Hungarian Studies Newsletter, 1981 (9. évfolyam, 27-30. szám)

1981 / 27-28. szám

made common cause with the Hungarian people and its destiny.” The author is a researcher at the Historical Institute of the HAS. (EMB) □

Brunwand, Jan Harold. “Traditional House Decoration in Romania: Survey and Bibliography,” East European Quarterly 14 -(Fall 1980) 255-301.

The author points out that his paper is a survey of the materials and state of studies on Romanian traditional house decoration, rather than a detailed study of styles and regional or ethnic differences. The limitations thus set lead the writer to ignore, in effect ethnic and regional traditions; that the whole area of studies is fraught with contradictions, and the impression that various styles coexist within the same region or even the same communities. The problem is briefly referred to in the concluding comments which urge that “future data-gathering should especially concentrate on identifying the constituents of specific regional and village styles, on particular ethnic strains of decoration, and on the continuing influenceoftechnology and urbanization."Certain distinctive qualities are mentioned, and in some instances reference is made to the region in which these are found. For example, while it is pointed out that the building materials range from wattle and daub to stone and brick, the use of stone in the Banat and Transylvania is given some attention. Similarly, while the general building-plan of a rectangular (sometimes nearly square) floorplan divided into the “clean room” and the “hearth room”, the use of a narrow porch and the projecting balcony found on the many two-story houses are identified as general elements, the distinctive ethnic traditions described in the works of Kos and Petrescu are mentioned also; the former described Szekely houses, the latter Saxon ones. Decoration is mentioned as an important element. Sometimes painting was used on whitewashed surfaces, at other times elaborately carved wood. Brunwand again mentions the need for more detailed study here, for example an examination of the “interplay” between Saxon styles and what he calls the “native” Roman tradition. A few paragraphs are added on “related traditions," with specific references to wooden gates and churches in Transylvania. The author is at the U. of Utah. (EMB) □

Congdon, Lee. “Hungary in Crisis: Communism and the Intellectuals - 1919,” East European Quarterly 14(Summer 1980)155-169.

The author reviews the beliefs of Hungary’s leading radicals in the early years of the 20th century, emphasizing the anticommunist and nationalistic nature of their writings. A special issue of Szabadgondolat (December 1918) was devoted to the question of bolshevism. In it Oscar Jaszi pointed out that the promises of the bolsheviks had proven empty. Reason and moral consciousness, not class struggle must lead men to create a better world, he argued, concluding with a warning against any attempt by the Hungarian communists to disrupt the Karolyi government. Károly Polányi believed that morally responsible men can control their own destinies. Jeno Varga pointed out that some sort of labor discipline is necessary for production and that the Russian revolution had failed to create a voluntary discipline not based on class structure. He thought that bolshevism would be possible in a country where the workers were better educated in the principles of socialism. Finally, György Lukács, who at this

ARTICLES & PAPERS (Continued)

8

time had not identified himself with any political movement or party, pointed out that bolshevism was based on an absurdity: the belief that good (the classless society) could issue from evil (dictatorship and terror). This, he said, is an instance of credo quia absurdum est. The Károlyi government, with whom most of these thinkers were identified, did not have a chance of survival. While “it sought to remake Hungary in the image of Western democracies,” the Allies were bent on “dismembering the Crown lands and dividing the spoils among the new nation-states.” The ultimatum of Lieutenant-Colonel Vix that Hungary accept an armistice line favorable to Romania led directly to the downfall of the government and the assumption of power by Bela Kun, who established a Soviet Republic in Hungary. Jaszi and Polányi chose exile, Varga and Lukács joined the Communist Party. The author is on the faculty of Madison U. (EMB) □

Deák, István. “The Social and Psychological Consequences of the Disintegration of Austria-Hungary in 1918.” Österreichische Osthefte 22(1980)22-31.

The experiences of the peoples of the Habsburg Monarchy during World War I were unique and more frustrating then those of most European peoples. The losses resulting from the war were extraordinary and they undermined the entire structure and dynamics of the state. Casualties on the Russian front alone exceeded 800,000 during the first few months of the war (1914). The army, which was “the mortar of the state and society”, was decimated and the professional officers corps was replaced by hastily trained reservists who in many cases could not communicate properly with the multi-ethnic troops. The developing political-economic inbalance was furthered by the fact that casualties were proportionately greater for the Monarchy than for the other participants on either side of the front lines, that they were greater for the Austrians and Hungarians than for the national minorities, and that they were greater for peasants than for other classes of the society. Subjection to alleged German influence, inflation, hunger, and rivalry between nationalism and proletarian internationalism, and rapid social change converged to produce unfavorable psychological conditions unparalleled in the countries of the other participating nations. Together, these facts and circumstances cannot be overlooked when studying post World War I events.

The author is prof, of history and director of the Insituteon East Central Europe, Columbia U. His most recent book. His, The Lawful Revolution: Louis Kossuth and the Hungarians, 1848-1849 (see HSN no. 19/20, pp.6-7) received the Lionel Trilling Book Award from the Students of Columbia Coll, in 1980; and a thorough and favorable review by Ambrus Oltványi in the August 1980 issue of Valóság. In the same issue, Ge'za Jeszenszky bases most of his article “Uj szellem szabadságharcunk külföldi megite'leseben?” [A new approach in the assessment of our war of independence abroad?] on Deak’s book. □

Deák, István. "Collaborationists or Resisters? The Hungarian Government and Army in World War II." Paper delivered at the 1980 annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Slavic Studies in Philadelphia.

The paperdealsonly incidentally with individual resistance, rather, it focuses on the policies and behavior of the government and the power elite. From the beginning of World War II, Hungary’s leadership attempted to keep both, the German and the Soviet armies out of the country, restore as much as

NO. 27-28, SPRING, 1981 HUNGARIAN STUDIES NEWSLETTER