia, in doua decenii, a avut doar doi presedinti: Václav Havel si Václav Klaus, amandoi realesi dupa primul mandat. In Ungaria, Árpád Göncz a avut si el un antrenorat de 10 ani si de doua mandate consecutive. In Slovacia, Ivan Gašparovič se afla si el la al doilea mandat succesiv. Si chiar si in Bulgaria, Georgi Parvanov a fost reinvestit si lasat sa continue ce a inceput in 2001, fiind si acum presedinte. Noi de ce nu putem lasa antrenorul pe banca si il demitem de la primele esecuri, dupa modelul fotbalistic, readucandu-l inapoi poate dupa cativa ani, pentru a o lua de la inceput. In timp ce altii au inteles ca schimbarea societatii si economiei vine prin continuitatea presedintelui, romanii prefera continuitatea societatii actuale, alegand schimbarea presedintelui, dupa modelul echipelor de fotbal din Romania. Poate este si asta o explicatie de ce Romania a ramas cea mai in urma dintre tarile ex-comuniste din Europa de Est. Pentru ca la noi, in loc de fotbal, se face politica, iar in loc de politica, se joaca fotbal.

Show me the Kitsch!

Kitsch, un cuvant de actualitate, pe cat de popular pe atat de greu definibil. Cei mai mulţi dintre cei care pretind că îi cunosc înţelesul reacţionează măcar cu o politicoasă repulsie atunci când îl aud rostit sau îl văd scris. Este fără dubii, pentru toţi esteţii formaţi, sau dozaţi parţial, fie şi cu un fragil spirit critic, un cuvânt negativ. “The K word”, daca tot ne lovim de americanisme la tot pasul (ma intreb daca parafraza asta nu e şi ea tot un kitsch). Dar totuşi, unde sfârşeşte domeniul operei de artă şi începe domeniul kitschului? O comisie de patrimoniu a artei adevărate, cu experţii care să decidă just ce e valabil şi ce este non-artă, pseudoartă sau artă de prost gust, nu există deocamdată. Dialectica dintre arta autentică şi fals rămâne singura justificată de premise legale. Aşadar, ce este un kitsch? L-aţi înţeles, l-aţi depistat, l-aţi detestat vreodată? Viaţa artistică, modă, moravuri, societate, politică, sport, acolo unde e, arătaţi-l cu degetul!

Was ist eine karikatur?

Was ist ein Cartoon?
Der Begriff Cartoon bezeichnet seit der Mitte des 19. Jahrhunderts humorvolle Dar-stellungen. Heute wird der Begriff allgemein für witzige Zeichnungen und Grafiken verwendet, die sich mit den kleinen Problemen des Alltags beschäftigen. Damit steht der Cartoon im Gegensatz zur Karikatur, die in zugespitzter Form bestimmte menschliche Verhaltensweisen oder gesellschaftliche Ereignisse und Zustände dar-stellt.
Was ist eine Karikatur?
Eine Karikatur ist eine satirisch-komische Darstellung von Menschen oder gesell-schaftlichen Zuständen, meist bewusst überzogen und mit politischer Tendenz. Die Anfänge der Karikatur in der bildenden Kunst datiert man bis ins Neue Reich Ägyp-tens zurück. Karikierende Darstellungen besonders aus dem Bereich des Mythos und Volksglaubens finden sich in der griechischen, körperliche Deformationen bis zur Groteske in der römischen Kunst. Die meist grobe Karikatur des Mittelalters richtet sich häufig gegen bestimmte Personengruppen (z.B. Mönche oder Landsknechte). Künstlerisch profiliert zeigt sich die Karikatur in der Renaissance (u.a. bei Leonardo da Vinci, Albrecht Dürer und Bosch). Zu der Darstellung des Individuellen kommt seit der Renaissance und Reformation die Kritik an Institutionen wie Kirche und Staat. Mit Goya beginnt die Reihe bedeutender Karikaturisten des 19. Jahrhunderts. Die ersten satirischen Zeitschriften entstehen: In Frankreich »La Caricature« und »Charivari«, in England der »Punch«, in Deutschland »Kladderadatsch« und die »Fliegenden Blät-ter«. Karikaturistische Züge zeigen unter anderem auch Wilhelm Buschs Bildge-schichten. Am Beginn des 20. Jahrhunderts stehen unter anderem die gesellschafts-kritischen Karikaturen von Karl Arnold, Olaf Gulbransson, Thomas Theodor Heine und Ernst Thöny, die alle für den »Simplicissimus« tätig sind. In der Weimarer Repu-blik klagen Heinrich Zille, Käthe Kollwitz, Georg Grosz, Otto Dix mit expressionisti-schen Karikaturen soziale Missstände an. Heute ist die politische Karikatur vor allem in Zeitungen und Zeitschriften verbreitet, die fantastische und komische Karikaturen auch durch Anthologien – häufig unter dem Begriff Cartoon – verbreiten. Bekannte zeitgenössische deutsche Karikaturisten sind unter anderem Toni Ungerer, Paul Flo-ra, Ernst Maria Lang, Loriot oder F. K. Waechter.
Die Gestalterischen Mittel von Cartoon und Karikatur
Cartoon und Karikatur beschreiben immer eine Person oder sie erzählen eine Ge-schichte. Dabei wird nahezu immer das Mittel der Stilisierung eingesetzt. Stilisierung bedeutet letztlich „Vereinfachung“ der Personendarstellung im Vergleich zur natürlichen Erscheinung. Stilisierende Zeichnungen erkennt man an der Verwendung der Linie, 1
des Strichs als Darstellungsmittel oder einer flächenhaften Darstellungsweise (Sche-renschnitt, Schattenriss) als Mittel treffender Charakterisierung einer Persönlichkeit. Im Gegensatz dazu verwendet der Comic meist Phantasiefiguren und er erscheint als Serie (z. B. Mickey Maus). Die gestalterischen Mittel des Cartoon und der Karika-tur sind im Einzelnen:
- Veränderung der Körperproportionen (Übertrei-bung/Überzeichnung/Verzerrung)
- Betonung körperlicher Eigenschaften
- Hinzufügung von charakteristischen Attributen
- Die Verwendung von Schrift und Texten
- Verschiebung von Größenverhältnissen
- Überzeichnung von Gefühlen/Stimmungen/Reaktionen
2

A short history of political cartoon

The premises for the forthcoming of political cartoon were set in the 16th century religious controversy between the Protestants and the Catholic Church. Calomnious images regarding each one of the party were circulated especially among the illiterate population, but they were addressed also to the the educated people. The spreading of such visual indictments became costumary and military conflicts resorted from now on also to this symbolic weaponry which had the purpose to disparage the image of the opponents.

However, one can discuss of fully developed political cartoons only from the 18th century on. The apparition of this specy is linked to the name of the Williams Hogarth and his succesors, Gillray Cruickshank and Rowlandson. Imputing the corrupt society and its rulers, by means of satirical drawings, became now a regular public act.

19th century was the moment for the wide-spread development of satirical publications. In France, in 1832, a new journal was edited, Charivari, which in time proved to be a model to be followed or even imitated in the rest of Europe. Charivary became prestigious also due to Honorė Daumier’s contribution, a famous artist which worked for the journal for a long time. In England, a famous replica of the parisian journal was Punch or the London Charivari, which appeared in 1843, but many other newspapers, looking up to their french predecessor, started to be published all over the continent. By the start of the new century, magazines such as L’Assiette au Beurre or the German Simplicissimus were known Europe-wide.

The art of editorial cartooning was however not mare european, by 19th century it became global. Political cartooning came to grow popular also in the USA, where a famous caricaturist of the time was Thomas Nast.

In the Romanian regions, the start of political cartooning was given on the eve of 1848 Revolution. However, a real breaktrough became visible after the union of the provinces in 1859, that same year marking the moment when the first satirical newspapers appeared. The most important and longevive proved to be Nikipercea and Ghimpele, but in the last decades of the century, satirical newspapers became more numerous. Tantal, Vermont and especially Constantin Jiquidy were some of the most important cartoonists of the moment. They worked for publications such as Moftul Român, Moş Teacă, Adevărul, Foarfeca, Viaţa, Veselia, the latter being the first magazine to publish colored cartoons.

Modern romanian caricature was born under the influnce of both french and german press caricature. Young artists studied in western countries and acquinted themselves with the european satirical art. A well-known figure of the time was Ary Murnu, who worked for Furnica, and Iosif Iser, who was renoumned for his biting graphic works pointing at the flaws of the monarchy. Satirical art became so influential that famous artists such as Sirato, Ressu, Tonitza came to work also in the domain of editorial caricature.

Between the two world wars, Aurel Jiquidi, the son of Constantin Jiquidi, and Ion Anestin were well-known for their inspired cartoons which depicted the blameworthy society and politics. After the instalation of the comunists, cartoonists were determined to work in the favour of the party and of the state. In the fifties artist such as Perahim or Gil attacked the capitalist society and its liders. But as the international situation detensioned, so did the press loose interest for the political cartoons. It could no longer ridiculize the authority of the state so political caricature came back into style only after 1989.