Approaching the Rural Abandonment in Twentieth Century Romania: Political Decisions, Strategies, and Intervention Projects

The paper is centred on two case studies in Romania (Dioști, Dolj county and Antonești, Argeș county). Besides the fact that both are representative of the current rural depopulation trend in Romania, the two case studies have a particular relevance due to their initial role as “model villages”, created during the interwar period, as part of the initiative of (re)organizing the rural national territory. The design and construction of both villages during 1938-1944 was a direct response to the destruction caused by devastating calamities in two rural areas. Their reconstruction was viewed as an opportunity to put into practice the already drafted theoretical ideas concerning the “model village,” based on extensive sociological research and on the interest and perspective of interwar sociologists on the ideal restructuring of the Romanian rural realm. The reorganization of the rural territories represented a constant issue for the (Romanian) intellectuals and professionals and the peasant was a substantial element of the identitarian construct of the modern Romanian nation. This idea reflects in the considerable amount of works (researches and studies, theories and operational instruments) issued during the interwar time. Romania faced a radical political turn after the Second World Word, becoming a country positioned on the road toward communism. Industrialization and urbanization seem to represent the great narrative from this point of view, although there is a significantly consistent body of works (designing typologies included) demonstrating the interest in the systematization and reorganization of the rural territories during communism. A three layered perspective over the common interest for the rural world in order to better place in this larger context the relevance of the two case studies and to identify the reasons that forged these initiatives is here proposed. The three layered perspective takes into account a technical approach placed in the aftermath of the agrarian reforms and finding solutions for the consequences of the changes in the land ownership, the previsions for the future of the national territory (in terms of economical development) and the idealist point of view that connects the fundamental elements of the identitarian construct. Still, in the contemporary context dominated by the depopulation trend, the reference to the two case studies seems to be magnetized by their idealized force connected to the modern myths present in the imaginary of Romanian culture. Our interest is to understand What should be the perspective on the two case studies (models for the idealization of the rural world) in the context of rural depopulation (Romanian realities).