[27] Despite his love for Berlin, he was also dissatisfied with his father's move to the city, and spread the rumor that, in the eyes of his family and friends, Ion Luca's departure was interpreted as "insane" (while alleging that Caragiale-father was planning to author plays in German, with assistance from Mite Kremnitz, the one-time lover of poet Mihai Eminescu).

[57] During the early stages of World War I, as Romania remained a neutral country, Caragiale's notes record that his friend Bogdan-Pitești was acting as a political agent of the Central Powers, and that money he made available had been provided by German propaganda funds.

[64] In mid summer 1916, Caragiale donated money to a fund whereby the Bellu Cemetery tomb of Ștefan Luchian, a recently deceased painter and protégé of Bogdan-Pitești, was to be decorated with a bust by sculptor Dimitrie Paciurea (the world conflict and later events prevented this from happening).

He was still active within the Germanophile circles, including those who opted for collaborationism, and was held in high regard by the occupying forces: his brother Luca was employed by the new administrative apparatus, but Mateiu's own promotion to the rank of prefect was vetoed by puppet minister Lupu Kostaki.

[95] In a 1985 essay later published as a preface for Sub pecetea tainei, literary critic Nicolae Manolescu proposed that, while the story was not given a finishing touch, its plot was meant to seem ambiguous, and thus had led other commentators to wrongly assume that the text ended abruptly.

"[104] He was planning to write a biography of Albrecht Joseph Reichsgraf von Hoditz, an extravagant Silesian nobleman of the 18th century, who is briefly mentioned in "Cele trei hagialâcuri",[105] and was also interested in the works of two French classics, Antoine Furetière and Honoré de Balzac.

[22] Rosetti and Eugen Lovinescu later recounted an unusual incident sparked by the event: Iancu Vulturescu, a friend of Caragiale's and frequenter of Casa Capșa, looked intensely upon the dead body as he was paying his respects; later in the evening, he committed suicide in a hotel room.

Many of the comments added by him to his copy of the book are polemic, sarcastic, or mysterious, while the sketches he made on the margin include portrayals of boyars being put to death in various ways, as well as caricatures (such as a blazon displaying a donkey's head, which he mockingly assigned to Octav-George Lecca himself).

[129] Other eccentricities Caragiale adopted included wearing a "princely gown" of his own design, developing unusual speech patterns,[129] as well as a noted love for decorations—official honors which he tried to obtain for himself on several occasions, culminating in the Légion d'honneur award.

[10] Literary historian George Călinescu recalled having seen a middle-aged Caragiale taking walks through downtown Bucharest: amused by the writer's everyday clothes, which he depicted as of an archaic fashion and slightly deteriorated, compared him to "a butler on Sunday leave".

[144] Aside from claiming to expose his patron's alleged financing by the Central Powers before and during World War I, Caragiale discussed Bogdan-Pitești's homosexuality in disparaging terms (calling him "a blusterer of the anti-natural vice"),[145] and even laying out a plan to rob his residence.

[147] Despite Caragiale's relationships with women and his lapses into homophobia, Ion Vianu argues (partly building on similar comments made by literary historian Matei Călinescu) that the writer had a preference for homosociality or even homoeroticism, both in line with his narcissism.

[39] Noting the manifest difference in style between the realist Ion Luca and his two sons, Vianu pointed out that the three shared, as characteristic traits, "The cultivation of fully-developed forms, the view of art as a closed system resistant to the anarchic forces of reality".

[111] Elsewhere, Cioculescu indicated that a letter written by Mateiu Caragiale in his early youth, which featured his first pieces of social commentary, imitated his father's calligraphy to the point where George Călinescu initially believed they were the work of Ion Luca.

[158] Literary critic Paul Cernat proposes that the clashes between father and son evidenced Mateiu's "maternal attachment and a break with paternal authority", and, in particular, his "Oedipus complex", which he also sees manifested in the personality of modern Romanian writers such as the avant-garde founding figure Urmuz and the co-founder of Dadaism, Tristan Tzara.

[172] Although his texts are characterized by precision in defining the moment and location for the plot, the general lines of the narratives are often subject to a calculated fragmentation, an innovative technique which, Vartic writes, attests the author's familiarity with Antoine Furetière's vision.

[166] According to Matei Călinescu, the story is intertextually shaped by two of Ion Luca's prose works: one of them, titled Inspecțiune... ("Inspection..."), is part of the Mitică cycle, while the other, Grand Hotel "Victoria română", is one of the earliest depictions of anxiety in the literature of Romania.

[111] Writing in 2007, Cernat also noted a similarity between Vinea's 1930 collection of novellas, Paradisul suspinelor ("The Paradise of Sighs"), and Caragiale's Craii..., defining the two books as "poetic, mannerist and fantastic", and stressing that they both portray decadent characters.

[179] Building on the observations of his older colleague Simion Mioc, Cernat commented that Vinea, Mateiu Caragiale, N. Davidescu and Adrian Maniu, all members of the same "post-Symbolist" generation, ultimately traced their inspiration to Alexandru Macedonski and his Symbolist work Thalassa, Le Calvaire de feu.

[183] In addition, Barbu Cioculescu believed to have identified other traits shared by the narrator and author, as well as a covert reference to Marica Sion,[42] while researcher Radu Cernătescu suggests further allusions to real-life eccentric noblemen, from Pantazi Ghica to "Claymoor" Văcărescu.

[184] Perpessicus noted that, in one of his outbursts, the character Pașadia criticizes the Brâncovenesc style developed in 17th century Romanian art (which he contrasts with "the tumultuous flowering of the baroque"), only to have the narrator speak out against him; in the process, the reader is informed about Caragiale's own tastes.

"[190] George Călinescu, who referred to the narrative as "a pastiche", and to Berlin as portrayed in Caragiale's story as "a Berlin-Sodom", concluded that the text allowed readers to form "the direct sensation" of Bucharest as a "Balkan Sodom" to be discerned from the German landscape.

[203] Pajere, which reunited all of the poems Caragiale had published in Viața Românească and Flacăra, was defined by Lovinescu as a series of "archaically-toned tableaux of our ancient existence",[39] and by Ion Vianu as "a picturesque history of Wallachia",[188] while George Călinescu remarks their "savant" character.

De mult, încât cad pradă amăgirii, Când cerul pârguit la zări cuprinde Purpura toată, și toți trandafirii [...][19] Come autumn, there are deep and splendid nights That, shedding light upon the darkness of my memory, Awake within me souls

For long sleeping, and thus I'm cheated, When the ripening sky envelops in its sheen All the Tyrian purple, as well as all the roses [...] In various pieces, the poetic language is characterized by pessimism, and, according to Barbu Cioculescu and Ion Vianu, was influenced by Romania's national poet, Mihai Eminescu.

Că margini nu cunoaște păgâna-mi semeție, Afară de trufie nimic n-avut-am sfânt, Mi-am răzbunat printr-însa întreaga seminție, Și sub călăuzirea-i pășesc cu bărbăție Pe-atât de aspra cale a negrului mormânt...[208] For my pagan race knows no boundaries, I held nothing sacred other than conceit, Through it, I have avenged my entire tribe, And under its guidance I ruggedly advance Down that abruptest path to the dark grave... Caragiale continued to be hailed as a relevant writer during the ten years following his death, and his work went through new critical editions.

However, after the death of Soviet leader Joseph Stalin signaled a relative change in cultural tenets, Communist Party affiliate and writer Petru Dumitriu wrote in favor of recovering supposed "realistic sections" of works by both Mateiu Caragiale and Tudor Arghezi.

[217] Other such authors are Fănuș Neagu, who was inspired by Craii... to write his 1976 book The Handsome Lunatics of the Big Cities,[218] and Virgiliu Stoenescu, whose poetry, according to Barbu Cioculescu, was influenced by "the charm of word appositions" in Caragiale's poems.

[230] A diverging opinion was expressed by literary critic and Anglicist Mircea Mihăieș, who suggested that, despite the theoretical potential presented by Mateiu's lifestyle and background, Craii... is primarily a poorly written work, characterized by "a disconcerting naïvite", "kitsch" aesthetics and "embarrassing affectations".

The work depicts notable episodes in his Bohemian life, including a scene where the overweight and inebriated Admiral Vessiolkin leaps over tables at Casa Capșa and recites English-language quotes from William Shakespeare to an audience comprising Caragiale and various by-standers.