Petre Paul Negulescu (October 18, 1870 – September 28, 1951) was a Romanian philosopher and conservative politician, known as a disciple and continuator of Titu Maiorescu. Affiliated with Maiorescu's Junimea society from his early twenties, he debuted as a positivist and monist, attempting to reconcile art for art's sake with an evolutionist philosophy of culture. He was a lecturer and tenured professor at the University of Iași, where he promoted the Junimist lobby against left-wing competitors, and formalized his links with the Conservative Party in 1901. From 1910, he taught at the University of Bucharest, publishing works on Renaissance philosophy and other historical retrospectives.
After World War I, Negulescu was an affiliate (later president) of the radical-conservative People's Party, and an advocate of labor and education reform. Serving several terms in Parliament, he was twice the Public Education Minister in the 1920s, but failed to enact his project for vocational-centered schooling.
By 1934, as an adversary of the nationalist far-right, he wrote tracts rejecting biological determinism of all sorts, and scientific racism in particular. Pushed in the minority by supporters of statism, Negulescu supported meritocracy within the framework of classical liberalism. He was sidelined by right-wing totalitarian regimes after 1940, and ultimately banned, shortly before his death, by the communist regime.
Biography Early years and debut Petre Negulescu is widely believed to have been born in Ploiești in October 1872. However, his early papers give his birth date as October 18, 1870, a date he probably concealed and replaced for vanity reasons. Cronicar, "Actualitatea" , in România Literară, Nr. 32/2000 As a youth, he attended Saints Peter and Paul High School in his native city, and subsequently enrolled in the sciences faculty of the University of Bucharest, being especially interested in mathematics. After hearing several lectures on the history of philosophy delivered by Titu Maiorescu, he transferred to the literature and philosophy faculty, graduating in 1892.Stan Stoica, Dinu C. Giurescu, Dicționar biografic de istorie a României, pp. 400-401. Bucharest: Editura Meronia, 2008. Lovinescu, pp. 71–72 In March 1891, by that time a student of Maiorescu's, he began attending meetings of Junimea literary society, where he met Simion Mehedinți and Mihail Dragomirescu.Ornea (1998, I), pp. 104–105
From his student days, Negulescu supported the patriotic activism of Romanians in Austro-Hungarian-ruled Transylvania. In 1890, together with Mehedinți, he edited Memoriul studenților universitari români privitor la situația românilor din Transilvania și Ungaria ("A Memorandum of Romanian University Students Regarding the Situation of Romanians in Transylvania and Hungary"), a document that also appeared in French and was meant to draw European public attention to the Magyarization policy of the Budapest government. He belonged to the leadership committee of the Cultural League for the Unity of All Romanians, founded in Bucharest the same year.
Encouraged by his mentor, he completed his theoretical preparation at the universities of Berlin, Leipzig and Paris. He became an associate professor in 1894, aged 22, in the history of modern philosophy and logic department of the University of Iași.Bagdasar et al., p. 114 Both Negulescu and Teohari Antonescu, the archaeologist, were moved there in a bid to ensure Junimea control over the university, and to consolidate the conservative circles of Iași, against a rising tide of socialist influence.Nastasă (2007), pp. 287–288; Ornea (1998, I), pp. 98–101 Although he found the city "repulsive" and a "place of exile", Negulescu accepted his appointment as a political and cultural mission.Nastasă (2007), p. 288 He was soon disappointed by the local Junimea branch and its president, N. Volenti, asking Maiorescu to send them better cultural material.Ornea (1998, I), pp. 99–100 In these early years, Negulescu was heavily indebted to Maiorescu's influence, down to oratory: he was known (and ridiculed) for copying Maiorescu's speech mannerisms.George Călinescu, Istoria literaturii române de la origini pînă în prezent, p.407. Bucharest: Editura Minerva, 1986; Nastasă (2007), pp. 73, 97–98, 475; Liviu Papuc, "Noi mărturii junimiste (II)" , in Convorbiri Literare, December 2005 Also like Maiorescu, he was an atheist and a positivist, who read religion in functionalist terms.Ornea (1998, II), pp. 81–82
Negulescu's publishing debut came in 1892, with a metaphysical essay, Critica apriorismului și a empirismului ("A Critique of Apriorism and Empiricism"), earning him the Romanian Academy award in philosophy. The title indicates the two main philosophical currents rejected by Negulescu, who sought a middle road between transcendental idealism and resurgent anti-realism, finalism, and theism. He found it in "realistic empiricism", a brand of monism, evolutionism and scientism that quoted heavily from Herbert Spencer.Bagdasar et al., pp. 114–122; Pătrășcanu, pp. 98–99 His monistic outlook fell short of classical positivism and historical materialism, since it rehabilitated metaphysical inquiry as a legitimate pursuit.Pătrășcanu, pp. 99–100 Various authors have regretfully noted that Negulescu never truly developed his tentative metaphysical system, which appeared to them inconclusive.Bagdasar et al., pp. 121–122; Pătrășcanu, pp. 99–101
Against didacticism and historicism Negulescu followed up with works of aesthetics, including: Psihologia stilului ("The Psychology of Style", 1892), Impersonalitatea și morala în artă ("Impersonality and Morality in Art", 1893), Religiunea și arta ("Religion and Art", 1894), Socialismul și arta ("Socialism and Art", 1895). Later, he published works of applied philosophy: Filosofia în viața practică ("Philosophy in Practical Life", 1896), and Rolul ideilor în progresul social ("The Role of Ideas in Social Progress", 1900).Bagdasar et al., pp. 114–115, 249 The latter works, of which Psihologia stilului was serialized in Maiorescu's Convorbiri Literare journal, were also attacks against the socialist literary critic, Constantin Dobrogeanu-Gherea, who had tackled Junimeas art for art's sake ideology with calls for didacticism.Bagdasar et al., p. 249; Lovinescu, pp. 47, 49, 52, 73–74, 76–78; Ornea (1998, I), p. 105; (1998, II), pp. 80–82, 130, 336–337, 343, 350–353, 356; Petrescu, p. 74
Dragomirescu and Negulescu remained the only two Maiorescu disciples who carried on his work in pure aesthetics; others, such as Alexandru Philippide and Constantin Rădulescu-Motru, began as aestheticists, but later veered into more applied science.Ornea (1998, II), pp. 73–74, 79 According to historian Z. Ornea, Negulescu stood further apart from Maiorescu not just because he questioned the more detailed aspects of his agenda, but also because he was a moderate, whereas Dragomirescu was a man of "rigid convictions" and "systematic dogmatism".Ornea (1998, II), pp. 92, 350
His polemic with the socialists, inaugurated in Psihologia stilului, was largely tributary to the theories of Spencer, Frédéric Paulhan, and Jean-Marie Guyau, trying to show that Junimism was more in tune with modern literary criticism.Lovinescu, pp. 74–77; Ornea (1998, II), pp. 350–352 The implicit target was Dobrogeanu-Gherea, depicted by Negulescu as a pale imitator of Pierre-Joseph Proudhon and his "social destination" of art.Ornea (1998, II), pp. 352–354 However, with Religiunea și arta, Negulescu went beyond Maiorescu's theories, and closer to Dobrogeanu-Gherea's, proposing that poetic art was not just a luxury of advanced societies, but also a functional entity that contributed to social progress. He also proposed interpreting style and tastefulness as variables emerging from objective psychological criteria, such as the "economy of attention" and "nervous excitement".Bagdasar et al., pp. 249–251 On this basis, he proposed a general hierarchy of art by appeal and subject matter, ranking old Egyptian murals below Italian Renaissance painting, but above the minor art of medieval goldsmiths.Ornea (1998, II), p. 85 He believed that art and religion served similar purposes in stirring up vital emotions, and amended the art for art's sake theory with his ideas on "impersonality", implying objectivity for the artist, but also a subjective, self-absorbed, relevancy for his artistic creation.Ornea (1998, II), pp. 80–84, 96
Negulescu spent those years traveling extensively in Europe, cementing his friendship with Maiorescu and with fellow Junimists. In 1894, he and Dumitru Evolceanu were in Gräfenberg, where the latter was curing his "sexual neurasthenia".Nastasă (2010), p. 68 It was in that context that Negulescu discovered and promoted Evolceanu as a storyteller, the literary hope of Junimea.Lovinescu, p. 45; Ornea (1998, I), p. 110 Later, Maiorescu took Negulescu along on vacations to Abbázia.Lovinescu, p. 45; Nastasă (2010), pp. 76, 107, 245–246 In Romania and abroad, Negulescu spent much time with Antonescu, who left notes about Negulescu's eccentric habits, including his asceticism, complete sexual abstinence, and social awkwardness.Nastasă (2010), pp. 69–70, 77, 79
In 1894, Maiorescu wrote confidently that the stage now belonged to "the second-generation Junimea", comprising Negulescu, Evolceanu, Antonescu, and Dragomirescu.Lovinescu, pp. 90–91; Ornea (1998, I), p. 107 While preparing for print Religiunea și arta, Negulescu found himself caught in a conflict with Nicolae Basilescu and other non-orthodox Junimists, who rejected his theories from a historicist perspective. In resisting Basilescu, he reaffirmed his purist reading of Maiorescu's credo, namely that "truth" was the universal artistic criterion, and formal perfection an objective trait.Ornea (1998, II), pp. 84–86, 336–337 He restated these tenets in an extended polemic with the anti-Junimist ideologue N. Petrașcu, the bulk of which became a standalone essay, Lucruri vechi ("Old Things", 1898). However, by then, he himself had embraced some of Basilescu's historicist views about art as an expression of civilization, trying to bring them into agreement with arguments picked up from Hippolyte Taine.Ornea (1998, II), pp. 86–92 Negulescu still argued that subjectivity was the main driver of cultural accomplishment, citing extreme (and, according to Ornea, flawed) examples of artists and intellectuals who withstood all immersion in contemporary life, from Galilei to Ingres.Ornea (1998, II), pp. 88–89
Rise to prominence Negulescu rose to full professor in 1896, in spite of not having a doctorate; he benefited from Maiorescu's influence and intrigues.Lovinescu, pp. 72–73, 79–80; Nastasă (2007), pp. 287–288, 326, 332, 369, 370–372; Ornea, p. 188. See also Bagdasar et al., p. 114 Maiorescu preferred him over Rădulescu-Motru, who had parted with mainline Junimism.Lovinescu, pp. 72–73, 79–80 Counteracting the anti-Junimists, Negulescu and Antonescu gave full support to Dragomirescu, when the latter presented his candidature for a professorship in Bucharest.Nastasă (2007), pp. 327–328 Meanwhile, Negulescu had a personal conflict with philologist Ilie Bărbulescu, intervening to have him denied employment at Iași.Nastasă (2007), pp. 385–386 His teaching and research were supplemented by articles he wrote for various magazines, including Convorbiri Literare (of which he became an editor in 1895),Lovinescu, pp. 12, 19, 21, 89–90; Nastasă (2007), p. 521; Ornea (1998, I), pp. 109, 116, 119 Arhiva Societății Științifice și Literare, and Revista Română Politică și Literară. The latter review was largely under his control, and marked his distancing from the Cultural League, publishing critical articles by Ovid Densusianu.Nastasă (2007), pp. 516–517