No. III.
Hlavní stránka » pages » Journal Soudobé dějiny » Volume XVII. (2010) » No. III. »
Contents
Jaroslav Kučera
Hidden Paths / Postranní cesty / Schleichwege / Drogy boczne / Köztes Terei:
Informal Contact between People from Socialist Countries, 1945–89
Articles
Martin Franc
Fraternal Cuisine:
Czech Society and Culinary Transfer from the USSR and Other Countries of the Soviet Bloc, 1948–89
Jerzy Kochanowski
Smugglers, Tourists, Wheeler-dealers:
A Polish View of Illicit Trade between Poland and Czechoslovakia, 1945–89
Mateusz Hartwich
‘Tourists Mainly Appear as Politically Conscious Citizens of Our State’:
East Germans in the Giant Mountains, 1945–70
Stefano Bottoni
Komárom/Komárno:
Cross-border Relations in Two Affiliated Central-European Towns, 1960–85
Jiří Pernes
Moravia, Too Dangerous?
Moravian Patriotism in Post-war Czechoslovakia, 1945–89
Jiří Knapík and Zdeněk Jirásek
Unwanted Silesia:
Reflections of Czechs ‘Silesianness’ in Post-war Czechoslovakia, 1945–69
Discussion
Zora Dvořáková
1968 and K 231:
Several Remarks on the Discussion of Jiří Hoppe’s Latest Work
Jiří Vančura
Was It an Opposition in 1968?
Concerning Jiří Hoppe’s Latest Book
Jan Mervart
New Aspects of the ‘Prague Spring’ in the Resurrected Conception of Czech Contemporary History
Jiří Suk
Is the Prague Spring of 1968 an Alternative to the Capitalism of Today?
Political Reflections on an Historical Interpretation
Karel Hrubý
Remarks on Czech Anti-Communism after the Changes of November 1989
Reviews
Milan Hauner
The Chemical Formula for Absolute Evil:
The French Obsession with Heydrich
Jiří Křesťan
Boon Companions:
Kaplan’s Double Portrait of Gottwald and Slánský
Miloslav Petrusek
A Laudable History of Czech Sociology of Religion
Zdeněk R. Nešpor
Czechs and Religious Feeling in Historical Perspective
Dalibor Vácha
Private Life in Stalin’s Russia
Of Archives and Periodicals
Jaroslav Vaculík
Wartime and Post-war History in Polish Periodicals in 2009
Chronicle
Miroslav Šepták
Versailles, Saint-Germain-en-Laye, and Trianon:
Conferences on the Birth of Interwar Europe
Annotations
Summaries
Hidden Paths / Postranní cesty / Schleichwege / Drogy boczne / Köztes Terei:
Informal Contact between People from Socialist Countries, 1945–89
Jaroslav Kučera
This article, which introduces the first block of essays in the current issue of Soudobé dějiny, presents the international project ‘Hidden Paths/Postranní cesty/Schleichwege/Drogy boczne/Köztes Terei: Informal Contact between People from Socialist Countries, 1945–89. Between a Transnational History of Everyday Life and Cultural Transfer’. The project was carried out in 2006–08 thanks to funding from the Volkswagen Foundation. Its cornerstone was a research group comprising German, Polish, Hungarian, and Czech scholars, and with the collaboration of others. Among these scholars were the authors of the articles in the main thematic block of this issue. The project mainly focused on four central European Communist countries – East Germany, Czechoslovakia, Poland, and Hungary – in which, since the 1960s, tourism began to be intensively developed in connection with state-promoted economic integration, the ideology of socialist internationalism, the expansion of leisure for the whole population, and general trends of civilization. This, however, also opened up space for informal contact and activity. From the point of view of the régimes, these contacts were sometimes problematic or outright ‘subversive’, particularly since the authorities were unable to monitor or regulate them completely. The aim of the project was to consider the various forms of contacts and activities, particularly in the sphere of tourism, illicit or illegal trade, and cultural transfers between the countries of east-central Europe. The results of the project are being published in German, Hungarian, Polish, and Czech.
Articles
Fraternal Cuisine:
Czech Society and Culinary Transfer from the USSR and Other Countries of the Soviet Bloc, 1948–89
Martin Franc
The gastronomic discourse in Czechoslovakia from 1948 to 1989 took a special form under the influence of the Communist régime, in particular targeted State intervention. Among its features was the excessive promotion of ‘rational nutrition’, while its opposite (especially in the 1950s), haute-cuisine, was squeezed out. Throughout Europe in the second half of the twentieth century cultural transfers in gastronomy increased in intensity and this trend partly affected Czech gastronomy as well. The article considers the question of what role the cuisines of the ‘fraternal countries’, that is, the Soviet Union and the rest of the Soviet bloc, as well as Yugoslavia, played in these transfers.
Cultural transfers in gastronomy occurred in three closely linked forms. First, there was the publication of recipes and articles related to the culinary arts, some of which included recipes from foreign cuisine in material consumption norms. The second important factor was personal encounters with foreign cuisine when travelling or at home thanks to visits and sojourns by people of other nationalities. In addition, restaurants specializing in foreign cuisine were established. The third form of gastronomic cultural transfer resulted from the importation of foodstuffs. In all three types of transfer, the cuisines of the fraternal countries of the East bloc were given preference. The structure of imports was clearly subordinated to the continuous shortage of hard currency. The large volume of tourism from one East bloc country to another far outweighed travel to the countries of the West. Ideological preferences, particularly in consumption norms, were also reflected in the availability of literature related to gastronomy. But by far not all cuisines of the East bloc countries were promoted, or received, in Czechoslovakia to the same extent. Most impulses came from Balkan and Hungarian cuisines, while the fewest came from East Germany. The transfer of different kinds of dishes from the Balkans and Hungary appears to be an ideologically contingent innovation; but a comparison with the situation in Austria in the same period indicates that one should be wary of simplistic interpretations. The greatest difference between Communist Czechoslovakia and the countries of western Europe with similar systems of alimentation is probably best reflected in the smaller size and slower diffusion of culinary transfer from capitalist countries, for example, Italy or the USA. After the Changes of late 1989, the politically motivated preference for the cuisine of East bloc countries vanished and in the Czech Republic gastronomic trends similar to those in other European countries have since become established. Nonetheless, traces of the influence of ‘fraternal cuisine’ have remained, particularly in cheap restaurants and office, factory, and school cafeterias.
Smugglers, Tourists, Wheeler-dealers:
A Polish View of Illicit Trade between Poland and Czechoslovakia, 1945–89
Jerzy Kochanowski
The article considers the sphere of illicit trade, partly suppressed, partly tolerated, that emerged amongst the inhabitants of post-war Poland and Czechoslovakia. It developed soon after the Second World War because of a combination of geographical, historical, social, economic, and political conditions, and considerably expanded with time, particularly in the 1970s and 1980s. It followed on from the earlier practice of smuggling, which had been possible primarily because most of the frontier between the two states (from Racibórz in the east) had been left largely unchanged since the Middle Ages, running through hard-to-access mountain terrain inhabited by mountain people, for whom smuggling had long been a source of livelihood. It was only on this border, in Poland in the late 1950s, that the existence of ‘professional smugglers’ was confirmed. The escalation of smuggling here was also influenced by the relatively quick development of tourism between the two states, after the signing of a 1955 agreement on relations in the border zones, and also by the convenience of illicit exchange for Poles and Czechoslovaks, since economic shortages were manifested differently in each country. One of the traditional items of illicit trade amongst the mountain people was farm animals (especially horses), which in Poland were less expensive than in Czechoslovakia, and, from the mid-1950s onward, gold and hard currency, as well as building materials, which were in extremely short supply in Poland. Tourists ‘underhandedly’ exported or imported a wide variety of goods, mainly textiles, footwear, foodstuffs, alcohol, cigarettes, and electric household appliances. The informal ‘tourist exchange’ between Poland and Czechoslovakia expanded from the traditional areas of the Tatra Mountains also to the Giant Mountains (Krkonoše in Czech, Karkonosze in Polish, Riesengebirge in German) and, in the late 1960s and early 1970s, their centres were Katowice, Zakopane, and Nowy Targ. The development of illicit trade led, from the mid-1970s, to the fact that the Czechoslovak side in particular (similarly to East Germany, for example) took measures to restrict this trade (for instance, putting bans on the export of various goods) and also undertook repressive operations (including uncompromising customs checks and confiscation of goods). Other factors were political unrest, the intensifying economic crisis, and eventually, in the 1980s, the complete lifting of travel restrictions on Poles. At the end of this period, problems with illicit trade were reflected also in the worsening diplomatic relations between the two countries.
‘Tourists Mainly Appear as Politically Conscious Citizens of Our State’:
East Germans in the Giant Mountains, 1945–70
Mateusz J. Hartwich
This article charts out the emergence and development of tourism between the Polish People’s Republic and the German Democratic Republic in the area of the Giant Mountains (Karkonosze/Riesengebirge/Krkonoše), taking into consideration the conditions on the Czechoslovak side. For this area, which had been settled by Germans and was traditionally a popular tourist destination, the end of the Second World War was an historic turning-point. The subsequent expulsion of the Germans thoroughly changed the ethnic composition of the population and Poland set out on the path to become a Communist state. This area was closed to foreign visitors practically until the mid-1950s. That changed in 1956, when, in connection with partial political liberalization in the country and anticipated financial profit, the Giant Mountains area was made accessible (as were, later, the Sudeten Mountains) and state support was provided for tourism from both the East bloc (particularly Czechoslovakia) and the West, including the German Federal Republic. Poland signed an agreement with West Germany on the reuniting of separated families, since some West German citizens came from areas now in Poland and longed to visit their old home. Though East German leaders were at first displeased by this, they nonetheless began to allow their citizens to visit the erstwhile German areas further east. Whereas the authorities’ fears of the political repercussions of West German tourism predominated in Poland in the late 1950s, considerably restricting travel for them, collaboration in tourism with East Germany continued to develop in the 1960s, including the establishment of a joint tourist region in the Giant Mountains (though that was not as intense as between Czechoslovakia and East Germany or as between Poland and Czechoslovakia). Using Polish and East German archive records, the author nonetheless shows the political and organizational problems that arose from this. He discusses in greater detail an isolated incident from the early 1960s, when a group of East German tourists in the Giant Mountains of Poland outraged the local inhabitants with Nazi behaviour and caused alarm at the border by climbing Śnieżka Mountain without permission. This was then dealt with at the highest political level. There were organizational difficulties mainly in the insufficient capacity of Polish accommodations for tourists and the poor quality of services, which the East German tourists were critical of, particularly when they compared what was available in the Czech Giant Mountains. The presence of East German tourists in Poland did not help to create an image of the ‘good German’.
Komárom/Komárno:
Cross-border Relations in Two Affiliated Central-European Towns, 1960–85
Stefano Bottoni
The town of Komárno, on the north bank of the River Danube, was originally settled by Hungarians. In the peace settlement after the First World War, it was awarded to the new state of Czechoslovakia. During the Second World War it was incorporated into Hungary, but was returned to Czechoslovakia after the war and part of the original population was expelled to Hungary. In the meantime, on the other bank of the Danube, the village of Újszőny became the parallel town of Komárom, which remained part of Hungary. This article examines the development of official and unofficial relations between the inhabitants of the town of Komárno/Komárom, which was divided by a state frontier during the Communist régimes, and how these relations were reflected in everyday life there. The article focuses on the regulating of the border regimen, and discusses the cultural agreements that were related to it, as well as cooperation in the sphere of economics and in the employment of labour between the two sides. It also searches for an answer to the question of how the proximity of a ‘mother nation’ and the Kádár variant of Socialism influenced the Hungarian majority in Komárno and the local relations between Hungarians and Slovaks.
Since 1948 the closed frontier made relations between the populations of the two towns practically impossible. That began to change in the early 1960s, when visa requirements were gradually lifted for Hungarian citizens travelling to Czechoslovakia, an agreement on border relations was signed, and getting a passport was made easier. In the mid-1960s a lively tourist trade thus existed between the two halves of the divided town, family visits both ways were numerous, and institutional relations began to develop between partners on both banks of the Danube. The inhabitants of both towns met at events related to sports and the arts and travelling over the border was made easier by bus service. The local governments endeavoured to present these new opportunities as evidence of intensifying Socialist solidarity, but many people also used them for semi-legal and illegal transactions, such as trans-border trade in foodstuffs, furniture, and household goods. The social movement of the Prague Spring 1968 seems to have been observed with sympathy by members of the Hungarian minority in south Slovakia and the inhabitants of Komárom. The involvement of Hungarian units in the military intervention in Czechoslovakia was then met with great disapproval by both Slovaks and Hungarians in Komárno. In the 1970s functionaries in the border areas of both countries were inclined to mutual cooperation and emphasized not only arts and sports events but also, indeed mainly, the mutually advantageous employment of labour. Thanks to the signing of agreements hundreds of men and women workers travelled over the border for work, to the textile factory in Komárom and the Slovak Shipyards in Komárno. Ritualized joint celebrations of important anniversaries were held four times a year. The limits of ‘internationalist’ cross-border cooperation, however, began to appear in the 1980s, when, after the signing of a Hungarian-Czechoslovak agreement on minimum hard-currency exchange requirements, tourism both ways began to stagnate and ultimately declined.
Moravia, Too Dangerous?
Moravian Patriotism in Post-war Czechoslovakia, 1945–89
Jiří Pernes
This article examines the phenomenon of ‘Moravianness’ (Moravian patriotism) and its development in interaction with Czechoslovak politics and social change from the end of the Second World War to the collapse of the Communist régime. Moravianness is rooted deep in history and it has been expressed in different, sometimes striking ways at various times. In the nineteenth century, according to the author, most Slav inhabitants of Moravia considered themselves Moravian rather than Czech. During the First World War Czech national consciousness predominated amongst them, and then intensified in the new state of Czechoslovakia, when the provincial government and the cultural and political institutions expressing the special character of Moravia were retained in Moravia. The republic was restored in this form after the Second World War, with the Moravian-Silesian National Committee (Zemský národní výbor) in Brno and a branch office in Ostrava and adhering to the provincial arrangement of running of economic life in Moravia. Moravian institutions, including the Moravian-Silesian organizations of the democratic political parties and the National Assembly deputies from Moravia and Silesia had to wrestle with growing Prague (or Czech) centralism. The Czechoslovak People’s Party advocated the clearest existence of the historical lands, but the Czechoslovak Communist Party, which, after victory in the general elections of spring 1946, controlled the Moravian National Committee in Brno, came out against that.
After the Communists established a monopoly of power, they substituted regional government (krajské zřízení) for provincial (zemské), taking effect as of 1949 and in some cases not respecting the borders of the historical lands. In their centralist policy there was no room for special Moravian needs, yet they expediently used Moravian tradition, particularly the folklore of Moravian Slovakia (Slovácko), which helped to enhance the government’s image as being of the ‘common people’, and also gave support to Moravian archaeology, which could provide evidence of the ancient historical roots of the Czech state. But that also had unwanted consequences by gradually reviving Moravian self-confidence in the 1960s. Here the author emphasizes the unusual response to the ‘The Great Moravia’ exhibition in 1963, and recalls the ‘hockey affair’ two years later, when a trivial statement printed in a newspaper after a match of the Kometa Brno hockey team provoked an avalanche of outraged letters from Moravian readers complaining about alleged Czech chauvinism. Moravianness enjoyed a renascence during the Prague Spring of 1968. Numerous eminent Moravians and Moravian institutions called for the restoration of the provincial government and the Society for Moravia and Silesia was established with this aim. Their hopes were dashed by the federalization of Czechoslovakia and the policy of ‘normalization’ after the Soviet-led military intervention of August 1968. In this period, Moravian patriotism was again driven into quasi-private club activities. The Velehrad pilgrimage in honour of Saints Cyril and Methodius in 1985, with the participation of between 100,000 and 250,000 people, was an exceptional event commemorating Moravian cultural-historical identity. Intellectually the most important expression of Moravianness was the heated debate in several issues of the Brno version of the conservative samizdat periodical Střední Evropa (Central Europe) in the late 1980s. The article concludes by mentioning the broad wave of politically articulated Moravian patriotism in the first half of the 1990s, and raises some general questions, for example, about the identification of Moravianness with the Brno centre, the patriotic Brno rivalry with Prague, the reasons for the damping down of the Moravian political movement, and the future of Moravian self-identity.
Unwanted Silesia:
Reflections of Czechs ‘Silesianness’ in Post-war Czechoslovakia, 1945–69
Jiří Knapík and Zdeněk Jirásek
Czech Silesianness, obvious throughout the twentieth century, was based on a mixture of strong regional, even local, patriotism, which was determined by historical developments. This patriotism developed on the ethnically mixed territory of Czech Silesia (formerly Austrian Silesia). After the Second World War this phenomenon was quickly revived, bit unlike the pre-war period, it took a clearly Czech national form. The territorial factor, by contrast, receded into the background. Behind this activity and new interpretation stood intellectual circles and institutions in Opava, some leading figures from Ostrava, and the Silesian Cultural Institute in Prague. In addition to cultural-educational activity, their efforts were concentrated on claiming some border areas of Polish and German Silesia as being historically Czech, and also on ensuring the distinctive administrative status of the territory of Silesia in Czechoslovakia, the seed of which they saw in the Ostrava branch of the Moravian National Committee (Zemský národní výbor) in Brno. During the Communist régime, according to the authors, the top state authorities showed an intentional lack of interest in the problems of Silesia when solving related economic and other questions. A consequence of this was a ‘silencing of the official sources’ about Silesia. In the 1950s, ‘Silesianness’ was condemned as a form of ‘bourgeois nationalism’ and was identified with the period of Czech-Polish national friction in the region. From the administrative point of view Silesia was dissolved in the Ostrava area, later in the North Moravian Region, and was recalled practically only by artistic expressions of an ‘antiquated Silesianness’, such as folklore and museum exhibitions. Silesian organizations and societies were, with few exceptions, dissolved or renamed and the newly established Silesian Research Institute in Opava had to orient its historical research chiefly to the labour movement. The works of the poet Petr Bezruč (born Vladimír Vašek, 1867–1958) and his collection of verse, Slezské písně (Silesian Songs), presented a problem because of their questionable depiction of Silesian identity, and the publication of the complete collection led to disputes in cultural policy. The Ostrava-based arts and politics periodical Červený květ (Red Flower), which repeatedly included debates about regionalism, began to be published in the mid-1950s. At the end of the decade, however, the Communist Party launched a campaign against parochialism (lokálpatriotismus), which was reflected also in the condemnation of publications seeking to exonerate the poems and ideas of Óndra Łysohorsky (born Ervín Goj, 1905–1989), who during the war promoted the theory of a ‘Lach nation’. In the 1960s the local authorities and figures of Opava again began to emphasize the role of their town as a regional centre. During the Prague Spring of 1968 there were calls for the restoration of Silesian self-government, but that remained more or less limited to the Opava region, and consequently some ‘Silesian’ cultural initiatives from this period were of greater importance.
Discussion
1968 and K 231:
Several Remarks on the Discussion of Jiří Hoppe’s Latest Work
Zora Dvořáková
This is the first contribution in a loosely conceived block of essays about Jiří Hoppe’s Opozice ’68: Sociální demokracie, KAN a K 231 v období Pražského jara (The Opposition of 1968: The Social Democrats, KAN, and K 231 during the Prague Spring; Prague: Prostor, 2009). The book received the 2010 Magnesia litera Prize in the category ‘Discovery of the Year’. The author of this article argues that Hoppe has provided a corrective to the growing number of interpretations by Reform Communists of 1968 who proclaim their allegedly rigorous democratic convictions of those days; Hoppe describes their attempt to prevent the emergence of competing political actors at any cost. In addition, the author returns to her own experiences of the Klub 231, in which former political prisoners of the Communist régime came together in 1968 and sought to achieve their legal and social ‘rehabilitation’ (or exoneration). The author emphasizes the fact that they did not succumb to the illusions of the day concerning ‘socialism with a human face’ and that they remained sceptical about future developments. And she reminds the reader of their links to the ideals of Masaryk, the First Republic, the Sokol association, and Scouting.
Was It an Opposition in 1968?
Concerning Jiří Hoppe’s Latest Book
Jiří Vančura
According to the author of this article, Jiří Hoppe’s Opozice ’68: Sociální demokracie, KAN a K 231 v období Pražského jara (Prague: Prostor, 2009) is a substantial contribution to our knowledge of a small but important part of what set Czechoslovak society in motion in 1968. One will also be considerably surprised to read genuine claims by Reform Communists which reveal their intentions to prevent the establishment of other political groupings at the time. The author of the article, however, questions Hoppe’s definition of political opposition in 1968, because the nascent Social Democratic Party, the Club of Engagé Non-Party Members (Klub angažovaných nestraníků), and Club 231, which constitute the topic of Hoppe’s interpretation, were part of a broad-based social movement demanding change; nor can all Communists be pigeon-holed in a single category. Searching for the opposition in the events of 1968 is, according to the author, misleading and ultimately tends to obscure, rather than to clarify, the ultimate meaning of the Prague Spring of 1968. That meaning, according to the author of the article, consists in its having been a truly national movement with unambiguously positive aims, however foggy their articulation.
New Aspects of the ‘Prague Spring’ in the Resurrected Conception of Czech Contemporary History
Jan Mervart
The author considers Jiří Hoppe’s Opozice ’68: Sociální demokracie, KAN a K 231 v období Pražského jara (Prague: Prostor 2009) to be a definite contribution to what we know about the Czechoslovak events of 1968 in terms of facts. Nonetheless he takes issue with the interpretational framework in which these facts have been placed here. Hoppe, according to him, has implicitly accepted the totalitarian model of the historical interpretation of the Communist period in Czechoslovakia, when the ruling party stood against society throughout the period. Though Hoppe claims that nascent civil society in 1968 was on the threshold of a revolution aiming at democracy and a market economy, and that the Reform Communists were, in their efforts to prevent the emergence of a political opposition, unfaithful to their own declared reforms, the validity of this model also relates to the period of the ‘Prague Spring’. At the same time it is problematic to measure the attitude of the Reform Communists against today’s liberal values; an analysis of the starting points of their programme would demonstrate that those points did not go beyond the bounds of Leninism. Though their aim was ‘socialist democracy’, rather than liberal democracy, one cannot simply claim that they betrayed the reforms. On the other hand, Hoppe is nonplussed when he tries to assess the radical reform efforts, for example, of the Prague Municipal Committee of the Czechoslovak Communist Party, for they would mar his dichotomous picture of the Prague Spring. The weakness of his approach is that it does not open the way to other questions or even to a more complex revealing of the nature of the social processes of the Prague Spring of 1968.
Is the Prague Spring of 1968 an Alternative to the Capitalism of Today?
Political Reflections on an Historical Interpretation
Jiří Suk
In this article, inspired by Jiří Hoppe’s Opozice ’68: Sociální demokracie, KAN a K 231 v období Pražského jara (Prague: Prostor 2009), the author considers the paradoxical attitudes of society and politicians in 1968 and the question of whether an alternative to the capitalist system had been born at that time (as was claimed by the Reform Communists back then and is argued by some left-wing intellectuals today). In the spring of 1968 the reformist politicians found themselves stuck between Kremlin pressure on the one hand and an awakening civil society on the other. They had no intention of relinquishing power, which they ultimately derived from the authority of Moscow, and they also longed to retain popularity and regain legitimacy from the public, whose intentions were quite contrary to Moscow’s. The public underwent a spontaneous, but civilly disciplined, diversification and pluralization of views, interests, and expectations, which, however, did not manage to crystallize clearly. In the summer of 1968, and particularly after the military occupation of the country, an illusory unity predominated between the politicians and the public, based on a fatal misunderstanding. In the street protests the political programme of liberty and independence was born and the public expected it would be defended by the Czechoslovak politicians interned in Moscow. But those men never wanted to go so far. For them it was more important to hold on to power and maintain the socialism that society now tended to perceive as an ideal rather than as a programme aim. In freedom there would necessarily have been a confrontation of various expectations and interests, which would not have remained limited to ‘democratic socialism’, as was the case after the Changes of November 1989.
The author concludes by taking issue with the conclusions of Jan Mervart’s contribution to this block of articles. In his emphasizing the necessity of another, more exact kind of research on 1968, one based on theoretical starting points of social history and freed from the obsolete theory of totalitarianism, the author perceives a belief in the possibility of history as a neutral field of scholarship, stripped of political or ideological preferences and assumptions. Though the ‘resurrected conception’ of the Prague Spring of 1968, which Mervart criticizes, was substituted for by another conception, one which would be based, for example, on the radical reform potential of the Municipal Committees of the Czechoslovak Communist Party, that would surely also have its political contingencies and consequences.
Remarks on Czech Anti-Communism after the Changes of November 1989
Karel Hrubý
In this article the author searches for an answer to the question that Jiří Suk asked in his paper at the conference ‘1989–2009: Society, History, Politics’, held in Liblice in September 2009 – namely, what was the origin of the strong wave of anti-Communism in Czech society after the Changes that began in November 1989, since, in the last free general elections in the country, in 1946, the Communist Party won and in 1968 most citizens of Czechoslovakia wanted socialism? (Suk’s paper, ‘Komunistická minulost jako politický problém: Nástin vývoje 1989–2009’, is published online in an volume of conference papers at http:/www.boell.cz/navigation/19-856.html.) The author of the present article adds that most of society in 1946 did not choose a future under Communist leadership and in 1968 the non-Communist majority may have supported the reform movement, but was expecting it to bring about the end of the Party’s monopoly of power or, indeed, to bring about the outright restoration of democracy. Anti-Communism, which erupted in Czech society in 1990, was therefore nothing new; it was only a long hidden and suppressed expression of most Czechoslovak’s dislike of Communist rule. To gain a real understanding of the anti-Communism that emerged after late 1989 one must analyze its sources, that is, chiefly the thinking of wide strata of the population, which inwardly did not identify with the past régime, ranging from passive disagreement to active resistance. Amongst them were mainly those who from 1948 to 1989 were somehow discriminated against or harassed, and also most of their family members. It is here that one can fruitfully search for the hotbed of anti-Communism after the Changes of late 1989. The author also points to the necessity of clearly defining what is meant by anti-Communism in each concrete case, since the term can easily have a number of different meanings.
Reviews
The Chemical Formula for Absolute Evil:
The French Obsession with Heydrich
Milan Hauner
Binet, Laurent. HHhH: Himmlerův mozek se jmenuje Heydrich. Trans. from the French by Michala Marková. Prague: Argo, 2010, 351 pp.
This is a review of the Czech translation of the originally French work by Laurent Binet, which won the Prix Goncourt in 2010. The book considers the fate of the Deputy Reich-Protector in the Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia, Reinhard Heydrich (1904–1942), and of members of the Czechoslovak parachute group that carried out his assassination in May 1942. Binet claims that his intention was to write neither a traditional historical novel nor an historical document. According to the reviewer, the book avoids a fictional reconstruction of the motives of the characters, and depicts events in a largely stereotypical manner. The author ascribes psychological traits to the characters and fails to pose complicated questions relating to the assassination. Though the author’s aim, to acquaint readers with the men who carried out the heroic act of killing Heydrich, is laudable, it provides little for the Czech reader.
Boon Companions:
Kaplan’s Double Portrait of Gottwald and Slánský
Jiří Křesťan
Kaplan, Karel. Kronika komunistického Československa: Klement Gottwald a Rudolf Slánský. Brno: Barrister & Principal 2009, 379 pp.
The reviewer considers this work, whose title translates as ‘A Chronicle of Communist Czechoslovakia: Klement Gottwald and Rudolf Slánský’. He does so, bearing in mind the context of Kaplan’s earlier historiography and the few biographies of Czechoslovak Communist politicians. He also considers Kaplan’s approach to research and his ethics as an historian. Concerning the life of Rudolf Slánský (1901–1952), a General Secretary of the Communist Party (1945–1951), Kaplan concentrates on the period from his arrest to his execution. His portrait of Klement Gottwald (1896–1953), the long-standing leader of the Czechoslovak Communist Party (1929–53), Premier (1946–48), and President (1948–53), is more comprehensive and colourful. It also offers a look at Gottwald’s private life, and does not skirt questions about how a man with ideals, who was fighting for a better world, changed into a ruthless holder of power. Kaplan’s work contains a great many interesting facts and highly competent interpretations of more general topics, such as the relationship between the Czechoslovak Communist Party and the Comintern as well as the international context of the show trials.
A Laudable History of Czech Sociology of Religion
Miloslav Petrusek
Nešpor, Zdeněk R. Ne/náboženské naděje intelektuálů: Vývoj české sociologie náboženství v mezinárodním a interdisciplinárním kontextu. Prague: Scriptorium, 2008, 426 pp.
This is a review of a synthetic monograph, whose title translates as ‘The (Non-) Religious Hopes of the Intellectuals: The Development of Czech Sociology of Religion in an International and Interdisciplinary Context’. According to the reviewer, this work provides an account of the development of Czech sociology of religion from the nineteenth century onwards. It is based on meticulous research using primary and secondary sources in the broader context. The author’s interpretations, says the reviewer, are well balanced and often original, but in a few places they are burdened with excessively long, albeit necessary, contextual passages. Moreover, the title of the book is somewhat misleading, for it gives the impression that the work is about Czech intellectuals’ attitudes to religion.
Czechs and Religious Feeling in Historical Perspective
Zdeněk R. Nešpor
Václavík, David. Náboženství a moderní česká společnost. Prague: Grada, 2009, 243 pp.
This is a review of a book on the development of religious feeling in Czech society from the nineteenth century onwards. Though reviewer considers its overall conception and main interpretations to be correct and apposite, he has found a number of small shortcomings with regard to facts, interpretations, and context. According to him, though the work offers little new to the specialist, it will be of fundamental interest to the general reader.
Private Life in Stalin’s Russia
Dalibor Vácha
Figes, Orlando. The Whisperers: Private Life in Stalin’s Russia. New York: Picador, 2008, 740 pp.
In the book under review, the British historian Orlando Figes, according to the reviewer, lives up to his reputation as a man of great erudition, who deftly handles the sources, and has an outstanding talent for narration. The book describes everyday life and family life in Stalin’s Russia from the 1920s to the 1940s. It describes how the tremendous upheavals of ‘great history’, including of course the terror in the late 1930s and the world war, were projected into the private sphere. Since the people he discusses are real and not anonymous, they add credibility to his account. Nevertheless, the reviewer considers the most inspiring part to be the final chapter, which contemplates the problems of the relationship between the methods of historiography and memory.
Of Periodicals and Archives
Wartime and Post-war History in Polish Periodicals in 2009
Jaroslav Vaculík
In this long article the author discusses the contents of the most interesting contemporary history essays published in Polish historical periodicals in 2009, in particular Dzieje Najnowsze, Biuletyn Instytutu Pamięci Narodowej, Przegląd Historyczny, Wiadomości Historyczne, Przegląd Zachodni, Studia Historyczne, Śląski Kwartalnik Historyczny Sobótka, Odra, and Przegląd Wojskowo-Historyczny.
Chronicle
Versailles, Saint-Germain-en-Laye, and Trianon:
Conferences on the Birth of Interwar Europe
Miroslav Šepták
This is a report on an international academic conference, ‘The Birth of a New Europe: Versailles, Saint-Germain-en-Laye, and Trianon and the Completion of the Post-war Peace’. Held in the Slovak Institute in Prague on 8 and 9 June 2010, the conference was organized by the Institute of History of the Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic, in collaboration with the Institute of History of the Slovak Academy of Sciences, the Slovak Institute in Prague, and the Slovak-Czech Society. The author particularly appreciates the fact that the papers reflected a clear, gradual tendency towards interdisciplinary research.
