Adherence to this concept in the formulation and execution of cultural policy has varied, however, and generally reflects the political climate of the time and the particular outlook of the men in power. During the 1950s, which has come to be known as the Dogmatic Period of cultural life in post-World War II Romania, the content of the arts and of intellectual expression was strictly controlled and restricted. Socialist Realism was interpreted to mean the presentation of the glories of communist ideals through the various forms of art and the use of such forms to further these ideals. All cultural effort, therefore, had to be directed to these goals, and no deviation was tolerated. The merits of a book, painting, or play were judged only by how well they fulfilled the propaganda function. Most individuals entrusted with passing judgment on what was or was not acceptable had no professional qualifications. As a result of all these factors, artistic production that was made public during this period was, with few exceptions, dull and mediocre. With the discrediting of Stalin and his policies in the mid-1950s, dogmatism in artistic expression gave way to a more liberal interpretation of what was considered appropriate. Emphasis on Socialist Realism was replaced with emphasis on nationalistic and historical themes, as Romania strove to gain greater political and economic independence from the Soviet Union. In order to be acceptable to the administrators of cultural policy, artistic expression no longer had to confine itself to the presentation of communist ideals in traditional styles, but it could address itself to a variety of themes and could experiment in innovative styles. Although artists were criticized for submitting to so-called decadent bourgeois culture if they moved too far away from the standards of Socialist Realism, they were not punished or enjoined from further creative activity unless their work could be interpreted as an attack on the regime or its policies. At the same time, expanding relations between Romania and the noncommunist world brought artists and intellectuals into contact with cultural developments elsewhere and stimulated Romanian creative expression. Cultural exchanges with Western countries were often used by the government to allow artists more freedom of expression than could be politically justified at home. Artists were allowed to exhibit or perform abroad works that had been highly criticized at home. The critical praise received abroad was proudly publicized at home as an example of Romanian genius, at the same time that these very works were being criticized for not meeting the desired standards of artistic expression.