A.M.: The Păltiniş Diary, as well as the memorial or epistolary literature published after 1989, also refers to the theme of the circulation of publications: as coming from abroad, passed on to friends, commented upon.

Andrei Pleşu: Noica had his almost candid way about these things. He managed to stay in touch with his friends from abroad, who sent him some periodicals. He was, for instance, a very passionate reader (a passion that we never shared) of Science et Vie. He wanted to be updated not so much on the strictly philosophical side of the intellectual life in the ?other? Europe, as on what was happening in scientific inquiry. The world goes on, there is a modernity ever more gloriously outlined and the ?philosopher? needs to be informed, to be updated? On the other hand, I would say that, curious as it might seem, it was not the access to the latest information, or the more or less illicit reading of bits of Western European bibliographies that kept us there. Being aware that this was chance information that we could not get on a regular, reliable basis, we chose to be safe with the classics. This was yet another of Noica?s themes, i.e. that, given the scarcity of information, our advantage was that we could still visit the classics with innocent minds. In the West, you needed to be informed on the latest commentaries on Aristotle, whereas in Păltiniş we could keep to Aristotle himself. This exquisite pleasure of visiting the classics, of engaging in commerce with the acknowledged values, with an already shaped and accepted ?canon? was part and parcel of our formation. Some younger colleagues might say that it was only unfortunately so, since we are thus left more insensitive to the canonical revolutions of our days. I can?t tell. But at that point, this ?imposed? conversation with the major texts was a vital one for us.

A.M.: Is it so important to be tuned in to the times? Păltiniş enjoyed the privilege of the intermission.

Andrei Pleşu: Under those circumstances, yes, it was a privilege. It is by no means compulsory to be tuned in to the times. Yet, I think it isn?t wise not to take evolutions into account. Whenever I find myself in a critical mood as to the developments of ?post-modernity?, I feel guilty too. My concern is not to slip into the classic generation gap, where every generation discards whatever comes after. I believe that the century is much more interesting and challenging than we can imagine and that, without indiscriminately embracing it, we need to face and vigorously assume it. Any solution that grows out of withdrawal, nostalgia or false solemnity can only be unhealthy.