|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
|
Profesorul Mihai Pop – de la teorie la obicei
Neîngãduindu-si niciodatã munca egoistã de a-si aduna si sistematiza opera, în anul 1976, când profesorul împlinea 69 de ani, soseste momentul de bilant al întregii sale cariere, bilant si totodatã deschidere cãtre o nouã etapã. Aparitia Obiceiurilor... dovedeste deopotrivã cã etapele uceniciei la scoala etnologicã româneascã, dominatã de registrul descriptiv si cumulativ, precum si cea de la scoala lingvisticii europene s-au încheiat, coagulând, prin filtrele rafinate ale barajului stiintific, teoria sistemicã a culturii populare al cãrei element definitoriu, obiceiul este analizat ca act de comunicare cu limbaj propriu, sincretic si bazat pe coduri diferite de cele ale limbajului comun. Acest sistem particular este caracterizat de functii dominante si subiacente, într-o continuã schimbare de raporturi, determinând mutatii functionale. Pe lângã acestea, cultura popularã, prin valoarea sa sistemicã, este susceptibilã si interferentelor – pe linia urban / rural – interferente pe care profesorul nu le neglijeazã, ci le înglobeazã analitic în trei forme de existentã: forma traditionalã (adesea ceremonialã), forma nouã (marile sãrbãtori populare) si forma spectacol (în care cultura traditionalã este introdusã). Never allowing himself the selfish work of gathering and systemizing his work, in 1967, when the professor turned 69, a moment of evaluating his whole carrier came. But this moment also meant an opening towards a new stage. The publishing of his Obiceiurile... proves not only that his time of apprenticeship at the Romanian school of Ethnology, a descriptive and cumulative one, but also that at the European Linguistics ended, coagulating, by means of sophisticated scientific filters, his theory upon the systemic feature of the traditional culture, the defining element of which, the custom, is analyzed as an act of communication having his different encoding system, based on its own syncretic language an. This particular systems has as features both dominant and subsidiary interchanging functions which determine a continuous shifting. Besides that, the traditional culture, by means of its systemic value, is susceptible of the interference between urban and rural. This is a state of facts which the professor does not disregard but which he includes analytically into three forms of existence: a traditional one (usually ritually shaped), a new one (in the big traditional holidays), and the show shaped one (in which the traditional culture is introduced). |
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
||
| Editura Valahia | ||