[22] His other literary works of the period include De la țară ("From the Countryside", 1906), În clasa cultă ("In the Cultured Class", 1909), Două iubiri ("Two Loves", 1910), Prăpastia ("The Abyss", 1912), and a collection of Schițe și povestiri ("Sketches and Short Stories", 1912).

One of his first contributions in Iorga's Neamul Românesc magazine was an article celebrating King Carol I's decision to pardon the rebels, and joining in the array of voices demanding more, and more substantial, reforms.

[3][22][49] Similarly exiled and sheltered, Goga put out the propaganda paper Gazeta Ostașilor, with contributions from both Agârbiceanu and Iorga; after a hiatus caused by the fall of Bucharest in December, it was reissued as România in February 1917.

He was enthusiastic about the unionist process, describing it in Neamul Românesc as the culmination of efforts by "all the long-gone sowers, the teachers and apostles of yesteryear, that whole sacrifice made by a Romanian generation in its entirety.

[89] In early 1920, he and Sever Dan split with the PNR's mainstream in agreeing to support Averescu as Prime Minister of Romania,[90] objecting in particular to the attempted rapprochement between the Nationalist opposition and the National Liberal Party.

[102] Initially joining the National Peasants' Party (PNȚ) ultimately formed by the PNR and the Peasantists in 1926, Agârbiceanu left in March 1927, allegedly because he felt "disgusted" by the group's practices.

Given the secular values of the movement's leaders in Romania, his participation was somewhat incongruous, but Agârbiceanu did not see a conflict between his religious creed and a current centered around supposedly objective natural laws.

[112] His critique of modern life and the constitutional system extended into the realm of language policy: with a series of articles published in Goga's Țara Noastră in 1928, he argued that political journalism had destroyed linguistic honesty; he also complained that parliamentary procedures were perfunctory, "even when speakers are in the opposition.

He argued that Maniu, recently appointed Prime Minister, had inherited a policy of terror which prevented peasant voters from even considering voting for the opposition; he also claimed that the party was undergoing a shift toward the left and far-left, with dangerous consequences for the country as a whole.

[115] His report on the Romanians of Yelisavetgrad, carried by Transilvania in 1928, included his thoughts on the need to maintain contact with the isolated community: Agârbiceanu proposed that Romania approach the Soviet Union with offers to mass-educate children in the Moldavian ASSR.

It hosted pieces condemning political violence and asking for "de-solidarization" with the movement; editorial opinion signed by Agârbiceanu, included the promise of a "Romanian sort of vengeance" for assassination of Armand Călinescu by an Iron Guard death squad (September 1939).

According to historian Petre Țurlea, his text was "downright hilarious", since it honored the king for having "organized the entire Nation for guarding and defending the borders"—"not two weeks later", Romania was forced by the Soviets to relinquish control over Bessarabia.

[155] Possibly due to sheer geographical proximity, Agârbiceanu was also sought out and praised by members of the liberal Sibiu Literary Circle, including Ion Negoițescu and Cornel Regman.

According to various accounts, he allowed the censors to operate multiple changes, as long as the substance of his writing was not itself altered;[86] critics are led to believe that any added similarities with the prevailing school of socialist realism can be attributed to such interventions.

[13] According to his Sămănătorul patron, Nicolae Iorga, he was great as the author of ballades,[10] and is seen by historian Radu Brateș as heavily indebted to George Coșbuc and János Arany[182] (or, in Breazu's words, as "typically Coșbucian").

[33] As an exponent of the Sibiu Literary Circle, Cornel Regman emphasized (and, according to critic Gabriela Gavril, grossly overstated) Agârbiceanu's links with Russian classics, seeking to downplay any Sămănătorist residue.

"[191] Building on the observations of various other critics, scholars Roxana and Antonio Patraș highlight Agârbiceanu's sociological talents, his links with literary modernism and behavioralism, especially in his willingness to investigate the social and economic upheavals of the interwar.

In a 1922 piece in Țara Noastră review, Moise Nicoară accused Agârbiceanu as living inside the "lair" of "intellectual regionalism", unable or unwilling to speak to the country as a whole; such claims were refuted in the 1930s by Transylvanian journalists such as Teodor Murășanu and Gheorghe Popa.

"[206] Critic Mihail Dragomirescu argues that Agârbiceanu's work amounts to a set of humanitarian "directives", although, he concludes, its depiction of "the bleak and mystical recess of life" is a fine literary contribution, "rising above" his generation's.

On the other hand, Voncu observes that the writer uses his artistic talents in theological works such as Despre minuni ("About Miracles") and Din pildele Domnului, ably narrating simple texts that can appeal either to their intended audience of rural believers or to a more cultivated set of readers.

[24] The work contains an implicit Christian lesson is about the love of money and its devastation of an Apuseni get-rich mining community; it is also one of Agârbiceanu's literary studies into the economic mindset as transformed by the arrival of credit, by the "alienating effects of existence outside the logic of agricultural labour.

"[214] The novel, Lovinescu argues, is overall "awkward", but still interesting as a social fresco,[206] called a "frightening human torment" by Iorga;[215] Șăineanu, however, deplores its "prolixity" and arcane mining terminology.

The erotic dilemma is one of several narrative threads: Legea trupului is also a story of inter-ethnic conflict (Romanians versus Hungarians), and a probe into the regional politics in Transylvania[220] (a theme that also preoccupied him when writing În clasa cultă).

The plot follows its protagonist, a scholarly priest by the name of Andrei Pascu (understood by readers to be Agârbiceanu's alter ego),[222] as he finds himself in his work as a missionary of religion and cultural nationalism, despite being set back by poverty and revisited by his worldly past.

Agârbiceanu suggests that both characters have secrets to hide from the village society, with its traditional mores—the husband, Andrei, because he is no longer able to present himself as a good laborer, and Stana, because she is increasingly driven by sensual urges; this results in them making a "strange deal" with each other.

[226] By contrast, other "Chekhovian" stories of the 1920s outline the fate of insignificant people crushed by existential disaster, who find a "tragically sublime" purpose—this is the case with Trăsurica verde, about a paralytic child and his suicidal father.

[233] According to Manolescu, his stories of the period were largely outdated, with more experimental work was being put out by Hortensia Papadat-Bengescu and Camil Petrescu; Agârbiceanu "could only strike the figure of a naive moralist, reeking of a parson's mindset, in all ways incompatible with the emancipated Romanian society of the interwar.

It shows Peter returning to Earth as a protector of Greater Romania, which he tries to defend from infestation by ruthless politicians and decadent writers;[125] the saintly figure is especially troubled by the Romanians' inability to distinguish right from wrong, by their being "fragile in front of temptation".

[239] Ovidiu Papadima celebrated Sectarii for its intent of bridging satire and the epic narrative, to reflect the "bitter" nature interwar conflicts and move away from the easygoing political comedies of Ion Luca Caragiale.

[242] Vremuri și oameni veers into describing the unintended consequences of interwar land reform, the spread of communist subversion as embodied by embittered war veterans, and eventually the toning down of discontent and feuds through common-sense solutions as devised by the peasants themselves.