Abbreviations. OUKIII Karel Čapek, O umění a kultuře III (Prague: Československý. spisovatel, 1984) spisovatel, 1985)

Abbreviations Adam

AZNI AŽŽ DČVU

Dodatky Dramata OaS OUKI OUKII OUKIII Povídky Tales Three Novels

Karel and Josef Čapek, Adam the Creator: A Comedy in Six Scenes and an Epilogue, trans. Dora Round (London: George Allen & Unwin Ltd, 1929) Štěpán Vlašín, ed., Avantgarda známá a neznámá, vol.1 (Prague: Svoboda, 1971) Stanislav K. Neumann, Ať Žije Život! Nové úvahy o novém umění (Prague: Borový, 1920) Vojtěch Lahoda, Mahulena Nešlehová, Marie Platovská, Rostislav Švácha, Lenka Bydžovská, eds., Dějiny českého výtvarného umění (IV/1–2) 1890/1938 (Prague: Academia, 1998) Karel Čapek, O umění a kultuře, Od člověka k člověku (Dodatky) (Prague: Český spisovatel, 1995) Karel Čapek, Dramata: Loupežník, RUR, Věc Makropulos, Bílá nemoc, Matka (Prague: Československý spisovatel, 1992) Jiří Padrta, ed., Osma a Skupina výtvarných umělců, 1907–1917: Teorie, Kritika, Polemika (Prague: Odeon, 1992) Karel Čapek, O umění a kultuře I (Prague: Československý spisovatel, 1984) Karel Čapek, O umění a kultuře II (Prague: Československý spisovatel, 1985) Karel Čapek, O umění a kultuře III (Prague: Československý spisovatel, 1986) Karel Čapek, Povídky z jedné a z druhé kapsy (Prague: Český spisovatel, 1993) Karel Čapek, Tales from Two Pockets, trans. Norma Comrada (North Haven, CT: Catbird Press, 1994) Karel Čapek, Three Novels: Hordubal, Meteor, and An Ordinary Life, trans. M. and R. Weatherall (Highland Park, NJ: Catbird Press, 1990)

All translations by the author unless otherwise noted.

209

Notes Introduction 1. The literature to which I refer includes, first and foremost, the classic work of Carl Schorske, Fin-de-Siècle Vienna: Politics and Culture (New York: Vintage, 1981). It also includes those who follow his paradigm implicitly or explicitly, even as they seek to modify or revise it. See, for example, Péter Hanák, The Garden and the Workshop: Essays on the Cultural History of Vienna and Budapest (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1998); William McGrath, Dionysian Art and Populist Politics in Austria (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1974); and Scott Spector, Prague Territories: National Conflict and Cultural Innovation in Franz Kafka’s Fin de Siècle (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 2000). Spector, however, rejects Schorske’s political conclusions. 2. Although Karel Čapek is properly credited with introducing the word “robot” to the international lexicon, it was his brother Josef who actually coined it. See Karel Čapek, “O slově robot,” OUKIII, 502–03. Originally published in Lidové noviny, December 24, 1933. 3. H. Stuart Hughes, Consciousness and Society: The Reorientation of European Social Thought, 1890–1930 (New York: Vintage, 1977), 337. 4. Ibid., 341, 397. 5. David S. Luft, Robert Musil and the Crisis of European Culture, 1880–1942 (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1980), 13. 6. Ibid., 14. 7. Ibid., 2. 8. René Wellek, “Karel Čapek,” in The Columbia Dictionary of Modern European Literature, ed. Horatio Smith, (New York: Columbia University Press, 1947), 139. 9. Tomáš Hlobil, “Karel Čapek a Thomas Mann,” Estetika 26 (1989): 5–7. 10. Barbara Köpplová and Kurt Krolop, eds., Robert Musil: Briefe Nach Prag (Hamburg: Rowohlt, 1971), 5–10. Musil wrote more for Die Prager Presse than for any other newspaper or journal. 11. Robert Musil to Arne Laurin, March 20, 1932, in Briefe Nach Prag, 40. The letter identifies Kodíček as Musil’s translator into Czech (which was also the first language into which any of Musil’s writings were translated). Since Tribuna, unlike Die Prager Presse, was a Czech-language newspaper, his contributions necessarily had to be reworked. The now well-known story by Robert Musil, “Die Affeninsel” (Opičí ostrov/Monkey Island), was the first to be translated. It was published in Tribuna, May 3, 1919. 12. Robert Wohl, The Generation of 1914 (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1979), 230–33. Wohl shows that the members of the generation of 1914 were drawn to the radical politics of both the left and right in the 1920s, but he stresses that fascism was their major political temptation. 211

212

13.

14. 15.

16.

17.

18. 19.

20.

Notes to Pages 6–8

One way of understanding the uniqueness of the Čapek generation is that even though its members shared so many of the same intellectual and aesthetic presuppositions as well as historical experiences as the figures of Wohl’s study, they generally followed a different path politically in the interwar years. Indeed, Wohl’s concept of the “generation of 1914” is another excellent means of situating Čapek and his peers in the broader cultural history of Europe, though in this case the contrasts are as important as the convergences. Czechs constituted 50.3 percent of the population. Statistics taken from the 1921 census cited in Josef Harna, “First Czechoslovak Republic (1918– 1938),” in A History of the Czech Lands, ed. Jaroslav Pánek and Oldřich Tůma (Prague: Karolinum Press, 2009), 400. Joseph Rothschild, East Central Europe between the Two World Wars (Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1974), 87. Kakania was the name Robert Musil gave to the fictional state in which he set The Man without Qualities. The model for that state was the AustroHungarian Empire, sometimes known as the k. u. k. (kaiserlich und königlich) empire, and hence “Kakania.” The term has a very witty scatological connotation meant to suggest the dysfunctional nature of that state. It can be translated roughly as “Shitland.” In addition to Hughes and Wohl, see Mary Gluck, Georg Lukács and His Generation, 1900–1918 (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1985), 13. Although Gluck’s book concerns intellectual developments in Hungary, not Czechoslovakia, she argues that the sense of a break with the past was much more marked in Eastern Europe as a whole than in Western Europe. For the most comprehensive general history of the First Republic of Czechoslovakia, see Zdeněk Karník, České země v éře První republiky (1918– 1938), 3 vols. (Prague: Nakladatelství Libri, 2000–2003). Older and briefer but indispensable English-language surveys include Rothschild, East Central Europe between the Two World Wars, 73–135; and Victor Mamatey and Radomír Luža, eds., A History of the Czechoslovak Republic, 1918–1948 (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1973). Victor Mamatey, “The Development of Czechoslovak Democracy, 1920– 1938,” in Mamatey and Luža, History, 52. Although this has been the dominant view for decades, recent studies have called into question the degree to which Czechoslovakia was more democratic or egalitarian than other countries in the region. See in particular Andrea Orzoff, Battle for the Castle: The Myth of Czechoslovakia in Europe, 1914–1948 (New York: Oxford University Press, 2009) and Nancy Wingfield, Flag Wars and Stone Saints: How the Bohemian Lands Became Czech (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2007). For a somewhat different view on egalitarianism in Czechoslovakia, see Melissa Feinberg, Elusive Equality: Gender, Citizenship, and the Limits of Democracy in Czechoslovakia, 1918–1950 (Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press, 2006), a subtle analysis of the politics of women’s rights in that state. Hillel J. Kieval, The Making of Czech Jewry: National Conflict and Jewish Society in Bohemia, 1870–1918 (New York: Oxford University Press, 1988), 185–86.


213

21. Ezra Mendelsohn, The Jews of East-Central Europe between the World Wars (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1983), 132. 22. Robert Musil, Diaries, 1899–1942, ed. Mark Mirsky, trans. Philip Payne (New York: Basic Books, 1998), 220. On Musil’s interest in acquiring Czechoslovak citizenship, see Robert Musil to Arne Laurin, September 22, 1919, in Robert Musil, Briefe, 1901–1942, Adolf Frisé, hrsg. (Hamburg: Rowohlt, 1981), 183. 23. Karel Teige, “Novým směrem,” AZNI, 92. Originally published in Kmen 4 (1921). 24. See Karel Čapek, “O čapkovské generaci za války a po ní,” OUKIII, 317. Originally published in Přítomnost, March 16, 1932. 25. Karel Čapek, “Když už je diskuse,” “O čapkovské generaci,” “O čapkovské generaci za války a po ní,” and “Tedy o takzvané mladé generaci,” OUKIII, 189–94, 309–27. Originally published in Přítomnost, January 1, 1930, March 9, 16, and 23, 1932. 26. Karel Čapek, “Hledá se generace,” OUKII, 522–24. Originally published in Přítomnost, March 27, 1924. 27. Čapek, “O čapkovské generaci za války a po ní,” OUKIII, 321. 28. The best-known attempt by far is Karl Mannheim’s. See his famous essay, “The Problem of Generations,” in Essays on the Sociology of Knowledge, ed. Paul Kecskemeti (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1968). 29. Hughes, Consciousness and Society, 30. 30. Robert Wohl notes exactly the same propensity to generational thinking among the figures of his study: “No one who has studied the writings and followed the careers of European intellectuals born during this period can doubt that generationalism was one of the most widespread and deeply rooted convictions of the ‘generation of 1914.’” See Wohl, The Generation of 1914, 237. 31. Čapek, “O čapkovské generaci,” OUKIII, 309. 32. See, for example, František Götz, “Tak zvaná generace čapkovská,” parts I–III, Přítomnost, November 18, 25, and December 2, 1931, 698–701, 712–15, 726–28; Pavel Fraenkel, “Karel Čapek a jeho generace,” Nová svoboda 2 (1925), 500–02; and Marie Štemberková, “Čapkovská generace,” unpublished manuscript, 1985. I am grateful to Marie Štemberková for sharing her manuscript with me. 33. Cited in Jan Kábrt, Krakonošova zahrada bratří Čapků: Léta pobytu Dr. Antonína Čapka a jeho rodiny v Úpici, 1890–1907 (Hradec Králové, Czechoslovakia: Kruh, 1985), 48. 34. Karel Čapek, “Proč máte rád své povolání,” Od člověka k člověku I (Prague: Československý spisovatel, 1988), 377–78. Originally published in Lidové noviny, April 6, 1924. 35. Bratří Čapkové, “Předmluva autobiografická,” in Karel Čapek and Josef Čapek, Ze společné tvorby: Krakonošova zahrada, Zářivé hlubiny a jiné prózy, Lásky hra osudná, Ze života hmyzu, Adam stvořitel (Prague: Československý spisovatel, 1982), 11. 36. Karel Čapek, “Jak jsem k tomu přišel,” OUKIII, 338. Originally published in Lumír 58 (1932). 37. Ibid., 340. 38. Ibid., 338–40.

214


39. Karel Čapek, Hordubal, Povětron, Obyčejný život (Prague: Československý spisovatel, 1985), 290–91. 40. Ibid. 41. Little is known about this fascinating incident. Čapek discussed it only briefly in the autobiographical introduction to his collection of stories Krakonošova zahrada, referring to the group merely as a “very non-murderous anarchist society.” See Bratří Čapkové, “Předmluva autobiografická,” 13. 42. Čapek, “O čapkovské generaci,” OUKIII, 313. 43. Ibid., 317. 44. See Ferdinand Peroutka, Deníky, dopisy, a vzpomínky (Prague: Lidové noviny, 1993), 157. 45. There is no relation, whatsoever, between the Czechoslovak National Socialists and the German National Socialists. The Czechoslovak incarnation was a party of the moderate left. For an excellent overview of the National Labor Party as well as Čapek’s involvement in it, see Andrea Orzoff, “The National Labor Party: Intellectuals as Politicians,” in “Battle for the Castle: The Friday Men and the Czechoslovak Republic, 1918–1938,” PhD diss., Stanford University, 2000, 125–218. See also Orzoff’s book, Battle for the Castle, 98–103, though the discussion here is more abbreviated. 46. Orzoff, Battle for the Castle, 101–05. 47. Karel Čapek, “O tom nacionalismu,” OUKIII, 46. Originally published in Lidové noviny, July 25, 1926. 48. Ivan Pfaff, “První protofašisticky manifest českých intelektuálů,” Český časopis historický 91 (1993): 247–67. 49. Jiří Opelík, Josef Čapek (Prague: Melantrich, 1980), 238–53. Bergen-Belsen was liberated by British forces on April 15, 1945. 50. Although there is no evidence that Čapek or Kafka knew one another, they did have numerous mutual friends and acquaintances as was almost inevitable in a small city like Prague. For example, it was Jiří Langer, the younger brother of František Langer, who introduced Kafka to Hasidic mysticism. See Spector, Prague Territories, 186. Kafka was also directly in touch with František Langer in the spring of 1914 about publishing excerpts of his first book, Meditations (1912), in Umělecký měsíčník [Art Monthly], the most important journal of the Czech prewar modernist movement (see chapter 1). Langer was one of the journal’s editors. The excerpts never ultimately appeared, but it may be that the outbreak of the First World War, which forced the closure of Umělecký měsíčník, prevented their publication. This incident demonstrates not only that Kakfa was familiar with Umělecký měsíčník and, by extension, with the Czech prewar modernist movement, but also that he believed the journal to be an appropriate outlet for his work. See Franz Kafka to Kurt Wolff Verlag [April 22, 1914], in Franz Kafka, Letters to Friends, Family, and Editors, trans. Richard and Clara Winston (New York: Schocken, 1977), 106. 51. Otakar Vočadlo, Anglické listy Karla Čapka (Prague: Nakladatelství Jan, 1995), 10–12. 52. See Bradley Abrams, The Struggle for the Soul of the Nation: Czech Culture and the Rise of Communism (Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield, 2005), 118–38.


1

215

Prague 1911: The Cubist City

1. The full passage reads: “Cet art [modern art/cubism] est très en honneur aujourd’hui en Bohême et les Tchèques ont pris la tête de Mouvement Moderne.” Cited in Josef Čapek, ed. Jaroslav Slavík and Jiří Opelík (Prague: Torst, 1996), 83. Originally published in Paris Journal, March 6, 1914. 2. See Rostislav Švácha, ed., Kubistická Praha/Cubist Prague, 1909–1925 (Prague: Středoevropská galerie a nakladatelství, 2004) and Emmanuel Starcky and Jaroslav Anděl, eds., Prague 1900–1938: Capitale secrète des avant-gardes (Dijon: Musée des Beaux-Arts de Dijon, 1997). On the place of Czech cubism in the artistic world of Austria-Hungary see Bruce Garver, “Czech Cubism and Fin-de-Siècle Prague,” Austrian History Yearbook, 19/20 (1983/84): 91–104 and Magda Czigány, “Imitation or Inspiration: The Reception of Cubism in the Habsburg Monarchy, 1910–15,” in Decadence and Innovation: Austro-Hungarian Life and Art at the Turn of the Century, ed. Robert Pynsent (London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson, 1989), 74–81. 3. See later in the chapter as well as chapter 2 for a full discussion. 4. Alexandre Mercereau cited in Vojtěch Lahoda, “Malířství v Čechách 1907– 1917/Osma, Skupina výtvarných umělců a jejich generační druhové,” DČVU, 259. 5. Karel Čapek, “O čapkovské generaci,” OUKIII, 310. Originally published in Přítomnost, March 9, 1932. 6. Ibid. 7. Ibid. 8. Stephen Kern, The Culture of Time and Space, 1880–1918 (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1983), 196. 9. Emil Filla, “O ctnosti novoprimitivismu,” OaS, 38–40. Originally published in Volné směry 15 (1911). Volné směry is usually translated into English as Free Trends or Free Directions, but I believe Open Paths is a better if slightly looser rendering. For an excellent overview of this distinguished journal’s history see Roman Prahl and Lenka Bydžovská, Volné směry: Časopis secese a moderny (Prague: Torst, 1993). 10. Emil Filla cited in Vilém Závada, “Rozhovor s Emilem Fillou,” in OaS, 254. Originally published in Rozpravy Aventina 7 (1931–1932). 11. Ibid. See Lahoda, “Malířství v Čechách 1907–1917,” 252. 12. Karel Čapek, “Úvaha korektivní,” OUKI, 187. Originally published in Umělecký měsíčník 1 (1911–1912). 13. Karel and Josef Čapek to Vlastislav Hofman, [spring 1911], in Karel Čapek, Korespondence I (Prague: Český spisovatel, 1993), 112. 14. Two of the pioneers of cubist architecture, Pavel Janák and Josef Chochol, studied with Wagner in Vienna. The relationship between Czech cubist architecture and Wagner’s modernism is discussed in chapter 2. 15. See Lahoda, “Malířství v čechách 1907–1917,” 233–93 and Vojtěch Lahoda, “Vincenc Kramář, collectionneur et promoteur du cubisme,” in Starcky and Anděl, Prague 1900–1938, 138–40. 16. See Viktor Dyk, “Němci v čechách a české umění,” Lumír 42 (1914): 331–34. The article is a criticism of Franz Werfel’s clumsy attempts at reconciliation

216

17.

18.

19.

20. 21. 22. 23.

24. 25. 26.

27. 28.

29. 30.


between Prague Germans and Czechs. Werfel argued for greater understanding between the groups on the basis that the Czech arts were the “child” of German culture. It was precisely claims of this sort that infuriated Czech nationalists. František Langer, Byli a bylo (Prague: Státní pedagogické nakladatelství, 1991), 141. The Union Café, or Kavárna Union, was the chief meeting place of the artists of the Czech prewar modernist movement. Letter from Josef Čapek to Vlastislav Hofman, [beginning of 1911], cited in Vojtěch Lahoda, “Kubismus jako politikum: k dějinám Skupiny výtvarných umělců,” Umění 40 (1992): 50. Carl Schorske, Fin-de-Siècle Vienna: Politics and Culture (New York: Vintage, 1981), xvii–xxx. Schorske may be guilty of overstating the pervasiveness of the inward turn since important figures of Viennese culture, such as the writers Karl Kraus or Robert Musil, do not fit comfortably into his scheme. His thesis has been challenged thoroughly over the years on these and other grounds, and I too count myself among its revisionists, but it still provides an exceptionally fruitful means of thinking about the cultural life of Habsburg Central Europe and so remains a touchstone for most studies of the subject. There are good reasons, moreover, for continuing to take many of Schorske’s claims seriously despite his over-generalization. As will be seen in the pages that follow, the artists of Čapek’s generation looked on Viennese modernist culture in much the same way that he describes it: as aestheticist, interiorized, and withdrawn from the realities of contemporary life. For a collection of important critiques of Schorske’s thesis see Austrian History Yearbook 28 (1997) and Steven Beller, ed., Rethinking Vienna 1900 (New York: Berghahn Books, 2001). Péter Hanák, The Garden and the Workshop: Essays on the Cultural History of Vienna and Budapest (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1998). Ibid., 65. Ibid., 66. Ibid., 147–78. Although Hanák’s category of “marginal” intellectuals should be treated with caution, it is worth noting that he classifies 65 percent of creative intellectuals in Budapest as “marginal,” while in Vienna the figure is even higher at 74 percent. Mary Gluck, Georg Lukács and His Generation, 1900–1918 (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1985), 71. Ibid., 105. The outstanding study of this process is by Jeremy King, Budweisers into Czechs and Germans: A Local History of Bohemian Politics, 1848–1948 (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2002). Gary Cohen, The Politics of Ethnic Survival: Germans in Prague, 1861–1914 (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1981), 86–139. For the best discussion of the Manifesto and the generation of the 1890s, see Katherine David-Fox, “The 1890s Generation: Modernism and National Identity in Czech Culture, 1890–1900,” (PhD diss., Yale University, 1996). Cited in David-Fox, “The 1890s Generation,” 398. Ibid., 396.


217

31. Ibid., 342–43. 32. Ibid., 327–28, 342–45. 33. Čapek, “O čapkovské generaci,” OUKIII, 311. Originally published in Přítomnost, March 9, 1932. 34. The situation was of course significantly more complicated for the Jewish artists and writers who identified themselves as Czech. Although antisemites always denied it, it was nonetheless increasingly possible to be both a Czech and a Jew, and in the last decades of the nineteenth century ever greater numbers of Bohemian Jews were identifying themselves as “Czech.” By 1900 more than half the Jewish population of Bohemia had declared itself Czech. See Hillel Kieval, The Making of Czech Jewry: National Conflict and Jewish Society in Bohemia, 1870–1918 (New York: Oxford University Press, 1988), 61. 35. See Jacques Le Rider, Modernity and Crises of Identity: Culture and Society in Fin-de-Siècle Vienna, trans. Rosemary Morris (New York: Continuum, 1993). 36. See Thomas Harrison, 1910: The Emancipation of Dissonance (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1996). The book opens with a description of a rash of suicides among young Austrian artists and intellectuals in 1910. 37. Scott Spector, Prague Territories: National Conflict and Cultural Innovation in Franz Kafka’s Fin de Siècle (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 2000), x. If, in Spector’s terms, the German-Jewish writers of Kafka’s circle were “deterritorialized,” that is, lacking a naturalized way of grounding claims about politics, society, culture, and above all identity, then the artists and writers of Čapek’s generation were profoundly “territorialized.” For a vivid portrait of Prague’s deeply divided Czech and German cultures, see also Peter Demetz, Prague in Black and Gold (New York: Hill and Wang, 1997). 38. Robert A. Kann, A History of the Habsburg Empire, 1526–1918 (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1974), 464. 39. Cohen, The Politics of Ethnic Survival, 132–34. 40. Some of the Czech-identified Jews in the Skupina and wider prewar modernist movement include Otokar Fischer, Otto Gutfreund, Josef Kodíček, František Langer, and Ervín Taussig. 41. Karel Čapek, “Otázka národního umění” and “Tradice a vývoj,” OUKI, 272–76 and 342–46. Originally published in Volné směry 17 (1912–1913) and Volné směry 18 (1913–1915). 42. All of these artists were important figures in the nineteenth-century Czech national revival. 43. See, for example, Schorske, Fin-de-Siècle Vienna; Le Rider, Modernity and Crises of Identity; Harrison, 1910; David S. Luft, Robert Musil and the Crisis of European Culture, 1880–1942 (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1980); and Gerald N. Izenberg, Modernism and Masculinity: Mann, Wedekind, Kandinsky through World War I (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000). 44. See H. Stuart Hughes, Consciousness and Society: The Reorientation of European Social Thought, 1890–1930 (New York: Vintage, 1977).

218


45. See Jeffrey Weiss, The Popular Culture of Modern Art: Picasso, Duchamp, and Avant-Gardism (New Haven, CT, and London: Yale University Press, 1994), esp. 49–105. See also Christopher Green, Cubism and Its Enemies: Modern Movements and Reaction in French Art, 1916–1928 (New Haven, CT, and London: Yale University Press, 1987) and Kern, The Culture of Time and Space, 181–210. 46. Bohumil Kubišta, “O duchové podstatě moderní doby,” OaS, 90. Originally published in Česká kultura 2 (1913–1914). 47. Their understanding of cubism is explored more completely in chapter 2. 48. Filla, “O ctnosti novoprimitivismu,” OaS, 39–40. 49. Karel Čapek and Vlastislav Hofman, “Indická architektura,” OUKI, 271. Originally published in Styl 5 (1913). 50. Karel Čapek, “Úvaha korektivní,” OUKI, 188. 51. Carl Schorske, “Explosion in the Garden: Kokoshka and Schoenberg,” Finde-Siècle Vienna, 343. 52. Josef Čapek, “Kandinsky: Über das Geistige in der Kunst,” Umělecký měsíčník 1 (1911–12): 270. Neither he nor Karel distinguished sharply between expressionism in its Viennese, German, or other incarnations. 53. Josef Čapek, “Krása moderní výtvarné formy,” OaS, 136. Emphasis in original. 54. Josef Čapek, “První Berlínský podzimní salon,” Lumír, 42 (1914): 94. 55. Karel Čapek, “2. Výstava skupiny výtvarných umělců v Obecním domě,” OUKI, 220–24. Originally published in Česká revue (1912–1913). 56. Karel Čapek, “K nejmladší německé poesii,” OUKI, 339–40. 57. Ibid., 340–41. Emphasis in original. 58. Lahoda, “Malířství v Čechách 1907–1917,” 233.

ˇ apek and 2 Between Life and Form: Karel C the Prewar Modernist Generation 1. Stanislav K. Neumann, “Otevřená okna,” AŽŽ, 67–68. Originally published in Lidové noviny, August 9, 1913. Frištenský was a famous Czech boxer, the Českomoravská Machine-Tool Works was one of the largest Czech industrial enterprises, Laurin and Klement was a Czech car and motorcycle maker. Part of the translation and explanation above is taken from Derek Sayer, The Coasts of Bohemia: A Czech History (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1998), 158. 2. Vincenc Beneš, “Moderní umění,” OaS, 103. Originally published in Umělecký měsíčník 2 (1912–1914). 3. Karel Čapek, “O dvou publikacích,” OUKIII, 638–39. Originally published in Lidové noviny, February 4, 1935. 4. Karel Čapek, “O čapkovské generaci,” OUKIII, 312. Originally published in Přítomnost, March 9, 1932. 5. Ibid. 6. Ibid. 7. Ibid., 312–13. 8. A handful of examples include Karel Čapek, “Henri Bergson: Das Lachen,” OUKI, 394–97 (originally published in Přehled, May 15, 1914); Jaroslav


9. 10.

11. 12.

13. 14.

15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31.

219

Kabelka, “Ideové vztahy novodobé filosofie a moderního umění,” Volné směry 17 (1913): 131–34; Jaroslav Kabelka, “O filosofii Bergsonově,” Přehled, March 21 and 28, 1913, 443–44, 473; Stanislav K. Neumann, “Ať Žije Život!” AŽŽ, 43–55 (originally published in Lidové noviny, August 2, 1913); Rudolf Procházka, “O podstatné proměně duchové povahy naší doby,” Umělecký měsíčník 2 (1912–1914); and Tankred [Tancrède] de Visan, “Filosofie Henri Bergsona a současná estetika,” trans. Hanuš Jelínek, Lumír 41 (1913): 416–20, 443–48. Mark Antliff, Inventing Bergson: Cultural Politics and the Parisian AvantGarde (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1993), 4–5. Henri Bergson, An Introduction to Metaphysics, trans. T. E. Hulme (New York: Macmillan, 1955), 51. The artists and writers of the Czech prewar modernist generation were familiar with most of Bergson’s major works from before the First World War, including Time and Free Will (1889), Matter and Memory (1896), Laughter (1900), and Creative Evolution (1907). For the brief description above, however, I have drawn primarily on An Introduction to Metaphysics (1903), an essay in which Bergson summarized most of his key ideas up to that time. Henri Bergson, Creative Evolution, trans. Arthur Mitchell (New York: Random House, 1944), 292–95. František Langer, “Problém generací,” in Tvorba z exilu (Prague: Akropolis, 2000), 246. This essay was originally delivered as a lecture on June 10, 1944, during Langer’s wartime exile in London. For an excellent analysis of the use of Bergson’s thought by French cubist artists, see Antliff, Inventing Bergson. See Karel Čapek, “Moderní lyrika francouzká,” and “Několik nových dramat francouzkých,” OUKI, 302–6 and 284–302. Originally published in Lumír 41 (1912–1913) and Scéna 1 (1913–1914). Čapek, “Několik nových dramat francouzkých,” OUKI, 294. Karel Čapek, “Jules Romains,” OUKI, 241. Originally published in Přehled, January 24, 1913. Ibid., 242. Karel Čapek, “Sociální filozofie. Ke kritice školy Durkheimovy,” OUKI, 359–68. Originally published in Přehled, February 6 and 13, 1914. Ibid., 367. Ibid., 363. Ibid., 364. Ibid., 366. Ibid., 367. Ibid., 367–68. Emphasis in original. Čapek, OUKI, 360. Karel Čapek, “A. Mamelet: Le relativisme philosophique chez Georg Simmel,” OUKI, 400–3. Originally published in Přehled, June 26, 1914. Ibid., 402. Ibid., 401. Ibid. Ibid., 402. Ibid., 401.

220


32. Karel Čapek, “Křik po náboženství,” OUKI, 329–30. Originally published in Volné směry 17 (1913). 33. Ibid., 330. 34. Vlastislav Hofman, “Duch přeměny v umění výtvarném,” OaS, 211. Originally published in Almanach na rok 1914 (1913). 35. Ibid., 212. 36. Karel Čapek, “Syntéza a výstava Osmi,” OUKI, 43. Originally published in Snaha 3 (1908). 37. Karel Čapek, “Moderní umění,” OUKI, 372–73. Originally published in Přehled, March 13 and 20, 1914. Emphasis in original. 38. Hofman, “Duch přeměny v umění výtvarném,” OaS, 212. Emphasis in original. 39. Josef Čapek, “Krása moderní výtvarné formy,” OaS, 136. Originally published in Přehled, September 1913. Emphasis in original. 40. Jiří Padrta, “Spory o kubismus,” OaS, 178–80. 41. Emil Filla, “Z berlínských výstav,” OaS, 167. Originally published in Umělecký měsíčník 1 (1911–1912). 42. Josef Čapek, “Postavení futuristů v dnešním umění,” OaS, 164–66. Originally published in Umělecký měsíčník 1 (1911–1912). 43. Vincenc Beneš, “Nové umění” and “Kubistická výstava v Mánesu,” OaS, 106 and 169–72. Both originally published in Umělecký měsíčník 2 (1912–1914). 44. See Čapek, “Moderní umění,” OUKI, 369–77. 45. Karel Čapek, “Výstava maleb italských futuristů,” OUKI, 349. Originally published in Česká revue (1913–1914). 46. Ibid. For a similar expression of sentiment see Josef Čapek, “Výstava futuristů,” Lumír 42 (1914): 140–42. 47. Čapek, “Výstava maleb italských futuristů” and “Moderní umění,” OUKI, 348–49 and 369–77. 48. Douglas Cooper, The Cubist Epoch (New York: Phaidon, 1970), 112. 49. See Vincenc Kramář, “Kapitoly o ismech,” Umělecký měsíčník 2 (1912–1914). 50. Beneš, “Kubistická výstava v Mánesu,” OaS, 170. 51. Karel Čapek, “Několik poznámek k moderní literatuře,” OUKI, 333–34. Originally published in Přehled, October 10, 1913. 52. Karel Čapek, “Zasláno,” Dodatky, 26–29. Originally published in Přehled, April 4, 1914. 53. See Carl Schorske, “The Ringstrasse, Its Critics, and the Birth of Urban Modernism,” Fin-de-Siècle Vienna: Politics and Culture (New York: Vintage, 1981), 24–115. 54. See Rostislav Švácha, The Architecture of New Prague, 1895–1945, trans. Alexander Büchler (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1995), 100. 55. Vladimír Šlapeta, “Cubism in Architecture,” in Czech Cubism: Architecture, Furniture, and Decorative Arts, 1910–1925, ed. Alexander von Vegesack (London: Laurence King, 1992), 34–36. 56. Pavel Janák, “Otto Wagner,” Styl 1 (1908–1909): 48. 57. Pavel Janák, “Od moderní architektury k architektuře,” Styl 2 (1910): 105–9. 58. Ibid., 106–7. 59. Ibid., 107–9. 60. Pavel Janák, “Proti náladě v architektuře,” OaS, 185–87. Originally published in Umělecký měsíčník 1 (1911–1912): 185.


221

61. Ibid., 186. 62. Most scholars of cubist architecture cite the German psychologist Theodor Lipps as the source of Janák’s ideas about the motion of mental life, for example, Marie Benešová, “Architektura kubismu,” in DČVU, 330; and Ivan Margolius, Cubism in Architecture and the Applied Arts: Bohemia and France, 1910–1914 (North Pomfret, VT: David & Charles, 1979), 12. It seems to me, however, that an equally possible source is Bergson, particularly the theory outlined in Creative Evolution, in which the philosopher explicitly equates consciousness with motion and describes it as life in its purest, freest state. But Janák never mentions by name Lipps, Bergson, or any other source for his ideas. Karel Čapek, on the other hand, did comment on Creative Evolution at length, though not until 1920. See chapter 3 for a discussion of his understanding of this important text. 63. Pavel Janák, “Hranol a pyramida,” OaS, 190–92, 209. Originally published in Umělecký měsíčník 1 (1911–1912). 64. Ibid., 192. 65. Ibid., 209. 66. Vegesack, Czech Cubism, 326. 67. Vlastislav Hofman, “Duch moderní tvorby v architektuře,” Umělecký měsíčník 1 (1911–1912): 127–35. 68. Ibid., 134. 69. Vlastislav Hofman, “Příspěvek k charakteru moderní architektury,” Umělecký měsíčník 1 (1911–1912): 229–30. 70. Karel Čapek, “2. Výstava skupiny výtvarných umělců v Obecním domě,” OUKI, 224. Originally published in Česká revue (1912–1913). Čapek’s praise for Hofman’s work should be seen in the context of their close friendship and also of the split within the Skupina in 1912, but it would be a mistake to understand it solely in terms of personal allegiances. Despite some criticism of Pavel Janák, Čapek was overwhelmingly enthusiastic about the work of all the cubist architects. His commentary on Hofman’s designs should therefore be taken as an indication of his true preferences and goals. 71. Ibid., 224. 72. Langer, “Problém generací,” Tvorba z exilu, 245. 73. Čapek, “Několik poznámek k moderní literatuře,” OUKI, 333. 74. Otakar Theer, “Mladá česka poesie,” Přehled, March 7, 1913, and “Dvě generace,” Národní listy, July 9, 1913. For an excellent account of the generational split announced by Theer see Evá Strohsová, Zrození moderny (Prague: Československý spisovatel, 1963). 75. Strohsová, Zrození moderny, 35–36. 76. Ladislav Matejka, ed., Czech Poetry: A Bilingual Anthology, vol. 1 (Ann Arbor: Michigan Slavic Publications, 1973), 347. See also Arne Novák, Dějiny českého písemnictví (Prague: Brána, 1994), 243. 77. See Josef Kodíček, “Z nové poesie III,” Lumír 41 (1913): 449–52; Josef Čapek, “J. Karásek ze Lvovic Posvátné ohně,” Umělecký měsíčník 1 (1911– 1912): 143–44 ; and Strohsová, Zrození moderny, 14. 78. Čapek, “O čapkovské generaci,” OUKIII, 314. 79. Čapek, “O dvou publikacích,” OUKIII, 638. 80. František Götz, “Tak zvaná generace čapkovská,” Přítomnost, November 18, 1931, 700.

222


81. Novák, Dějiny českého písemnictví, 246–47. 82. Neumann, “Ať Žije Život,” AŽŽ, 52–55. 83. Visan, “Filosofie Henri Bergsona a současná estetika,” 416–20, 443–48. See note 8. 84. Bergson, An Introduction to Metaphysics, 51. 85. Visan, “Filosofie Henri Bergsona a současná estetika,” 445. 86. Neumann, “Ať Žije Život,” AŽŽ, 44–45. 87. Ibid., 45. 88. Ibid., 45–46. 89. Ibid., 53. 90. Stanislav K. Neumann, “K nové poesii sociální,” AŽŽ, 136–39. Originally published in Lidové noviny, November 14, 1913. Emphasis in original. 91. Stanislav K. Neumann, “Různé odpovědi,” AŽŽ, 82–83. Originally published in Lidové noviny, September 12, 1913. 92. Strohsová, Zrození moderny, 37. 93. Čapek, “Několik poznámek k moderní literatuře,” OUKI, 335. 94. Ibid., 335–36. 95. See Karel Čapek, Básnické počátky—Předklady (Prague: Český spisovatel, 1993). 96. Čapek, “Moderní lyrika francouzká,” OUKI, 304–5. 97. F. X. Šalda, “O dnešní tvorbě románové,” Česká kultura 1 (1913) and “K dnešní situace literární,” Česká kultura 1 (1913). 98. Čapek, “Několik poznámek k moderní literatuře,” OUKI, 336. 99. Ibid., 335. It is more likely he was thinking of those poets who associated themselves with the literary movement, similar to Futurism, known as paroxysm. 100. See Čapek, “O čapkovské generaci,” OUKIII, 312. See also, Karel Čapek, “Henri Bergson,” OUKIII, 179–81. Originally published in Lidové noviny, October 18, 1929. 101. Čapek, “Henri Bergson: Das Lachen,” OUKI, 394–97. 102. Ibid., 396. 103. Ibid., 397. Emphasis in original. 104. Although the conﬂict with Filla and Beneš was spread out over the course of nearly two years, it culminated in the spring of 1914 at about the same time Čapek wrote his article on Bergson. The article in which Čapek used the phrase “resolution of life” was written in April 1914. See Čapek, “Zasláno,” Dodatky, 28.

ˇ apek and 3 The Lessons of Life: Karel C the First World War 1. Karel Čapek, “O čapkovské generaci za války a po ní,” OUKIII, 318. Originally published in Přítomnost, March 16, 1932. 2. Ibid., 315–21. See also Karel Čapek, “O čapkovské generaci,” OUKIII, 309–15. Originally published in Přítomnost, March 9, 1932. 3. Karel Čapek, “Stanislav K. Neumann: Ať Žije Život!” OUKII, 222–25. Originally published in Národní listy, November 26, 1920.


223

4. Ibid., 223 5. Ibid. 6. Vilém Závada, “Rozhovor s Emilem Fillou,” OaS, 254–55. Originally published in Rozpravy Aventina 7 (1931–1932). 7. Milan Blahynka, ed., Čeští spisovatelé 20. století (Prague: Československý spisovatel, 1985), 337. 8. Holger H. Herwig, The First World War: Germany and Austria-Hungary, 1914–1918 (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1997), 296–301, 439; Rudolf Kiszling, Österreich-Ungarns Anteil am Ersten Weltkrieg (Graz: Stiasny Verlag, 1958), 95. 9. This was a phenomenon that took place not only in a provincial city like Prague, but in a cosmopolitan center like Paris as well. Ironically, whereas in Paris conservatives condemned cubism as an un-French German import, in Prague cubism was attacked for exactly the opposite reasons. See Kenneth Silver, Esprit de Corps: Art of the Parisian Avant-Garde and the First World War, 1914–1925 (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1989), 3–27. 10. The Berlin journals Der Sturm and Die Aktion were among their principal outlets at this time. Owing to the relative paucity of published material during the war and because of the necessity to censor one’s publically stated opinions, this chapter draws heavily from private correspondence, especially between the Čapek brothers and the poet S. K. Neumann. 11. Another notable exception was his brother, Josef, who was called up repeatedly but was granted a series of temporary exemptions because of his poor eyesight. See Jiří Opelík, Josef Čapek (Prague: Melantrich, 1980), 132–33. 12. Karel Čapek to Stanislav K. Neumann, [December 7, 1914], in Stanislava Jarošová, Milan Blahynka, and František Všetička, eds., Viktor Dyk, St.K.Neumann, Bratři Čapkové: Korespondence z let 1905–1918 (Prague: Nakladatelství Československé akademie věd, 1962), 109. 13. After the war, this institution, which sits imposingly at the top of Prague’s Wenceslaus Square, was renamed the National Museum. 14. Despite his denunciations of popular antisemitism, Čapek was also given to some anti-Jewish feeling during the war. Specifically, he was disturbed by the overwhelming support for the war among Austria’s Jews. See, for example, his letter to Neumann [January 4, 1915], Korespondence z let 1905–1918, 115. On Jewish support for the war, see Marsha Rozenblit, Reconstructing a National Identity: The Jews of Habsburg Austria during World War I (New York: Oxford University Press, 2001). 15. Karel Čapek to Neumann [after September 25, 1914], Korespondence z let 1905–1918, 102–3. 16. Ibid. [December 18, 1914], 112. 17. On the popular and intellectual enthusiasm for the war see, for example, Hew Strachan, The First World War, Volume I: To Arms (New York: Oxford University Press, 2001), especially Chapter 2, “Willingly to War,” and Roland Stromberg, Redemption by War: The Intellectuals in 1914 (Lawrence, KS: Regents Press of Kansas, 1982).

224


18. Stefan Zweig, The World of Yesterday (Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1964), 229–30. 19. Ibid., 223. 20. See Ivan Šedivý, Češi, české země a velká válka, 1914–1918 (Prague: Nakladatelství Lidové noviny, 2001), 270–85, and Claire Nolte, “Ambivalent Patriots: Czech Culture in the Great War,” in Aviel Roshwald and Richard Stites, eds., European Culture in the Great War (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999), 162–75. 21. Čapek, “O čapkovské generaci za války a po ní,” OUKIII, 316. 22. Martin Kučera, “Názory a postoj F.X. Šaldy za první světové války,” Český časopis historický (1992): 539–40. 23. Cited in Kučera, “Názory a postoj F.X. Šaldy za první světové války,” 540. 24. Karel Čapek, “Dr. Emanuel Rádl: F.X. Šaldova filozofie,” OUKI, 458. 25. Josef Čapek to Neumann [January 4, 1915], Korespondence z let 1905–1918, 117. 26. Karel Čapek to Neumann [December 22, 1914], Korespondence z let 1905– 1918, 113. 27. Ibid. [October, 1914], 106. 28. Josef Kodíček to Vlastislav Hofman, December 24, 1915, Vlastislav Hofman papers and drawings, Series II, Box 2, Folder 18, Getty Research Institute for the History of Art and the Humanities, Los Angeles, CA. 29. Karel Čapek to Neumann [after February 6, 1916] and [spring-summer 1916], Korespondence z let 1905–1918, 158 and 163. 30. See Mahulena Nešlehová, Bohumil Kubišta (Prague: Odeon, 1984), 174, 206. The submarine that Kubišta’s unit sank was the Marie Curie. In 1915, it was raised from the bottom of the harbor at Pula, repaired, and placed into the service of the Austro-Hungarian navy as SM U-14. Georg Ritter von Trapp of The Sound of Music fame became U-14’s most successful commander, sinking numerous British, French, and Italian vessels. See Lothar Baumgartner and Erwin Sieche, Die Schiffe der k. (u.) k. Kriegsmarine im Bild (Vienna: Verlagsbuchhandlung Stöhr, 1999). 31. Josef Čapek to Neumann [October 27, 1915], Korespondence z let 1905– 1918, 150. 32. In one letter he wrote: “Czech newspapers have reached a low no one could have ever anticipated; the ‘world-historical events’ have been good mainly for kicking Jews off of newspapers; it’s the absolutely lowest form of cowardice, pettiness, and ignorance.” Karel Čapek to Neumann [after September 25, 1914], Korespondence z let 1905–1918, 102–3. 33. Josef Čapek to Neumann [December 5, 1917], Korespondence z let 1905– 1918, 189. 34. Karel Čapek to Neumann [December 5, 1917], Korespondence z let 1905– 1918, 191–92. 35. Josef Čapek to Neumann, [December 5, 1917], Korespondence z let 1905– 1918, 189. 36. Karel Čapek to Neumann, [December 5, 1917], Korespondence z let 1905– 1918, 190. 37. Karel Čapek, “Několik poznámek k moderní literatuře,” OUKI, 336–38. Originally published in Přehled, October 10, 1913. See chapter 2. 38. Čapek, “Stanislav K. Neumann: Ať Žije Život!” OUKII, 223.


225

39. Karel Čapek, “K nejmladší německé poezii,” OUKI, 339. Originally published in Přehled, October 31 and November 7, 1913. 40. Stanislav K. Neumann, “Ať Žije Život!” Lidové noviny, August 2, 1913. 41. Čapek, “Stanislav K. Neumann: Ať Žije Život!” OUKII, 222–23. 42. Ibid., 223. For reasons of intelligibility, I have translated the word rozmach as “surge.” This translation, however, is imperfect since the word thereby loses its Bergsonian connotation. Rozmach is the usual Czech means of rendering Bergson’s term “élan,” which Čapek unquestionably had in mind. 43. Karel Čapek, “Filozofie Bergsonova. Henri Bergson: Vývoj tvořivý,” OUKII, 159–87. Originally published in Cesta, April 30, May 7, and May 14, 1920. 44. Henri Bergson, Creative Evolution, trans. Arthur Mitchell (New York: Random House, 1944). 45. Čapek, “Filozofie Bergsonova,” OUKII, 159–87. 46. Ibid., 186. 47. Ibid. 48. See chapter 4. 49. See chapter 2. 50. Čapek, “Stanislav K. Neumann: Ať Žije Život!” OUKII, 223–24. 51. Ibid., 225. 52. Ibid., 223. 53. Ibid., 223–4. 54. Ibid. 55. Miroslav Halík, Karel Čapek: Život a dílo v datech (Prague: Academia, 1983), 26. 56. Karel Čapek, Pragmatismus, čili filosofie praktického života (Prague: F. Topič, 1918). The paper was not in fact written for Beneš’s class, which was a lecture course, but for a separate philosophy seminar that Čapek took the same semester. See Halík, Karel Čapek, 26. 57. Čapek, “O čapkovské generaci za války a po ní,” OUKIII, 316. 58. Karel Čapek, “Pragmatism,” OUKI, 538–43. Originally published in Červen 1 (1918–1919). 59. Ibid., 540 60. Ibid. 61. Ibid., 543. Emphasis in original. 62. Bergson and James were great friends and mutual admirers. Both shared a deep distaste for rationalist philosophy, and there is clear convergence in their conceptions of the fluid nature of consciousness and reality. But their views of “life” are very different, as are their attitudes toward the attainment of absolute knowledge. See Horace Kallen, William James and Henri Bergson: A Study in Contrasting Theories of Life (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1914). 63. Ibid., 541. 64. Karel Čapek, Pragmatism, čili filosofie praktického života (Olomouc, Czech Republic: Votobia, 2000), 57. 65. Václav Štěpán, “Pařížský Loupežník bratří Čapků,” Sborník Národního muzea v Praze 41 (1987): 1–49. 66. See chapter 1. 67. Karel Čapek, Dramata, 11.

226


68. Cited in Willam Harkins, Karel Čapek (New York: Columbia University Press, 1962), 71. 69. Karel Čapek, “Musím dále,” OUKII, 415. Originally published in Lidové noviny, June 18, 1922. 70. Čapek, Dramata, 82–83. 71. Ibid., 9. 72. Ibid.

ˇ apek Generation and Deveˇtsil 4 Art ≠ Life: The C in Interwar Czechoslovakia 1. Josef Čapek, “Cestou II,” in Co má člověk z umění a jiné úvahy o umění – výbor z článků z let 1912–1937 (Prague: Výtvarný odbor Umělěcké besedy v Praze, 1946), 63. Originally published in Život 8 (1928–1929). 2. “U.S. Devětsil,” AZNI, 81–83. Originally published in Pražské pondělí, December 6, 1920. Although it did not officially announce its existence until December, Devětsil was first organized two months earlier, on October 5, 1920. The literal translation of the word devětsil is “butterbur,” the plant. While it should be taken primarily as an avant-garde nonsense word, it does have other possible meanings, including “nine strengths” or “nine forces.” I know, however, of no satisfactory explanation of these meanings. Perhaps most important is the word’s expressive quality: it sounds very good in Czech. 3. Karel Teige, “Novým směrem,” AZNI, 92. Originally published in Kmen 4 (1921). 4. Karel Teige, “Naše umělecké touhy,” AZNI, 167. Originally published in Rovnost, July 19, 1921. 5. For a good summary of the group’s activities, see Jaroslav Slavík, “Skupina Tvrdošíjní: Ke kronice její aktivity,” Umění 3 (1982): 193–211. 6. Karel Teige, “Věc Tvrdošíjných,” Československé noviny, January 3, 1923. 7. Some of the most important books, edited volumes, special journal issues, essay collections, and translations of Teige include: Karel Srp, Karel Teige (Prague: Torst, 2001); Eric Dluhosch and Rostislav Švácha, eds., Karel Teige, 1900–1951: L’Enfant Terrible of the Czech Modernist Avant-Garde (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1999); Manuela Castagnara Codeluppi and Hana Císařová, eds., “Karel Teige: Architecture and Poetry,” special issue, Rassegna 15 (1993); Lenka Bydžovská and Rostislav Švácha, eds., “Karel Teige a evropská avantgarda,” special issue, Umění 43 (1995); Karel Teige, Osvobozování života a poezie: Studie ze čtyřicátých let, ed. Jiří Brabec, Vrastislav Effenberger, Květoslav Chvatík, and Robert Kalivoda (Prague: Aurora and Český spisovatel, 1994); Karel Teige, The Minimum Dwelling, trans. and intro. Eric Dluhosch (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; Chicago: Graham Foundation for Advanced Studies in the Fine Arts, 2002); Karel Teige, Modern Architecture in Czechoslovakia and Other Writings, intro. JeanLouis Cohen, trans. Irena Žantovská Murray and David Britt (Los Angeles: Getty Research Institute, 2000). 8. Teige, “Novým směrem,” AZNI, 92. 9. Ibid., 91.


227

10. Ibid., 95–96. See also Karel Teige, “Nové umění a lidová tvorba,” AZNI, 150–56. Originally published in Červen 4 (1921). 11. Karel Teige, “Obrazy a předobrazy,” AZNI, 102. Originally published in Musaion 2 (1921). 12. Karel Teige, “S novou generací (polemické poznámky),” AZNI, 134–47. Originally published in Červen 4 (1921). 13. Karel Čapek, “Poznámka,” AZNI, 104. Originally published in Musaion 2 (1921). Václav Nebeský, “Umělecký defétismus,” AZNI, 115–19. Originally published in Tribuna, March 27, 1921. 14. Josef Čapek, “Dnešní umělecké jaro,” Lidové noviny, May 10, 1922. Václav Nebeský, “Manifest mladých I & II,” Tribuna, May 6 and 7, 1922. 15. Slavík, “Skupina Tvrdošíjní,” 193–211. 16. For a good review of the developing strains but also continuing cooperation between some members of the two generations, see Pavla Pečinková, “Generační roztržka (Josef Čapek kontra Karel Teige),” Zpravodaj Společnosti bratři Čapků 34 (1995): 23–31. 17. Josef Kodíček, “Devěthnid,” AZNI, 382–91. Originally published in Tribuna, December 31, 1922. 18. Josef Čapek, Nejskromnější umění (Prague: Aventium, 1920). 19. Teige, “Nové umění a lidová tvorba,” AZNI, 152. See also Vítězslav Nezval cited in Jiří Holý, “František Langer a předválečná avantgarda,” in František Langer na prahu nového tisíciletí, ed. Milena Vojtková and Vladimír Justl (Prague: Nadační fond Františka Langera, 2000), 75. 20. See, for example, Peter Gay, Weimar Culture: The Outsider as Insider (New York: Harper & Row, 1970). 21. Cited in Mary Gluck, Georg Lukács and His Generation, 1900–1918 (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press), 11. 22. For a challenge to this standard interpretation of Duchamp, however, see Jerrold Seigel, The Private Worlds of Marcel Duchamp: Desire, Liberation, and the Self in Modern Culture (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1995). 23. Peter Bürger, Theory of the Avant-Garde, trans. Michael Shaw (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1984), 49. 24. Ibid. 25. Karel Teige and Jaroslav Seifert, “J. Kodíček a jeho generace (Několik fakt jako odpověd),” AZNI, 564. Originally published in Host 3 (1924). 26. Teige, “Obrazy a předobrazy,” AZNI, 97. 27. Teige, “Novým směrem,” AZNI, 91–92. 28. Jiří Jelínek, “Situace na počátku roku 1924,” AZNI, 538. Originally published in Veraikon 10 (1924). 29. František Götz, “Spor generací,” Host 3 (1924): 154. Although he identified himself politically with the radical left and sympathized mainly with the young artists of Devětsil, Götz was one of the most fair-minded critics in the notoriously ideological 1920s. 30. Ibid. 31. František Götz, “O těch generacích,” Přerod 6–7 (1924): 101. 32. F. X. Šalda, “Trojí generace: Kus české literární morfologie,” Kritika 1 (1924): 328–29. Emphasis in original. 33. F. X. Šalda, “Spory literární,” Var 3 (1923–1924): 101.

228


34. Ibid., 330–31. In this essay, Šalda badly mischaracterized Vaihinger for whom the “as if” was neither a deficit nor a weak substitute for real faith or knowledge but an accurate description of the scientific method. Vaihinger argued that science advanced on the basis of useful fictions, acting “as if” a proposition were true even though it might patently be false or unproven. Vaihinger is correctly seen as a precursor to pragmatism, though he never accepted its more radical claims about the relativity of truth. See Hans Vaihinger, The Philosophy of “As If”: A System of the Theoretical, Practical, and Religious Fictions of Mankind, trans. C. K. Ogden (London: Routledge and K. Paul, 1935). 35. See Teige, “Novým směrem,” “Naše umělecké touhy,” and “Nové umění proletářské,” AZNI, 90–96, 165–68, and 247–75. Last essay originally published in Sborník Devětsil 1 (1922). 36. Teige, “Naše umělecké touhy,” AZNI, 165. Interestingly, Teige himself never joined the Party. 37. See Ladislav Cabada, Intelektuálové a idea komunismu v českých zemích, 1900–1939 (Prague: Institut pro středoevropskou kulturu a politiku, 2000), 80–176, and Ivan Pfaff, Česká levice proti Moskvě, 1936–38 (Prague: Naše vojsko, 1993). 38. Karel Čapek, Továrna na Absolutno, Krakatit (Prague: Československý spisovatel, 1982), 117. 39. Ibid., 118. 40. See, for example, František Buriánek, Karel Čapek (Prague: Melantrich, 1978), 146, and William Harkins, Karel Čapek (New York: Columbia University Press, 1962), 101–2. 41. Čapek, Továrna na Absolutno, Krakatit, 154. 42. Götz, “Spor generací,” 153–55, and “O těch generacích,” 100–102. See also František Götz, “Generace ztracená—a přece oficielní,” Nová svoboda 46 (1925): 435–37. 43. Josef Kodíček, “Generace skoro nalezená,” Přítomnost, June 19, 1924, 365. 44. Josef Čapek, “Skepsi ve psí a o kursu nadosobních hodnot,” Přítomnost, June 24, 1924, 372. 45. Ibid. 46. Karel Čapek, “Ignoramus a ignorabimus,” OUKII, 537. Originally published in Přítomnost, October 23, 1924. 47. Ibid. 48. Ibid. 49. Ibid., 538. 50. Ibid. 51. Ibid., 539. 52. Ibid., 540. 53. Ibid. 54. Teige, “Obrazy a předobrazy,” AZNI, 97. 55. Čapek, “Poznámka,” AZNI, 104. 56. Václav Nebeský, “Umělecký defétismus,” AZNI, 115–19. Originally published in Tribuna, March 27, 1921. For my analysis of the aesthetic conflict between the artists of Čapek’s generation and those of Devětsil, I am


57. 58. 59. 60. 61.

62.

63. 64. 65. 66. 67. 68.

69. 70. 71. 72. 73. 74. 75. 76. 77.

78. 79.

80.

229

indebted to the excellent work of the art historian Karel Srp. His article, “Tvrdošíjní a Devětsil,” Umění 35 (1987): 54–68, was especially helpful. Nebeský, “Umělecký defétismus,” AZNI, 119. Ibid. See also Václav Nebeský, “Uměni a společnost,” Volné směry 22 (1923–24): 9–20. Karel Teige, “Umění dnes a zítra,” AZNI, 365–81. Originally published in Sborník Devětsil 1 (1922). See especially Karel Teige, “Constructivism and the Liquidation of ‘Art’,” in Karel Teige, Modern Architecture in Czechoslovakia and Other Writings, trans. Irena Žantovská Murray (Los Angeles: Getty Research Institute, 2000), 340. Originally published as “Konstruktivismus a likvidace ‘umění’,” Disk 2 (1925). See Karel Srp, “Teige in the Twenties,” in Karel Teige, 1900–1951: L’Enfant Terrible of the Czech Modernist Avant-Garde, ed. Eric Dluhosch and Rostislav Švácha (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1999), 26. Karel Teige, “Poetism,” trans. Alexandra Büchler, in Karel Teige, 1900– 1951, 70. Originally published as “Poetismus,” Host 3 (1924). Vítězslav Nezval cited in Karel Honzík, Ze života avantgardy: zážitky architektovy (Prague: Československý spisovatel, 1963), 71. Ibid. Václav Nebeský, “Umění trůnu zbavené,” Tribuna, May 10, 1923. Ibid., 2–3. Honzík, Ze života avantgardy, 47–89. Devětsil’s architects were far less dogmatic than its writers and theoreticians and were also among the first to have major differences with them. See František Šmejkal, “Výtvarná avantgarda dvacátých let Devětsil,” DČVU, 171–72. See Karel Teige, “Uměni dnes a zítra,” AZNI, 371. Nebeský, “Umění trůnu zbavené,” 3. Nebeský, “Umění a společnost,” 11–12. See his introduction to the play published in Karel Čapek, Dramata, 181–82. Dramata, 256–57. Cited in Robert Hilferty and Paul Thomason, “The Case for and against Makropulos,” Opera News, April 11, 1998, 21. Karel Čapek to Leoš Janáček [February 27, 1923] in Karel Čapek, Korespondence I (Prague: Český spisovatel, 1993), 182–83. As reported by Helena Čapková. Cited in John Tyrell, Janáček’s Operas: A Documentary Account (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1992), 311. See, for example, Bohuslava Bradbrook, Karel Čapek: In Pursuit of Truth, Tolerance, and Trust (Brighton, UK: Sussex Academic Press, 1998), 56–61. Karel Čapek, The Makropulos Secret, trans. Yveta Synek Graff and Robert T. Jones, in Towards the Radical Center: A Karel Čapek Reader, ed. Peter Kussi (Highland Park, NJ: Catbird Press, 1990), 111. Karel Čapek, “Filozofie Bergsonova. Henri Bergson: Vývoj tvořivý,” OUKII, 179. Originally published in Cesta, April 30, May 7, and May 14, 1920.

230


81. Ibid., 179–180. 82. Miroslav Halík, Karel Čapek: Život a dílo v datech (Prague: Academia, 1983), 37. Most of the novel, however, was written in 1923. It was completed in September 1923. 83. There are clear similarities between krakatit and Čapek’s karburators in Factory for the Absolute. 84. Čapek, Továrna na Absolutno, Krakatit, 179. 85. Čapek, “Filozofie Bergsonova,” OUKII, 163. 86. Ibid. 87. Karel Čapek, “O čapkovské generaci,” OUKIII, 312. Originally published in Přítomnost, March 9, 1932. 88. Georg Simmel, “The Conflict in Modern Culture,” in On Individuality and Social Forms, ed. Donald N. Levine (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1971), 375–93. Reprinted from Georg Simmel, The Conflict in Modern Culture and Other Essays, trans. K. Peter Etzkorn (New York: Teachers College Press, 1968). Originally published in 1918 but written in 1914. 89. Ibid., 375. 90. Ibid., 377–78. Emphasis in original. 91. Ibid., 392. Emphasis in original. 92. Ibid., 393. 93. Ibid. 94. Čapek, “O čapkovské generaci,” OUKIII, 312; “A. Mamelet: Le Relativisme philosophique chez Georg Simmel,” OUKI, 400. Originally published in Přehled, June 26, 1914. See also chapter 2. 95. Halík, Karel Čapek, 37. 96. Karel Čapek, “Formy,” in Od člověka k člověku I (Prague: Československý spisovatel, 1988), 228–30. Originally published in Lidové noviny, September 10, 1922. 97. Ibid., 229–30. Emphasis in original. 98. Čapek and his generational peers often accused members of the postwar avant-garde of plagiarizing their innovations. See, for example, Josef Kodíček, “O jedné generaci,” Přítomnost, March 20, 1924, 152–53. 99. Čapek, Továrna na Absolutno, Krakatit, 398. 100. Halík, Karel Čapek, 40–41. 101. Čapek, Továrna na Absolutno, Krakatit, 399. 102. Ibid., 402. 103. Ibid., 400. 104. Ibid. 105. Ibid., 402.

5 The Self as Empty Space and Crowd: ˇ apek and the Czechoslovak Condition Karel C 1. Karel Čapek, “Téměř kus noetiky,” OUKIII, 568. Originally published in Přítomnost, June 6, 1934. 2. Karel Čapek, “Ignoramus a ignorabimus,” OUKII, 537–40. Originally published in Přítomnost, October 23, 1924. See chapter 4 for a full discussion.


231

3. René Wellek, “Karel Čapek,” in The Columbia Dictionary of Modern European Literature, ed. Horatio Smith (New York: Columbia University Press, 1947), 139. 4. Karel Čapek, “Hledají se jistoty,” OUKIII, 541–45. Originally published in Přítomnost, March 7, 1934. 5. Karel Čapek, “O té státotvornosti,” OUKIII, 293. Originally published in Přítomnost, February 3, 1932. Čapek does not mention Benda by name in this article, but there can be no doubt about the reference or about Čapek’s familiarity with his work. In Čapek’s Conversations with Masaryk (1928–1935), Benda’s Treason of the Intellectuals (1927) was a topic of discussion between him and Masaryk. See Karel Čapek, Hovory s T G Masarykem (Prague: Československý spisovatel, 1990), 329–32. 6. Karel Čapek, “Klamal nás rozum?” OUKIII, 583–89. Originally published in Přítomnost, July 11, 1934. 7. See Robert Musil, The Man without Qualities, trans. Sophie Wilkins (New York: Knopf, 1995), 30. 8. William Harkins, Karel Čapek (New York: Columbia University Press, 1962), 116. 9. Adam, 9–10. 10. See, for example, Ferdinand Peroutka, “O té avantgarrde rrrévolutionairre,” Tribuna, January 6 and 9, 1923. In this article Peroutka asked, “I want to know why exactly [Devětsil’s] poetry is called Marxist and not, for example, Bakuninist.” In the novel Krakatit (1924), Karel Čapek also blurred the lines between anarchism and communism in his depiction of the young generation’s political aspirations. See chapter 4. 11. Adam, 17–19. 12. See Květoslav Chvatík and Zdeněk Pešat, Poetismus (Prague: Odeon, 1967). 13. Adam, 19. 14. Ibid., 20–21. 15. Ibid., 22–27. 16. Ibid., 28–30. 17. Ibid., 50. 18. Ibid., 78. Emphasis in original. 19. Ibid., 82. 20. Ibid. 21. Ibid. See also the discussion of Tales from Two Pockets below. 22. According to Harkins, the dichotomy between Adam and Alter Ego “parodies the ambivalence of the modern radical intellectual, who inclines towards individualism, at least for himself, but fancies that totalitarian methods are an easier and quicker way of perfecting the social order.” This is unquestionably a viable explanation, but it ignores the play’s generational dynamics as well as the disparate programs within the postwar avant-garde of which the Čapek brothers were well aware. The two readings, however, are not mutually exclusive. See Harkins, Karel Čapek, 117. 23. Adam, 105. 24. Ibid., 157. 25. Ibid., 166. 26. See Viktor Kudělka, Boje o Karla Čapka (Prague: Academia, 1987), 39–40.

232


27. F. X. Šalda cited in Ivan Klíma, Karel Čapek: Life and Work, trans. Norma Comrada (North Haven, CT: Catbird Press, 2002), 134–35. 28. Karel Čapek, “Hovory s Karlem Čapkem,” OUKIII, 276–77. Originally published in Rozpravy Aventina 7 (1931). 29. It goes without saying too that not every story is successful artistically or interesting from a philosophical point of view. It should be mentioned, however, that Tales from Two Pockets is highly prized for its innovative use of colloquial Czech. Many of the stories are written entirely in everyday speech, a major formal innovation at the time. For a good discussion of this feature, see Zdeněk Pešat, afterword, in Povídky, 320–21. Pešat fails to note, however, that this innovation belongs to the modernist attempt, advocated by Čapek in the years before the First World War, to break down the barriers between art and everyday life. Čapek then called for an end to the highly stylized, ostentatious, literary prose that long characterized Czech belles lettres. He only fully realized his aspirations here. 30. Tales, 18–19. Emphasis in original. This translation is for the most part excellent, and I cite it extensively. For some passages, however, I have sought slightly more precision and have provided my own translations. This is indicated by a reference to the original Czech text (Povídky). 31. The story was apparently inspired by an interview with Leoš Janáček about his experiences in England. See Pešat, afterword, Povídky, 322. 32. Ibid., 222. 33. Ibid., 57. 34. Tales, 46. 35. Ibid., 333–34. 36. It is impossible to know whether Čapek was thinking of Robert Musil when he wrote this story, but it cannot be ruled out. Musil is a relatively common Czech name, but the character is described in a way that recalls Robert Musil. The story’s narrator, Kavka (whose name is also suggestive— Kavka is the Czech form of the German Kafka), describes Musil as “an unusually well-educated and sophisticated man” and comments ironically: “He’s the type of intellectual who sees a problem in everything and has to cast around for his point of view on it. For example, he even has a point of view on his own wife: Musil isn’t a partner in the state of matrimony, he’s a partner in the problem of matrimony. He thinks in terms of the social problem, the sexual question, the problem of the subconscious, the problem of education, the crisis of contemporary culture, and a whole range of other problems” (Tales, 335). 37. Tales, 335–36. 38. Ibid., 337. 39. Ibid., 339. 40. Povídky, 280. 41. Tales, 344–35. 42. Ibid., 346. 43. The original Czech title is “Sbírka známek,” literally “A Collection of Stamps.” 44. From right to left, beginning with the Czech and Czechoslovak parties, the coalition included the Czech National Democrats, the Czech


45.

46. 47.

48.

49. 50. 51. 52.

53.

54. 55. 56. 57. 58. 59. 60. 61.

62.

233

Small Traders, the Czech Populists, the Czechoslovak Agrarians, the Czechoslovak National Socialists, the Czechoslovak Social Democrats, the German Farmer and DAWG, and the German Social Democrats. Joseph Rothschild, East Central Europe between the Two World Wars (Seattle and London: University of Washington Press, 1974), 116–17. Even though the Sudetendeutsche Partei won the greatest number of votes, the Czechoslovak Agrarians were a close second and emerged as the largest parliamentary party (by one seat) due to some clever maneuvering. Rothschild, East Central Europe between the Two World Wars, 125–26. Josef Branžovský, Karel Čapek, světový názor a umění (Prague: Nakladatelství politické literatury, 1963), 183. Branžovský, a harsh critic of Čapek’s work, poses the above question but acknowledges that the novels represent another aspect of Čapek’s engagement with contemporary life rather than a retreat from it. Čapek made the political and social implications of his novels more explicit in an epilogue he wrote after their publication. Bedřich Golombek, “Podkarpatská tragédie ze soudního přelíčení,” reprinted in its entirety in Karel Čapek, Hordubal, Povětroň, Obyčejný život (Prague: Československý spisovatel, 1985), 407–8. Harkins, Karel Čapek, 133. Čapek, Hordubal, 15. Harkins, Karel Čapek, 134. The state is unnamed, but the locale is most likely the Johnstown in Cambria County, Pennsylvania, about 70 miles east of Pittsburgh. The city was home to major coal and steel industries in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, attracting thousands of immigrant laborers including many from Eastern Europe. Three Novels, 17. Although this translation of the trilogy is outdated and imperfect in many respects, much of it is perfectly serviceable. Where it is insufficient or lacking in precision, I have provided my own translations. These are indicated by references to the original Czech texts (Hordubal, Povětroň, Obyčejný život). Čapek, Hordubal, 27. Ibid., 103. Ibid., 102. Three Novels, 125. Čapek, Hordubal, 106. A Flobert is a French-made rifle or pistol. Ibid., 126. Henri Bergson, Creative Evolution, trans. Arthur Mitchell (New York: Random House, 1944), 181–82. Emphasis in original. William Harkins, introduction, Three Novels (unpaginated); Harkins, Karel Čapek, 137–38; Harkins, “Karel Čapek: From Relativism to Perspectivism,” History of Ideas Newsletter, 3 (1957): 50–53. See José Ortega y Gasset, The Modern Theme, trans. James Cleugh (London: C. W. Daniel, 1931) and Karl Mannheim, Ideology and Utopia, trans. Louis Wirth and Edward Shils (New York: Harcourt, Brace & World, 1936). On the relationship of Ortega and Mannheim’s thought, see Robert Wohl, The Generation of 1914 (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1979).

234

63. 64.

65. 66. 67. 68. 69. 70. 71. 72. 73. 74. 75. 76.

77. 78.

79. 80. 81. 82. 83. 84. 85. 86. 87. 88. 89. 90. 91. 92.


Mannheim’s theory is sometimes known as relationism rather than perspectivism. Karel Čapek, “Vzpoura davů,” OUKIII, 517–24. Originally published in Přítomnost, January 17, 1934. Both works, however, were well-known at the time and Čapek’s familiarity with them is likely. If he did read Ideology and Utopia, he would undoubtedly have been sympathetic to Mannheim notion of “unattached” or “free-floating” intellectuals, who, because of their skepticism toward all contemporary ideological alternatives, occupied the most creative cultural position in society. Povětroň, 142. Ibid., 178. Ibid., 230. Ibid., 143, 137, and 171. Ibid., 172. Ibid., 174. Ibid., 198. Ibid., 203. Ibid., 204. Emphasis in original. Henri Bergson, An Introduction to Metaphysics, trans. by Arthur Mitchell (New York: Random House, 1944), 24–25. Čapek, Obyčejný život, 274. Ibid., 275. The exact dates of the man’s life are never given, but the year of his birth, the reader learns, is 1864. Approximately 70 years old at the time of his death, the man would have passed in the year 1934, the year in which Čapek composed the novel. Ibid. Although Čapek’s father was a doctor and not a cabinetmaker, the descriptions of the ordinary man’s parents closely mirror Čapek’s own statements about his parents as well as his sister’s account in her memoirs. See Karel Čapek, “Jak jsem k tomu přišel,” OUKIII, 338–40 (originally published in Lumír 58 (1932)), and Helena Čapková, Moji milí bratři (Prague: Československý spisovatel, 1962). An Ordinary Life has long been recognized to contain many autobiographical elements. Čapek, Obyčejný život, 290. Three Novels, 344. Čapek, Obyčejný život, 297. Ibid., 303. Ibid., 305. Ibid., 309. Ibid., 324. Emphasis in original. Ibid., 328. Ibid., 330. Three Novels, 391. Čapek, Obyčejný život, 332. Ibid., 343. Čapek, Obyčejný život, 344. Ibid., 347.


93. 94. 95. 96. 97. 98. 99. 100.

235

Ibid., 352–54. Ibid., 354. Emphasis in original. Three Novels, 445. Emphasis in original. Musil, The Man without Qualities, 30. Čapek, Obyčejný život, 381. Emphasis in original. Bergson, An Introduction to Metaphysics, 51. Čapek, Obyčejný život, 392–93. Emphasis in original. This was Musil’s description of Kakania, or rather Austria-Hungary, but it applies well to Czechoslovakia too. See Musil, The Man without Qualities, 31.

Conclusion 1. Karel Čapek, “O čapkovské generaci za války a po ní,” OUKIII, 321. Originally published in Přítomnost, March 16, 1932. 2. H. Stuart Hughes, Consciousness and Society: The Reorientation of European Social Thought, 1890–1930 (New York: Vintage, 1977), 337–41, 395–401, 404–11. 3. David S. Luft, Robert Musil and the Crisis of European Culture, 1880–1942 (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1980), 15–17. 4. Hughes, Consciousness and Society, 338–41; Luft, Robert Musil, 17. See also Robert Wohl, The Generation of 1914 (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1979), 232. Although Wohl concerns himself with a slightly younger group of writers than Hughes or Luft, there is significant overlap between the generation of 1905 and the generation of 1914. Wohl reaches an even starker conclusion than Hughes and Luft with respect to this cohort’s political inclinations. “It is fair to say,” he writes, “that Fascism was the great temptation of the generation of 1914.” 5. Luft, Robert Musil, 17. 6. See, for example, Karel Čapek, “Jak jsem k tomu přišel,” OUKIII, 340. Originally published in Lumír 58 (1932). Not only did Čapek often conceive of his work in medical terms, but the figure of the doctor is also one of the most common characters in his writing. 7. Otakar Vočadlo cited in Andrea Orzoff, “Battle for the Castle: The Friday Men and the Czechoslovak Republic, 1918–1938,” PhD diss., Stanford University, 2000, 29. Legionaires were members of the army of Czech prisoners of war and deserters that first fought against the Central Powers during the First World War and then, after the Bolshevik Revolution, against the Red Army during the Russian Civil War. They were generally oriented on the right wing of the Czechoslovak political spectrum. Orzoff’s dissertation contains the best discussion of the Friday afternoon meetings at Čapek’s home. 8. Communist propaganda cited in Věra Olivová, The Doomed Democracy: Czechoslovakia in a Disrupted Europe, 1914–38, trans. George Theiner (Montreal: McGill-Queen’s University Press, 1972), 189. 9. See Václav Kapoun, Silvestrovská aféra Karla Čapka (Prague: Nakladatelství Melantrich, 1992).

236


10. See Viktor Kudělka, Boje o Karla Čapka (Prague: Academia, 1987), 95–143 and Štěpán Vlášín, “Bojovník proti fašismu,” in Kniha o Čapkovi, ed. Štěpán Vlášín (Prague: Československý spisovatel, 1988), 346–59. 11. Ferdinand Peroutka, “Sbohem K. Č.” Přítomnost, December 29, 1938. 12. Jean-François Lyotard, The Postmodern Condition: A Report on Knowledge, trans. Geoff Bennington and Brian Massumi (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1984), xxiv. 13. Jean-François Lyotard, “Answering the Question: What is Postmodernism?” in Innovation/Renovation: New Perspectives on the Humanities, ed. Ihab Hassan and Sally Hassan, trans. Régis Durand (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1983), 341. 14. See, for example, Richard Rorty, Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1979) and Essays on Heidegger and Others: Philosophical Papers II (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991).

Bibliography Archival Sources Literární archív Památníku národního písemnictví (Literary Archives, Museum of National Literature), Karel Čapek papers, 1890–1938 Getty Research Institute for the History of Art and the Humanities, Vlastislav Hofman papers and drawings, 1904–1984

Newspapers and Periodicals Almanach na rok 1914 Broom Červen Česká revue Československé noviny Disk Host Kmen Lidové noviny Lumír Kritika Musaion Nárdoní listy Nová svoboda Pásmo Die Prager Presse Pražské pondělí

Přehled Přerod Přítomnost ReD Rovnost Rozpravy Aventina Sborník Devětsil Scéna Snaha Les Soirées de Paris Styl Tribuna Umělecký měsíčník Var Veraikon Volné směry Život II

Published Primary Sources and Memoirs Benda, Julien. The Betrayal of the Intellectuals. Translated by Richard Aldington. Boston: The Beacon Press, 1955. Benson, Timothy, and Éva Forgács, eds. Between Worlds: A Sourcebook of Central European Avant-Gardes, 1910–1930. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2002. Bergson, Henri. Creative Evolution. Translated by Arthur Mitchell. New York: Random House, 1944. ———. An Introduction to Metaphysics. Translated by T. E. Hulme. New York: Macmillan, 1955. Čapek, Josef. Co má člověk z umění a jiné úvahy o umění—výbor z článků z let 1912–1937. Prague: Výtvarný odbor Umělecké besedy v Praze, 1946. 237

238

Bibliography

Čapek, Josef. Dvojí osud: dopisy Josefa Čapka které v letech 1910–1918 posílal své budoucí ženě Jarmile Pospíšilové. Edited by Jaroslav Dostál, Jiří Opelík, and Jaroslav Slavík. Prague: Odeon, 1980. ———. Méně výstav a více umění: výběr z výtvarných referátů v Lidových novinách, 1921–1939. Prague: Vysoká škola uměleckoprůmyslová, 1999. ———. Nejskromnejší umění. Prague: Dauphin, 1997. Čapek, Karel. The Absolute at Large. Translated by (unlisted). New York: Macmillan, 1927. Reprint, Westport, CT: Hyperion, 1974. ———. Básnické počátky – Předklady. Prague: Český spisovatel, 1993. ———. Dramata: Loupežník, RUR, Věc Makropulos, Bílá nemoc, Matka. Prague: Československý spisovatel, 1992. ———. Hordubal, Povětron, Obyčejný život. Prague: Československý spisovatel, 1985. ———. Hovory s T G Masarykem. Prague: Československý spisovatel, 1990. ———. Korespondence I-II. Prague: Československý spisovatel, 1993. ———. Krakatit. Translated by Lawrence Hyde. London: Geoffrey Bles, 1925. ———. Od člověka k člověku I. Prague: Československý spisovatel, 1988. ———. O umění a kultuře I-III. Prague: Československý spisovatel, 1984–1986. ———. O umění a kultuře, Od člověka k člověku (Dodatky). Prague: Český spisovatel, 1995. ———. Povídky z jedné a z druhé kapsy. Prague: Český spisovatel, 1993. ———. Pragmatismus, čili Filosofie praktického života. Olomouc, Czech Republic: Votobia, 2000. ———. Přijatá korespondence. Edited by Marta Dandová and Milada Chlíbcová. Prague: Nakladatelství Lidové noviny, 2000. ———. Tales from Two Pockets. Translated by Norma Comrada. North Haven, CT: Catbird Press, 1994. ———. Továrna na Absolutno, Krakatit. Prague: Československý spisovatel, 1982. ———. Three Novels: Hordubal, Meteor, and An Ordinary Life. Translated by M. and R. Weatherall. Introduction by William Harkins. Highland Park, NJ: Catbird Press, 1990. ———. War with the Newts. Translated by Ewald Osers. Highland Park, NJ: Catbird Press, 1990. Čapek, Karel, and Josef Čapek. Adam the Creator: A Comedy in Six Scenes and an Epilogue. Translated by Dora Round. London: George Allen & Unwin Ltd, 1929. ———. Ze společné tvorby: Krakonošova zahrada, Zářivé hlubiny a jiné prózy, Lásky hra osudná, Ze života hmyzu, Adam stvořitel. Prague: Československý spisovatel, 1982. Čapková, Helena. Moji milí bratři. Prague: Československý spisovatel, 1962. Hoffmeister, Adolf, ed. Kavárna Union: Sborník vzpomínek pamětníků. Prague: Nakladatelství československých výtvarných umělců, 1958. Honzík, Karel. Ze života avantgardy: zážitky architektovy. Prague: Československý spisovatel, 1963. Hořec, Jaromír, ed. Proč nejsem komunistou. Prague: Lidové noviny, 1990. James, William. Pragmatism and Four Essays from the Meaning of Truth. New York: Meridian, 1960.

Bibliography

239

Jarošová, Stanislava, Milan Blahynka, and František Všetička, eds. Viktor Dyk, St.K.Neumann, Bratři Čapkové: Korespondence z let 1905–1918. Prague: Nakladatelství Československé akademie věd, 1962. Kafka, Franz. Letters to Friends, Family, and Editors. Translated by Richard and Clara Winston. New York: Schocken, 1977. Kussi, Peter, ed. Toward the Radical Center: A Karel Čapek Reader. Highland Park, NJ: Catbird Press, 1990. Langer, František. Byli a bylo. Prague: Státní pedagogické nakladatelství, 1992. ———. Tvorba z exilu. Prague: Akropolis, 2000. Mannheim, Karl. Ideology and Utopia. Translated by Louis Wirth and Edward Shils. New York: Harcourt, Brace & World, 1936. ———. “The Problem of Generations.” Essays on the Sociology of Knowledge. Edited by Paul Kecskemeti. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1968. Musil, Robert. Briefe nach Prag. Hrsg. Barbara Köpplova und Kurt Krolop. Hamburg: Rowohlt, 1971. ———. Briefe, 1901–1942. Hrsg. Adolf Frisé. Hamburg: Rowohlt, 1981. ———. The Man without Qualities. Translated by Sophie Wilkins and Burton Pike. New York: Knopf, 1995. ———. Diaries, 1899–1941. Edited by Mark Mirsky. Translated by Philip Payne. New York: Basic Books, 1998. Nebeský, Václav. Umění po impresionismu. Prague: Aventinum, 1923. Neumann, Stanislav K. Ať Žije Život! Nové úvahy o novém umění. Prague: Borový, 1920. Ortega y Gasset, José. The Modern Theme. Translated by James Cleugh. London: C. W. Daniel, 1931. Padrta, Jiří, ed. Osma a Skupina výtvarných umělců, 1907–1917: Teorie, Krtika, Polemika. Prague: Odeon, 1992. Peroutka, Ferdinand. Jací jsme. Prague: Obelisk, 1924. ———. Úděl Svobody. Prague: Academia, 1995. Scheinpflugová, Olga. Byla jsem na světě. Prague: Mladá fronta, 1994. Seifert, Jaroslav. Všecky krásy světa. Prague: Československý spisovatel, 1993. Simmel, Georg. On Individuality and Social Forms. Edited by Donald N. Levine. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1971. Strnad, Jaroslav, ed. Ferdinand Peroutka: Muž Přítomnosti. Zurich: Konfrontace, 1985. Teige, Karel. The Minimum Dwelling. Translated and introduced by Eric Dluhosch. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; Chicago: Graham Foundation for Advanced Studies in the Fine Arts, 2002. ———. Modern Architecture in Czechoslovakia and Other Writings. Translated by Irena Žantovská Murray and David Britt. Introduced by Jean-Louis Cohen. Los Angeles: Getty Research Institute, 2000. ———. Osvobozování života a poezie: Studie ze čtyřicátých let. Edited by Jiří Brabec, Vrastislav Effenberger, Květoslav Chvatík, and Robert Kalivoda. Prague: Aurora and Český spisovatel, 1994. ———. Svět stavby a básně: Studie z dvacátých let. Edited by Jiří Brabec, Vrastislav Effenberger, Květoslav Chvatík, and Robert Kalivoda. Prague: Československý spisovatel, 1966.

240

Bibliography

Vaihinger, Hans. The Philosophy of “As If”: A System of the Theoretical, Practical, and Religious Fictions of Mankind. Translated by C. K. Ogden. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1935. Vlašín, Štěpán, ed. Avantgarda známá a neznámá. 3 vols. Prague: Svoboda, 1970–72. Vočadlo, Otakar. Anglické listy Karla Čapka. Prague: Nakladatelství Jan, 1995. Zweig, Stephan. The World of Yesterday: An Autobiography. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1964.

Secondary Sources Abrams, Bradley. The Struggle for the Soul of the Nation: Czech Culture and the Rise of Communism. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield, 2005. Adamson, Walter L. Avant-Garde Florence: From Modernism to Fascism. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1993. Anděl, Jaroslav. The Art of the Avant-Garde in Czechoslovakia 1918–1938. Valencia, Spain: IVAM, Centre Julio Gonzales, 1993. Anděl, Jaroslav, Anne Wilkes Tucker, Alison de Lima Greene, Ralph McKay, and Willis Hartshorn. Czech Modernism, 1900–1945. Houston: Museum of Fine Arts/Bullfinch Press, 1989. Antliff, Mark. Inventing Bergson: Cultural Politics and the Parisian Avant-Garde. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1993. Antliff, Mark, and Patricia Leighten. Cubism and Culture. New York: Thames and Hudson, 2001. Baumgartner, Lothar, and Erwin Sieche. Die Schiffe der k. (u.) k. Kriegsmarine im Bild. Vienna: Verlagsbuchhandlung Stöhr, 1999. Becker, Edwin, ed. Prague 1900: Poetry and Ecstasy. Amsterdam: Van Gogh Museum, 1999. Beller, Steven. “Modern Owls Fly by Night: Recent Literature on Fin de Siècle Vienna.” The Historical Journal 31 (1988): 665–83.. ———, ed. Rethinking Vienna 1900. New York: Berghahn Books, 2001. ———. Vienna and the Jews, 1867–1938: A Cultural History. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989. Benson, Timothy, ed. Central European Avant-gardes: Exchange and Transformation, 1910–1930. Los Angeles: Los Angeles County Museum of Art; Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2002. Blahynka, Milan, ed. Čeští spisovatelé 20. století. Prague: Československý spisovatel, 1985. Bradbrook, Bohuslava. Karel Čapek: In Pursuit of Truth, Tolerance, and Trust. Brighton, UK: Sussex Academic Press, 1998. Bradbury, Malcolm, and James McFarlane, eds. Modernism, 1890–1930. New York: Penguin, 1991. Branžovsky, Josef. Karel Čapek, světový názor a umění. Prague: Nakladatelství politické literatury, 1963. Burkhardt, François. Vlastislav Hofman: Architektur des böhmischen Kubismus. Berlin: Internationales Design Zentrum Berlin, 1982. Bürger, Peter. Theory of the Avant-Garde. Translated by Michael Shaw. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1984.

Bibliography

241

Buriánek, František. Karel Čapek. Prague: Melantrich, 1978. Burrows, J. W. The Crisis of Reason: European Thought, 1848–1914. New Haven, CT and London: Yale University Press, 2000. Bydžovská, Lenka, and Rostislav Švácha, eds. “Karel Teige a evropská avantgarda.” Umění 43 (1995). Cabada, Ladislav. Intelektuálové a idea komunismu v českých zemích, 1900–1939. Prague: Institut pro středoevropskou kulturu a politiku, 2000. Chvatík, Květoslav, and Zdeněk Pešat, eds. Poetismus. Prague: Odeon, 1967. Codeluppi, Manuela Castagnara, and Hana Císařová, eds. “Karel Teige: Architecture and Poetry.” Rassegna 15 (1993). Chipp, Herschel B., ed. Theories of Modern Art: A Source Book by Artists and Critics. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1968. Coen, Deborah. Vienna in the Age of Uncertainty: Science, Liberalism, and Private Life. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2007. Cohen, Gary. The Politics of Ethnic Survival: Germans in Prague, 1861–1914. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1981. Cooper, Douglas. The Cubist Epoch. New York: Phaidon, 1970. Cubisme a Praga: Obres de la Galeria Nacional. Exhibition catalog. Museu Picasso, Barcelona, 1990. Le Cubisme à Prague. Exhibition catalog. Château de Biron, Dordogne, and Musée des beaux-arts Nancy, 1991. Dagan, Avigdor. “The Czech-German-Jewish Symbiosis of Prague: The Langer Brothers.” Crosscurrents 10 (1991): 181–93. David-Fox, Katherine. “The 1890s Generation: Modernism and National Identity in Czech Culture, 1890–1900.” PhD diss., Yale University, CT, 1996. Demetz, Peter. Prague in Black and Gold: Scenes from the Life of a European City. New York: Hill and Wang, 1997. Dluhosch, Eric, and Rostislav Švácha, eds. Karel Teige, 1900–1951: L’Enfant Terrible of the Czech Modernist Avant-Garde. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1999. Feinberg, Melissa. Elusive Equality: Gender, Citizenship, and the Limits of Democracy in Czechoslovakia, 1918–1950. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press, 2006. Field, Frank. The Last Days of Mankind: Karl Kraus and His Vienna. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1967. Garver, Bruce. “Czech Cubism and Fin-de-Siècle Prague.” Austrian History Yearbook 19/20 (1983/84): 91–104. Gay, Peter. Weimar Culture: The Outsider as Insider. New York: Harper & Row, 1968. Gluck, Mary. Georg Lukács and His Generation, 1900–1918. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1985. ———. “Beyond Vienna 1900: Rethinking Culture in Central Europe,” Austrian History Yearbook 28 (1997): 217–22. Green, Christopher. Cubism and Its Enemies: Modern Movements and Reaction in French Art, 1916–1928. New Haven, CT and London: Yale University Press, 1987. Habermas, Jürgen. “Modernity versus Postmodernity.” In A Postmodern Reader. Edited by Joseph Natoli and Linda Hutcheon, 91–104. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1993.

242

Bibliography

Hacohen, Malachi. Karl Popper—The Formative Years, 1902–1945: Politics and Philosophy in Interwar Vienna. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000. Halík, Miroslav. Karel Čapek: Život a dílo v datech. Prague: Academia, 1983. Hanák, Péter. The Garden and the Workshop: Essays on the Cultural History of Vienna and Budapest. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1998. Harkins, William. Karel Čapek. New York: Columbia University Press, 1962. ———. “Karel Čapek: From Relativism to Perspectivism.” History of Ideas Newsletter 3 (1957): 50–53. ———. “Pragmatism and the Czech Pragmatist Generation.” Gravenhage (selfpublished), 1958. Harrison, Thomas. 1910: The Emancipation of Dissonance. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1996. Hassan, Ihab, and Sally Hassan, eds. Innovation/Renovation: New Perspectives on the Humanities. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1983. Heftrich, Urs. “Čapek a Bergson.” Zpravodaj Společnosti bratří Čapků 28 (1989): 34–56. Herbert, Robert L., ed. Modern Artists on Art: Ten Unabridged Essays. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1965. Herwig, Holger H. The First World War: Germany and Austria-Hungary, 1914– 1918. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1997. Hilferty, Robert, and Paul Thomason. “The Case for and against Makropulos.” Opera News, April 11, 1998, 20–24. Hlobil, Tomáš. “Karel Čapek a Thomas Mann.” Estetika 26 (1989): 1–7, 65–79. Hughes, H. Stuart. Consciousness and Society: The Reorientation of European Social Thought, 1890–1930. New York: Vintage, 1977. Izenberg, Gerald. Modernism and Masculinity: Mann, Wedekind, Kandinsky through World War I. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000. Janik, Allan. “Vienna 1900 Revisited: Paradigms and Problems.” Austrian History Yearbook 28 (1997): 1–27. Janik, Allan, and Stephen Toulmin. Wittgenstein’s Vienna. New York: Simon & Schuster, 1973. Kábrt, Jan. Krakonošova zahrada bratří Čapků: Léta pobytu Dr. Antonína Čapka a jeho rodiny v Úpici, 1890–1907. Hradec Králové, Czechoslovakia: Kruh, 1985. Kallen, Horace Meyer. William James and Henri Bergson: A Study in Contrasting Theories of Life. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1914. Kann, Robert A. A History of the Habsburg Empire, 1526–1918. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1974. Kapoun, Václav. Silvestrovská aféra Karla Čapka. Prague: Nakladatelství Melantrich, 1992. Karník, Zděnek. České země v éře První republiky, 1918–1938. 3 vols. Prague: Nakladatelství Libri, 2000–2003. Kautman, František. St. K. Neumann: Člověk a dílo, 1875–1917. Prague: Academia, 1966. Kern, Stephen. The Culture of Time and Space, 1880–1914. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2000. Kieval, Hillel. The Making of Czech Jewry: National Conflict and Jewish Society in Bohemia, 1870–1918. New York: Oxford University Press, 1988.

Bibliography

243

King, Jeremy. Budweisers into Czechs and Germans: A Local History of Bohemian Politics, 1848–1948. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2002. Kiszling, Rudolf. Österreich-Ungarns Anteil am Ersten Weltkrieg. Graz, Austria: Stiasny Verlag, 1958. Klíma, Ivan. Karel Čapek: Life and Work. Translated by Norma Comrada. North Haven, CT: Catbird Press, 2002. Králík, Oldřich. První řada v dílě Karla Čapka. Ostrava, Czechoslovakia: Profil, 1972. Kučera, Martin. “Názory a postoj F.X. Šaldy za první světové války.” Český časopis historický 90 (1992): 537–53. Kudělka, Viktor. Boje o Karla Čapka. Prague: Academia, 1987. Kunc, Jaroslav. Slovník soudobých českych spisovatelů, 1918–1945. Prague: Orbis, 1945–46. Lahoda, Vojtěch, Mahulena Nešlehová, Marie Platovská, Rostislav Švácha, Lenka Bydžovská, eds. Dějiny českého výtvarného umění (IV/1–2) 1890/1938. Prague: Academia, 1998. Lahoda, Vojtěch. “Kubismus jako politikum. K dějinám Skupiny výtvarných umělců.” Umění 40 (1992): 44–66. Lahoda, Vojtěch, and Karel Srp. “Příspěvek k rané teorii kubismu.” Umění 23 (1984): 418–40. Lamač, Miroslav. Osma a Skupina výtvarných umělců, 1907–1917. Prague: Odeon, 1988. Le Rider, Jacques. Modernity and Crises of Identity: Culture and Society in Fin-deSiècle Vienna. Translated by Rosemary Morris. New York: Continuum, 1993. Luft, David S. Robert Musil and the Crisis of European Culture, 1880–1942. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1980. Lunn, Eugene. Marxism and Modernism: An Historical Study of Lukács, Brecht, Benjamin, and Adorno. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1982. Lyotard, Jean-François. The Postmodern Condition: A Report on Knowledge. Translated by Geoff Bennington and Brian Massumi. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1979. Makin, Michael, and Jindřich Toman, eds. On Karel Čapek: A Michigan Slavic Colloquium. Ann Arbor: Michigan Slavic Publications, 1992. Malevič, Oleg. Bratři Čapkové. Translated by Hana Štěpánková. Prague: Ivo Železný, 1999. Mamatey, Victor, and Radomír Luža, eds. A History of the Czechoslovak Republic, 1918–1948. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1973. Margolius, Ivan. Cubism in Architecture and the Applied Arts: Bohemia and France, 1910–1914. North Pomfret, VT: David & Charles, 1979. Matejka, Ladislav, ed. An Anthology of Czech Poetry: A Bilingual Anthology Vol.1. Ann Arbor: Michigan Slavic Publications, 1973. Matuška, Alexander. Man against Destruction: Karel Čapek, an Essay. Translated by Cathryn Alan. London: George Allen & Unwin, 1964. McGrath, William. Dionysian Art and Populist Politics in Austria. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1974. Mědílek, Boris, ed. Bibliografie Karla Čapka: soupis jeho díla. Prague: Academia, 1990.

244

Bibliography

Mendelsohn, Ezra. The Jews of East-Central Europe between the World Wars. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1983. Nešlehová, Mahulena. Bohumil Kubišta. Prague: Odeon, 1984. ———, ed. Vlastislav Hofman. Prague: Vlastislav Hofman Society, 2005. Novák, Arne. Dějiny českého písemnictví. Prague: Brána, 1994. Olivová, Věra. The Doomed Democracy: Czechoslovakia in a Disrupted Europe, 1914–1938. Translated by George Theiner. Montreal: McGill-Queens University Press, 1972. Opelík, Jiří. Josef Čapek. Prague: Melantrich, 1980. ———, ed. Karel Čapek ve fotografii. Hradec Králové, Czechoslovakia: Středočeské nakladatelství, 1991. Orzoff, Andrea. “Battle for the Castle: The Friday Men and the Czechoslovak Republic, 1918–1938.” PhD diss., Stanford University, CA, 2000. ———. Battle for the Castle: The Myth of Czechoslovakia in Europe, 1914–1948. New York: Oxford University Press, 2009. Pánek, Jaroslav and Oldřich Tůma, eds. A History of the Czech Lands. Prague: Karolinum Press, 2009. Pečinková, Pavla. “Generační roztržka (Josef Čapek kontra Karel Teige).” Zpravodaj Společnosti bratří Čapků 34 (1995): 23–31. ———. Josef Čapek. Prague: Svoboda, 1995. ———, ed. Malíř-Básník: Vzpomínání na Josefa Čapka. Prague: Academia, 2004. ———. “Příspěvek bratři Čapků k činnosti naší výtvarné avantgardy.” Estetika 20 (1983): 30–48. Péter, László, and Robert Pynsent, eds. Intellectuals and the Future in the Habsburg Monarchy, 1890–1914. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1988. Pfaff, Ivan. Česká levice proti Moskvě, 1936–38. Prague: Naše vojsko, 1993. ———. O perspektivu lidského společenství: politické myšlení Karla Čapka. Prague: Artforum, 1994. Pocheho, Emanuela, ed. Encyklopedie českého výtvarného umění. Prague: Academia, 1975. Poggioli, Renato. The Theory of the Avant-Garde. Translated by Gerald Fitzgerald. Cambridge, MA: Belknap, 1968. Prahl, Roman, and Lenka Bydžovská. Volné směry: časopis secese a moderny. Prague: Torst, 1993. Pynsent, Robert, ed. Decadence and Innovation: Austro-Hungarian Life and Art at the Turn of the Century. London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson, 1989. Rechcigl, Miloslav, ed. The Czechoslovak Contribution to World Culture. The Hague: Mouton & Co., 1964. Rorty, Richard. Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1979. ———. Essays on Heidegger and Others: Philosophical Papers II. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991. Roshwald, Aviel, and Richard Stites, eds. European Culture in the Great War. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999. Rothschild, Joseph. East Central Europe between the Two World Wars. Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1974. Rozenblit, Marsha L. Reconstructing a National Identity: The Jews of Habsburg Austria during World War I. New York: Oxford, 2001.

Bibliography

245

Sayer, Derek. The Coasts of Bohemia: A Czech History. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1998. Schorske, Carl. Fin-de-Siècle Vienna: Politics and Culture. New York: Vintage, 1981. Šedivý, Ivan. Češi, české země a velká válka, 1914–1918. Prague: Nakladatelství Lidové noviny, 2001. Seigel, Jerrold. The Idea of the Self: Thought and Experience in Western Europe Since the Seventeenth Century. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005. ———. The Private Worlds of Marcel Duchamp: Desire, Liberaton, and the Self in Modern Culture. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1995. Silver, Kenneth. Esprit de Corps: Art of the Parisian Avant-Garde and the First World War, 1914–1925. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1989. Slavík, Jaroslav. “Skupina Tvrdošíjných: Ke kronice její aktivity.” Umění 30 (1982): 193–213. Slavík, Jaroslav, and Jiří Opelík. Josef Čapek. Prague: Torst, 1996. Šmejkal, František, ed. Devětsil. Česká avantgarda dvacátých let. Prague: Galerie hlavního města Prahy, 1986. ———. “Futurismus a české umění.” Umění 36 (1988): 20–52. Spector, Scott. Prague Territories: National Conflict and Cultural Innovation in Franz Kafka’s Fin de Siècle. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 2000. Srp, Karel. Karel Teige. Prague: Torst, 2001. ———. “Tvrdošíjní a Devětsil.” Uměni 35 (1987): 54–68. Starcky, Emmanuel, and Jaroslav Anděl, eds. Prague 1900–1938: Capitale secrète des avant-gardes. Dijon, France: Musée des Beaux-Arts de Dijon, 1997. Štemberková, Marie. “Čapkovská generace.” Unpublished manuscript. Prague, 1985. Štěpán, Václav. “Pařížský Loupežník bratří Čapků.” Sborník Národního muzea v Praze 41 (1987): 1–49. Strachan, Hew. The First World War, Volume I: To Arms. New York: Oxford University Press, 2001. Strohsová, Eva. Zrození moderny. Prague: Československý spisovatel, 1963. Stromberg, Roland. Redemption by War: The Intellectuals in 1914. Lawrence, KS: Regents Press of Kansas, 1982. Švácha, Rostislav. The Architecture of New Prague, 1895–1945. Translated by Alexandra Büchler. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1995. ———, ed. Devětsil: Czech Avant-Garde Art, Architecture, and Design of the 1920s and 30s. Oxford: Museum of Modern Art; London: Design Museum, 1990. ———, ed. Kubistická Praha/Cubist Prague, 1909–1925. Prague: Středoevropská galerie a nakladatelství, 2004. Tyrell, John. Janáček’s Operas: A Documentary Account. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1992. Vegesack von, Alexander, ed. Czech Cubism: Architecture, Furniture, and Decorative Arts, 1910–1925. London: Laurence King, 1992. Vlášín, Štěpán, ed. Kniha o Čapkovi. Prague: Československý spisovatel, 1988. Vlček, Tomáš. “Programy českého výtvarného umění 20. let.” Estetika 12 (1975): 212–33.

246

Bibliography

Vlček, Tomáš. Praha 1900. Studie k dějinám kultury a umění Prahy v letech 1890– 1914. Prague: Panorama, 1986. Vojtová, Milena, and Vladimír Justl, eds. František Langer na prahu nového tisíciletí. Prague: Nadační fond Františka Langera, 2000. Wingfield, Nancy. Flag Wars and Stone Saints: How the Bohemian Lands Became Czech. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2007. Weiss, Jeffrey. The Popular Culture of Modern Art: Picasso, Duchamp, and AvantGardism. New Haven, CT and London: Yale University Press, 1994. Wellek, René. “Karel Čapek.” In The Columbia Dictionary of Modern European Lierature. Edited by Horatio Smith. New York: Columbia University Press, 1947 ———. “Karel Čapek.” In Essays on Czech Literature. The Hague: Mouton & Co., 1963. Wohl, Robert. The Generation of 1914. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1979. Yack, Bernard. The Fetishism of Modernities: Epochal Self-Consciousness in Contemporary Political and Social Thought. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press, 1997. Znoj, Milan, Jan Havránek, and Martin Sekera, eds. Český liberalismus: Texty a osobnosti. Prague: Torst, 1995.

Index Académie Colarossi, 39 Academy of Fine Arts (Vienna), 78 aestheticism, 2, 16, 27, 45, 48, 54, 86–8, 102 Aleš, Mikoláš, 51 Allied Powers, 10, 99, 101, 112 America. See United States, the anarchism, 21, 87, 149, 157, 161, 214n41, 231n10 antipositivism, 3–4, 16, 52, 63–4, 66–7, 91–2, 154–5 antirationalism, 1, 2, 6, 7, 200 antisemitism, 8, 24, 51, 99, 205, 223n14 Apollinaire, Guillaume, 31, 90, 123, 125 “Zone” (1913), 125 Archipenko, Alexander, 31 Arcos, René, 90, 124 Austria/Austria-Hungary/AustroHungarian Empire. See Habsburg monarchy autonomy of art, 46, 61–2, 71–3, 109, 119–21, 124–5, 127–8, 137, 139–40, 201 avant-garde, postwar. See Devětsil; generations: young, postwar; Teige, Karel Bahr, Hermann, 48 Bakunin, Mikhail, 231n10 Balkans, 98 Belgium, 98 Benda, Julien, 155, 231n5 Treason of the Intellectuals (1937), 231n5 Beneš, Edvard, 23, 24, 112, 203, 225n56 Beneš, Vincenc, 32, 37, 38, 39, 61, 63–4, 74–6, 92, 222n104 Tram No. 4 (1911), 32

Bergen-Belsen, 24, 214n49 Bergson, Henri aesthetic theory, 91–2, 109 and Čapek, Karel, 65–7, 91–3, 107–9, 113, 140, 143–6, 155–6, 176, 181–2, 196–7, 221n62, 222n104, 225n42 Čapek generation, and idea of, 2, 16, 27–8 and cubism, 27, 62, 66, 219n13, 221n62 and death, 65–6, 107, 144–5 duration, 65–6, 186 élan vital, 66, 107–8, 140, 144, 225n42, 225n62 and generation of 1905, 4, 199 intuition, 65–6, 88, 155–6, 176, 187, 196–7 and pragmatism, 113 prewar modernist generation, influence on, 27–8, 62, 64–7, 87–8, 91–3, 107, 110, 130, 140, 143–5, 219n10, 221n62 Bergson, Henri, writings Creative Evolution (1907), 66, 107–9, 146, 181–2, 219n10, 221n62 Introduction to Metaphysics (1903), 219n10 Laughter (1900), 91, 219n10 Matter and Memory (1896), 219n10 Time and Free Will (1889), 219n10 Berlin, 1, 31, 39, 57, 74 Bohemia, 8, 17, 18, 32, 47, 50, 105, 114, 124, 143, 190 See also Bohemian Lands Bohemian Lands, 9, 32, 50, 51, 77, 99 See also Bohemia; Moravia Bolshevik Revolution, 98, 235n7

247

248

Index

Bourdelle, Emile-Antoine, 39 Bourgeois Radical Party (Hungary), 44 Brancusi, Constantin, 31 Braque, Georges, 31, 36–8, 40–1, 53–4, 74–6, 123 Britain, 24, 133, 166 Brno, 21, 143 Broom (journal), 121 Brunner, Vratislav, 37, 61 Buchenwald, 24 Budapest, 1, 26–7, 35, 42–6, 48, 49, 58–9, 200 Bürger, Peter, 127 Čapek, Antonín, 18–21, 22, 50 Čapek, Josef avant-garde, criticism of, 119, 125, 157, 160–1, 163 Čapek, Karel, collaboration with, 14, 21, 28, 96, 113, 154, 156–64 Čapek generation, and idea of, 14, 134–5, 203–4 cubist painting, 14, 31, 33, 42, 73, 76 death, 24 early life, 20, 50 and expressionism, 56–7, 218n52 and Futurism, 74 Paris, study in, 39–40 and prewar modernist generation, 37–9, 61, 129, 134–5 and Skupina výtvarných umělců, 31, 37–8, 73–6 and Tvrdošíjní, 121 and World War I, 98, 102, 104–6, 223nn10–11 Čapek, Josef, writings and works Adam the Creator (1927), 28, 96, 154, 156–64, 231n22 Drinker, The (1913), 33 Fateful Game of Love, The (1922), 21 From the Life of Insects (1921), 15, 21, 95 Lelio (1917), 105

Čapek, Karel and antipositivism, 3, 16, 64, 66–7, 91–2, 154–5 and Benda, Julien, 155, 231n5 Čapek generation, and idea of, 1, 2, 3, 14–16, 120, 134, 154 and collectivism, 36, 64, 67–8, 89–90, 97, 109–11, 121, 126 and communication, 29, 156, 166, 176, 178, 196, 198, 202–6 and communism, 23, 25, 132–3, 149, 157, 160, 162, 205, 231n10 and cubism, 2, 3, 16, 26–7, 31, 35, 37–9, 42, 53–6, 58–9, 62–4, 66, 71–6, 85, 93, 154 and cubist architecture, 78, 82–3, 85, 221n62, 221n70 death, 24, 206 and Durkheim, Emile, 67–70, 109, 130 early life, 17–21, 50, 214n41, 234n78 and empathy, 29, 156, 185, 187–9, 197–8, 202 and expressionism, 2, 38, 56–8, 106, 218n52 “faithlessness,” 135–7 and fascism, 1, 3, 5, 23–4, 149–50, 162, 174, 202, 205–6, 211–12n12 French poetry, translations of, 2, 90, 99, 102, 125 Friday salon, 23, 203–4, 235n7 and futurism/Futurism, 2, 38, 75, 89, 102, 222n99 and generation of 1905, 4–5, 7, 199–202 and generation of 1914, 211–12n12 and generation of the 1890s, 2, 48, 87, 89–90, 120, 129–30, 134 generational consciousness, emergence of, 35–6 generational thinking, 11–13

Index

legacy, post-World War II, 25–6, 214n50 limitations of reason, emphasis on, 3, 4, 13, 28–9, 129, 132, 134–7, 154–5, 163, 164–8, 176, 181–2, 188, 196, 198, 202, 207 and modern art/modernism, 12, 27, 51–2, 56–8, 63, 71–3, 75–6, 90–3, 105, 134, 194, 207, 232n29 and modern literature, 55, 67, 85, 89–90, 93, 105–6 and national art, 51–2 and Neumann, Stanislav Kostka, 89–92, 99, 102, 104–7, 110, 116 Paris, study in, 39–40 and perspectivism, 184–5, 234n64 and philosophical novel, 5, 155, 174–5 politics, 22–4, 132, 149, 153, 163, 203–6, 214n45 and postmodernism, 207 and pragmatism, 97, 111–13, 115, 117, 126, 200, 225n56 and primitive art, 55 and Romains, Jules, 67–8 and Šalda, František Xaver, 90, 102, 130–1, 134, 163 and Simmel, Georg, 67, 70–1, 141, 145–8, 151 and Skupina výtvarných umělců, 31, 37–9, 73–6, 221n70 See also under Bergson, Henri; Čapek, Josef; generations: prewar modernist and young, postwar; self, the; World War I Čapek, Karel, writings Adam the Creator (1927), 28, 96, 154, 156–64, 231n22 Conversations with Masaryk (1928–1935), 2, 15, 231n5

249

Factory for the Absolute, (1921–1922), 21, 95, 132–4, 153, 230n83 Fateful Game of Love, The (1922), 21 “Forms” (1922), 148 From the Life of Insects (1921), 15, 95 Hordubal (1933), 5, 16, 28, 154, 164, 174–83, 233n47 Krakatit (1924), 21, 96, 140, 145–51, 230n82–3, 231n10 Makropulos Case, The (1922), 15, 21, 140–5 Meteor (1934), 5, 16, 28, 154, 164, 174–5, 182–8, 233n47 Mother (1938), 24, 95, 206 Ordinary Life, An (1934), 5, 16, 28, 96, 154, 164, 173, 174–5, 188–98, 233n47, 234n76, 234n78 Pragmatism, or A Philosophy of Practical Life (1918), 112–13 Robber, The (1919), 21, 113–17, 144 R.U.R. (Rossum’s Universal Robots, 1920), 2, 15, 17, 21 Tales from Two Pockets (1929), 28, 154, 163–73, 175–6, 183, 232n29, 232n36 stories: “Ballad of Juraj Čup,” 175; “Dr. Mejzlík’s Case,” 164–6; “Man Who Couldn’t Sleep, The,” 168–71, 173; “Mystery of Handwriting, The,” 167–8; “Orchestra Conductor’s Story, The,” 166; “Stamp Collection, The,” 171–3; “Stolen Document 139/VII, Sect. C,” 166–8; “Telegram, The,” 168–9 War with the Newts (1936), 2, 15, 17, 24, 95 Wayside Crosses (1917), 105 White Plague, The (1937), 24, 95 Čapek generation, the. See under generations Čapková, Božena, 19–21 Čapková, Helena, 20, 21

250

Index

Catholicism, 23, 204 Čech, Svatopluk, 51 Central Powers, 98, 102, 235n7 Cézanne, Paul, 54, 123 Chagall, Marc, 124 Chochol, Josef, 32, 34, 37, 38, 61, 73, 77, 82, 215n14 apartment house on Neklan Street (1913–1914), 34 collectivism. See under Čapek, Karel; generations: prewar modernist and young, postwar communism/Communism, 2–3, 10, 23, 25, 28, 122, 126, 131, 135, 149, 163, 174, 201, 203–4, 231n10, 235n8 See also under Čapek, Karel; Devětsil Communist Party (Czechoslovakia), 18, 87, 110, 131–2, 204 constructivism. See under Devětsil Coubine, Othon. See Kubín, Otakar Croce, Benedetto, 3 cubism architecture, 26, 32, 34–5, 42, 77–84, 85, 221n62, 221n70 Čapek generation, and idea of, 2, 16, 154 cultural unity, and aspiration to, 53–5, 59, 62–3 and Czech Francophilia, 39–42 design, 32, 34–5, 42 and Devětsil, 123–4 and expressionism, 56–8, 59 and form/formalism, 52–5, 58, 59, 71, 73, 77–83, 85, 123 and naturalism, 2, 52, 66, 71–3, 93 and neoprimitivsm, 37, 38, 53–4 painting, 14, 27, 31–3, 40, 71–3, 76, 77, 85 and Prague, 26–7, 31–5, 40–2, 58–9, 75, 77–8, 81, 85, 223n9 and prewar modernist generation, 3, 26–7, 31–42, 53–5, 58–9,

61–4, 71–5, 77–85, 93, 121, 123–4, 218n47 Puteaux group, 31, 74–5 rondo-cubism, 35 sculpture, 40, 42 and Skupina výtvarných umělců, 31, 37–8, 58, 74–6 and subjectivism, 52–5, 59 and Tvrdošíjní, 121 See also under Bergson, Henri; Čapek, Josef; Čapek, Karel Czech Fascist Party, 10, 205 Czech Legion, 98, 204, 235n7 Czech National Gallery, 40 Czech National Theater, 21 Czech Populist Party, 232–3n44 Czech Republic, 25 Czech Technical University (Prague), 78, 81 Czechoslovak Agrarian Party, 232–3nn44–5 Czechoslovak generation. See under generations Czechoslovak National Committee, 8 Czechoslovakia, 1–3, 6–7, 11, 15, 17, 18, 28, 112, 119, 122, 132, 143, 156, 195 Communist regime, 25, 122 demise of, 24, 198, 206 diversity of, ethno-national, 6, 10, 174, 200 foundation of, 6–11, 27, 36, 191, 200–1 and generation of 1905, 5–7, 11, 200–2 instability of, 29, 153, 155–6, 174–5, 198, 235n100 politics in, 6–10, 22–4, 126, 153, 174, 200, 204–6, 212n17, 212n19, 235n7 preservation of, 29, 175, 202–3, 206 Dachau, 24 decadence, 2, 16, 49, 55, 86, 87

Index

Delaunay, Robert, 31, 123 democracy, 3, 6, 7, 9, 11, 16, 22–3, 46–7, 162, 182, 200, 202, 203 Der Sturm (gallery and journal), 31, 57, 74, 83–5, 223n10 Derain, André, 37, 40, 74, 124 Devětsil, 207, 227n29, 228n56, 229n68 communism, 28, 122, 131, 160, 231n10 constructivism, 123, 138–9, 161 formation, 110, 119–20, 226n2 membership, 122, 203 negation of art, 28, 120, 127–8, 137–41, 144, 156 poetism, 123, 138–9, 150, 158, 161 proletarian art, 123, 131, 138 and Tvrdošíjní, 121–2, 124–5, 137 See also generations: young, postwar; Teige, Karel Dewey, John, 111 Die Aktion (journal), 223n10 Die Brücke, 57 Dostoyevsky, Fyodor, 124 Duchamp, Marcel, 127, 227n22 Duchamp-Villon, Raymond, 31 Dufy, Raoul, 31 Duhamel, Georges, 90, 124 duration. See under Bergson, Henri Durkheim, Emile, 67–70, 76, 109, 130 Durych, Jaroslav, 23 Dvořák, Vilém, 38 élan vital. See under Bergson, Henri England. See Britain Entente Powers. See Allied Powers Ernst, Paul, 55 expressionism, 2, 38, 56–8, 59, 61, 106, 218n52 “faith,” 2, 4, 10, 29, 126, 129–32, 134–5, 137, 153–5, 163 fascism, 1, 3, 5, 23–4, 126, 149–50, 162, 174, 202, 204–6, 211–12n12, 235n4

251

Feuerstein, Bedřich, 122, 128 Filla, Emil, 33, 37, 38, 39, 41, 54, 74–6, 92, 98, 222n104 Glass and a Bottle, A (1914), 33 “Virtue of Neoprimitivism, The” (1911), 37 First Republic. See Czechoslovakia First World War. See World War I Fischer, Otokar, 37, 61, 217n40 Fragner, Jaroslav, 122 France, 24, 31, 39, 41, 58, 98, 99, 101, 143, 169 Franz Josef I, 78 French Foreign Legion, 98 Freud, Sigmund, 3 Friesz, Emil-Othon, 31 functionalism, 77–81 futurism/Futurism, 2, 38, 74–5, 89, 102, 103, 123, 222n99 generations Čapek generation, idea of, 1–3, 28, 119–21, 134, 154, 198, 207, 211–12n12. See also under Bergson, Henri; Čapek, Josef; generations: young, postwar and cubism, 2, 16, 154 and generation of 1905, 3, 5, 11, 200–2, 207 and generation of the 1890s, 2, 15, 120–1, 134 and generational thinking, 11–13, 15 limitations of reason, emphasis on, 3, 17, 28–9, 129, 132, 134–7, 154–5, 198, 201–2, 207 membership, 13–15 methods of studying, 15–16 politics, 2–3, 7, 17, 28, 120, 129, 154, 201–7, 211–12n12 significance, 17, 207 cubo-futurist generation, 124 Czechoslovak generation, 12 generation of 1890 (Hughes), 3–4

252

Index

generations—Continued generation of 1905 (Hughes), 3–7, 11, 13, 199–202, 207, 235n4 generation of 1914, 129, 134, 211–12n12, 213n30, 235n4 generation of the 1890s, 2, 15, 46–9, 54, 71, 85–7, 89–90, 120, 129–30, 134, 161, 216n28 National Theater generation, 46 prewar modernist generation (Karel Čapek’s generation/cohort/ peers). See also under Bergson, Henri; Čapek, Josef; cubism antipositivism, 3, 63–7, 91–2 autonomy of art, defense of, 28, 127–8, 137–40, 201 collectivism, 36, 63–4, 67–8, 89, 90, 97, 109–11, 126 cultural unity, aspiration to, 53–5, 59, 62–3, 92–3, 125 “faithlessness,” 129–30, 132, 134–7 Francophilia, 39–42 and Futurism, 74–5, 89 and generation of the 1890s, 54, 71, 85–90, 129–30, 134 and Kafka circle, 49–50, 214n50, 217n37 limitations of reason, emphasis on, 3, 65–6, 129, 134–7, 154 membership, 31–2, 37–8, 61 modern literature, 84–92, 105–6 and naturalism, 27, 62, 66, 71–3, 92–3 optimism, 36, 49–52, 53, 59, 134–5 politics, 3, 6, 10–11, 129, 131–2, 136, 201, 205 pragmatism, 3, 28, 64, 97, 117, 130 relativism, 3, 27–8, 62, 64–5, 67, 70, 93, 97, 129, 130, 132, 135

vitalism, 27, 62, 64, 91, 93, 97, 107, 109–11, 116–17, 126 and World War I, 6, 10, 14, 26–9, 36, 96–9, 111, 116–17, 119–21, 149, 200 and young generation/postwar avant-garde, 28, 97, 119–20, 122, 124–32, 134, 137–41, 144–5, 160–1, 201, 205, 227n16, 228n56, 230n98 Tvrdošíjní generation, 121 young, postwar generation (postwar avant-garde) Čapek, Karel, criticism by, 16, 22–3, 28, 97, 109–11, 116, 120, 124–5, 127–9, 140–1, 144–5, 149, 154, 156–7, 160–1, 201, 230n98, 231n10 Čapek generation, and idea of, 2–3, 7, 9–10, 15, 28, 120–1, 129, 134, 201, 204–5, 207 collectivism, 2, 110–11, 121, 130–1, 161 “faith,” 126, 129–31, 134–5 negation of art, 28, 109, 119–20, 127–8, 137–40, 141, 144, 201 politics, 2–3, 7, 10, 22–3, 28, 120, 122, 126, 129, 131, 149, 201, 205, 231n10, 231n22 “wholeness,” 10, 28, 126–7, 145, 201 and World War I, 7, 10–11, 28, 97, 110–11, 120, 123, 126, 156. See also Devětsil; Teige, Karel German Farmer and DAWG (Czechoslovakia), 232–3n44 German Social Democrats (Czechoslovakia), 232–3n44 German Technical University (Prague), 78 Germany, 2, 5, 9, 24, 99, 100, 102, 133, 153, 174, 202, 205–6

Index

Gestapo, 24 Gleizes, Albert, 31, 74–5, 123 Gluck, Mary, 44, 126 Georg Lukács and His Generation, 1900–1918 (1985), 212n16 Gočár, Josef, 35, 37, 38, 61, 77–8 desk and chair (1915), 35 Götz, František, 129–31, 134–5, 227n29 Gris, Juan, 74 Gutfreund, Otto, 37, 38, 39, 42, 61, 98, 217n40 Habsburg monarchy, 17, 50, 156, 174, 212n15, 235n100 cultural life in, 1, 26–7, 31, 35, 40–1, 42–4, 59 dissolution of, 6–10, 27, 36, 49, 195–6, 201 politics in, 8–9, 22, 40–1, 42–4 and World War I, 9, 27, 36, 96, 98, 101–2, 191–2 See also Kakania Hanák, Péter, 42–4, 216n23 The Garden and the Workshop (1998), 211n1 Hanuš, Stanislav, 61 Hardubej, Jiří, 175–6 Hardubejová, Polana, 175–6 Hašek, Jaroslav, 1 The Good Soldier Švejk (1923), 1 Heckel, Erich, 57 Hegel, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich, 127 Hesse, Hermann, 200 Hitler, Adolf, 24, 95, 174, 205–6 Hoffmeister, Adolf, 122, 203 Hofman, Vlastislav, 32, 37, 38, 55, 61, 72, 73, 77–8, 81–5, 98, 102–3, 121, 221n70 Corner Building (1914), 84 Detail of a Façade (1914), 83 Proposal for a Cemetery near Prague (1912), 85

253

Hora, Josef, 129 Hradec Králové, 20 Hughes, H. Stuart, 3–5, 7, 13, 199–201, 235n4 Consciousness and Society (1977), 3 See also generations: generation of 1890 and generation of 1905 Hungary, 9, 58, 212n16 impressionism, 37, 54–5, 71–2, 74–5, 80, 124 individualism, 6, 46, 54, 109, 135, 231n22 intuition, 3, 4, 7, 12–13, 17, 29, 65–6, 88, 155–6, 164–6, 176, 183–4, 187–8, 197–8, 202 See also under Bergson, Henri; knowledge irrationalism, 3, 4, 17, 29, 155, 199, 201–2, 207 Italy, 39, 99, 102, 121, 150 Jacob, Max, 123 James, William, 2, 111–13, 130, 225n62 Janáček, Leoš, 142–3, 232n31 Jenůfa (1904), 142 Káťa Kabanová (1921), 142 Makropulos Case, The (1926), 143 Janák, Pavel, 34, 37, 38, 61, 74, 77–82, 98, 215n14, 221n62, 221n70 “Against Mood in Architecture” (1911–12), 79–80 box with lid (1911), 34 “From Modern Architecture to Architecture” (1910), 79 Jászi, Oszkár, 44 Jews in Budapest, 44 in Čapek generation/prewar modernist generation, 24, 217n40

254

Index

Jews—Continued and Czech antisemitism, 8, 24, 46, 167–8 Czech-identified, 51, 217n34 in Czechoslovakia, 6, 8–9 German-identified, 26, 45, 49–50, 59, 217n37 in Vienna, 43 and World War I, 223n14, 224n32 Jičín, 81 Jung Wien, 48 Kafka, Franz, 1, 25–6, 49–50, 214n50, 217n37, 232n36 Meditations (1912), 214n50 Kahnweiler, Daniel-Henry, 40, 74 Kakania, 6, 212n15, 235n100 Kandinsky, Vassily, 56 On the Spiritual in Art (1911), 56 Kant, Immanuel, 70–1 Karásek, Jiří ze Lvovic, 48, 86 Kirchner, Ernst Ludwig, 57 Klee, Paul, 121 Klimt, Gustav, 56 knowledge balance of rational and intuitive forms of, 3, 13, 29, 155, 165–6, 187, 202 balance of objective and subjective forms of, 70–1, 168–73, 186–7 experience as a form of, 161, 164, 166–8, 180, 182 pragmatic conception of, 112, 137, 225n62 limitations of intuitive forms of, 4, 13, 154–5, 164–6, 175–6, 198, 225n62 limitations of rational/scientific forms of, 3–4, 17, 28, 65–6, 129, 136, 154–5, 164–8, 175–6, 180–2, 183, 188–9, 192–3, 196, 198, 199, 201–2, 207, 228n34

subjectivity of, 3–4, 52, 164, 168–73, 185–7, 192–3, 199 uses of intuitive forms of, 3–4, 7, 13, 17, 29, 65–6, 88, 154–6, 164–6, 175–6, 183–4, 186–7, 188, 197–8, 202 Kodíček, Josef, 5, 14, 23, 24, 61, 98, 102–4, 115, 134–5, 203, 217n40 Kokoschka, Oskar, 40 Kotěra, Jan, 78 Krakatoa, 146 Kramář, Karel, 8 Kramář, Vincenc, 39–41, 74–5 Kratochvíl, Zdeněk, 37, 61 Kraus, Karl, 216n19 Krejcar, Jaromír, 122, 128 Kremlička, Rudolf, 121 Kubín, Otakar, 32, 37, 39 Kubišta, Bohumil, 32, 37, 39, 61, 98, 103–4, 224n30 Air Raid on Pula (1915), 104 Shore Artillery in Battle with Ships (1915), 103 Still Life for an Officer (1914–1916), 104 Kupka, František, 39 Kysela, František, 37, 61 la Fresnaye, Roger de, 31 Langer, František, 14, 24, 37, 38, 41, 61, 66, 84–5, 98, 105, 203, 214n50, 217n40, 219n12 Langer, Jiří, 214n50 Laurens, Henri, 42 Laurin, Arne, 5 Lažanský, Vladimír, 100 Le Bon, Gustave, 67, 109 liberalism, 1–3, 6–7, 8, 10–11, 18–19, 22–3, 29, 42–4, 46, 131, 200, 202, 204, 207 Lidové noviny (newspaper), 15, 21, 133, 164, 175 Lipchitz, Jacques, 42

Index

Lipps, Theodor, 221n62 logical positivism, 4 London, 1, 24, 25 Luft, David, 4, 199, 201–2, 235n4 Lukács, Georg, 44, 46 Lyotard, Jean-François, 207 Machar, Josef Svatopluk, 48 Malé Svatoňovice, 17 Mamelet, Albert, 70 Le relativisme philosophique chez Georg Simmel (1914), 70 Maňák, Vasil, 175–6 Mánes, Josef, 51 Mánes Art Association, 37, 54, 71 Manifesto of Czech Modernism (1895), 47, 216n28 Mann, Thomas, 4–5, 200, 201–2 The Magic Mountain (1924), 4 Mannheim, Karl, 126, 184, 233–4n62, 234n64 Ideology and Utopia (1929), 184, 234n64 “Problem of Generations, The” (1923), 213n28 Marchand, Jean, 31 Marcoussis, Louis, 31 Marinetti, Filippo Tommaso, 89 Marvánek, Otakar, 121 Marx, Karl, 139 Marxism, 110, 204, 231n10 Masaryk, Tomáš Garrigue, 2, 8, 11, 15, 21, 22–3, 132, 203–4, 231n5 Matějček, Antonín, 37 Matisse, Henri, 57, 123 Mercereau, Alexandre, 31–2 Metzinger, Jean, 31, 74–5, 123 modern art/modernism, 28, 31, 37, 40, 46–7, 61, 77, 79, 81, 84, 88, 90, 101–7, 121, 200, 216n19 conception of, conventionalist/ relativist, 27, 62–3, 73–4, 76, 92–3

255

conception of, vitalist, 27, 62–3, 76, 87, 93 modernist culture, shifts in, 6–7, 11, 15, 111, 134, 201, 207 and Teige, Karel, 123–5, 127, 137 See also Čapek, Karel; cubism; Devětsil; expressionism; futurism; generations: prewar modernist and young, postwar; impressionism; neoprimitivism Mondrian, Piet, 31 Moravia, 8, 21, 50 Mucha, Alfons, 39 Muir, Edwin and Wilma, 25 Munch, Edvard, 58 Munich, 39, 206 Munich Agreement, 24, 206 Musaion (journal), 124 Museum of the Kingdom of Bohemia, 100 Musil, Robert, 10, 14, 211nn10–11, 212n15, 213n22, 216n19, 232n36, 235n100 and generation of 1905, 4–5, 199–202 Man without Qualities, The (1930–1942), 4, 29, 156, 195, 198, 212n15 “Monkey Island” (1919), 211n11 and self, the, 29, 156, 195 Mussolini, Benito, 150 Muzika, František, 122 Národní listy (newspaper), 21, 100 National Democratic Party (Czechoslovakia), 10, 21, 232n44 National Labor Party (Czechoslovakia), 23, 214n45 National Museum, 223n13. See also Museum of the Kingdom of Bohemia National Socialist Party (Czechoslovakia), 23, 214n45, 232–3n44

256

Index

Ortega y Gasset, José, 183–4, 233n62 Modern Theme, The (1923), 184 Revolt of the Masses, The (1930), 184 Ottoman Empire, 9

postmodernism, 207 Prager Presse, Die (newspaper), 5, 211n11 pragmatism, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 28, 64, 97, 99, 102, 111–13, 115, 126, 130, 199, 200, 207, 225n56 Prague, 1, 5, 8, 15, 16, 19, 21, 22, 39–42, 87, 112, 113, 114, 127, 141, 142, 148, 169, 189, 190, 191, 223n13 exhibitions in, 31–2, 55, 57, 58 German-Jewish culture in, 49–50, 59, 215–16n16, 217n37 and Kafka, Franz, 1, 25–6, 49–50, 214n50, 217n37 Vienna and Budapest, contrast with, 42, 45–6, 48–9, 58–9 and World War I, 98, 100, 103, 104 See also under cubism primitive art/primitivism, 54–5, 124–5. See also neoprimitivism Přítomnost (journal), 14, 15 Procházka, Antonín, 37 Procházka, Arnošt, 48 proletarian art. See under Devětsil Pula, 98, 104, 224n30 Puteaux cubists. See under cubism

Paris, 5, 31, 39–41, 65, 75, 98, 113, 223n9 paroxysm, 61, 222n99 Peroutka, Ferdinand, 14, 23, 24, 203, 206, 231n10 perspectivism, 183–4, 233–4n62 Philippe, Charles-Louis, 124 philosophical novel, 4–5, 155, 174–5, 199 Picasso, Pablo, 31, 36–8, 40, 41, 53–4, 74–6, 123 Pirandello, Luigi, 200 poetism. See under Devětsil Poland, 8, 58 Ponc, Miroslav, 122 positivism, 3, 16, 22, 52, 64, 66, 91, 107, 154

Red Army, 98, 235n7 Reichsrat, Austrian, 8 relationism. See perspectivism relativism, 2, 3, 7, 17, 27, 28, 64, 70, 112, 115, 126, 130, 132–3, 135, 153, 155, 200, 206–7 Rickert, Heinrich, 64 Rimbaud, Arthur, 193 Rivera, Diego, 31 Rodin, Auguste, 58 Romains, Jules, 67–8, 90, 109, 124 Romania, 8 rondo-cubism. See under cubism Rorty, Richard, 207 Rosipal, Josef, 98 Rousseau, Henri, 124 Russia, 9, 58, 101, 102

naturalism, 2, 16, 27, 62, 66, 71–3, 90, 92, 93, 124, 154 Nazism (National Socialism), 5, 24, 25, 29, 153, 174, 206, 214n45 Nebeský, Václav, 125, 137–40 “Art Dethroned” (1923), 139–40 “Artistic Defeatism” (1921), 137–8 neoclassicism, 38, 55 neoprimitivism, 37, 38, 53–4 neoromanticism, 86 Neruda, Jan, 51 Netherlands, 98 Neumann, Stanislav Kostka, 61, 87–93, 98, 99, 102, 104–7, 109–10, 116, 131, 134 Long Live Life! (1920), 107, 110 New York, 25, 127 Nezval, Vítězslav, 23, 122, 138, 158, 203, 204 “Parrot on a Motorcycle” (1924), 158 Nietzsche, Friedrich, 158 Nobel Prize, 1, 15, 122

Index

Russian Civil War, 98, 235n7 Ruthenia, 8, 175 Sachsenhausen, 24 Šalda, František Xaver, 48, 90, 102, 105, 130–1, 134, 161, 163, 228n34 Puppets and Workers of God (1917), 102 Schiller, Ferdinand Canning Scott, 111 Schmidt-Rottluff, Karl, 57 Schorske, Carl, 26–7, 42–3, 56, 211n1, 216n19 Fin-de-Siècle Vienna (1981), 27, 42 Scotland, 25 Secession, the, 56, 61–2, 74, 78–82 Second World War. See World War II Seifert, Jaroslav, 122 self, the, 19, 44, 58, 101, 131 autonomy of, 105–6 constructedness of, 50, 170–3, 193–4 as crowd, 28–9, 153, 156, 196–7 dissolution of, 106, 131 as empty space, 28–9, 153, 156, 195–6 knowledge of, 170–3, 182, 184–5, 191 multiplicity of, 29, 156, 194–8, 202 as object of intuition, 29, 50, 156, 176, 186–8, 196–8, 202 transcendence of limits on, 131, 150 withdrawal into, 1, 42–3, 48, 56–7, 59 Seurat, Georges, 124 Shaw, George Bernard, 141–2 Back to Methuselah (1921), 141–2 Šíma, Josef, 128 Šíma, Ladislav, 32, 37 Simmel, Georg, 64, 67, 70–1, 141, 145–8, 151 “The Conflict in Modern Culture” (1918), 146 Skupina výtvarných umělců, 31, 37–40, 55, 58, 73–6, 79, 98, 99, 119, 221n70 Sládek, Josef, 51

257

Slovakia, 8, 148 Social Democratic Party (Czechoslovakia), 9, 110, 232–3n44 socialism, 2, 10 socialist realism, 122, 131 Sorbonne, 5, 39 Soviet Union, the, 122, 156 Špála, Václav, 32, 37, 38, 39, 73, 98, 121 Spanish Civil War, 95 Spector, Scott Prague Territories (2000), 211n1, 214n50, 217n37 Štech, Václav Vilém, 37 Štěpán, Václav, 37 Šturc, Václav, 18 Štyrský, Jindřich, 122 subjectivism, 52–6, 59, 87, 89, 105, 109, 121 Sudeten Nazi Party, 174 Sudetendeutsche Partei, 174, 206, 233n45 Sunday Circle, 44–5 Švehla, Antonín, 8 symbolism, 86 Tatra mountains, 148 Taussig, Ervín, 98, 134, 217n40 Teige, Karel, 120, 122–5, 128, 131, 134, 137–40, 145, 149–50, 156–8, 160, 203–4 Theer, Otakar, 86–7, 221n74 Third Reich. See Nazism Thon, Jan, 37, 38 Toyen (Marie Čermínová), 122 Tribuna (newspaper), 5, 211n11 Tvrdošíjní, 121–2, 124–5, 137 Uhlíř, Antonín, 68 Umělecký měsíčník (journal), 31, 40, 42, 54–5, 214n50 unanimism, 67–8, 109 Union Café, 41, 216n17 United States, the, 112, 122, 175–9, 181 University of Berlin, 5, 70

258

Index

University of Prague, 5, 21, 112 Úpice, 17–21, 50 Vaihinger, Hans, 130, 228n34 The Philosophy of “As If ” (1911), 130 van Dongen, Kees, 40 van Gogh, Vincent, 124 Vančura, Vladislav, 203 Verhaeren, Emile, 123 Versailles Treaty, 174 Vienna, 1, 22, 26–7, 35, 39, 40–6, 48–9, 56, 58–9, 61, 77–8, 200, 215n14 Vildrac, Charles, 90, 124 Villon, Jacques, 31 Visan, Tancrède de, 87–8 Visual Artists Group. See Skupina výtvarných umělců vitalism, 1, 16, 27, 62–4, 91, 93, 97, 109–11, 116, 126, 145–6, 155, 200 See also Bergson, Henri: élan vital Vlaminck, Maurice de, 40 Volné směry (journal), 37, 215n9 Vrchlický, Jaroslav, 51 Wagner, Otto, 39, 77–82, 215n14 Weber, Max, 3 Wellek, René, 5 Werfel, Franz, 215–16n16 Whitman, Walt, 123 “wholeness,” 10, 28, 126–7, 145, 201 Wilson, Woodrow, 112

Wirth, Zdeněk, 37 Wohl, Robert, 6, 7, 211–12n12, 213n30, 235n4 Wolker, Jiří, 122, 129 World War I, 1–3, 12–13, 15, 16, 32, 35, 39, 52, 62, 82, 87, 90–3, 134, 138, 140–1, 143, 147, 153, 155, 176, 214n50, 219n10, 223n13, 223n17, 232n29, 235n7 and Čapek, Josef, 98, 102, 104–6, 223nn10–11 and Čapek, Karel, 16, 21–2, 27–8, 93, 95–7, 99–100, 102–17, 126, 149, 191–2, 196, 200, 206, 223n10, 223n14, 224n32 and Czechoslovakia, foundation of, 6–7, 9, 22, 27, 36, 191, 200 and Habsburg monarchy, 9, 27, 36, 96, 98, 101–2, 191–2 and Jews, 223n14, 224n32 See also under generations: prewar modernist and young, postwar World War II, 24, 25, 29, 95, 219n12 Young Czech Party, 10, 46, 47 Yugoslavia, 8 Zeyer, Julius, 51 Zionism, 8 Život (journal), 128 Zrzavý, Jan, 121 Zweig, Stefan, 101

Abbreviations. OUKIII Karel Čapek, O umění a kultuře III (Prague: Československý. spisovatel, 1984) spisovatel, 1985)

Recommend Documents