Tato recenze původně vyšla anglicky v německém časopise Bohemia, roč. 53, č. 2 (2013), s. 493-495. Autor konstatuje, že se nejedná o ucelený životopis Václava Havla, Suk se soustředí na Havla jako disidenta, politického spisovatele a zakladatele nezávislých iniciativ. Originálním způsobem přitom využil a zpracoval primární prameny, v prvé řadě obsáhlou korespondenci a svazky z Havlova vyšetřování bezpečnostními složkami. Suk píše jako příslušník generace vyrůstající v době normalizace, která v roce 1989 právě dospěla. Jeho vztah k Havlovi je kladný a uctivý, nikoli však zbožný a nezavírá oči před kontroverzními momenty jeho biografie. V dalším Williams rozvíjí úvahu, v níž komentuje Sukovu volbu „komedie“ (v pojetí literárního vědce Northropa Fryeho) jako žánru pro jeho knihu. Tomuto žánru by podle recenzenta lépe odpovídalo, kdyby Suk plnohodnotněji uvedl na scénu Gustáva Husáka a Alexandera Dubčeka jako Havlovy protihráče., This review was originally published in English in the German periodical Bohemia, vol. 53 (2013), no. 2, pp. 493-95. (To access it free of charge, go to http://recensio.net/r/4e2937fb30d447aea90d2d5cf58cb326) As the author notes, Suk does not aim to provide a comprehensive biography, but instead concentrates on Havel the dissident, political writer, and co-founder of independent opposition groups and projects. Suk achieves this with an original approach to the primary sources, first and foremost Havel’s voluminous correspondence and the secret-police files kept on him. Suk writes as a member of the generation that grew up in the period of Normalization policy and came of age in 1989. His attitude to Havel is positive, respectful, but not idolizing; he does not shut his eyes to controversial aspects of Havel’s life. The reviewer then comments on Suk’s choice of the term ‘comedy’ (as understood by the literary critic and theorist Northrop Frye) as the genre of his book. This genre, the reviewer argues, would have been better served had Suk brought Gustáv Husák and Alexander Dubček more fully onto the stage as Havel’s adversaries., [autor recenze] Kieran Williams ; z angličtiny přeložila Marzia Patonová., přeloženo z angličtiny, Obsahuje bibliografii, and Tři hlasy k jedné knize
ASCR recalls the ninetieth anniversary of the signing of Three Kings Declaration which paved way for Czechoslovak independence. For the first time this declaration formulated the proposal for an independent Czech state, united with Slovakia, but with no mention of Habsburg Dynasty. and Martin Kučera.
Autor se zastavuje u archetypálního půdorysu „komedie“, který si Jiří Suk vypůjčil od literárního teoretika Northropa Fryeho jako výkladový rámec své knihy, a zamýšlí se nad tím, nakolik se dá použít i pro porozumění Havlovým dramatizací absurdity a absurdní povahy politiky. Podle jeho soudu je lépe vystihuje žánr grotesky, spočívající na napětí mezi nesmiřitelnými protiklady a paradoxy. Právě jejich existenci a působení v životě a činnosti Václava Havla ve sledovaném období dokázal Jíří Suk velice plasticky ukázat. Z jeho knihy lze usuzovat, že Havel nevěřil na historický happy end, dějiny pro něj byly naopak otevřeným, neukončeným a nenaplánovatelným děním. Tento způsob intelektuálního vztahování ke světu zůstal podle autora Havlovi vlastní i v prezidentské roli po změně režimu v listopadu 1989. Sloužil mu k distanci od stávající reality i k ironické distanci od sebe sama a tematizován byl například v antinomiích morálky a politiky nebo občanské společnosti a stranické demokracie. Patří k přednostem Sukovy práce, jak účelně významově strukturuje bohatý pramenný materiál s použitím vlastních metahistorických pojmů i převzatých metafor typu „obnovení pořádku“ nebo „šedá zóna“. Suk ukazuje Havla přesvědčivě jako centrální osobnost Charty 77 a politického převratu, jeho výklady jsou vysoce poučené a představují dosud nejhlubší vhled do dané problematiky., The author focuses on the archetypal plan of ‘comedy’ which Jiří Suk has borrowed from the literary theorist Northrop Frye as the interpretational framework for his book about Václav Havel. Moreover, the author questions the extent to which it can properly be used to understand Havel’s dramatizations of absurdity and the absurd nature of politics. In the author’s judgement, these would have been better classified under the genre of the grotesque, which consists in the tension between irreconcilable opposites and paradoxes. It is their existence and operation in Havel’s life and work in the period covered by the book, which Suk has so vividly demonstrated. From this book, one can reasonably conclude that Havel did not believe in a historical happy ending; indeed, history for him comprised open-ended and unplanned events. This way of intellectually relating to the world remained, according to the author, true of Havel also in his role as President after the Changes beginning in November 1989. It helped him to maintain his distance from reality at that time, and also to maintain ironic distance from himself; it is thematized, for example, in the antinomies of morals and politics or civil society and the multi-party system. Among the strong points of Suk’s work is how he has structured the wide range of primary sources according to their meaning and for his own purposes, by using his own meta-historical terms and also adopting metaphors such as the ‘restoration of order’ or the ‘grey zone’. Suk persuasively shows Havel as the central figure of Charter 77 and the Changes. His interpretations are well informed, and constitute the deepest probe into the topic so far., [autor recenze] Miloš Havelka., Obsahuje bibliografii, and Tři hlasy k jedné knize
A major reform in the reign of Joseph II was the establishment in 1786 of the provincial building directorates, through which the court aimed to regulate all public building works in the monarchy. Although the original aim of unifying building regulations throughout the realm was never achieved, the reform was a success and remained in force, with a few minor amendments, until the revolutionary year of 1848. One reason for its success was the elite corps of civil engineers who staffed these institutions. This study looks at advances in technical education, especially engineering, in the Habsburg monarchy from the beginning of the 18th century and the emergence of the Collegia Nobilia, or elite colleges, where graduates were prepared for a career in the Imperial Army. Besides military architecture, the colleges also taught the fundamentals of civil engineering, turning out some of the best‐trained creators of early modern architecture. The development and nature of this elite engineering training is examined with reference to the engineering academies of Prague, Vienna and Olomouc. In all three cases we stress the colleges’ status within the state framework, and their evolution in the light of changing official doctrine and methods of instruction. In all three cases it is clear that during the latter half of the 18th century the original ‘aristocratic’ colleges began to decline and were slowly replaced by similar state‐controlled establishments. As a first step, the court of Joseph II introduced a specialized course in practical architecture at the Vienna Academy of Fine Arts. From around 1800 this model was gradually superseded by the progressive French‐style polytechnic, a modified version of which remains the standard model for technical education to this day., Michal Konečný., and Obsahuje bibliografické odkazy
přednesl při posmrtné oslavě ve velké aule University Karlo-Ferdinandovy 3. prosince 1914 Jan Kapras., KČSN, and Separát z: časopisu Sborník věd právních a státních, roč. 15., seš. 1