Tradition and Modernity in the Romanian Rural Space. Case Study: the Arges Sub-Carpathian Foothills

Open access

Abstract

This paper intends to demonstrate on the basis of a case study that rural people’s access to modern goods and services is not necessarily a relentless source of deculturalisation, because it sometimes allows a better management and valorisation of the main characteristics of the rural space. Despite socio-economic unrest and successive changes of political regimes that took place in Romania during the last century, the human communities within the Arges foothills have defended with dignity their traditional material and spiritual values, passing them down from generation to generation. In the medium and long-term, the valorisation of the Romanian rural space, in general, and of that belonging to the Arges foothills, in particular, will imply the creation of a balance between the valuable cultural potential and the quality of life of the inhabitants, who are the keepers of rural cultural heritage. At present, the best thing to do to pass on the traditions of this area is to proudly accept the affiliation to this geographical space. This is true not only for the permanent inhabitants of rural settlements, but mostly for those who have left the countryside to carry it in their minds and souls. In our opinion, this fact is a pre-requisite for preventing the loss of material and spiritual values of this cultural-historical space.

If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.

  • Alessandrescu C. 1893. Dicţionarul geografic al judeţului Muscel. Bucharest: Socec.

  • Bacanaru I. Candea M.1977. Aspecte geografice in alimentarea cu apa a localitatilor rurale si urbane din Romania’SCGGG-Geogr.. Vol. XXIV 2.

  • Barbic A. 1988. ‘Cultural identity of the Slovenian countryside: Territorial integrity and Cultural diversity from the perspective of rural communities’ Agriculture and Human Values. Journal of the Agriculture Food and Human Values Society. Vol.15 nr. 3/1998: 253-265.

  • Cocean P. 2002. Geografie regional. Cluj Napoca: Presa Universitară Clujeană.

  • Conea I.1931. ‘Aşezările omeneşti in depresiunea subcarpatică din Oltenia’ BSRRG Vol. L.

  • Courville S . 1993. ‘Tradition et modernite: leurs significations spatiales’ (Tradition and modernity: their spatial significance’) Recherches sociographiques Vol. 34 no.2: 211-231 (2 p.).

  • Cucu V. 2009. Satul Romanesc. Tradiţie contemporaneitate si speranţe de viitor. Bucuresti: Editura Transversal.

  • Dejeant-Pons M. 2007. Ghid de valorificare a patrimoniului rural. Casa de Presa si Editura TRIBUNA.

  • Giddens A.1990. The Consequences of Modernity. Cambridge: Polity Press

  • Ianoş I. 1996. ‘The changing Romanian village. The case of Semlac in Arad county Romania’ Geojournal. Vol. 38 (2).

  • Majerova V. 2009. ‘Local Initiatives Functioning as a C ondition of Rural Development of the Czech Countryside’ Eastern European Countryside. Vol. 15.: 127-149.

  • Manu C. M.2003. ‘Focul lui Sumedru’ Satul natal. Vol. III (9).

  • Florea M. S . 1994. Les fetes chez les Roumains. Etude ethnographique. Bucaresti: Ed. F undaţiei Culturale Romane.

  • Mlinar Z. Uvod M. Zdravko Ur.1995. Osamosvajanje in povezovanje vevropskem prostoru (Emancipation and Unification in the European Space). Ljubljana: Fakulteta za drubene vede Znanstvena knjinica pp.1-22.

  • Tudor P. 1997. Sărbătorile la romani. Studiu etnografic (Les fetes chez les Roumains. Etude ethnographique). Ediţie de: Datcu Iordan. Bucureşti Ed. S aeculum I. O . pp.43.

  • Panea N. 1995. Antropologie a tradiţiilor: tradiţia populară şi mecanismele de reglare a mentalităţii (Anthropologie des traditions: la tradition populaire et les mecanismes de reglage des mentalites). Craiova Ed. O mniscop pp.137.

  • Sandru I. 1967. Problemele modernizarii satului romanesc in Rev. „Terra” nr.2

  • Strassoldo R. 1990. ‘Lokalna pripadnost in globalna Uvrstitev. Druboslovne razprave’ (‘Local belonging and global placing’). Ljubljana: Slovensko sociološko društvo in Inštitut za sociologijo pp: 64-76.

  • Urucu V. 1985. ‘Centres ruraux de polarisation locale en Oltenie’ RRGGG Geographie pp.29.

  • Urucu V. Dobre S. 1998. ‘Particularitati ale dezvoltarii durabile a satului din Campia Romana si din Dobrogea’ Comunicari de Geografie. Vol.II.

Search
Journal information
Impact Factor

IMPACT FACTOR 2018: 0.391
5-year IMPACT FACTOR: 0.560

CiteScore 2018: 0.33

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2018: 0.129
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2018: 0.206

Metrics
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 170 80 5
PDF Downloads 88 58 6