As early as the nineteenth century the constitution of the modern Czech nation and the efforts towards its gradual emancipation brought about certain specific conceptions of the place and role of fiction and its authors in the life of the Czech nation. The impact of these conceptions made themselves felt well into the twentieth century. Generally speaking, fiction played an important social role in the Czech nation as early as the era of National Revival, and its evaluation often was based upon its potential to perform other than aesthetic functions.

In certain phases of the evolution of the Czech nation politics were virtually non-existent; this often led to writers themselves taking an active part in political life. Sometimes perhaps this was the intention of mystifying (e.g., Jaroslav Haek in "Mild-Progress-Within-the-Limits-of-Law Party"), but mostly with serious and earnest intentions (from K. Havlíek and J.K. Tyl as deputies, to the Kromí Reichstag in 1840, to Václav Havel as the president of the Republic). Consequently, politics tended to be made ethical, political measures tended to be judged by high moral standards, and artists and writers tended to enjoy great moral authority, At the same time, however, and paradoxically enough, politicians lacking responsibility and tolerance sometimes found themselves unable to make sound political decisions, and myths about writers embodying the conscience of the nation were created.

In certain periods, Czech philosophical thought was complemented by the works of authors of fiction. There certainly are differences between philosophy and fiction, as defined, e.g., by Jan Patoka:

A poet and the one who philosophizes experience the world and thought in a quite a different manner. Both try to penetrate as deeply as possible into the matter, to the very sources of being. For the philosopher, however, the most important thing is to clarify and constitute them within a specific and firm conceptual standpoint. The poet, however, is drawn towards visions whose subjective unity is his poetic experience itself, whereas for him the objective unity is meaningless.⁽²²⁹⁾

At the same time, it is certainly true that some tendencies of thought "are not always necessarily actualized in philosophy but are found in some periods in art and literature or in the general cultural awareness and its multiple manifestations."⁽²³⁰⁾

There can be no doubt that some authors do belong to the history of Czech philosophical thought, not only because they wrote essays or theoretical works but in view of the character of the questions and issues they put forth. Of these, among the modern Czech writers of fiction let us mention at least F.X. alda, O. Bezina, S.K. Neumann, and K. apek. They contributed significantly to creating the intellectual atmosphere, from the turn of the century to the period between the Wars, and their work has remained influential up to the present.

alda, Bezina, and Neumann began creating their works in the 1890s. In that period, Czech culture was profoundly influenced by intellectual currents that the academic philosophers either refused to take into consideration or did not reflect at all. Nearly all strata of Czech society were marked by a deep crisis which, even on the European scale, was characterized by disillusionment with all the unactualized ideas and hopes they had invested in the modern period. There was nostalgia for the vanishing tranquility, the well-known "end of the century sadness", feelings of impending disaster and pessimism, as well as efforts to discover new values.

In the Czech lands this had its proper specificities. The economic and social causes of the crisis coincided with complicated ethnic and political conditions. The complex social situation was reflected in Czech thought and gave rise to increasing criticism. Much of it was connected with the wave of irrationalism found especially in the arts and literature. The new Czech literature of the 90s, characterized as Modernism, was an extremely varied phenomenon. It dealt with issues that by and large maintained their relevance until much later, e.g., the relationship between popular and esoteric literary production, the issue of modern art as the expression of the inner feelings of the modern man, the problem of the loneliness of people in the modern era, the critique of bourgeois morals, religious attitudes and social issues. Its features were subjectivism, profound pessimism, aestheticism, and extreme psychologizing. The effort to comprehend and grasp subjectivity was, however, a part of the endeavor of Czech society to come to an intellectual emancipation.

The way in which the awareness of the social crisis in the 1890s was overcome, in a period when conceptions and opinions collided and the general atmosphere was marked by extreme criticism, had an important influence upon later Czech thought.

F.X. alda (1867-1937)

A literary critic and journalist, alda was an influential figure from the 1890s until his death. From 1892-1900 his texts appeared regularly in Literární listy (Literary Papers). In 1908-1912 he edited Novina (The News); in 1912-1914, together with Z. Nejedlý, he published eská kultura (Czech Culture)", in 1917-1919 a review, Kmen (The Stem)". After the War he founded Kritika (Criticism) and Tvorba (Creative Production), 1926-1927. When the Communist press was abolished he gave it to J. Fuik, a Communist editor, and in 1928 founded his own review, aldv zápisník (alda's Diary), written exclusively by himself until 1937. He made important contributions to Ottv nauný slovník (Otto's Encyclopedia): he was a member of its editorial board and wrote a number of its entries dealing, among other things, with Western literature. In 1916 he became a docent (associate professor), and in 1919 a full professor of modern literature in the Faculty of Arts at Charles University. He is mentioned in handbooks of the history of Czech literature, criticism, and aesthetics, especially for his works: Boje o zítek (The Fights for Tomorrow), 1905; Due a dílo (The Soul and the Work), 1913; a novel Loutky a dlníci boí (The Puppets and Workers of God, (1917); and the tragedies: Zástupové (Multitudes), 1921, and Dít (The Child), 1923.⁽²³¹⁾

alda's work is extremely versatile and deals with a wide variety of topics. From the point of view of the Czech philosophical tradition there remain important, especially, his methodology of the social sciences for the way in which he reflected contemporary social and political issues, his approach to the philosophy of history, his search for new attitudes towards religion, and his reflections on the Czech national character.

The exceptional character of alda's work is evidenced by the fact that he is very often quoted by the representatives of nearly all currents of Czech aesthetics. However much he appreciated positivism at first, alda came to clear solutions of the methodological problems of the history and sociology of literature, of the dispute between the positivist approach to social sciences, on the one hand, and Dilthey's distinction between the natural sciences and the social sciences, on the other hand. He stressed the role of the literary critic as an important cultural authority who assists in a normal, "healthy" social evolution. According to his views, the difference between modern and earlier criticism consists in the fact that modern criticism takes as its point of departure the poet as a creator and reconstructs the poet's creative process. Thus, criticism performs a scholarly function (structural criticism), as well as a literary and a social function.

The first editorial in alda's diary was entitled Znova a znova: tradice a revoluce (Again and Again: Tradition and Revolution). In it, alda professed his faith in tradition, but could not agree to the traditionalist approach characteristic of those advocating national particularism. He adhered instead to a humanist universalism. He takes tradition for "something forever open, moving and changing, which keeps being revitalized by means of explosive revolutionary processes." In that sense, he considers revolution to be a means of cultural renewal, not of annihilation of cultural continuity. alda's thoughts on tradition were also conditioned by the special situation during World War I and the period after the Czechoslovak Republic came into being. In that context, he emphasized the requirement of evolutionary continuity based on the national character, as well as the requirement, of a conscious service to higher national aims. The traditional thus means for him that which lies beyond the personal and the present.

alda's philosophy of history is aimed against historicism, against positivist objectivism. He attempts to divide the evolution of history into clear-cut periods, and searches for the characteristic features of individual cultural periods and wholes. These he distinguishes according to different artistic styles and lifestyles, and according to the spiritual tendencies of a particular period. He understands the historical event as an act or deed, which at the same time constitutes a value; historical cognition must be accompanied by an evaluation. He considers historical epochs unique; nevertheless, he looks for historical continuity. In order to render it truthfully he creates historical types, whose function it is to disclose a correlation. At the roots of European culture, alda discovers the Classical Age, Judaism, and Christianity.

alda's novel, Loutky a dlníci boí, expressed his viewpoint about social changes, which was identical to that of Masaryk. It puts an emphasis on "social statics as opposed to dynamics, that which is essential, constant, that which remains, as opposed to that which is changeable or evolutional". As a universalist and a humanist, F.X. alda believed in the implementation of universal ideas. New society must be built on the basis of civil liberty; it must respect human dignity and defend conscience against violence.⁽²³²⁾

Otokar Bezina (1868-1929)

A symbolist, O. Bezina ranks among the greatest Czech poets of all times. He worked as a teacher in the Czech-Moravian Highlands and gained wide knowledge and horizons studying philosophical and scientific works on his own, following the latest literary production, and keeping in touch with leading cultural figures of that time.

The early collections of his poems, Tajemné dálky (Mysterious distances), 1895, and Svítání na Západ (Dawning in the West), 1896, were marked by deep pessimism, which Bezina managed to overcome in his third collection of poems, Vtry od pól (Winds from the Poles), 1897. It is poetry with a cosmic vision in which the whole Universe is controlled and governed by the Supreme Will and united by Love. The subject of his fourth collection of poems, Stavitelé chrámu (The Builders of a Temple), 1899, is the human situation and mission, that of strong personalities and geniuses, as well as that of ordinary people in this world. The harmony of Bezina's image of the world sounds strongest in his last collection, Ruce (The Hands), 1901. O. Bezina's poetic work is complemented by books of essays and poetic texts, Hudba pramen (Music of the Sources), 1903, and Skryté djiny (Hidden History), first published in 1970.

In his poetry, under the influence of Schopenhauer and Nietzsche, Bezina makes extensive use of the idea of the will as a cosmic principle. This is an attribute found especially in leading personalities, a unifying principle in the universe and the driving force of its evolution. This results in a kind of voluntaristic fatalism in which the will ceases to be a human feature and becomes a cosmic impersonal principle.

Nevertheless, Bezina balances the will as a cosmic principle with his faith in the power of love. Love becomes a manifestation, and mainly a correlative, of will: it is a means of reconciliation, of finding harmony in the world and consolation in the pains of creation.

Bezina caused much attention and controversy with his attitude to religion. Although he followed the contemporary criticism of religion, he unambiguously stated that "neither Nietzsche nor anybody else will convince me that there is no other world, inaccessible to the senses, bound up with thousands of connections and metamorphoses which play the game of the ages before our eyes." Bezina needs these "symbols disguising the beginnings of life" so that life may make sense to him. This opinion, however, does not mean that Bezina professed a religious affiliation. He emphasized the fact that his work is "independent of any dogma; it touches only on the esoteric fundamentals of religion and nothing else." He explained that the notion of the Eternal One, the Supreme One, is a symbol of the Mystery of the Invisible World, his Law of Love. He highlights the importance of idealist philosophy as opposed to a genuine scientific approach to the world, but his vision does not coincide with any official religion.⁽²³³⁾

Many authors consider the book of essays, Skryté djiny, especially the essays "Pítomnost" (The Presence), and "Skryté djiny" (Hidden History) to be the climax of Bezina's intellectual legacy. They express his conception of the history of the world, his vision of the individual and of humankind arranged in a universal context, and his concept of the social function of art and literature.

Stanislav Kostka Neumann (1875-1947)

Neumann emerged as a poet in 1890s. After being released from prison in Plze (Pilsen), where he had served the sentence passed on him during the trial over Omladina (The Youth), he became acquainted with

people around the Moderní revue (The Modern Review). In 1897-1905 he preached extreme individualism and published a journal, Nový kult (The New Cult). He was influenced, among others, by M. Stirner and Grave; he published translations of Nietzsche and Przybyszewski and was interested in Satanism.

The figure of Satan as the opposite of God was then for the poets a symbol of evil, sin, and vice. For Neuman, however, he also embodies " a god of life, earth, and nature, freedom and strength, pride and revolt, passion and delight, knowledge and progress." It is a god not only of individual, but also of collective rebellion; Neumann's Satanism is above all a belief in man's capabilities. Nový kult became perhaps the most important journal of Czech anarchism, especially of that part which met the greatest response in Czech society.

In the first part of this century, the artistic and literary endeavors of leading Czech writers and artists, more often than not, were linked to anarchism. They were attracted to anarchism by its radicalism and individualism, as well as by its proclaimed revolt against the establishment, religion, clericalism, nationalism, and the centralist state. Apart from S.K. Neumann, tests by F. rámek, F. Gellner, J. Mahen, K. Toman, R. Tsnohlídek, J. Haek, and others were published in the anarchist press, especially in Nový kult, ibenky (The Gallows Man), Zádruha, Práce (Work), Komuna (The Commune), Anarchistická revue (The Anarchist Review), etc. Note, however, that even the direct participants in the anarchist movement were involved in it only temporarily; anarchism was more like an episode in their literary and ideological evolution.

Neumann overcame the exclusive anarchist individualism with feelings of joy, longing for a fulfilled life, a celebration of nature and life, vitalism, and admiration for technological progress. Together with K. apek, O. Fischer, O. Theer and others, he made a statement in Almanac 1914, which became a manifesto of new literary and artistic endeavors even before the outbreak of World War I.

After Neumann returned from the front in 1918, he adopted a new ideological and political position, that of so-called Czech socialism. In 1920, under the influence of Lenin's work, he gradually adopted a Marxist-Leninist position. He took part in the founding conference of the Communist Party of Czechoslovakia in May 1921, as well as in the ideological, political and educational activities of the Communist Party in Proletkult and in Komunistická revue (The Communist Review). After Gottwald became the leader of the Communist Party in 1929, Neumann was expelled from it (his membership was renewed in 1939); nevertheless, he continued to deal with the issues of a proletarian, socialist culture.

Karel apek (1890-1938)

apek was one of the most important and influential Czech writers of the twentieth century in whose fiction and dramas philosophical overtones kept emerging. apek had a degree in philosophy and in some periods dealt with it quite intensively. One of his essays, supervised by Frantiek Krejí, was published twice (1918, 1925) under the title of Pragmatismus ili Filosofie praktického ivota (Pragmatism or the Philosophy of Practical Life). His dissertation was in aesthetics. His constant interest in philosophy is evidenced by numerous essays, articles and reviews dealing with Czech as well as other philosophers and various philosophical issues.⁽²³⁴⁾

For the study of apek's work one can draw on apek's own notes, the accounts of his contemporaries, contemporary critical responses, numerous studies on apek of a later date, and works of a synthetic character. As a whole, the literature on apek would seem to suggest that everything of importance had been said, but the constant vitality of apek's work time and again calls for up-to-date analyses from the point of view of both literature and philosophy.

Karel apek's work is often considered an example of the way pragmatic philosophy exercised a profound influence on fiction. On the other hand, he is often said to occupy a relativist philosophical position, often wrongly confused with pragmatism. apek himself explained his poetic and axiologic opinions more than once. At least the collection of his texts, Krize inteligence (The Crisis of Intelligence), 1934, should be noted. He wrote these texts in the period in which he wrote his "noetic trilogy", Hordubal, Povtro, (The Meteor) and Obyejný ivot (Ordinary Life). Here, apek says, he knows that he is often labeled a relativist and feels this to be a slight. On the other hand, he points out that relativity is an attribute of each evaluation since each one is made always in relation to something. The subjectivity of an evaluation follows from the fact that nobody gives up his or her right to a personal point of view. If agreement on evaluation cannot be reached, it appears necessary to come to an agreement on the field of cognition: "Things are not disputable, only our opinions are disputable; there would be fewer controversies among us if there were fewer attitudes and more knowledge in our relationship to things." According to apek, knowledge is a way of cultivating the world, a way of removing the conflicts and collisions between people, nations and states.

In contemporary society, however, there is more evaluation than objective, critical knowledge; all this has something to do with the chaotic conflict of opinions, the tendency to respect and serve only one value and radically to refuse everything else. Pragmatism with its relativism, individualism, and activism could have been a resource as well as a starting point for apek while he was depicting and solving social and interpersonal conflicts; it could have helped him discover ways of finding mutual understanding, reconciling antagonisms, and defending the human being. At the same time, however, apek was searching for a way out of a relativism of values; he strove for a guarantee of the objectivity of knowledge and a hierarchy of values and knowledge.

Besides pragmatism, apek was influenced by other philosophical conceptions, e.g., by the thought of Henri Bergson and, above all, of T.G. Masaryk.⁽²³⁵⁾ apek took up Masaryk's conception of humanism, democracy, social justice, and freedom; under Masaryk's influence he evaluated the Russian and Soviet social situation, Marxism, and Communism. Masaryk represented a great political and intellectual authority for apek; even the existence of an independent Czechoslovakia appeared linked to Masaryk. This friendship often led to confusing his positions with the official presidential political line with the result that, in some periods of the First Republic, apek was attacked from both the political left and right.

The essential basis of Karel apek's Weltanschauung is humanism; apek was a follower of the humanist tradition in Czech thought in the best sense of the word. For him, man has always been a basic measure of all values, things, phenomenon, and processes. Regardless of the evolution in apek's work, this "man" of his can be characterized as an active subject, often pursuing his goal rather vehemently, confronting obstacles, and cooperating with other people. In this concept, that which is individual is subordinated to that which is generally human; individuality, however, does not disappear altogether. The sum of subjective views should eventually lead to an objective opinion on man, but this must be corporate. One point of view, however matter-of-factly describing man's behaviour, is not enough, and neither is his own self reflection: only a juxtaposition of several standpoints and views may objectivize human personality, behaviour, acts, and thoughts.

In apek's work, one often finds both thoughts on concrete "real" people, and thoughts on "what they should be like", or, "what they could be like". This ideal of apek's is not a project for a titanism of any kind, for a "superman"; rather, it is actualized in "ordinary life" with its "plainness", "mundaneness" and "little joys". The plainness and mundaneness of everyday life seems to disguise the real greatness of man. In that respect, fiction should also help man to attain corresponding knowledge and thus make him more perfect and cultivated. Man and woman are, of course, exposed to a great deal of danger; one has to face a number of enemies. To put it simply, apek's defence of man focuses on the relationship of man to technological civilization and his fight against violence, his relationship to other people and to the human community.

apek reacted to the coming of the technological civilization even before World War I. He entered Czech literature as a member of Generation-1914 (he was one of the initiators of Almanac 1914) embodying a new attitude to life, admiration for the new age, and for a civil sense. From that same point, however, there appeared in his work traces of a fear of uncontrolled industrialization and of a dehumanization of society, later expressed in his novels Továrna na absolutno (The Absolute Factory), Krakatit (Krakatit), and the tragedy R.U.R.⁽²³⁶⁾ Here, apek does not repudiate technological progress, he does not oppose it with a "back to the nature" doctrine; he only warns against losing genuine human values. He links the defence of the humanist ideal of universalism, peace, and freedom with the development of a spiritual culture and of means of understanding between nations, with a balance of the "spirit of knowledge" and the "spirit of control", of spiritual culture and technology.

apek feared that a one-sided development of technology makes possible its misuse as a means of violence against people. Violence, repression, and war are the gravest dangers for a free development of the individual and his capabilities, and thus the chief danger for humankind altogether. In apek's works, a note of protest against Fascism and war sounds the strongest. A number of his works were devoted to this, among which Válka s mloky (The war with Salamanders), Bílá nemoc (The White Disease), and Matka (The Mother) are perhaps the most representative. In his notes to Bílá nemoc, apek says that the world "we live in" is "a world of feverish arms races, wavering on the division line between war and peace, jeopardized by states striving for success, expansion, and subjugation of other nations.⁽²³⁷⁾ Violence, liquidating the values of human culture, emerges in society in the form of intolerance which, in the name of enforcing one's own idea, programme or position, leads to negating and canceling such crucial values as "law, freedom of thought, equality before the law, sacredness of human life, and so on."⁽²³⁸⁾

apek's philosophy and Weltanschauung were born out of a search for a modern philosophical position to overcome positivism, mechanical materialism, and determinism, and out of reflection on the crisis of the technological society. Nowadays, we must share with apek, the philosopher, through efforts to preserve basic human values in the world and to be rid of war and all other forms of violence, as well as through awareness of the fact that bringing these efforts to successful realization is by no means an easy task.