Abstract
The critic Arne Novák (1880–1939) called Masaryk ‘the judge sentencing the decadent Austro-Hungarian state at the very hour of the twilight of the idols.’1 That is a hyperbole or at least a misleading aggrandisement. Masaryk was a man of his age. Czech intellectuals of his time were, most of them, judging and condemning Austrian society as a whole and Czech society in particular. Masaryk was not a man of literary taste; he was not an aesthete; he was a moralist and a student of literary phenomenology. That was unusual in Czech literary studies. First and foremost, however, Masaryk was a criticiser. The period was a criticising period in Czech culture and Masaryk possibly contributed more than any other Czech intellectual of the last years of the nineteenth century to the spirit of criticism. In the first chapter of Naše nynější krise (1895) he speaks of all the main new camps in art and in political thought as growing out of the critical spirit. The new ideas like those of the Realists, Progressivists, Modernists, Socialists, and even Clericals and Aristocratists were produced from mutual criticism and conflict. In Otkzka sociální (1898) he rebukes Marx and Engels for being outmoded, for lacking the spirit of true criticism, the spirit of the 1890s. Masaryk himself is as dogmatic as the other Czech turn-of-the-century polemicists, K. M. Čapek-Chod (1860–1927), Arnošt Procházka (1869–1925) and F. X. Šalda (1867–1937), when he writes that Marx and Engels do indeed constantly criticise their opponents, but that ‘that criticism always relates to given individual problems; they accept their own philosophical bases without any truly philosophical criticism. Marx and Engels are typical representatives of materialist dogmatism.’2
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
Arne Novak, Krajané a sousedé. Kniha studii a podobizen, 2nd ed. (Prague: Aventinum, 1930) p. 95.
T. G. Masaryk, Otazka socialnl. Zaklady marxismu filosofické a sociologické (Prague: Laichter, 1898). An improved, expanded German version appeared as Die philosophischen und sociologischen Grundlagen des Marxismus (Vienna: Carl Konegen, 1899) and a Russian edition in 1900. Masaryk’s editor, V. K. gkrach, collated the Czech and German editions for a third edition which appeared in 1936. Here I use a new impression of the third edition, 2 vols. (Prague: Cin, 1946) I, p. 85.
T. G. Masaryk, Ceskci otazka. Snahy a tuiby narodnIho obrozenl, 7th ed. (Prague: Melantrich, 1969) p. 225.
T. G. Masaryk, Nase nynéjsl krise. Pad strany staroéeské a poéatkové smérti novych, 2nd ed. (Prague: Bursik a Kohout, 1908) p. 360.
T. G. Masaryk, Jan Hus. Nase obrozenl a nase reformace, 4th edn. (Prague: Bursik a Kohout, 1923) pp. 41–2.
T. G. Masaryk, Karel Havlíček. Snahy a tužby politického probuzení, 2nd rev. ed. (Prague: Laichter, 1904) p. 115.
T. G. Masaryk, O zené, 2nd edn. (Prague: Cin, 1929) p. 24.
T. G. Masaryk, O studiu del basnickych [1884] 2nd edn. (Prague: Volesky, 1926) p. 19.
Karel Capek, Hovory s T. G. Masarykem (Prague: Borovy, 1937) p. 16.
T. G. Masaryk, ‘Palackého idea ndroda éeského’, Nase doba, vol. V, pp. 769–95; here, Palackého idea ndroda ceského, 2nd edn (Prague: Cin, 1925) p. 432.
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 1990 School of Slavonic and East European Studies, University of London
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Pynsent, R.B. (1990). Masaryk and Decadence. In: Winters, S.B. (eds) T. G. Masaryk (1850–1937). Studies in Russia and East Europe. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-20596-7_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-20596-7_4
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-20598-1
Online ISBN: 978-1-349-20596-7
eBook Packages: Palgrave Political & Intern. Studies CollectionPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)