The author fi rst summarizes the career of Jozef Tiso (1887-1947), a politician and a Roman Catholic priest. His entire political life was linked to Hlinka’s Slovak People’s Party; he was always a representative of its moderate faction, and even represented it as a minister of the Czechoslovak government. In 1939, he became its chairman. In the First Czechoslovak Republic, he was a dyed-in-the-wool federalist; since the proclamation of the Slovak State in March 1939 until the end of his life,an advocate of Slovakia’s independence. As the president of the Slovak Republic between 1939 and 1945, he was responsible for Slovakia’s political regime, alliance with the Nazi Germany until the end of the war, and deportations of Slovak Jews. After the war, he was tried by the National Court of Justice, sentenced to death, and executed in 1947. The author analyzes in detail the accusations brought against Tito during the trial and Tiso’s defence, as the arguments presented by both parties were later used by Tiso’s adversaries and sympathizers. Czech politicians and general public after the war were united in their condemnation of Tiso; in their eyes, Tiso’s biggest crime was his share in the destruction of the common state. On the other hand, the Slovaks’ view on Tiso depended on their attitude toward the previous political regime in Slovakia. Furthermore, the author monitors how Tiso’s cult was formed in the separatist segment of the Slovak exile since the end of the war. It was spreading mainly in the United States, Canada, and Argentina, but the efforts aimed at Tiso’s moral purifi cation were unsuccessful. The article also pays special attention to Tiso’s refl ections in the Czech and Slovak dissent in the 1970s and 1980s. In the end, the author describes disputes over Tiso which broke up after 1989 in Slovakia and which were a part of the ''return of history'' to the public space. They were related to attempts for Tiso’s commemoration and historical rehabilitation, and found their way to the media, politics, and historiography. The essay is concluded by a statement that the Czech society is not interested in Tiso as a historical fi gure, but that Tiso still divides the Slovak one: a minority of the Slovak society sees Tiso as a hero and a martyr, while most Slovaks perceive him as an unsuccessful and discredited politician. and Přeložila Blanka Medková
Autor reaguje na předešlou stať Víta Strobacha ''Dějiny obětí: K historiografii a politice identity českých židů'', která je pojata jako kritická polemika s nejnovějšími (nejen českými) diskusemi o dějinách Židů. Považuje za přínosné, že Strobach jde za pouhé obsahové shrnutí a že přitom nevede jasnou dělicí linku mezi historiografií a politikou, když historiky chápe nejen jako vědecké, ale zároveň jako společenské a politické aktéry. Výsledek této snahy však podle autora příliš nepřesvědčuje, protože Strobachovy kategorizace typu ''dějiny obětí'' nevzešly z důkladné analýzy pramenného materiálu, ale jsou spíše apriorním soudem, který ho vedl při výběru textů. V důsledku tohoto programově selektivního přístupu vzbuzuje Strobach zkreslený dojem o povaze celé diskuse, neboť v současné české historiografické produkci o minulosti Židů a holokaustu nehrají normativní koncepty ,,dějin obětí'' větší roli, stejně jako sotva platí tvrzení, že dějiny Židů jsou v ní často ztotožňovány s historií antisemitismu. Pokud jde o ''politiku identity'' českých Židů, je zavádějící tvrdit, že se v ní prosazují takto vyhraněné podoby jejich historické kolektivní paměti, aniž Strobach označí jejich konkrétní nositele. Navíc ani nedefinuje základní používané pojmy, které tak postrádají analytické ostří. Celkově se Strobach spokojuje s příliš jednoduchou a nikterak novou kritikou a nevyužívá příležitosti posunout diskusi konstruktivně kupředu., In this contribution, the author responds to Vít Strobach´s ''The history of the victim: Concerning the historiography and politics of identity of the Czech Jews'', which is conceived as a polemic with the altest discussing about the history of the Jews, and not only those written by Czechs. The author considers it useful that Strobach is concerned only to summarize the content of the discussions, without drawing a clear line between historiography and politics, because he understands historians not only as academic actors but also as social and political actors. But, according to the author of this article, the results of the effort are not particularly convincing: Strobach´s categorizations of the ''history of the victim'' type is not based on a thorough analysis of the sources, but are instead a judgement based on assumptions, which have guided him in his selection of texts. In consequence of this intentionally selective approach,. Strobach creates a distorted impression of the nature of the whole discussion, because in current Czech historiography about the Jews and the Holocaust normative concepts on the ''history of the victim'' does not play much of a role. Similarly, it can hardly be claimed that the history of the Jews is often said to be identical with the history of antisemitism. Concerning the ''identity politics'' of the Jews of the Bohemian Lands, it is misleading of Strobach to claim that a form of the historical collective memory clearly defined in this way is asserted in historiography, without naming who exactly is the bearer of this memory. Moreover, he fails to define his basic terms, which thus lack an analytical keenness. On the whole, Strobach is satisfied with a simplistic, unoriginal critique, and fails to use the opportunity to constructively move the discussion forward., Peter Halama ; Z němčiny přeložil Petr Dvořáček., and Obsahuje bibliografii a bibliografické odkazy
The most intensive expansion of Polish cultural, culturally-social and educational life in the Český Těšín region started in the period between the two World Wars when some elements of the cultural life started to stabilize and some others only started to form. A certain type of cultural life gradually started to develop; despite of the existence of formal obstacles, there were some conditions under which a certain literary culture evolved. Polish literature in the Český Těšín region did not have any aspiration to surnount a stage of regional writings, which met the specific needs of the region´s inhabitants. There was no literary criticism in the region of Český Těšín that would determine norms, regulations, rules and valuations necessary for the standard existence of literary life. There did not arise any academic and special research centers, where some of the Polish experts (scholars, intellectuals and specialists) would work. It was only about local types of literary activities, which were not united overall. There were a lot of positive elements helping to develop the Polish "minority" culture and literature, but on the other side there existed many limitations caused by specific political conditions.
Professor Karel Krejčí publizierte in den 50. und 60. Jahren des 20. Jahrhunderts wertvolle Studien über die Problematik der tschechisch-ungarischen kulturellen Beziehungen und über die ungarische Literatur (Imre Madách, Tragödie des Menschen) im 19. Jahrhundert.
Karel Krejčí war einer der berühmtesten tschechischen Literaturhistoriker im 20. Jahrhundert. Sein Spezialgebiet war die slavische, und hier vor allem die polnische und tschechische Literatur. Diesen Gebieten hat er zahlreiche Bücher, Studien und Zeitschriftenartikel gewidmet (z. B. Geschichte der polnischen Literatur, Werke über Jakub Arbes und A. M. Tilschová). Er wirkte an der Philosophischen Fakultät der Karlsuniversität, wo er eine Reihe von Schülern hatte. Leider musste er Ende der 1950er Jahre die Universität verlassen. Danach arbeitete er im Slavischen Institut der Tschechoslowakischen Akademie der Wissenschaften bis zur Zeit der sog. Normalisierung.
Hlavní osou knihy je podle recenzentky konflikt mezi tradičními zájmy a hodnotami světa filmu na jedné straně a politickou snahou o jeho reformu v systému státního socialismu na druhé straně v Československu v poválečném čtvrtstoletí, především pak v padesátých letech. Autor přitom nevychází jen z podřízenosti kinematografie vládnoucí elitě, ale spíše z její proměnlivé autonomie. Staví na neobyčejně bohaté pramenné základně a efektivně využívá různé teoretické koncepty. Díky tomu dokáže zprostředkovat živý a plastický obraz mikrosvětů v pražských filmových ateliérech Barrandov, jejich neformálních vztahů a procesu zrodu filmového díla. Jedná se o strhující četbu pro poučenější čtenáře, kteří hledají metodologicky inspirovaný, otevřený výklad s bohatými odkazy i sebereflexí., According to the reviewer, the book The Barandov Factory: The world of filmmakers and political power 1945-1970 revolves around a conflict between traditional interests and values of the world of filmmaking and political efforts ro reform it within the Czechoslovak state socialism system during the twenty-five years after the war, mainly in the 1950s. The author´s starting assumptions include not only the subordination of cinematography to the ruling elite, but also a variable degree of the film industry´s autonomy. He builds on an extremely rich source base and employs various theoretical concepts in an effective manner. Thanks to the above, he can provide a vivid and plastic picture of micro-worlds in the Barrandov film studios in Prague, their informal relations, as well as the birth of a movie. He wrote a captivating book for more knowledgeable readers looking for a methodologically inspired and open account with ample references and self-reflection., [autor recenze] Alena Šlingerová., and Obsahuje bibliografii a bibliografické odkazy
Liberalization of political and ideological barriers after the fall of Communistic regime in Czechoslovakia in 1989 has led to intensification of research of period 1918-1948. Although it presents relatively short historical period, it involved some milestones like first Czechoslovak Republic, after-Munich fall of democratic parliamentary, the Second World War and transformation after the war, that altogether resulted in start of Communistic regime in February 1948. and Jaroslav Šebek.