Recenzentka vychází z toho, že zrod socialistické kultury v Československu po únoru 1948 předjímal také nový přístup k urbánním konceptům a společenské funkci architektury, která začala být chápána jako prostředek aktivní proměny „přírodního prostředí“ v „životní prostředí“ a stala se tak politikem. První recenzovaná publikace je podle ní zatím jedinou větší prací věnovanou komplexní historii takzvané Nové Ostravy a jejích satelitních sídlišť, která v této nejprůmyslovější oblasti Československa od konce čtyřicátých let minulého století vznikala. Její autor zde sleduje sovětský vliv a problém sovětizace české architektury, zároveň se ale snaží vidět pod rouškou příklonu k sovětským vzorům návrat či počátek specifického československého vývoje. Ve druhé práci pak autor zaměřil pozornost na takzvané kulturní domy jako multifunkční zařízení určené k všestrannému vzdělávání veřejnosti, které se staly typickým dobovým fenoménem, jehož zhodnocení může poukázat nejen na hlavní rysy vývoje architektury a urbanismu za komunistického režimu, ale také na měnící se chápání společnosti, respektive „lidu“. Přes dílčí historické nepřesnosti a omyly obě publikace Martina Strakoše podle recenzentky znamenají jednoznačný přínos pro pochopení dobové atmosféry v architektonických a urbanistických kruzích a zároveň historikům umožňují nahlédnout do nepříliš prozkoumaných oblastí „budovatelské“ epochy., b1_The reviewer of these two publications starts from the premise that the birth of Socialist culture in Czechoslovakia after February 1948 also anticipated a new approach to the concepts of urban planning and the social function of architecture, which began to be understood as an active way to change the ‘natural environment’ into a ‘living environment’, and this function thus became policy. The first publication considered here, whose title translates as ‘The New Ostrava and its satellites: Chapters in the history of architecture from the 1930s to the 1950s’, is, according to the reviewer, so far the only large comprehensive history of what is called Nová Ostrava (New Ostrava) and its satellite housing estates, which were built in this region, the most industrial of Czechoslovakia, from the late 1940s onwards. Its author, Martin Strakoš, traces the Soviet influence and the question of the sovietization of Czech architecture, but also tries to see, beneath the veil of the inclination to Soviet models, a return to specifically Czechoslovak changes or the beginning of new developments. In the second work under review, whose title translates as ‘Community arts centres in the Ostrava region in the context of twentieth-century architecture and art: The cornerstones of society’, the author, again Strakoš, focuses on community arts centres (kulturní domy, literally ‘houses of culture’) as multipurpose facilities intended for the all-round education of the public, which became a typical phenomenon of the period, the assessment of which can help to throw light not only on the main features of the development of architecture and urban planning during the Communist regime, but also on changes in understanding society and the ‘people’., b2_Despite their occasional historical imprecision and mistakes, Strakoš’s two publications make, according to the reviewer, definite contributions to our understanding of the atmosphere amongst architects and urban planners at the time, and they also provide historians with insight into a largely neglected aspect of the era of ‘building Socialism’., [autor recenze] Doubravka Olšáková., and Obsahuje bibliografii
Both collective publications (Prefab houses 1: Fifty prefab housing schemes in the Czech Lands. A critical catalogue of the “Prefab house story” series of exhibitions and Prefab houses 2: History of housing schemes in the Czech Lands 1945–1989. A critical catalogue of the “Residence – prefab housing scheme: Planning, realization, housing 1945–1989” exhibition) are products of a broadly conceived interdisciplinary research project the deliverables of which included, inter alia, exhibitions in Prague and all regional capitals of the Czech Republic and which were awarded the prestigious Magnesia Litera prize in 2018 as an extraordinary feat in the fi eld of professional and educational literature. In the reviewer’s opinion, they bring the fi rstever systematic attempt to periodize the prefab-based building projects in the Czech part of the former Czechoslovakia between the mid-1940s and the end of the 1980s, at the same time providing a multifaceted characterization based on a representative sample of fifty prefab housing schemes in Bohemia and Moravia. and Each of them was subjected to a thorough artistic-historical analysis outlining the development of the housing scheme’s concept, providing brief information about its authors, describes its urbanistic concept, prefab technology used, and artefacts and decorations. Added to the above is a set of interdepartmental studies analyzing different aspects of the historical development of prefab housing schemes. The compact collective of authoresses and authors has succeeded in presenting the prefab housing schemes, no matter how similar they may seem, as a varied and dynamically developing phenomenon, which fact is underlined by excellent work with archival photographs and the generally outstanding graphic layout of the publications. The only critical comment the reviewer has is that the authors were so absorbed by the architectural aspect of the matter that they tended to overlook substantial changes of the socialist urbanism in Czechoslovakia.
Using the planning in Prague between the 1960s and 1980s as an example, the article deals with the transformation of the concept of a socialist city among urbanists and architects. The author describes how the generation of the inter-war modernist avant-garde inspired by works of Karel Teige (1900-1951) started reasserting itself again after Khrushchevʼs speech on architecture in 1954. Its infl uential member, Jiří Voženílek (1909-1986), became the Chief Architect of Prague. It was under his leadership that the General Plan of the Capital City of Prague was drafted at the turn of the 1950s and 1960s. The author analyzes the plan as an example of the socialist modernism and urbanistic optimism of its creators who believed that, subject to a correct application of principles of inter-war avant-garde architecture, an urbanistic transformation might become the base of a social transformation of socialism. The plan envisaged sacrifi cing not only all residential quarters of Greater Prague built at the turn of the century, but also the very principle of a traditional city with a network of living streets which socialist urbanists saw as an incarnation of all evils that the development of towns and cities had thitherto been governed by: mixing of functions, too high density of population, lack of light and air. New housing projects comprising high-rise prefab residential buildings set in greenery were to become the opposite of traditional streets. The article explains how criticism of the housing schemes, the chief representative of which was urbanist Jiří Hrůza (1925-2012), had been growing stronger since as early as the mid-1960s. Infl uenced by works of US journalist and urbanistic activist Jane Jacobs (1916-2006), he presented a comprehensive critique of socialist modernism and questioned they very principle of urban planning as a tool of social transformation. The intellectual skepticism was soon thereafter refl ected in urban planning practices in Prague; they abandoned the modernistic principle of zoning and acknowledged the value (fi rst urbanistic, later architectural) of traditional quarters. In the end of the article, the author analyzes how the urbanistic turning point was confronted with building industry practices and political preferences demanding rapid construction of fl ats and apartments. and Překlad: Blanka Medková
In Vienna, Josef Hlávka is mainly remembered as one of the most successful architects and builders of the 1860s. In a period of ten years from the 1860 to the 1870, he designed and built almost 150 buildings. One of the most significant achievements is the Vienna Opera which he built at the request of Emperor Franz Joseph I during the period of 1863-1869. The Emperor was very pleased with it and presented him with a special prize. and Josef Pechar, Marina Hužvárová.
The Residence of Bukovinian and Dalmatian Metropolitans (Ukraine) has been recently added to UNESCO's World Heritage List. The residence represents a masterful synergy of architectural styles built by the renowned Czech architect and philanthrophist Josef Hlávka from 1864 to 1882. The property, an outstanding example of 19th century historicist architecture, also includes a seminary and monastery and is dominated by the domed, cruciform Seminary Church with a garden and park. The complex expresses architectural and cultural influences from the Byzantine period onward and embodies the powerful presence of the Orthodox Church during the reign of the Austro-Hungarian Empire, reflecting its policy of religious tolerance. The former residence is located in the city of Chernivtsi in southwestern Ukraine and is now in use as an University. and Karel Ksandr.