Romanian Village Halls in tHe eaRlY 1950s : [608291]

Romanian Village Halls in tHe eaRlY 1950s :
between CultuRal and PolitiCal PRoPaganda *
Sorin Radu
abstract: Village halls [Romanian: cămine culturale] appeared in many european
countries and elsewhere as early as the nineteenth century and multiplied in the twentieth.
The presence of these institutions in the rural world, despite obvious differences in their
goals and activities, demonstrates a general interest in the cultural development of
villages, as well as the emergence and growth of leisure practices amongst peasants. This essay is not a study of the history of village halls; rather, it focuses on the changes that this
institution underwent in the early years of the communist regime in Romania. it analyses
how communists transformed the village hall into a place of propaganda under the guise of “cultural work”. The study starts from the premise that communist propaganda deliberately did not distinguish between “political work” and “cultural work”. at the end
of the
1940s and the beginning of the 1950s , the village hall became the communist regime’s
central venue for disseminating political and cultural propaganda.
Introduction
Community and village halls appeared in many european countries and
elsewhere as early as the nineteenth century and multiplied in the twentieth.
Known under various names – for example, the village or community hall (uK),
rural civic center (us), foyer culturel (France), Volksheim (austria), Halkevleri
(turkey) and cămin cultural (Romania) – these:
[…] new institutions of village life were part of a global process of rural
transformation aimed at integrating peasants into the modern world whilst preserving local cultures and traditions. often founded by urban
or rural elites, the state, voluntary associations or religious organizations, these institutions aimed to refocus rural life around new practices and moral values that were often exogenous to the rural community itself.
1
The presence of these institutions in the rural world, despite obvious
differences in their goals and activities, demonstrates a general interest in
* This study was supported by CnCs – ueFisCdi , project no. Pn-ii-Ru-te-2012-3-0334
– Communism in Romanian Countryside: Case Study: Ploughmen’s Front Propaganda (1944-
1953) .
1 Raluca mușat, “transforming Village Culture: Village Halls and Cultural Centres in
the nineteenth and twentieth Century”, Rural History 2013 : International Conference of
The Historical Review / La Revue Historique
section of n eohellenic Research / institute of Historical Research
Volume Xii (2015)

230 Sorin Radu
the cultural development of villages, as well as the emergence and growth of
leisure practices amongst peasants.
The study of village halls is a new subject in the academic literature of
Romania,2 as well as abroad to a great extent.3 The village hall represents a
meeting point amongst local, regional and international history. Furthermore,
it is important to research certain aspects that aim at understanding the social,
cultural and sometimes political impact that these cultural institutions had in
rural areas. This essay is not a study of the history of village halls; rather, it
focuses on the changes that this institution underwent in the early years of the communist regime in Romania. it analyses how communists transformed
the village hall into a place of propaganda under the guise of “cultural work”.
The study starts from the premise that communist propaganda deliberately
did not distinguish between “political work” and “cultural work”. The
propaganda and “agitation” apparatus was constantly preaching the need to
elevate the cultural level of peasants, but in fact it was conducting “a work of political persuasion” in order to disseminate the soviet model, as well as
the image of the “new man” and of a “new world” in Romanian villages. The
village hall became the communist regime’s central venue for disseminating political and cultural propaganda at the end of the
1940s and the beginning
of the 1950s . The research is based on archival sources, the newspapers of the
day and the current historiography.
the European Rural History Organisation: Conference Programme: Abstracts of all Panels
and Papers, university of bern, unis, 19-22 august 2013, Zurich 2013, p. 96.
2 two almost unique cases within the specialized literature are Raluca mușat, “Cultural
Politics in the Heart of the Village: The institutionalisation of the ‘Cămin Cultural’ in
interwar Romania”, New Europe College Ștefan Odobleja Program Yearbook (2012-2013) ,
pp. 149-180, and antonio momoc’s book Capcanele politice ale sociologiei interbelice.
Școala gustiană între carlism și legionarism [The political snares of interwar sociology: The
gusti school between Carlism and legionarism], bucharest: Curtea Veche, 2012, which
discusses, briefly, dimitrie gusti’s efforts to establish village halls (pp. 150-165).
3 The significance of the topic is also emphasized by the organization of a panel at the
second international scientific conference of euRHo (august 2013), organized by Raluca
mușat and presided over by Prof. Jeremy burchardt from the university of Reading (see
http://www.ruralhistory 2013.org/rh 2013/). see also Jeremy burchardt, “Reconstructing
the Rural Community: Village Halls and the national Council of social service”, Rural
History 10/2 (1999) , pp. 193-216; brian donahoe and Joachim otto Habeck, Reconstructing
the House of Culture: Community, Self and the Makings of Culture in Russia and Beyond, new York: berghahn books, 2011; anne white, De-Stalinisation and the House of Culture:
Declining State Control over Leisure in the
USSR , Poland and Hungary, 1953-1989 , london:
Routledge, 1990.

Romanian Village Halls in the Early 1950s 231
The Institution of the Village Hall in Romania
Village halls were created in Romania as a result of the efforts of Professor
dimitrie gusti, supported by Prince Carol (later Carol ii), who was involved
in a vast programme of social, economic and cultural change in Romanian
villages at the beginning of the 1920s . in 1922 gusti was appointed director of
the newly established House of People’s Culture [Casa Culturii Poporului], the purpose of which was to “oversee the culturalization of villages”. one
of the specific tasks of this new institution was to establish village halls according to the austrian model. gusti argued that the existence of such halls
would enable the implementation of the government’s programme for the culturalization of the people through cooperation between villagers and local
élites.
4 ultimately, the House of People’s Culture did not become a reality, but
the idea of creating village halls was later included on the agenda of the “Prince
Carol” Royal Cultural Foundation.5 its founders argued that for peasants the
village hall had to act as “an establishment for spiritual construction”, meant to complement the activity of schools, churches and the administration.
6
Village halls were regulated in april 1927, when the law on the reorganization
of the “Prince Carol” Royal Cultural Foundation was published. according to
article 8, the Foundation would establish one or more village halls in each
commune for the people’s education and cultural development. Village halls
had the rights of a legal body and were run by a cultural council.7
upon being appointed minister of public education and arts in 1933,
gusti became more involved in the cultural development of villages. He made
considerable efforts to promote culture in rural areas by establishing libraries,
village halls and peasant schools.8 student and technical teams, guided by
cultural inspectors, were sent to villages with the task of elevating the cultural
level of villages and to advise the peasants in order to improve their living
conditions. guidance work took place in parallel with practical work in various
aspects of everyday life, such as health (medical tests, treatments, prescriptions, etc.), household works (practical lessons on household management and
animal husbandry, as well as buildings, wells, bridge-mending, etc.), social
4 momoc, Capcanele politice ale sociologiei interbelice, pp. 150-151, 154; dimitrie gusti,
Opere [works], Vol. iii, bucharest 1970, pp. 230-231.
5 andrei Pippidi, România regilor [The Romania of kings], bucharest 1994, p. 41.
6 Fundația Culturală Principele Carol, 1922-1925 [The “Prince Carol” Cultural Foundation,
1922-1925] , bucharest 1926, p. 7.
7 momoc, Capcanele politice ale sociologiei interbelice, p. 156.
8 dimitrie gusti, Opere [works], Vol. i, bucharest 1968, pp. 479-480.

232 Sorin Radu
life (organization of social events, festivities, theatre performances, etc.) and
religious life (distribution of icons, restoration of roadside crucifixes, buildings
and churches).9 all these activities were either conducted inside the village hall
or were organized by it somewhere else in the village.10
in 1934, the Căminul cultural. Revista pentru cultura poporului [The village
hall: magazine for the people’s culture] began to be published under the aegis
of the Royal Cultural Foundation. gusti made a distinction between “high
culture” and “mass culture”, justifying the need for the latter. He encouraged teachers to become actively involved in the establishment of village halls.
11
beyond the drive to culturalize the rural world, Carol ii was also pursuing
another goal, namely that of drawing peasants, particularly the youth, away from the propaganda of radical political movements, the legionary movement
in particular. He was also attempting to make them loyal to the monarchy, especially given that he was paving the way for creating his personality cult
and was increasingly moving towards authoritarian rule.
12
The advent of the communist regime in Romania led to major changes in the
organization and purpose of village halls. Thus, in march 1950, the Committee
for Cultural establishments [Comitetul pentru Așezăminte Culturale] was
created and was attached to the Council of ministers. From a political point of
view, this institution was subordinated to the Propaganda and agitation section
of the Central Committee of the Romanian workers’ Party [RwP] . according
to decree no. 63 of the grand national assembly,13 its aim was to “intensify the
9 traian Herseni, “expoziția de lucru a echipelor regale studențești” [The exhibition of
the royal student teams], Sociologie Românească i/1 (January 1936), p. 36.
10 Henry H. stahl, “metoda de lucru a echipelor cu satul și căminul” [The working
method of teams with the villagers and the village hall], Sociologie Românească i/12
(december 1936); dimitrie gusti, “Principiile culturii poporului” [The principles of
people’s culture], Cultura poporului. Revista asociației învățătorilor din județul Cetatea –
Albă V/3-4 (march-april 1934), pp. 1-2.
11 V. lovinescu-Rădășeni, “Învățătorul în slujba satului” [The teacher in the service of
the village], Satul 95 (october 1938), p. 16.
12 in this context, Carol ii created the organization Straja Țării [The country’s sentinel]
in 1934. its purpose was to engage Romanian youth politically and ideologically, to provide
an alternative to the propaganda of the extreme right – mainly the legionary movement,
which was very attractive to youngsters – and to garner support for the king’s autocratic
regime, thus playing a major role in the propaganda and construction of his personality cult. see sorin Radu, “Forms of Political and Para-military Youth enrollment [sic] in Romania:
Case survey: The Country’s sentinel (straja Țării),
1934-1940 ”, Estudios humanísticos.
Historia 10 (2011), pp. 209-227.
13 Published in the Buletinul Oficial, no. 25 (17 march 1950).

Romanian Village Halls in the Early 1950s 233
work of elevating the cultural level of the working masses in cities and villages”,14
as well as to coordinate the activity of state institutions for mass culture, such as
village halls, libraries, museums and reading houses [case de citit].15 moreover,
it coordinated the educational institutions that trained “cadres for mass cultural work”.
16 The Committee was headed by a president, assisted by two
vice-presidents and between four to six members appointed by decision of the Council of ministers.
17 it published three magazines: Îndrumătorul cultural [The
cultural mentor], Albina [The bee] and Călăuza bibliotecarului [The librarian’s
guide], to which they added Cultura poporului [People’s culture] in 1951. The
institution was financed directly from the state budget.18
due to the importance that the communists assigned to spreading political
propaganda amongst peasants, in december 1951 special legislation was
passed to regulate the activity of the Committee for Cultural establishments.
The stated aim was to “strengthen and develop the activity of village halls”.
several institutions were expected to contribute to this end, with support from
each local commune’s People’s Council [Sfatul Popular]. The latter were legally
bound to renovate village hall premises until 1 January 1952, to equip them
with new furniture and necessary fixtures, to provide fuel for heating and lighting, to make sure that on village hall premises only cultural activities were
conducted, to provide suitable premises to those village halls which did not
have their own or which were operating in schools, and to provide technicians
and materials for the building of new village halls.
19
The propaganda purpose of village halls was also very clearly formulated:
[…] to elevate to the highest possible level the work of presenting
and explaining to peasants the latest international political events; to contribute to the unmasking of american and english imperialists, of
14 Cristina diac, “Comitetul pentru așezămintele Culturale” [The Committee for Cultural
establishments], in dan Cătănuș (ed.), România, 1945-1989 . Enciclopedia regimului comunist.
Instituții de partid, de stat, obștești și cooperatiste [Romania, 1945-1989 : encyclopaedia of
the communist regime: Party, state, public and cooperative institutions], bucharest: editura
institutului național pentru studiul totalitarismului, 2012, p. 142.
15 The case de citit were rural libraries.
16 diac, “Comitetul pentru așezămintele Culturale”, p. 144.
17 its first president was mihail Roșianu, a native of Vâlcea County, a teacher and
former underground fighter. He was succeeded in this position by C. nistor in march
1952.
18 diac, “Comitetul pentru așezămintele Culturale”, pp. 143-144.
19 decision of the Council of ministers, no. 1442 (9 october 1951), published in the
Buletinul Oficial, no. 116 (9 december 1951); decision of the Council of ministers, no.
1542 (20 december 1951), published in the Buletinul Oficial, no. 120 (20 december 1951).

234 Sorin Radu
their titoist servants and their local agents; to intensify the work of
encouraging working people to fulfil and exceed the five-year plan; to
intensify the propagation of soviet agricultural and animal husbandry
methods amongst working peasants; to employ every form of cultural activity for the concrete popularization of the superiority of socialist agriculture and the successes attained at collective farms; to intensify the action of eradicating illiteracy and the work of disseminating
science for a more active fight against mysticism, obscurantism and
religious superstitions; to raise the artistic and political standard of events organized in village halls; to intensify local sports activities.
20
besides propaganda tasks, the Committee was also tasked with training the
village hall managers recruited from amongst workers and peasants, as well
as other cultural activists. in order to “raise the political and professional
standard”, the Committee was required to organize short-term training courses; additionally, special attention was given to the management and development
of village halls.
21
in collaboration with the ministry of public education and the society for
the dissemination of science and Culture, the Committee had to draw up
study plans, set subjects and prepare lessons for the science and artistic circles organized within village halls, and together with the ministry of agriculture it
was tasked with the same for agricultural and animal husbandry circles. They
emphasized the creation and development of libraries in village halls, as well
as the organization of training courses for librarians.
22
The Committee for Cultural establishments operated under this name
until october 1953, when it was restructured as a directorate and transferred
to the newly re-established ministry of culture.23
Political and Cultural Propaganda in the Countryside
Communists understood that both man and society had to go through a reconstruction and remodelling process with a view to creating a favourable
environment for the development of a new political regime. in order to
achieve this, they chose to combine the damaging actions of persuading, manipulating and propagandizing. The Communist Party leadership would
use propaganda as a “transmission belt” for communist ideology.
24 it was
20 diac, “Comitetul pentru așezămintele Culturale”, p. 146.
21 Ibid.
22 Ibid., pp. 146-147.
23 decree no. 462, published in the Buletinul Oficial, no. 44 (31 october 1953).
24 in this regard, see david brandenberger, Propaganda State in Crisis: Soviet Ideology,
Indoctrination and Terror under Stalin, 1927-1941 , new Haven and london: Yale university

supposed to create a bridge between the avant-garde, represented by the
Party, and the unified social categories of the proletariat, the peasantry and
the intelligentsia. Throughout the five decades of Romanian communism,
communications control, the rewriting of the past and of language, social
exclusion and mystical manipulation through the sacralization of the leader
remained constant instruments of support for the doctrinal control that
became an absolute criterion, capable of turning people into “enemies of the people” in order to impose the “new man” through terror.
25
The Communist Party generated propaganda through specially created
institutions, such as ministries, propaganda directorates and sections, but also through a series of front organizations founded to inoculate the masses with
marxism-leninism. The most important of these was the Propaganda and
agitation department [Secția de Propagandă și Agitație]. in the first years of
communist rule, some of the most significant propaganda instruments were the “fellow travellers”, namely the parties allied to the communists under the umbrella
of the national democratic Front; such mass organizations as the Patriotic
defence [Apărarea Patriotică], the union of Patriots [Uniunea Patrioților],
the Ploughmen’s Front [Frontul Plugarilor] and the Romanian association for
strengthening ties with the soviet union [Asociația Română pentru strângerea
Legăturilor cu Uniunea Sovietică
(aRlus) ]; such youth organizations as the
union of Communist Youth [Uniunea Tineretului Comunist]; the pioneers and student organizations; women’s organizations; professional associations; as well
as such scientific institutions as the institute for Party History, the Romanian-
Russian museum, the institute for Romanian-soviet studies and the society for
the dissemination of Culture and science. in addition, the communist regime
made use of a series of personalities capable of exerting influence over the collective consciousness due to their status and fame. some of them collaborated
willingly, whilst others were coerced to do so.
26
Press, 2011; Philip m. taylor, Munitions of the Mind: A History of Propaganda from the
Ancient World to the Present Day, manchester and new York: manchester university
Press, 32003; Carol s. lilly, Power and Persuasion: Ideology and Rhetoric in Communist
Yugoslavia, 1944-1953 , boulder: westview Press, 2001; Peter Kenez, The Birth of the
Propaganda State: Soviet Methods of Mass Mobilization, 1917-1929 , Cambridge: Cambridge
university Press, 1985; Vladimir Reisky de dubnic, Communist Propaganda Methods: A
Case Study on Czechoslovakia, new York: Frederick a. Praeger, inc., 1960; lindley Fraser,
Propaganda, london, new York and toronto: oxford university Press, 1957, esp. the chapter
“Communism and Propaganda”, pp. 123-140.
25 brîndușa armanca, “Propagandă și cenzură în România comunistă” [Propaganda and
censorship in communist Romania], Sfera Politicii, nos 129-130 (accessible online: http://
www.sferapoliticii.ro/sfera/ 129-130 /art11-armanca.html, last accessed: 28 January 2015).
26 For details, see oana ilie, Propaganda politică. Tipologii și arii de manifestare (1945-1958) Romanian Village Halls in the Early 1950s 235

236 Sorin Radu
after the installation of the pro-soviet government led by Petru groza
on 6 march 1945, communist propaganda became rife, because, apart from
its own propaganda apparatus, the Communist Party was now able to make
full use of the main means and state institutions that it now controlled
completely. The propaganda machine, using a great number of propagandists
and agitators, launched a full-scale assault on people’s souls and minds in its
attempt to transform them not only into obedient subjects – namely, people
ready to accept the rules imposed by the communist power if not happily, at
least passively or with complicit indifference – but also into active and loyal
subjects of the new regime.
Communist propaganda and agitation, whether we are talking about
the Communist Party or the satellite political organizations that joined its propaganda drive, attached great significance to the ideological training of their
own cadres and activists, strengthening their feeling of belonging to an élite
and ensuring their loyalty towards the Party through protection from external
“devious influences”. in this sense, communist propaganda and agitation had
an overall offensive character, but it did not neglect the defensive elements of protection. The regime argued that the strengthening of base organizations and
the consolidation of their leading role, in other words the Party’s domination
over society, largely depended on completing this task. simultaneously, they
believed that the quality of propaganda could be improved by means of a proper system of recruiting propagandists. Propaganda had to be convincing
through its revelation of the “truth” (of the communist truth, that is) in the
simplest and clearest form, so that it could be easily understood by the masses.
27
Theoretically, based on leninist principles, communists distinguished between
propaganda and agitation. if propaganda was considered a more complex
activity, which disseminated more ideas to a narrower group of individuals,
mostly Party members and sympathizers, agitation was regarded as the work
of persuading the masses, the uneducated and the uncultivated.28 Communist
agitation, in the conception of its promoters, never lied and had to be carried out consistently, on a daily basis, on any occasion and everywhere, preferably
in high-traffic or densely populated areas, such as railway stations, central
squares, schools, universities, stadiums, factories and threshing areas in the
countryside. Concretely, in the field they did not distinguish between agitation
and propaganda, the two terms being generally considered synonymous.
[Political propaganda: typologies and areas of manifestation (1945-1958) ], târgoviște: editura
Cetatea de scaun, 2014.
27 Ibid., pp. 27-63.
28 Călin Hentea, Noile haine ale propagandei [The new clothes of propaganda], bucharest:
editura Paralela 45, 2008, p. 101.

Romanian Village Halls in the Early 1950s 237
at the end of the 1940s and beginning of the 1950s , the communists
organized political propaganda in the rural world and mainly used a political
front organization for this purpose, namely the Ploughmen’s Front, led by
Prime minister Petru groza. The tactic of using fellow travellers to disseminate
communist ideas and the communist programme in Romanian villages had a reason: the Communist Party lacked credibility amongst the peasantry,
the social category that constituted approximately
80% of the country’s
population.29 From 1949 to 1953, the Ploughmen’s Front had organizations
in almost all Romanian villages and communes, and its main task was to disseminate the Communist Party’s ideology amongst peasants, to explain to them the Party’s plans for the socialist transformation of agriculture in simple
terms, to persuade them of the Party’s importance in the life of the peasantry
and the modernization of villages and so on. to achieve this goal, they
needed to train “cultural mentors” [îndrumători culturali] and “apparatchiks” (political activists) to disseminate communist ideas in peasant households.
They also needed to organize the propaganda and to construct a simple and
clearly understandable discourse – given that most peasants were illiterate,
deeply religious and very suspicious of the communist ideology – to explain the
“dictatorship of the proletariat”, “people’s democracy” and “collectivization”.
30
“Cadres” – Cultural Mentors
The propaganda and agitation of the Ploughmen’s Front paid great attention
to the ideological training of its own “cadre” (political staff) and activists.
besides strengthening their feeling of belonging to an élite, it ensured their
loyalty to the Party by protecting them from external “evil influences”. The
propaganda of the RwP served as a model for the propaganda, organization
and cadre training of the Ploughmen’s Front. The purpose of Party education, conducted according to the soviet model, was to train cadres so that, upon
graduation, they were ready to take up positions of responsibility within the central and local structures of the
RwP and in state institutions. moreover,
Party education also aimed at indoctrinating Party members in order to “enhance their ideological level”.
31
29 sorin Radu, “agrarianism in Romania: Political evolution and doctrine of Ploughmen’s
Front (1933-1953) ”, Humanities and Social Sciences Review 3/3 (2014), pp. 355-362.
30 Id., “Communist Propaganda in the Romanian Countryside: Case study – the activity
of the Cultural guides of the Ploughmen’s Front (1948-1953) ”, in Feng tao (ed.), Humanity
and Social Sciences: International Proceedings of Economics Development and Research, Vol.
lXXX , singapore: iaCsit Press, 2014, p. 32.
31 Id., “Party education in Communist Romania: Case study: The establishment and
organization of the Ploughmen’s Front’s schools of Cadres (1948 )”, Slovanský přehled 1-2
(2012) , pp. 65-79.

238 Sorin Radu
at the end of the 1940s and beginning of the 1950s , a new type of propa-
gandist emerged in communist Romania, namely “cultural mentors”
[îndrumători culturali] . They were apparatchiks educated at cadre schools with
the aim of organizing and supervising cultural propaganda activities in the countryside. Propaganda, cultural activities and education were not objectives
in themselves, but included added political-ideological messages. Peasants had
to be persuaded to attend cultural events, festivals and social functions. it was
very important for the cadres responsible for propaganda to take advantage of such events from the life of villages and to maintain control over the strategies and methods by which they could capitalize on them. “Cultural teams” were
specially instructed at cadre schools, where they learnt techniques of cultural
propaganda, its special language and the main themes of soviet propaganda.
The principal mentors attended the “training” courses. These propagandists were mainly recruited from amongst the wealthier peasants. The recruitment
of mentors or agitators was fundamental to the Ploughmen’s Front, and the selection of students for its cadre schools was based on a few essential criteria.
Thus, they had to have a “healthy origin” [origine sănătoasă], meaning they
should come from a peasant family, and a spotless political past, meaning they
should not have been members of bourgeois or fascist parties. in addition,
students should not have a hostile attitude towards the proletariat and the working peasantry, but should inspire their trust instead. The candidates’ past
was rigorously checked by the leadership of the respective Ploughmen’s Front
county organization. as for the prior education of candidates, they had to have
at least elementary education, as well as “potential for political development”.
32
The central leadership of the Ploughmen’s Front regularly transmitted,
through the propaganda apparatus, guidance and:
[…] explanations to the working peasantry in villages on all political,
economic and administrative issues to counter malicious rumours spread by the hostile reactionary forces of the peasantry with the aim
of maintaining it in a state of uncertainty, thus preventing it from
starting to implement all the measures that the government took for the improvement of their material and cultural situation […] The proclamation of the People’s Republic of Romania set the Ploughmen’s
Front Party, apart from other tasks, also that of intensifying the work
of political persuasion amongst the ploughmen masses and that of [persuading] them of the importance of the proclamation of the People’s Republic in particular.
33
32 Radu, “Communist Propaganda in the Romanian Countryside”, p. 33.
33 arhivele naționale istorice Centrale [Central national Historical archives], bucharest,

Romanian Village Halls in the Early 1950s 239
at the end of 1948, one of the main concerns of the propaganda apparatus
was to recruit cultural mentors and village instructors who were to perform:
[…] guidance and propaganda activities from person to person in
order to contribute to the mobilization of all ploughmen to fight for the consolidation and development of our People’s Republic. Peasants
must be persuaded that the People’s Republic of Romania is also theirs
and, as a result, it must be supported. The persuasion work must be conducted in plain language, easy to understand by the masses.
34
instructions related to the policy of recruiting village instructors were also
very clear:
1. instructors must be selected from amongst the most active,
politically best-prepared and most dynamic elements; 2. They will
be the permanent propagandists and persuaders in villages; 3. They
should be selected from the ranks of the working peasantry, peasant
men and women who work their own land; 4. They should be devoted
to the popular cause, to be honest and hardworking elements able to understand and explain to ploughmen all political issues.
35
at the same time, the tasks of village instructors were assigned very explicitly
in the instructions that the central leadership sent to local organizations of
the Ploughmen’s Front. They should read on a daily basis the newspapers
Frontul Plugarilor [The Ploughmen’s Front], Scânteia [The spark] and Vestea
Satelor [Village news], as well as the agitation and propaganda brochures:
[…] to combat the malicious rumours spread by reactionaries and to
reveal the goals they wish to achieve by this; to mobilize ploughmen and to be actively involved in village activities of public interest [the
construction of a footbridge, the renovation of a school or a road,
deliveries of compulsory quotas, capital enhancement of cooperatives, etc.].
They were expected to be the active correspondents of propaganda papers and
to organize collective readings of propaganda newspapers and brochures. in
particular, instructors:
[…] had to perform a constant work of persuasion concerning the
importance of the People’s Republic of Romania, [and] economic and
arhiva Comitetului Central al Partidului Comunist din România [archive of the Central Committee of the Romanian Communist Party], Fond Frontul Plugarilor [The Ploughmen’s Front Fund], file
93, p. 42 [hereafter aniC , arhiva CC al PCR, Fond Frontul Plugarilor].
34 Ibid.
35 Ibid.

240 Sorin Radu
political issues, and will relentlessly combat reactionaries by unmasking
the monarchy and by popularizing the achievements of the government of democratic Romania. […] instructors will persuade and stimulate
peasants to prepare their tools in time for the spring agricultural works, to take good care of their cattle and to select the necessary seeds for the spring sowing.
36
drafting work plans and organizing the activity of village instructors was the
task of political education departments within each county organization of
the Ploughmen’s Front.37
in reality, most agitators had a poor level of education. archival documents
shed light on a number of shortcomings faced by the political propaganda apparatus and particularly by cadre schools in the first years after world war
ii: reluctance towards involving the leaders of central and local organizations;
the poor circulation of Party press and propaganda materials; the lack of understanding of the contents and messages, hence the weak dissemination
of propaganda in rural areas; the course participants, the “students” of cadre
schools, as well as the teaching staff were poorly prepared and uninvolved,
many of them without the needed skills (they were semi-literate, lazy and
did not understand the training purposes, etc.); instructors did not possess
a coherent policy and could not coordinate political information activities in
villages; and propagandists lacked the ability to organize political information, which would have allowed them to capitalize on marxist ideas.
38
“Cultural Work” in Village Halls
The places where cultural teams and cultural mentors routinely organized
“educational” activities were village halls and even schools. in addition, they
frequently resorted to “person-to-person propaganda”. as village halls were
becoming important propaganda centres, one essential task of the Ploughmen’s
Front was to provide the necessary support to local authorities in building or
planning them, in identifying the appropriate cadres for “agitation” activities
and in coordinating propaganda activities. Village halls hosted theatre groups, folk dance ensembles, choirs and fanfares, as well as social evenings and
festivities. Cultural activity reports submitted by activists contained many
36 Ibid., pp. 42-43.
37 Ibid., p. 44.
38 For details, see Vasile Ciobanu, sorin Radu and nicolae georgescu (eds), Frontul
Plugarilor. Documente [The Ploughmen’s Front: documents], Vol. ii (1948-1951) , bucharest:
institutul național pentru studiul totalitarismului, 2012.

Romanian Village Halls in the Early 1950s 241
grossly exaggerated figures of hundreds or even thousands of events organized
in one county throughout a single year.39
The official slogan embraced by the propaganda apparatus was “no
village without a village hall, no village hall without a library and its own
premises”.40 Village halls would democratize following the removal of kulaks
[chiaburi] and of the exploitative bourgeois elements from the leadership of rural institutions and their replacement with peasants.
41 many village halls
were given names that were significant to the new regime, such as “ 23rd of
august 1944”, “1st of may”, “ 30th of december 1947”, “Horea, Cloșca and
Crișan”, “ 1907” and “Red banner”. The official discourse tried to convince
villagers not only of the importance of village halls, but also of the paradigm shift implemented by the new social order:
one of the means of cultural dissemination is the Village Hall. initially
founded on a bourgeois-landlord cultural basis, after 23 august 1944,
it continued to promote kulaks to the leadership of villages, while the
impoverished ploughmen were kept at a distance. The Village Hall,
being under the patronage of the dynasty, attempted to transform into
a reactionary instrument instead of being at the service of the masses, exploited by landlords and kulaks for ages. Village halls were run by people with reactionary views who were ultimately exposed. all across
the country mass organizations started to purge the halls, removing people with outdated views and electing to leadership councils people from the ranks of the poor and enlightenment-loving rural proletariat. steadily, the Village Hall took over its real role, namely
that of enlightening and culturalizing the working peasant masses.
42
Cultural mentors had manifold tasks, but one of the most important
was to create artistic groups, folk dance ensembles or choirs and to organize
regular “shows”. The topic of each “cultural” activity perfectly reflected the
stalinist dogma and platitudes on the “new world”, following the soviet
model. in many venues, apart from village halls, they also created artistic
39 “Căminele culturale bănățene s-au luat la întrecere în munca de luminare a poporului”
[Village halls in the banat region are competing in the work of enlightening the people],
Frontul Plugarilor, no. 1039 (12 august 1948).
40 “niciun sat fără cămin cultural!” [no village without a village hall!], Frontul Plugarilor,
no. 1051 (26 august 1948).
41 “Țărănimea muncitoare în sfaturile de conducere ale căminelor culturale” [The working
peasantry on the leadership councils of village halls], Frontul Plugarilor, no. 1047 (21 august
1948).
42 “Căminele culturale și viața satelor” [Village halls in the life of villages], Frontul Plugarilor,
no. 1048 (22 august 1948).

242 Sorin Radu
departments that organized various cultural events. The programmes of these
shows included, for instance, the singing of The International hymn, sketches
(A Story for Miners by mayakovsky, For a Better Life),43 the interpretation of
revolutionary songs (March of the Worker Youth, Partisan March) and poetry
readings (We Want Land by george Coșbuc, The Boyars by d. Corbea). They
even created theatre groups in village halls, which mainly included teachers
or civil servants working for the People’s Council.
beginning in 1950-1951 , the central leadership assigned to cultural mentors
ever-more precise tasks regarding the organization of educational-cultural work in the countryside. These so-called “cultural plans” were meant to organize cultural-political propaganda activities and stipulated measures for
the improvement of the functioning of village halls. Cultural mentors and
village instructors were hence expected to ensure the smooth operation of
village halls; to guarantee their supply of newspapers, books and brochures;
to create reading halls; and to deal with the organization of visual propaganda,
the installation of notice boards and photograph boards in the street and so on.
one of their fundamental tasks, which was connected to their village
hall activities, was the organization of conferences on various topics, as
amongst others “the alliance between the proletariat and the working
peasantry under the Party’s leadership”, “the struggle for the defence of peace
and the popularization of the forces of peace headed by the ussR and her
brilliant leader Comrade stalin”, “elevating the cultural level of peasants”,
“the delivery of compulsory quotas; the completion of the spring sowing
campaign”, “exposing class enemies, the kulaks and saboteurs”, “exposing
warmongers and their titoist conspiracies”, “enhancing love for the Party
and its leaders by recognizing the leading role of the RwP ”, “the people’s
health”, “collectivization” and “the help provided by the ussR ” to Romania.
They had to prepare artistic events, plays, choir performances, games and such.
44 They also drew up plans for sporting events: the organization of the 1
may 1951 cross-country race, the creation of football pitches, volleyball courts
and athletics grounds, support for the purchase of sporting equipment and even the establishment of sport clubs with the aim of “training the masses
for participation in sporting events”.
45 The propaganda for the socialist
43 “Căminele culturale sprijin activ în ridicarea culturală a satelor noastre” [Village
halls actively support the cultural development of our villages], Frontul Plugarilor, no.
1342 (10 august 1949).
44 For details, see Ciobanu, Radu and georgescu (eds), Frontul Plugarilor. Documente,
pp. 145-148, 219-221, 298-299.
45 serviciul Județean Vâlcea al arhivelor naționale ale României [Vâlcea County

Romanian Village Halls in the Early 1950s 243
transformation of agriculture, meaning the establishment of collective farms,
which was a fundamental task of cultural mentors, was mainly disseminated
through village halls. we do not have access to exhaustive data, but certain
documents indicate that in 1949-1950 the Ploughmen’s Front used about
1200 mentors and instructors from the central and county level who had
been specially trained for this purpose. This was meant to complement the propaganda effort of members who had received only modest training
at “village organization meetings for training and popularization”. at the
village level, for instance, from
1 october to 31 december 1952, over 3700
village instructor teams, with more than 18,000 members in total, “conducted
persuasion work amongst working peasants”. most instructors, mentors,
members of educational collectives and cadres generally responsible for the collectivization propaganda were “removed from the production process”,
being very well paid by the ploughmen organization.
46
Propaganda, “agitation work” or “persuasion work” mainly consisted of the
following activities: “processing”, namely explaining newspaper articles from Scânteia and Frontul Plugarilor to peasants, as well as brochures on the socialist
transformation of agriculture, published by communists or the Central Committee of the Ploughmen’s Front; organizing group visits of Front members to collective
farms; and organizing “reading circle meetings”, as well as “person-to-person”
propaganda amongst Ploughmen’s Front members. The central leadership
instructed regional organizations that every village organization had to form one
or two teams to “go from door to door and talk to people, […] from person to
person”. People responsible for reading circles had to be trained individually or
in groups by activists and members of education teams from the district in order
to persuade Ploughmen’s Front members of the importance of the campaign. The
latter were also required to “commit themselves” to joining collective farms and
associations [întovărășiri]. moreover, organization members had to be “trained
to uncover all kulak plots to sabotage the fulfilment of the collectivization plan”. another major task of cultural mentors was to fight the “class enemy” who spread
rumours with the purpose of creating distrust amongst peasants with regard to
government measures aimed at the socialist transformation of agriculture.
47
Propaganda leaflets on the socialist transformation of agriculture according
to the soviet model – published by the Ploughmen’s Front or the Communist
directorate of the Romanian national archives; hereafter sJVanR ], Fond Primăria orașului
Călimănești [Călimănești town Hall Fund], file 7/1951 , p. 32.
46 aniC , arhiva CC al PCR, Fond Frontul Plugarilor, roll 432, frames 71-79 ; roll 435,
frames 526-545 .
47 For details, see sorin Radu, Cosmin budeancă and Flavius solomon, “The ‘Comrades’,

244 Sorin Radu
Party and mainly distributed to ploughmen and “processed” during reading
circles – exceeded one million copies in 1950. amongst the most important
titles were: Statutul model al Gospodăriei Agricole Colective [The model status of
the collective farm], Hotărârea privitoare la consolidarea G. A. C. [The decision
on the consolidation of collective farms], Zece întrebări, zece răspunsuri [ten
questions, ten answers], Așa ne făurim o viață mai bună [This is how we
forge a better life for ourselves], Întrebări și răspunsuri despre viața țărănimii
sovietice [Questions and answers about the life of soviet peasants], Scrisori din
colhozul Budionâi pentru țăranii români [letters from the budyonny Kolkhoz
to Romanian peasants], Familia sovietică [The soviet family], Răspunsurile
țăranilor sovietici din colhozul STALIN [The answers of soviet peasants from
the stalin Kolkhoz] and Tractoriștii [The tractor drivers].48
Contemporary documents present an interesting picture of village halls in
the 1950s . For instance, reports on the activity of the village hall in Călimănești,
Vâlcea County, for the years 1950 to 1957 reveal significant aspects of the
manner in which communists used this institution in their “cultural-political
work”. Thus, in 1951, their primary goals were “to educate and promote literacy
amongst the masses, and to elevate their cultural level through village halls”, “to disseminate soviet methods amongst the working peasantry” and “to intensify
persuasion work regarding collective farms amongst the working peasantry”.
49
The institution’s entire activity was focused on implementing the “directives of the second Congress of the workers’ Party on the development of agriculture”.
Furthermore, “it contributed to the mobilization of the entire people to the struggle for the defence of peace and the construction of socialism in the People’s
Republic of Romania”. in order to ensure the success of the sowing campaign,
they planned eleven cultural evenings to persuade the locals; they devised two slogans related to agricultural works; they held five conferences using the
radio-relay station; and the theatre group was also prepared. as for the issue
of collectivization, the village hall arranged two cultural evenings and three conferences, as well as social events in cooperation with the pupils. in addition,
they organized conferences on various “international issues”, for instance on the
Propaganda and the Collectivization of agriculture in eastern europe: The Ploughmen’s
Front in Romania”, Historický časopis 63/1 (2015) , pp. 113-135.
48 aniC , arhiva CC al PCR, Fond Frontul Plugarilor, roll 435, frames 112-139 ; serviciul
Județean Hunedoara al arhivelor naționale [Hunedoara County directorate of the
Romanian national archives; hereafter sJHanR ], Fond Comitetul Regional al Partidului
muncitoresc Român [The Regional Committee of the Romanian workers’ Party Fund],
file 83/1950 , p. 175.
49 sJVanR , Fond Primăria orașului Călimănești, file 7/1951 , pp. 6-12, 202-205.

Romanian Village Halls in the Early 1950s 245
18th anniversary of the adoption of the Constitution of the ussR in 1936. The
report admitted the existence of problems in the sense that many of those involved
in artistic and propaganda work refused to take part in rehearsals; it was mainly
teachers who declined to participate in the work of cultural elevation. as for the
preparation of the artistic programme, there were difficulties in “mobilizing the youth and the elderly for rehearsals”.
50 For local political officials, it was more
serious that the manager turned the village hall premises into “a dance hall and
an entertainment hall instead of caring for the culturalization of the masses”.51
we encounter the same criticism in march 1956, citing the People’s Council
deputies’ lack of interest in the activity of the village hall, which was turned into
an “entertainment hall”.52 it appears that a year later they managed to rectify the
problem and reported that “a collective of conference speakers, a dance and a
theatre group, a brigade, a choir and a library” were now operational there. This
institution hosted conferences, sunday socials, cultural evenings, radio listening
clubs, chess games and preparations for the 1 may programme, as well as for
the communal festival on 26 may, the intercommunal one on 16 June and the
regional one on 23 June.53
Cultural propaganda activities were financed directly from the state
budget, but later, as local Party and Ploughmen’s Front organizations grew
in strength, they also created donation funds and collected dues from Party
members. within local organizations they created so-called “self-imposition
funds” [fonduri de autoimpunere], to which ordinary citizens contributed “voluntarily”.
54 Ploughmen and Party organizations, which started to multiply
in rural areas after 1949, made considerable efforts to persuade peasants to
become voluntarily and actively involved in the building of village halls.55
The official discourse conveyed inflated numbers of community halls built
in villages and towns. in august 1948, their number was allegedly close to
50 sJVanR , Fond Primăria orașului Călimănești, file 1/1954 , pp. 28, 29.
51 Ibid., p. 77.
52 sJVanR , Fond Primăria orașului Călimănești, file 5/1956 , p. 61.
53 sJVanR , Fond Primăria orașului Călimănești, file 3/1957 , pp. 70, 71.
54 sJHanR , Fond Frontul Plugarilor. Comitetul Județean Hunedoara [The Ploughmen’s
Front: Hunedoara County Committee Fund], file 5/1947 , p. 373; sJVanR , Fond Primăria
orașului Călimănești, file 2/1951 , p. 4.
55 “Plugărimea muncitoare din Cher, jud. arad a construit un local de cămin cultural”
[working ploughmen in Cher, arad County, built premises for a village hall], Frontul
Plugarilor, no. 1042 (15 august 1948); “Țăranii muncitori din comuna iliușa – someș au
construit prin muncă voluntară un cămin cultural” [working peasants in the commune
of iliușa – someș built a village hall through voluntary work], Frontul Plugarilor, no. 1308
(1 July 1949).

246 Sorin Radu
7000,56 and by the end of 1949 it grew to over 10,000 . in addition, the state
plan for 1950 stipulated the construction of another 1400 across the country.57
beyond the propaganda discourse, there were numerous cases when village
halls did not have their own premises, but were hosted on school grounds
or in buildings assigned to them by local authorities, as evidenced in the
contemporary press and especially in archival documents.58
amongst the propaganda methods regularly employed by agitators and
propagandists was the use of cinema caravans, which showed movies in village halls, as well as newsreels on the political achievements of the government and, obviously, of the soviets under stalin’s leadership. They alternated
between political content and musical pieces.
59 Certain village halls started
to be equipped with film projectors and radios.60 The propaganda discourse
took full advantage of these technical improvements implemented by Party organizations. Relevant in this sense is an article published in the Frontul
Plugarilor newspaper, entitled “old Costache ene from the commune of
Corbul de sus – Constanța listens to radio in the village hall”.
61
in village halls they also organized a significant number of so-called “reading
circles” and “people’s libraries”.62 Presidents of communist organizations and/or
of the Ploughmen’s Front in villages were tasked with overseeing and supporting the activity of reading circles, so that they operated as efficiently as possible. “we
shall train all education collectives” – one document reveals – “and we shall go
over the material together so that they are better informed and able to control
and support reading circles in order for them to conduct their activities, and
we shall schedule reading circles in close connection with village halls.”
63 They
encouraged the “collective reading” of newspapers64 and propaganda materials.
56 “Căminele culturale și viața satelor”.
57 “Căminele culturale să fie un factor tot mai activ în lupta pentru îndeplinirea Planului
de stat pe 1950” [may village halls become an ever-more active factor in the fight for the
fulfilment of the state plan for 1950], Frontul Plugarilor, no. 1463 (4 January 1950).
58 “Căminele culturale bănățene s-au luat la întrecere în munca de luminare a poporului”.
59 sJHanR , Fond Frontul Plugarilor. Comitetul Județean Hunedoara, file 5/1947 , pp.
375, 376.
60 “Căminul Cultural de la Voinești – muscel a primit în dar de la ministerul artelor
un aparat de filmat” [The village hall in Voinești – muscel received a camera as a present
from the ministry of arts], Frontul Plugarilor, no. 1295 (16 June 1949).
61 Frontul Plugarilor, no. 1200 (21 February 1949).
62 “bibliotecile căminelor culturale capătă o mare dezvoltare” [Village hall libraries are
developing quickly], Frontul Plugarilor, no. 1166 (12 January 1949).
63 sJHanR , Fond Comitetul Regional al PmR Hunedoara, file 83/1950 , p. 176.
64 Frontul Plugarilor, no. 1160 (2 January 1949).

Romanian Village Halls in the Early 1950s 247
as for peasants’ participation in these circles and the efficiency of these
cultural propaganda actions, contemporary documents disclose a profound
discrepancy between the objectives established at the central level and the
realities in the field.65 organization leaders frequently pinpointed that it was
necessary for reading circle organizers to be trained in reading brochures and
newspapers in order to attract new members. similarly, each agitator had to
be trained to have a responsible attitude towards the circle.66
The official image of the efficiency of “cultural work” in villages was extremely
positive for the central political leaders, given that reports submitted by activists from local, county and central organizations were usually exaggerated and marked by an enthusiasm that was not grounded in reality. in this respect, we
can mention the “official” impression of a propagandist working in the village of Pietroasele in buzău County on the activity of village halls:
The library hall was filled with ploughmen and ploughwomen of all
ages. one of them read a few articles and pieces of news from Scânteia,
Frontul Plugarilor and Albina on current national and international
political issues. Considerable interest was stirred by an article on the life of soviet ploughmen, published in Frontul Plugarilor. Then, they
all listened to the village hour on the radio and discussed what they heard. afterwards, they discussed household issues. They shared what
they learnt from their work and from reading books and newspapers. Then, they committed themselves to improve their work, so that they do not fall behind other villages. in the afternoon the working
ploughmen in Pietroasele once again gathered in the village hall and attended a festivity organized by the village youth. The programme
included recitals, folk dances and a wonderful choir made up
exclusively of peasants.
67
everything seems taken out of the propagandist’s manual. The practice of
“self-commitments”68 for work was routine amongst village instructors and
65 For example, the organization in orăștie, Hunedoara County, reported on 22
december 1950 that they had 75 reading circles, of which 46 were operational; sJHanR ,
Fond Comitetul Regional al PmR Hunedoara, file 83/1950 , p. 194.
66 Ibid., p. 197.
67 “niciun sat fără cămin cultural!” [no village without a village hall!], Frontul Plugarilor,
no. 1128 (23 november 1948).
68 “la consfătuirea care a avut loc la Huși, directorii căminelor culturale și bibliotecarii
și-au luat angajamente pentru îmbunătățirea muncii” [at the meeting in Huși village hall
managers committed themselves to improving their work], Frontul Plugarilor, no. 1402
(20 october 1949).

248 Sorin Radu
others as well. Consequently, their activity reports had to reflect the fulfilment
of these commitments and implicitly the fulfilment of cultural work plans.
another “cultural” activity constantly included on village hall agendas
was the organization of celebrations to mark important events and dates for
the Party, such the great october Revolution, the celebration of which often
caused bafflement amongst peasants since it occurred on 7 november,69 as well
as on 1 may, 23 august and 30 december.70 The organization of tournaments
and competitions amongst village halls at commune, district and county level can be similarly understood.
71
a further important role that the propaganda apparatus assigned to village
halls was their involvement in the “cultural development of villages”. For this, they singled out teachers, who were often appointed to lead cultural teams
tasked with improving the image of the Ploughmen’s Front and implicitly
that of communists. The village hall became the place where, under the
guidance of teachers, they created literacy schools for peasants according to
the soviet model, which were operational mainly during the winter months.
72
in certain villages there were zealous activists who tried unsuccessfully to teach peasants the Russian language.
73 in general, teachers were determined
to become involved in the literacy campaign,74 to adopt teaching methods
69 “Căminele culturale din întreaga țară au făcut mari pregătiri pentru cinstirea zilei
marii Revoluții socialiste” [Village halls across the country have made intense preparations
for the celebration of the great socialist Revolution], Frontul Plugarilor, no. 1097 (18
october 1948).
70 “Căminele culturale din județul Cluj se pregătesc pentru sărbătoarea de 23 august”
[Village halls in Cluj County are preparing for the 23 august celebrations], Frontul
Plugarilor, no. 1351 (20 august 1949).
71 “Întrecerea între căminele culturale din Plasa broșteni, județul mehedinți” [The
competition between village halls in the rural district of broșteni, mehedinți County],
Frontul Plugarilor, no. 1073 (20 september 1948); “În județul Ciuc a avut loc a doua etapă a
concursurilor între echipele căminelor cultural” [Ciuc County organized the second stage
of the competition between village hall teams], Frontul Plugarilor, no. 1299 (20 June 1949).
72 “Învățătorii și actul de la 23 august” [teachers and the events of 23 august], Frontul
Plugarilor, no. 166 (24 august 1945); “Fiecare trebue să pună umărul” [everybody must
contribute], Frontul Plugarilor, no. 551 (10 december 1946).
73 “la căminul cultural din comuna gugești – Fălciu s-au deschis cursuri pentru învățarea
limbii ruse” [The village hall in the commune of gugești – Fălciu organizes Russian language
classes], Frontul Plugarilor, no. 1344 (12 august 1949).
74 “În lupta dusă împotriva neștiinței de carte să nu precupețim nicio sforțare” [we must
not waste any effort in our fight against illiteracy], Frontul Plugarilor, no. 1190 (10 February
1949); “Școlile de alfabetizare au desfășurat o muncă fără răgaz” [literacy schools have
worked without respite], Frontul Plugarilor, no. 1249 (20 april 1949); “Pentru cuprindrea

Romanian Village Halls in the Early 1950s 249
from the ussR ,75 to combat superstitions76 and to support the activities of
village halls.77
as for the campaigns amongst peasants, activity reports clearly overstated
the successes and achievements of village instructors and propaganda agents:
“The activity of village halls in our villages,” reported an activist in 1949,
“improved on a daily basis. The work of elevating the political and cultural level of the working peasantry is performed with ever-more zeal.”
78 “guided
and supported by the organizations of the RwP and of the Ploughmen’s
Front, village halls became a living reality. […] artistic and cultural activities
taking place at this institution allegedly contributed to unity amongst the nationalities and the elevation of their cultural level”,
79 as well. The propaganda
press sent to rural areas regularly published articles maintaining the idea that village halls were meant to spread “the light” amongst peasants. The meaning
of the concept was political: “Village halls in competition to spread the light
in villages”;
80 “working peasantry fighting for the cultural development of
villages”;81 “The cultural upheaval of the working peasantry”.82
another cultural activity undertaken in village halls and encouraged by
village instructors was the creation of choirs, which organized “performances” for villagers, usually on sundays. Controls conducted by activists from the
central leadership noted that the number of village choirs in village halls
tuturor neștiutorilor de carte la cursurile de alfabetizare” [For the enrolment of all illiterate
people in literacy courses], Frontul Plugarilor, no. 1601 (8 February 1951); “organizațiile
Frontul Plugarilor trebue să sprijine activ munca de alfabetizare” [Ploughmen’s Front organizations must actively support the work of promoting literacy], Frontul Plugarilor, no.
1699 (21 december 1952).
75 “Cum se duce munca culturală la sate în uniunea sovietică” [How cultural work is
conducted in soviet villages], Frontul Plugarilor, no. 1230 (28 march 1949).
76 “să luptăm pentru luminarea plugărimii muncitoare combătând superstițiile” [let us fight
for the enlightenment of working ploughmen by combatting superstitions], Frontul Plugarilor,
no. 1215 (11 march 1949).
77 “Învățătorii în sprijinul activității căminelor culturale” [teachers support the activity
of village halls], Frontul Plugarilor, no. 1210 (5 march 1949).
78 “Căminele Culturale sprijin activ în ridicarea cultural a satelor noastre” [Village halls
actively support the cultural elevation of our villages], Frontul Plugarilor, no. 1342 (10 august
1949).
79 “Căminele culturale din județul Ciuc” [Village halls in Ciuc County], Frontul Plugarilor,
no. 1033 (5 august 1948).
80 Frontul Plugarilor, no. 1174 (21 January 1949).
81 Frontul Plugarilor, no. 1196 (17 February 1949).
82 Frontul Plugarilor, no. 1197 (18 February 1949).

250 Sorin Radu
grew considerably, but admitted to “certain shortcomings”, especially to
“[…] certain choir leaders’ lack of training and understanding of musical
problems. The repertoire of our choirs still includes the old melancholic
songs devoid of moral and educational value. These songs must be replaced
by songs that convey the goals of working people from all areas of activity.”
another noted inadequacy was “the lack of songs from our neighbouring and
friendly neighbours”. activists argued that some of these deficiencies could be
overcome by creating a cadre school for the training of village choir masters.83
The activity agenda of village halls also included the organization of exhibitions
illustrating aspects from the life of soviet workers and peasants, the achievements
of collective farms or the sacrifices made by the Party in the construction of a
“democratic” Romania. For instance, in august 1948, in the village hall in strehaia,
aRlus mounted an exhibition with the title Soviet Workers Earned their Right to a
Better Life: “The exhibition is a glimpse into the country where exploitation of man
by man has been abolished for good.” it was visited by “hundreds of peasants” on
31 July, when the weekly market was held at strehaia.84
as the influence of communists extended over the rural world, they assigned
new meanings and ever-more complex tasks to village halls. Thus, “fighting against superstitions and prejudices”
85 became a major objective of this
institution. Furthermore, the objective of propaganda and cultural activities had to be “the tightening of friendly relations between peasants and workers
and between Romanians and the other nationalities”.
86 not least, village hall
managers had to organize “conferences” to disseminate science, especially the
books published by the Cartea Rusă [The Russian book] publishing house:
“Village halls had to conduct a serious activity, capable of contributing to the
arming of working people in villages with one of the most powerful weapons
against the class enemy, namely the weapon of science.”87
83 “Corurile sătești ale căminelor cultural” [Village hall choirs], Frontul Plugarilor, no.
1040 (13 august 1948).
84 “activitatea culturală în județul mehedinți” [Cultural activity in mehedinți County],
Frontul Plugarilor, no. 1038 (11 august 1948).
85 “Căminul cultural din comuna bozna – sălaj în luptă pentru combaterea superstițiilor”
[The village hall in the commune of bozna – sălaj is fighting against superstitions], Frontul
Plugarilor, no. 1347 (15 august 1949).
86 “Căminele culturale trebue să fie arme tot mai puternice împotriva neștiinței” [Village
halls must be ever-more powerful weapons against ignorance], Frontul Plugarilor, no. 1299 (20
June 1949).
87 Following the controls, it was noted that, “popular science brochures published by
Cartea Rusă are not made available to working peasants in order to persuade them on
these issues”; ibid.

Romanian Village Halls in the Early 1950s 251
Conclusions
Communist propaganda understood the important role that village halls
played in the life of local communities. Therefore, it is not fortuitous that,
with the institutionalization of the communist regime, the propaganda
apparatus intended to integrate these institutions into the political agitation
machine. in an attempt to conceal the real motives behind the new
propaganda campaigns in villages, apparatchiks, propaganda agents, and political and cultural instructors conducted their agitation and propaganda work under the guise of “cultural work” or “political-cultural work for the
enlightenment of peasants”. Peasants regarded these new persuasion methods with suspicion, especially given that most ideas and clichés that village
instructors promoted by using various propaganda methods ran counter
to their interests (such as the issues of delivery quotas and collectivization,
the fight against superstitions, etc.), while others were foreign to their
interests and mentality (the fight for peace, stalin’s personality cult, soviet
science, etc.). The introduction by the propaganda apparatus of certain new techniques into the propaganda mechanism, such as the creation of dance
groups, choirs, libraries and literacy campaigns, had the aim of erasing
peasants’ reticence towards the new political order and of attracting them
into the ensemble of political-cultural activities conducted in village halls.
The formalism of peasants’ participation in the activities of village halls in the
1950s can be understood from the perspective of their fears of staying away,
especially given that the regime’s hunt for and repression of “class enemies”,
rumour-mongers and such was fierce. in this context, the communists’ use
of the Ploughmen’s Front for propaganda purposes in rural areas, in general, and the evolution of village hall activities, in particular, had a simple and
obvious motive: the Ploughmen organization had greater credibility amongst
peasants, many of them taking refuge in it in the hope of escaping the grip of
the Communist Party.
at this stage of research, we still do not have a clear picture of the activity
and especially the effectiveness of village halls and cultural mentors in the
Romanian rural world. nonetheless, we note that, beyond certain cadres’
weak activity and the deputies’ lack of involvement in People’s Councils, in economically more developed localities with strong Ploughmen and
communist organizations village halls managed to organize their work
very efficiently. Thus, in the second half of the
1950s , village halls operated
based on activity plans drawn up by the People’s Councils, and, at least at the level of official reports, most village cultural institutions included reading
circles, dance groups, choirs and libraries. The activity of village halls was

252 Sorin Radu
to be rigorously organized later, especially after 1965, when the regime
organized the “political-cultural work” in villages more coherently and with
greater impact amongst peasants, stirring their enthusiasm on more than
one occasion, as happened in the case of the participation of village cultural
teams at various festivals and competitions under the aegis of the Cântarea
României [song to Romania] festival in the 1970s and 1980s .
Lucian Blaga University of Sibiu