Theodorescu's work as a satirical novelist was generally considered an extension of his journalistic polemics, although various critics and historians also made a point of noting the author's literary skill.

Alongside journalists Nae Ionescu and Constantin Beldie, he was employed by the literary and art magazine Insula, put out by poets Ion Minulescu and N.

[9] Both had as main targets the iconic figures of traditionalism (Alexandru Vlahuță) or moderate aestheticism (Victor Eftimiu, Eugen Lovinescu, Cincinat Pavelescu).

During the early stages of the war, when Romania balanced her neutrality, Theodorescu was working as Chief Editor of the political daily Dreptatea, under patrons Nicolae Fleva and Pache Protopopescu.

He pushed the newspaper into a position of full support for the Entente Powers, making use of strong anti-Germanic imagery: "Once you meet a German, wring his neck!

"[13] He urged Romania to enter the war on the Central Powers and annex Transylvania, while condemning the Germanophile politicians of the day—Alexandru Marghiloman, of the Conservative Party, was a canalie ("scoundrel"), and Ioan Slavici an "enemy of the national ideal".

[13] As Toader Chirca, Theodorescu was already contributing articles to Libertatea, the Germanophile sheet managed by Alexandru Bogdan-Pitești; in November 1915, he formalized this affiliation, and resigned from Dreptatea.

[17] The following moths were chaotic, leading to the invasion of Romania by the Central Powers; Bucharest fell after a month-long attack, but the legitimate government continued to resist the enemy in Moldavia.

As D. Ghirca, Theodorescu became staff writer for Pamfil Șeicaru's Țara Nouă, working alongside Cezar Petrescu, Victor Ion Popa, and Gib Mihăescu.

[26] Theodorescu was also hosted by Flacăra, a tribune of moderate Symbolism, where he published a critique of, his old rival Goga, whose work in poetry, he argued, had become too docile and mainstream.

Later a tribune for the artistic avant-garde, it was at the time mainly a political venue with socialist and Peasantist leanings, as evidenced by its original list of contributors: Theodorescu, Arghezi, Eugen Filotti, Benjamin Fondane, Henric Streitman, Nicolae N. Lupu, Camil Petrescu.

[29] Theodorescu's earliest contribution to the paper was a defense of the Socialist-Communist Party, whose members, affiliates of the Comintern, faced prosecution for dissent (see Dealul Spirii Trial).

[30] In 1924, Theodorescu joined the staff of Cuvântul Liber, Filotti's own newspaper, where he debuted with an article on a major social issue, that of knowledge workers and their payment.

He concluded, sarcastically: "Only those who are either Bolshevik or shameless will dare speak with the voters; an honest mind and a true Romanian spirit are well satisfied with the [notion of a] country.

This is all the more true if you consider that the electoral corps is something local and petty, whereas 'the country' is something integral, that will only head for Bucharest if promised free food and drink.

In December, they produced a Cuvântul issue which hosted musings by Guard founder Corneliu Zelea Codreanu, concerning a supposed "Judeo-Masonic" plot against his movement, as well as homage pieces by both editors, deploring the fate of Guardsmen in police custody.

[2] Married to the actress Marioara Zimniceanu,[2] Theodorescu was working on a translation of the Sardou–Moreau comedy Madame Sans-Gêne, which premiered at the National Theater Bucharest, under the management of novelist Liviu Rebreanu.

[2] His work with Lope's text was controversial: Theodorescu took an exact translation by Alexandru Popescu-Telega and changed it as he had done with Madame Sans-Gêne, sparking a dispute between theater professionals, with Rebreanu as an arbiter.

[48] Reviewer Șerban Cioculescu, of Revista Fundațiilor Regale, noted that, although "the spawn of journalism", Theodorescu was "a committed writer, who knows how to neatly lay down the issues and then solve them courageously.

[1] Octav Botez, literary columnist at Viața Românească, spoke of Theodorescu as "an astute social analyst", but not in fact "the sort of spirit who is endowed with the mysterious gift of creation.

"[50] În cetatea idealului was part of a family of political novels specifically dealing with the social and moral upheavals of the 1910s, standing alongside N. Davidescu's Conservator & Comp.

[52] As noted by culture critic Eugen Lovinescu, the book is seasoned with irony, which is "an admirable weapon when it comes to clashes of ideas", but "a dissolving factor in matters of creativity".

[54] The secondary plots are more "lively", according to Lovinescu: "we only retain here the profile of one Gonciu [...], the unmissable, but also selfless, partaker in all high life events, an encyclopedic dictionary of all things scientific, a genealogist and heraldist, an arbiter of taste, who, late at night, after having participated in the most 'selective' reunions of the grand salons, unbeknown to all, sinks back into his distant mahala, by the Sfânta Vineri Cemetery, and into the home of his mother, a laundress".

The murder attempt is accidentally discovered by a high society houri, Roxana Mischianu, who is infatuated with Vasile and follows him in his missions abroad, while Firina, no longer in control of her actions, turns to political assassination.

"[51] Critic Constantin Șăineanu also gave a rather positive review to the narrative, praising Theodorescu for conjuring an "intense emotion" by means of the central love story.

[59] He also notes that, stylistically, Sub flamura roșie is a failure: "[Theodorescu] has made pointless efforts to pour in all sorts of adjectives and belabored expressions, with convoluted phrases, bizarre neologisms and with risky images and comparisons that defy common sense and wear out the most benevolent of his patient readers.

[62] The communist party organ Cultura Proletară gave Sub flamura roșie a poor review, objecting to its depiction of socialist men undone by sheer erotic instinct.

This perspective, the reviewers wrote, showed Theodorescu as a "petty bourgeois", unreceptive of revolutionary idealism, but "overly familiar with the world of horse-racing, hags, and prostitutes".

[63] Other figures on the left, such as Contimporanul editor Ion Vinea, contrarily cherished Theodorescu as an anti-bourgeois from the same ideological family as Vasile Demetrius or Panait Istrati.