For Everyone His Own Verhaeren: Czech Reception of Belgian Modernist Literature as an Example of Cultural Transfer and a Path to the Czech Avant‑Garde (1880s–1920s)
Abstract
117
Full text
For Everyone His Own Verhaeren: Czech Reception of Belgian Modernist Literature as an Example of Cultural Transfer and aPath to the Czech Avant ‑Garde (1880s–1920s) Petra James– Université libre de Bruxelles ABSTRACT Translating and interpreting the work of the Belgian francophone poet Émile Verhaeren in Bohemia between 1880s–1920s was away of being Czech, Francophile, modern, and certainly not German– not always in the same order or with the same understanding of what ‘modern’ means. The study analyzes Czech reception of Émile Verhaeren (1855–1916), in critical discussion with the German (Austrian) appropriation and in the context of debates on modern art. Jaroslav Vrchlický needs to be given credit for introducing to his Czech aesthetic adversaries of the 1890s their Belgian symbolist models. The trajectory that leads Verhaeren, a“Rubens in words” of Vrchlický’s1888 interpretation, to Šalda’srecognised representative of Belgian symbolism of the 1910s and the proto -communist collective author of Neumann’sand Hilar’sappropriation of 1920s guides us through the complex development of Czech modernist art from early modernism of the 1880s to its avant -garde peak in the 1920s. Verhaeren served as acatalyzer and aguiding figure for the Czech artists, who helped to steer them, through complex meanders, towards the modernity of the 20th century. KEYWORDS Émile Verhaeren, Czech modernism, Avant -Garde, Belgian Symbolism, Cultural Transfer, Cultural Networks, Cultural Mediation, Reception Studies The Czech search for cultural autonomy was carried out since the 1860s and 1870s through the appropriation of foreign, often Francophone, cultural models. “Être francophile fut bien plus une manière d’être tchèque que d’être gallomane” [Being aFrancophile was much more away of being Czech than of being alover of the French], writes Stéphane Reznikow in his groundbreaking monograph Francophilie et identité tchèques 1848–1914 [Francophilia and Czech Identity 1848–1914]. This insightful and witty remark quoted by Antoine Marès points to the complex nature of Czech Francophilia, which was as much acultural and aesthetic phenomenon as it was geopolitical (Reznikow 2002; Marès 2003: 153). We could say, being Francophile in Bohemia meant finding ways of not being German (or Austrian). Reznikow’swork can be used as astarting point for the exploration of paradigms of cultural appropriation. Indeed, atriangular model might reveal the complex dynamics at work within Czech Francophilia in Bohemia at the turn of the 20th century with aconstant consideration of the
118 BRÜCKEN 29/2 Germanic reception. We can understand this triangulation paradigm as an example of cultural transfer in Bohemia. This methodological approach is inspired by classical studies on cultural transfer between France, Germany and Russia edited by Michel Espagne and Katia Dmitrieva (Dmitrieva/Espagne 1996) but also by German studies scholars such as Hubert Roland (Roland 2004; 2013) and the Czech researcher Ondřej Vimr, who highlighted atriangulation pattern with German culture in the case of the Czech reception of Scandinavian literatures (Vimr 2014). We suggest analyzing Czech reception of the francophone Belgian modernist poet Émile Verhaeren (1855–1916), which developed in triangulation and in critical dialogue with the Germanic (mostly Austrian) reception. Translating and interpreting the work of Verhaeren in Bohemia between 1880s and 1920s would thus be away of being Czech, modern, Francophile and certainly not German. Not always in the same order or with the same understanding of what ‘modern’ means. We will argue that Czech interest in Francophone modernisms was symptomatic of the transformation process of a‘peripheral’ society grappling with modernity and seeking to define its national and cultural project. Since its foundation in 1830, Belgium has been attracting the attention of Czech intellectuals, writers, and translators. Acountry founded as abuffer state between France and the German states and the end of the Napoleonic wars with an ambiguous identity in shaping, it has been continuously struggling with competing cultural, linguistic, and political influences of its powerful neighbors, France, Germany, and the Netherlands. The place of modern Belgium– “entre la France ardente et la grave Allemagne” [between fiery France and earnest Germany] as Émile Verhaeren wrote was accepted and promoted as adefining principle of positive syncretism by modernist Belgian intellectuals and artists before the political and cultural closeness with Germany was questioned because of German invasion of Belgium during WWI and the invaders’ policy of forced acculturation (Roland 2004; 2013).1 The modernist movement of Belgian (largely Flemish francophone) poets, met with keen interest of their Czech counterparts immediately in the 1880s. However, the first major article dedicated to the authors of the group of Belgian symbolists La Jeune Belgique [Young Belgium] was not published by one of the representatives of the upcoming Czech modernist generation, who will dominate the 1890s, but by the older member of the established school of poetry of lumírovci, Jaroslav Vrchlický (1853–1912) (Mocná 1993).2 His extensive review Parnas mladé Belgie [Parnas of Young Belgium] was published in March 1888 and Vrchlický commented on the works of Verhaeren 1 The leading Czech Germanist Otokar Fischer (1883–1938) was one of the major mediators of Czech -Belgian cultural relations during the interwar period. He was invited as avisiting professor to University of Gent in 1926, where he met with important Belgian scholars, such as Henri Pirenne (author of the concept of syncretic Belgian identity between French and German cultural influences) and wrote adense and interesting synthesis of Belgian relations to Germany entitled Belgie aNěmecko (Fischer 1927; Petrbok/Stašková/Zbytovský 2020). 2 It was probably thanks to Vrchlický, that his friend, author and translator Marie Kalašová (1854–1937) took interest in Materlinck’swork, befriended him and became his translator. Their personal contacts represent one of the major examples of Czech -Belgian cultural contacts of the period. The author of this study is currently preparing the critical edition of Maeterlinck’sletters to Kalašová (to be published in 2023).
119PETRA JAMES and Rodenbach, viewed by him as already established authors, while bringing to the Czech readers the first translations of Belgian poets such as Maurice Maeterlinck, Charles Van Lerberghe, Iwan Gilkin, Albert Giraud, Max Waller and others. Vrchlický includes these poets in his large anthology Moderní básníci francouzští [Modern French Poets] of 1893.3 The historical role of the Habsburgs and the experience of baroque culture were cultural frames that Vrchlický chose to present Belgian modern culture to Czech readers. Indeed, Vrchlický describes Verhaeren as “Rubens in words” [„Verhaeren jest jakýsi Rubens slova“], further comparing him to Spanish baroque painters Ribera and Zurbaran before strengthening the Flemish baroque aesthetic filiation in the anthology of 1893 where he likens Verhaeren to Rubens and Jacob Jordaens, another prominent Flemish baroque painter. In the subsequent study we will demonstrate the complex development of the Czech reception of Verhaeren, which will establish this symbolist Francophone Flemish poet as the patron of the Czech avant -garde. It is important to note that while the cultural frames chosen by younger Czech artists for the appropriation of Belgian symbolists within the Czech literature differed from that of Vrchlický, the canon established by him changed little over three decades– Karel Čapek, in his much more famous anthology of modern French poetry Francouzská poezie nové doby [French Poetry of the New Era], considered as akey inspiration for the Czech avant -garde of the 1920s, adds only two new names from Belgian symbolism4– Albert Mockel (1866–1945) and Max Elskamp (1862–1931), both members of the older symbolist generation– and otherwise maintains the authors, who had been translated by Vrchlický in 1888 and 1893.5 1. NOVINA: ČASOPIS ČESKÉ DUŠEVNÍ KULTURY [THE VIRGIN SOIL: THE NOTEBOOK OF CZECH SPIRITUAL CULTURE] AND ITS FOREIGN CULTURAL MODELS 6 The years 1895–1925 were marked by aparadoxical development of Czech -French relations. The failure of adiplomatic rapprochement between the Czechs and the French, adiplomatic effort, that did not go beyond the opening of the French consulate 3 While Belgian Francophone symbolist poets are well represented in the anthology of 1893, Vrchlický did not include any of them in his previous anthology Poesie francouzská nové doby [French Poetry of the New Era] of 1877, considered to be the first systematic introduction of French modern poetry in the Czech context. It is thus during the 1880s that Czech artists got acquainted with Belgian symbolism. 4 Součková (1964) discusses Vrchlický’sandČapek’stranslations of Baudelaire andputs forward the quality ofVrchlický’stranslations and the importance of his work forČapek. 5 In his text of 1888, which is adetailed review of the French anthology of Belgian symbolist poetry Parnasse de la Jeune Belgique (Paris, Vanier, 1887), Vrchlický regrets that the poetry of Verhaeren (along with that of Georges Rodenbach) was not included in the anthology edited in Paris. The text shows that Vrchlický is aware of their poetry, while considering them the most important of Belgian symbolists (“bez odporu nejvýznamnější dosud zcelé belgické kolonie“). The anthology was edited by the Belgian symbolist poets themselves– Iwan Gilkin, Albert Giraud and Max Waller. 6 The title of the magazine– Novina– is polysemic. While its first meaning is simply “news”, its second meaning in Old Czech is also anew field created by cutting down trees of aforest. Šalda’suse of the polysemy is intentional and is intertextually connected to the last novel by Turgenev, The Virgin Soil. The meaning is discussed further in this article.
120 BRÜCKEN 29/2 in Prague in 1897, contrasts with the richness and extent of the presence of French culture in Bohemia during this period. However, the actual Czecho -French exchange was, according to Reznikow, based on small networks of Czech and French expatriates from modest social backgrounds (Reznikow 2002). Cultural scene in Bohemia before 1918 shows aconstant triangulation between Czech, German (Austrian) and French (or Francophone) cultures in the multi -ethnic and multilingual space within the Habsburg Empire. Indeed, it is paradoxical that during this period, even the great Francophiles in Bohemia might have had more direct contacts with Austrian artists and critics and their works were probably more often translated into German than into French.7 The Francophilia of the Czech writers was still more an act of identity activism than areality supported by existing cultural and political ties. Belgian francophone literature offers an interesting case study of these complex processes of cultural mediation between the perceived cultural centers and its peripheries. The Prague cultural journal Novina, founded in 1908, offers an important testimony of the struggles of modernism in Bohemia during the key period of sensible shift from early modernism to early avant -garde. Indeed, the first years of the journal Novina are interesting to follow as their collide with the years of this shift, which Daniel Vojtěch situates around 1910, the moment of culmination of thirty years of early modernism in Bohemia (Vojtěch 2008). The journal reveals the pattern of triangulation of foreign cultural models through the critical discussion of the Austrian reception of Francophone literatures. Novina was one of the first independent platforms of F.X. Šalda (1867–1937). Although Šalda founded Novina together with Jindřich Vodák (1867–1940) and Josef Svatopluk Machar (1864–1942), it was Šalda himself who decided on the concept and content of the journal, which he edited from its first issue in 1908 until 1912. The contacts of Machar with Viennese literary figures of the 1890s, such as Hermann Bahr and his magazine Die Zeit (Kostrbová 2011), are less visible in the journal, although its contributors continue to closely follow publications in Viennese literary journals. Whereas the editors are well informed about literary activities in Vienna, they rely on foreign correspondents for information about what is happening in Paris, showing that the proclaimed Francophilia of the journal is rather acultural project in the making than areality comparable to the networks developed by Czech artists (most prominently by Machar) in Vienna in the 1890s (Kostrbová 2011). As Robert Pynsent notes, the Czech modernists, including the representatives of the fin -de -siècle aesthetics around Moderní revue (contrary to their loud programmatic proclamations) paradoxically shared asocial sensitivity with the circle around Šalda and Machar and their 1895 Manifest české moderny [Manifesto of Czech Modernism] (Pynsent 1987: 428). 8 This social commitment might have well distinguished them from 7 See the works of Merhautová and Ifkovits on the Viennese cultural magazine Die Zeit and the collaboration of its editor Hermann Bahr with Czech artists and intellectuals (Merhautová 2011, 2013, 2016) and the books of the teams working on transnational approach to the history of literature in Bohemia (Petrboketal. 2019; Fialová -Fürstová 2022). What still deserves amore detailed analysis is the circulation of ideas and cultural transfers among these three cultural and linguistic spaces (Czech, Germanic, and Francophone). We might discover the vital role that German (Austrian) culture played in the mediation of French literature. 8 The Manifesto united an aesthetically very diverse group (realists, impressionists, symbolists, naturalists), who came together around common cultural and political goals (Pešat 1998: 229; Pynsent 1987: 428).
121PETRA JAMES their Austrian counterparts, most of whom were members of wealthy aristocracy or upper -middle -class, asocial reality of art that would still deserve amore detailed analysis.9 This social divide, although it needs more nuancing, was often referred to by Czech modernists themselves who, observing the Viennese art scene, criticized the detachment of its representatives from social realities. Machar and Šalda were often commenting the work of Hugo von Hofmannsthal in this sense (Simonek 2021: 51).10 This specific social dimension of Czech modernist art of the 1890s might well explain the less radical rupture between the symbolist generation of the 1890s and the avant -garde of the 1920s in Bohemia. The rallying of the key figures of the older generation such as Šalda and Stanislav Kostka Neumann around the social and political commitment of the young avant -garde artists of the 1920s constitutes aproof of this continuity. 2. BOHEMIA WRITES TO VERHAEREN The Archives of the Museum of Literature [Archives du Musée de la Littérature, AML] of the Royal Library in Brussels contain documents that testify to the importance of Émile Verhaeren for Czech artists in the early 20th century. They reveal that in February 1908 Verhaeren received apostcard from Prague at his French address in Saint -Cloud (Verhaeren was spending part of the year in France since 1898), which was intended as a‘hommage of the artistic youth of Prague’ to Verhaeren and his art. It was signed by Karel Čapek, Josef Čapek, Bohumil Kubišta, Otto Gutfreund, Vlastislav Hofman and Pavel Janák. These young people (Karel Čapek, the youngest of them, was then only 18 years old) would become in the 1920s major representatives of Czech modernism and avant -garde in various art forms and genres. In October 1909, Verhaeren received another message from Prague, this time from his “most fervent and humble admirer”, who reverently informed him of the publication of his poems in the literary magazine Novina. The author was none other than F.X. Šalda. Twenty -three years separated him from Karel Čapek, and although Šalda’simportance for the development of Čapek’spoetics has already been mentioned (Malevič 1987), they are often considered adversaries in the artistic debates of the 1910s–1920s. Their common interest for Verhaeren can serve as astarting point for the exploration of the ambiguities and complexities of Czech Francophilia and the diverse modernist projects of the nascent, early avant -garde in Bohemia in the 1910s.11 9 See for example Merhautová’sstudy on Otokar Fischer’sinterpretation of Hofmannsthal (Merhautová 2020: 426–464). 10 According to Simonek, the dislike and caution was mutual. 11 Both documents can be found in Archives et Musée de la littérature (AML) at the Bibliothèque Royale in Brussels.
122 BRÜCKEN 29/2 3. LETTER FROM FRANTIŠEK XAVER ŠALDA TO VERHAEREN Prague, 20 Octobre 1909 Monsieur et Maître, J’ai l’honneur de vous faire parvenir les trois numéros de ma revue littéraire «Novina» (= en français Les terres vierges), écrite en tchèque qui est la langue de six millions habitants slaves dans le royaume Bohême et dans Moravie. Deux entre eux contiennent un chapitre d’un livre critique sur votre Œuvre à paraître par le poète viennois, M. Stefan Zweig, le troisième la traduction de vos deux poèmes, spécimen de votre admirable livre «Les multiples Splendeurs» que je voudrais appeler «Le Bréviaire poétique de l’homme moderne» et dont je suis avec quelques amis l’admirateur le plus fervent et le plus humble. Acette occasion je prends la liberté de vous adresser, Monsieur et Maître, au nom de vos admirateurs tchèques la prière de vouloir bien écrire pour ma revue quelques pages sur l’admirable renaissance littéraire moderne dans votre beau pays. Je le répète: il suffiraient deux ou trois pages. D’autres traductions de vos poèmes s’ensuivront j’espère bientôt et je ne tarderai pas de vous en envoyer le spécimen. Agréez, Monsieur et Maître, l’expression de mon admiration. F.X.Šalda Directeur de la revue Novina Prague (Bohême) III. 28b. [Prague, 20 October 1909 Sir and Master, Ihave the honour of sending you the three issues of my literary journal “Novina” (= in French Les terres vierges), written in Czech, which is the language of six million Slavic inhabitants in the kingdom of Bohemia and Moravia. Two of them contain achapter of acritical book on your work to be published by the Viennese poet, Mr. Stefan Zweig, the third the translation of your two poems, aspecimen of your admirable book “The Multiple Splendors” which Iwould like to call “The Poetic Breviary of Modern Man” and of which Iam, along with afew friends, the most fervent and most humble admirer. On this occasion Itake the liberty of addressing to you, Sir and Master, in the name of your Czech admirers, the request to write for my review afew pages on the admirable modern literary renaissance in your beautiful country. Irepeat: two or three pages would suffice. Other translations of your poems will follow, Ihope soon, and Iwill not delay in sending you aspecimen. Please accept, Sir and Master, the expression of my admiration. F.X.Šalda Director of Novina magazine Prague (Bohemia) III. 28b.]
123PETRA JAMES The eminent critic, acentral and imposing figure on the Czech cultural scene for almost two decades (often locked in bitter and personal disputes with the representatives of decadence around Moderní revue), makes himself very small in front of Verhaeren. He feels the need to ‘translate’ himself to him, aware that the Czech culture and language, which are little known outside the Habsburg empire, are in the shadow of Germanic culture on the one hand and Russian culture on the other. The need to explain what being Czech means shows that Šalda is aware of the peripheral character of Czech culture at that time. We have found no evidence of earlier personal contacts between Czech writers and Verhaeren. Vrchlický, despite his visit of Brussels that he refers to in his text of 1888, seems to have maintained correspondance contact only with Flemish authors from Antwerp (see the diploma thesis of Štěpán Eliáš 2011).12 What is important for our argument is the fact that Šalda clearly addresses Verhaeren as arepresentative of Belgian symbolism (in line with Vrchlický). Seeking original contributions from foreign correspondents, such as the French symbolist poet and critic Charles Morice (1860–1919),13 who wrote regularly about French literature, he was asking Verhaeren for asimilar participation concerning Belgian francophone literature. Beyond flattery, his request testifies to an awareness of the specificities of amodern French -speaking Belgian literature that had been developing rapidly since the 1880s. This development could not but arouse the interest of arepresentative of Czech culture, seeking its place as a‘minor’ literature in the shadow of adominant one. The three issues of Novina referred to in Šalda’sletter are issues 8, 21 and 22 of 1909. The first contains František Tichý’stranslation (under the pseudonym Zdeněk Broman) of two poems from the collection La Multiple Splendeur [The Multiple Splendor] (1906), “To the Glory of the Heavens” and “The Praise of the Human Body” (Verhaeren 1909). Tichý later became the translator of two anthologies of Verhaeren’spoetry, both of which appeared in 1917 as atribute to the Belgian poet who had died tragically the previous year, in 1916, while boarding atrain in Rouen, France. The other two issues contain achapter of the original essay that Stefan Zweig dedicated to Verhaeren’spoetry, which was not published in full until ayear later, in 1910, simultaneously, in French and in German.14 As Clément Dessy affirms, this relatively unknown text by Zweig effectively launched the writer’scareer in the German and, more broadly, in the European cultural context. On ascale of achapter, it was however in Prague and in Czech that this work appeared for the first time, in agreement with Zweig, with whom Šalda was clearly in contact, at least by mail. In another review, Šalda referred to Zweig as “our valuable collaborator” and introduced him as a“young, excellent Viennese poet”15. This publication of Zweig in Czech is indicative of the Czech Francophile triangulation with Germanic culture. With this translation, Šalda entered adialogue with Zweig’sinterpretation of Verhaeren. In 1910, when 12 The only personal contact that we found evidence of is from after Verhaeren’sdeath between Otokar Fischer and Verhaeren’swidow Marthe, who thanks Fischer for his Czech translation of Verhaeren’shistorical play Philip II, that Fischer had sent to her. LA PNP, file of Otokar Fischer. 13 It is interesting to note that Charles Morice lived in Brussels between 1896–1901 and for some time was collaborating with the University in Brussels. He wrote several essays dedicated to Belgian art. 14 „Báseň Verhaerenova ajejí architektonika“ (Zweig 1909) corresponds to the chapter “Le poème de verhaerenien” of the French translation of Zweig’sessay (Zweig 2013 [1910]: 190–214). 15 F. X. Šalda (1909: 447). It is avery positive commentary of Zweig’sreview of the German translation of Březina’spoetry published in the number 6 of the magazine Oesterreichische Rundschau.
124 BRÜCKEN 29/2 Zweig’sessay was published in its entirety, Šalda commented on it in Novina, before writing one himself in 1917 entitled Émile Verhaeren: Odpověď na otázku po smyslu jeho díla [Émile Verhaeren: Answer to the Question about the Meaning of his Work], which appeared in Tichý’santhology of Verhaeren’spoetry (Verhaeren 1917). This dialogue with Zweig was clearly conditioned by the geopolitical context– especially Šalda’seffort to distance himself from Zweig’sinsistence on the Germanic aspects of Verhaeren’saesthetic. Thus, Šalda’sVerhaeren, still considered as one of the key texts on the Belgian author in Bohemia today, is the result of acritical confrontation with Zweig’sVerhaeren and aclear example of atriangulation of the Czech reception of Francophone modernist literature at the turn of the 20th century. In this complex case of cultural transfer Šalda succeeded in imposing “his” Verhaeren in Bohemia and Zweig’smonograph was never translated into Czech in its entirety. We do not know whether Verhaeren replied to Šalda’sletter; no letter from him is to be found in his Prague archive and no contribution by Verhaeren on Belgian symbolism was ever published in Novina. We also do not know whether Verhaeren sought to meet Šalda during his brief visit to Prague with Zweig on 7th and 8th March 1912, when they stayed overnight at the ‘Hotel zum Blauen Stern’. Indeed, in 1912 and 1913, Verhaeren undertook aseries of trips and lectures throughout Central and Eastern Europe, but Bohemia probably remained for the Belgian poet, to paraphrase Zweig’swords, amarginal, borderline space, through which one passes on the road ‘between Leipzig and Vienna’.16 4. NOVINA, RURAL METAPHOR FOR REGIONAL MODERNITY In 1909, Šalda wrote Verhaeren that the title of his magazine translated as ‘The Virgin Soil’ (Les Terres vierges). If novina in Czech simply means ‘news’, it was also the term chosen for the title of Turgenev’slast novel, Новь, i.e. in French Les Terres vierges (The Virgin Soil)– atitle that Turgenev had no doubt accepted, having reviewed Émile Durand -Gréville’stranslation published in Paris in 1877, the year of its publication in Russian.17 It is the subtitle of the magazine, published on the cover of each issue, that allows this connection: “Novinu orati třeba pluhem hluboko zabírajícím.” [The virgin soil must be ploughed with aplough that goes deep into the soil.] This quotation is the Czech translation of the epigraph with which Turgenev opens his novel The Virgin Soil and which he claims to quote from adiary of apeasantagronomist. The already mentioned centrality of social commitment of Czech modernism of the 1890s, is thus inscribed in Novina’svery title and subtitle, more then 10 years after the publication of the Manifesto (1895). It thus places itself, probably at Šalda’sinstigation, under the aegis of Turgenev (who spent most of his life in France). Turgenev’ssocial and political ideals as well as his openness to the West stand here as central qualities. The fact that ajournal that aimed to represent modern art in Bohemia was placed under the aegis of aRussian realist novel published 30 years earlier confirms the complex and ambiguous nature of modernism in Bohemia, which at this 16 “[L]e 7 mars, Verhaeren et moi en wagon entre Leipzig et Vienne” [7th March, Iand Verhaeren on the train between Leipzig and Wien] (Van de Kerkhove 1996: 49–53). Ithank Fabrice van de Kerkhove for this information (e -mail from 29 June 2021). 17 The first German translation was also published in 1877.
125PETRA JAMES stage included also critical realism and social awareness alongside its openness to WestEuropean cultures (inherited from Vrchlický’sgeneration around the revue Lumír). Turgenev’snovel was published in Czech translation between 1884 and 1895. With asocial aim, it evokes the members of the narodniki (populist) movement, agroup of Russian intellectuals in the second half of the 19th century who tried to enter dialogue with the popular masses and bring about more or less radical social reforms in Russia. Although Turgenev insisted that the ‘plough’ in his epigraph was not ametaphor for revolution, the novel makes clear the inadequacy of small -scale reforms and accentuates the need for more profound social and political change, metaphorically
132 BRÜCKEN 29/2 motivation for Šalda’sinsistence on the ‘French’ character of Verhaeren’spoetry can be seen as areaction to the systematic efforts of German -speaking artists and critics, such as Zweig (Buchinger 2012) and Schlaf to stress the ‘Germanic’ features in the aesthetics of French -speaking Flemish writers (Defraeye/Mitterbauer/Reyns -Chikuma 2022) and against the German efforts to ‘germanise’ Belgian authors, astrategy clearly used by authors and critics such as Stefan Zweig or Johannes Schlaf (Roland 2012; 2013). Indeed, as Clément Dessy writes, when Zweig’sbook on Verhaeren was finally translated and published in Great Britain during WWI, similar criticism was raised by British critics against the efforts by Zweig to make Verhaeren more ‘German’. By this time, Germany invaded Belgium and Verhaeren, forced into British exile, broke all contacts with Zweig and even his widow Marthe Verhaeren did not renew the contacts after the end of the war (Dessy 2021; Defraeye/Mitterbauer/Reyns -Chikuma 2022). Zweig participated in the climactico -geographical identity cultural discourse, widespread in Europe at the beginning of the 20th century (Boia 2005). The discourse on the ‘Nordic’ cultures was part of it and Zweig was including Belgian literature in the ‘Nordic’ ones, which he considered more ‘clairvoyant’ and positively detached from French literature and its ‘Latin purity’ eroded by positivism. As his 1910 monograph on Verhaeren reveals, Zweig “believed that the Belgian race lay essentially in the mixture the neighboring French and Germanic races and thus reflected the ethnic and linguistic diversity of Europe” (Rensen 2015: 4), mirroring the narrative promulgated by Belgian historians themselves (most importantly by the aforementioned Henri Pirenne and further developed by Edmond Picard and Paul Colin, see Roland 2004), while trying to establish apositive identity for Belgium based on cultural syncretism and openness to Europe, which would also strengthen its political project as an independent country. However, after trying to establish their position somewhere between France and Germany, the Belgian intellectuals and artists decidedly moved towards France during and immediately after WWI (Roland 2004; 2013). Šalda therefore follows Verhaeren’sown cultural shift when he claims in his essay of 1917 that Verhaeren is apure Frenchman by his “objectivist idealism, his creative social faith, by the style of his sensibility, thought and judgement” (Šalda 1962: 15f.). This definition does not contain any geographical, climatic, or biological -racial criteria. Šalda thus rejects aracially and politically motivated pan -Germanic interpretation and places the Belgian poet within the French aesthetic tradition, while criticizing Zweig’sinterpretation. From a‘valuable collaborator’ of 1909 Zweig becomes for Šalda ‘aGerman literary essayist’: The poet, once dismissed as abarbarian by the narrow French traditionalists, Jean Moréas and the Ecole romane28, and hastily and superficially appropriated by various German literary essayists as aGerman of race and soul, was in truth apure Frenchman, in his objectivist idealism, in his creative social faith, in the very style of his feeling, his thinking, his judgement. His magnificent Soir [Evening] from Les Forces Tumultueuses [The Fiery Elements], in which he placed himself and his entire 28 Despite this comment, Jean Moréas and his circle were very popular in Bohemia since 1880s, being highly regarded by Jaroslav Vrchlický, promoted by Charles Morice, his collaborator and translated by Karel Čapek in his anthology of modern French poetry of 1920.
133PETRA JAMES work like agrain of wheat before the immense objective of an accomplished future, of accomplished times, by this unique movement of humility and pride fused into one, is an essentially French poem, afiery spark, springing straight from the hearth of the national soul. (Šalda 1962: 15f.). Šalda was clearly aware of the cultural debates of his time, both in German and French cultural sphere. Contrary to the tendency to associate national character (and aesthetics) with geography, climate, and biology, Šalda adopted the model of national belonging by choice. His shift in interpreting Verhaeren offers interesting evidence of that. At the crossroads of French and Germanic cultures, between ‘North’, ‘West’ and ‘East’, Belgium had aspecial place in the climate -racial discourse of the turn of the 20th century. As Svetlana Čečović notes, Belgian writers themselves used this symbolism in their aesthetic and identity research, forging the myth of the ‘Nordic soul’ in the late nineteenth century: “This literary stereotype combining ‘French and German ingredients’ into aBelgian culture, was crystallized by French -speaking Flemish authors such as Émile Verhaeren, Maurice Maeterlinck and Georges Rodenbach” (Čečovic 2019: 33). Conversely, their conservative French detractors used the same strategy to attack the ‘impurity’ of Belgian French -language poetry. In reaction to these discursive strategies of symbolic exclusion, the members of La Jeune Belgique came to embrace amodel of cultural hybridity and “métissage” (Čečovic 2019: 33). Šalda was visibly aware of the polemics initiated by École romane against the Belgian symbolists, and Verhaeren in particular. As Patrick McGuinness has correctly observed, Charles Maurras multiplied attacks against Belgian writers, accusing them of mastering the language by subverting it and diverting it from French culture. These accusations were also present in Rémy de Gourmont’sessays of this period (see the special issue of Worlds of Literature of 2022, in particular Gauthier 2022). The hybrid mythological creatures (such as centaurs) that populate their poetry symbolized, according to McGuinness, representatives of mixed cultures, such as Jews, Belgians or Germans, dubious peoples against whom the purity of Latin poetry had to be erected. These criticisms were relayed by representatives of Ecole romane, such as Ernest Raynaud in 1892 in the Mercure de France: Il importait de restituer à la langue française son intégrité première. Il importait de sauvegarder notre patrimoine de cet assaut furieux donné au nom de Wagner par des hordes belges, allemandes et tartares. L’idée romane est donc née surtout d’un réveil de l’esprit national. (Raynaud quoted byMcGuiness2015: 235) [It was important to restore the French language to its original integrity. It was important to safeguard our heritage from this furious assault in the name of Wagner by Belgian, German and Tartar hordes. The idea of Romanity was therefore born above all out of arevival of the national spirit.] Let us return to the meaning of the title Novina of Šalda’smagazine. An aspect of Turgenev’snovel that could have inspired Šalda was the concept of national culture. Aconvinced Westerner, Turgenev in his last novel gives apositive value to hybridity and cultural and national mixing. As Olga Gortchanina notes in her doctoral thesis,
134 BRÜCKEN 29/2 The Virgin Soil is dominated by atrio of characters– Nejdanov, the illegitimate son of aRussian aristocrat, Marianna, ayoung Russian girl with aPolish father, and Solomine, asimple Russian man steeped in Anglo -Saxon pragmatic culture. While the most typical representative of the Russian character, Nejdanov, ends up committing suicide, Marianna and Solomine unite after his death and form acouple who clearly represent avision for the future of Russia. The solidity and strength of these two characters is nourished by their cultural ‘hybridity’ (Gortchanina 2014). Turgenev sees the future in openness to other cultures and transnational mixing. This is how his work fits into modernism and partly explains the interest he aroused in Šalda, an advocate of opening of Czech culture to international impulses.29 As in the conclusion of Turgenev’sVirgin Soil, Šalda establishes miscegenation and hybridity as positive principles: Verhaeren’s‘hybrid’ cultural identity thus strengthens the quality of his French identity for Šalda. Šalda’s‘francization’ of Verhaeren can be further understood as agesture against the strategies of alienation by the perceived dominant cultures employed against the peripheral ones. It is arejection of cultural identity being defined by geography and biology (as does Raynaud, who gives a‘racial’ definition of the ‘national spirit’) to which Šalda prefers abelonging to ideas. Šalda’sinsistence of Verhaeren’s‘French’ identity can be seen as amodernist act– affirming identity as apersonal choice, independent of place of birth (geography), socio -economic determination (class) and ‘ethnicity’ (biological and racial aspect). 8. CONCLUSION– VERHAEREN AS CATALYSER OF CZECH MODERNISM AND AVANT ‑GARDE The extensive body of work authored by Émile Verhaeren explains the multiplicity of interpretations and the diverse reception that have unfolded around it, revealing the diversity of modernist art projects at the turn of the century in Europe. As the editors of the 2016 special issue of the Belgian literary magazine Textyles dedicated to the reception of Verhaeren argue: Émile Verhaeren est probablement le poète qui bénéficie du plus de stature dans la poésie belge francophone entre la fin du XIXe siècle et le début de la Seconde Guerre mondiale. Il est un peu notre Victor Hugo, quoique d’une autre époque, le romantisme en moins, le modernisme en plus. (Aron/Bertrand 2016: 8) [Émile Verhaeren has probably enjoyed the most eminent status in French -speaking Belgian poetry between the end of the 19th century and the beginning of the Second 29 It is to be noted that while not succumbing to general antisemitic atmosphere in Bohemia of the turn of the 20th century, Šalda did not hesitate to use ahomophobic argument in avicious public scandal of 1909, which opposed him and his aesthetic adversary Jiří Karásek ze Lvovic (pseudonym of the Czech decadent artist Josef Karásek, 1871–1951). While publicly accusing Karásek of being the author of vulgar anonymous letters addressed to him and four other artists of Šalda’scircle, Šalda used Karásek’shomosexuality and his defence of Oscar Wilde as proofs of Karásek’sflawed morals. The affair had major professional consequences for Karásek, who was temporarily suspened from his employment as apublic servant at the national postal services and remained marked by the affair for the rest of his life.
135PETRA JAMES World War. He is abit like our Victor Hugo, albeit from adifferent era, without romanticism and with modernism added.] In Great Britain, as Clément Dessy notes, “it is the regions of northern England and Wales where the memory of his work has perhaps best persisted, thanks to the poetic mirror it held up to them” (Dessy 2016: 137). In Germany, Zech’stranslation of Verhaeren’spoetry is said to have been the underestimated impetus for the expressionist aesthetics (Roland 2016: 102). In Poland, in Kazimierz Filip Wize’stranslation, “the Polish public could read in Verhaeren’sstanzas ahymn to the glory of the native land and of the peasant, the faithful guardian of national values” (Niedokos 2016: 118). In Italy, Verhaeren’simportance for the development of futurism has been the focus of critical interest in recent years (Castiglione 2011). Textyles, however, omits the importance of Verhaeren in the Czech context discussed here, and his role in the formation of Czech modernism from its early onset in the 1880s till the historical avant -garde of the 1920s. The major actors of Czech modernism each constructed ‘their own’ Verhaeren, whether baroque, symbolist, neo -classical, avant -garde, or revolutionary. Indeed, the inspiration by Émile Verhaeren’swork in the first decade of the 20th century seems to be one of the few commonalities shared by representatives of several generations with different (often violently opposing) agendas and visions of modern art that were to confront each other between 1880s and 1920s. Before 1918, the reception of Belgian francophone writers, with Verhaeren at the center, developed in atriangular model. It was an opportunity to create acritical dialogue with the dominant Germanic Austrian culture of the Habsburg empire but also to further nuance Czech Francophilia as amilitant, identity -affirming tool, through the appropriation of aforeign literature that might have been perceived as peripheral at various times both by the French and German cultural establishment. Šalda’srejection of the Germanic appropriation of Verhaeren by Austrian critics such as Zweig and Schlaf and his identification with French literature must be understood within this larger cultural context. After 1918, Verhaeren’swork was used for establishing the avant -garde of the 1920s, especially through the theater adaptations, stressing the revolutionary dimension of the work. This tendency would further prevail between 1948–1989. The work of Émile Verhaeren was thus steering Czech culture through complex meanders of modernism and modernity throughout the large part of the 20th century. LITERATURE Aron, Paul/Bertrand, Jean -Pierre (2016): Présentation.– In: Textyles 50–51, 7–12. Bischoff, Sebastian/Jahr, Christoph/Mrowka, Tatjana/Thiel, Jens (eds.) (2018): “Belgium is abeauti‑ ful city?” Resultate und Perspektiven der historischen Belgienforschung. Münster: Waxmann. Boia, Lucian (2005): The Weather in the Imagination. London: Reaktion Books. Brabec, Jiří (2010): 1920 – Neklidný rok [1920 – A restless year]. – In: Papoušek, Vladimíretal. (eds.), Dějiny nové moderny [History of New Modernism]. Prague: Academia, 336–338.
136 BRÜCKEN 29/2 Brett, Vladimír (1955): St. K. Neumann, Verhaeren avolný verš [St. K. Neumann, Verhaeren and free verse]. – In: Česká literatura 3/3–4, 282–283. Brett, Vladimir (1977): Sur la fortune de l’oeuvre de Verhaeren en Tchécoslovaquie. – In: Marginales 177, 44–47. Buchinger, Susanne (2012): Stefan Zweig– Schriftsteller und literarischer Agens: Die Beziehungen zu seinen deutschsprachigen Verlegern (1901–1942). Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter (reprint of the 1998 edition). Castiglione, Vera (2011): Émile Verhaeren: Modernisme et identité générique dans l’œuvre poétique. Paris: L’Harmattan. Čečovic, Svetlana (2019): Under the Breath of Asia: Echoes of the 1917 Revolution in French -speaking Belgium. – In: Revolutionary Russia 32/1, 31–58. URL: <https://doi.org/10.1080/09546545.201 9.1599514> [8 August 2022]. Černý, Václav (1935): Essai sur le titanisme dans la poesie romantique occidentale entre 1815 et 1850. Prague: Orbis. Černý, Václav (1955): Emile Verhaeren ajeho místo vdějinách volného verše [E.V. and his place in the history of free verse]. Prague: Československý spisovatel. Červenka, Miroslav (2001): Dějiny českého volného verše [History of Czech free verse]. Brno: Host. Colin, Paul (1933): Belgique Carrefour de l’Occident. Paris: Rieder. Crombois, Julie (2020): Das „andere“ Belgien/Das „andere Deutschland“. Zirkulation, Kulturtransfer und Vereinnahmungen im deutsch ‑belgischen literarischen und intellektuellen Kontext 1933–1945. Doctoral thesis, supervised by Hubert Roland, Université catholique de Louvain (to be published by Waxmann in Münster in 2022 in the collection Historische Belgienforschung). Defraeye, Piet/Mitterbauer, Helga/Reyns -Chikuma, Chris (eds.) (2022): Brussels 1900 Vienna. Net‑ works in Literature, Visual and Performing Arts, and Other Cultural Practices. Leiden, Boston: Brill, Rodopi. Dessy, Clément (2016): Les vies britanniques d’Émile Verhaeren. – In: Textyles 50–51, 119– 138. Dessy, Clément (2021): Cross -Border Narratives and Life Writing. Émile Verhaeren by Stefan Zweig and its English Translation in Wartime. – In: Comparative critical studies 18, 36–61. Dmitrieva, Katia/Espagne, Michel (eds.) (1996): Transferts culturels triangulaires France– Allemagne– Russie. Paris: Éditions de la Maison des Sciences de l’Homme (= Philologiques, 4). Eliáš, Štěpán (2011): Jaroslav Vrchlický ajeho francouzská korespondence na pozadí česko ‑francouzských kulturních vztahů [Jaroslav Vrchlický and his French Correspondence against the Background of Czech -French Cultural Relations]. Diploma thesis. Charles University Prague. URL: < https://dspace.cuni.cz/bitstream/handle/20.500.11956/49536/DPTX_2011_1_11410_0_76628_0_ 77288.pdf?sequence=1 & isAllowed=y> [11 October 2022]. Fialová -Fürstová, Ingeborgetal. (eds.) (2022): Lexikon Deutschmärischer Autoren. Olomouc: Palacký University. Fischer, Otokar (1927): Belgie aNěmecko [Belgium and Germany]. Prague: Charles University Press (= Sbírka pojednání arozprav [Collection of Presentations and Discussions]). Gauthier, Cécile (2022): Littérature fin de siècle, littérature fin de langue? Imaginaires linguistiques vers 1900 chez Rémy de Gourmont. – In: Svět Literatury/World of Literature. Special Issue, 2022, 190–200. URL: <https://svetliteratury.ff.cuni.cz/wpcontent/uploads/sites/14/2022/06/ Cecile_Gauthier_190-200.pdf> [1 October 2022]. Gilk, Erik (ed.) (2014): Almanach na rok 1914 [The Almanac for 1914] (reprint). Prague, Olomouc: Akropolis, UPOL. Gilk, Erik (ed.) (2016): Almanach na rok 1914. Mezi modernou aavantgardou [The Almanac for 1914. Between Modernism and Avant -garde]. Prague: Akropolis. Gorceix, Paul (1995): Sur la rencontre de Hermann Bahr avec le symbolisme franco -belge. – In: Université de Toulouse LeMirail (CERAM et Département d’Allemand) (ed.), Les Songes de la raison. Mélanges offerts à Dominique Iehl.Bern: Peter Lang, 273–288.
137PETRA JAMES Gortchanina, Olga (2014): Identité culturelle d’Ivan Tourgueniev: entre la Russie et la France. Doctoral thesis, defended 8 Decembre 2014 at Université Lille 3–Charles -de -Gaulle. URL: https://tel. archives -ouvertes.fr/tel-01158978/document [1 July 2022]. Hanuš, Stanislav (2014): Půlnoc [Midnight].– In: Gilk, Erik (ed.), Almanach na rok 1914. Prague: Akropolis, 75–76. Heczková, Libuše (2009): Píšící Minervy. Vybrané kapitoly zdějin české literární kritiky [Writing Minervas. Selected chapters from the history of Czech literary criticism]. Prague: FF UK. Hofman,Vlastislav (2014 [1914]): Duch přeměny vumění výtvarném [The Spirit of Change in Plastic Art] [1914]. – In: Gilk, Erik (ed.), Almanach na rok 1914. Prague: Akropolis, 49–56. James, Petra (2022): Achacun son Verhaeren: francophilie militante en Bohême (1895–1921). – In: Royer, Clara/Marès, Antoine (eds.), Lettres françaises en Europe centrale. Flux et transferts au 20e siècle, (accepted for publication). Konůpek, Jiří (1960): Doslov [Epilogue]. – In: Verhaeren, Émile, Žárné chorály. Prague: Mladá fronta, 115–128. Kostrbová (Merhautová), Lucie (2011): Mezi Prahou aVídní [Between Prague and Vienna]. Prague: Academia. Lahoda, Vojtěch (2016): Umělecký měsíčník a/ nebo Almanach na rok 1914. – In: Gilk, Erik (ed.), Almanach na rok 1914. Mezi modernou aavantgardou. Prague: Akropolis, 26–32. Malevič, Oleg (1987): F. X. Šalda aKarel Čapek. Smysl jednoho literárního sporu [F. X. Š and K. Č.The Meaning of One Literary Dispute]. – In: Česká literatura 35/5–6, 451–486. Marès, Antoine (2003): Review of Francophilie et identité tchèque (1848–1914) by Stéphane Reznikow. – In: Vingtième siècle77, 153–154. Marten, Miloš (1906): Knihy dobrých autorů.– In: Moderní revue 17, 45–48. Matuschek, Oliver/Renoldner, Klemens (eds.) (2022): Anton Kippenberg– Stefan Zweig. Briefwechsel 1905–1937. Berlin: Suhrkamp. McGuinness, Patrick (2015): Poetry and Radical Politics in Fin de Siècle France. From Anarchism to Action Française. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Merhautová, Lucie (2016): Paralely aprůniky [Parallels and Intersections]. Prague: Masarykův ústav Archiv AV ČR. Merhautová, Lucie/Ifkovits, Kurt/Doubek, Vratislav (eds.) (2011): Die Zeit (1894–1904) als Mittler zwischen der Tschechischen und Wiener Moderne. Prague: Masarykův ústav Archiv AV ČR/ Wien: Österreichisches Theatermuseum. Merhautová, Lucie/Ifkovits, Kurt (eds.) (2013): Die Zeit (1894–1904) und die zentraleuropäische Moderne. Prague: Masarykův ústav Archiv AV ČR / Essen: Klartext / Wien: Österreichisches Theatermuseum. Merhautová, Lucie (2020): Otokar Fischer und Hugo von Hofmannsthal. – In: Petrbok, Václav/ Stašková, Alice/Zbytovský, Štěpán (eds.), Otokar Fischer (1883–1938). Ein Prager Intellektueller zwischen Dichtung und Wissenschaft. Vienna, Cologne, Weimar: Böhlau Verlag, 426–464. Middell, Matthias (ed.) (2019): The Routledge Handbook of Transregional Studies. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge. Mocná, Dagmar (1993): Maeterlinck vČechách (Kproblematice utváření dobových estetických norem) [Maeterlinck in Bohemia (On the Question of Shaping of Historical Aesthetic Norms)]. – In: Česká literatura 41/2, 206–217. Neumann, Stanislav Kostka (1988 [1913]): Volný verš anová poezie [Free Verse and New Poetry]. – In: Ders., Rozuměti umění [Understanding Art]. Ed. by Milada Chlíbcová. Prague: Československý spisovatel, 263–268. Niedokos, Judyta (2016): Émile Verhaeren et Kazimierz Filip Wize, traduction polonaise des Visages de la Vie et des Douze Mois. – In: Textyles 50–51, 103–118. Ort, Thomas (2013): Art and Life in Modernist Prague. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
138 BRÜCKEN 29/2 Papoušek, Vladimíretal. (eds.) (2010): Dějiny nové moderny I[History of New Modernism I]. Prague: Academia. Pešat, Zdeněk (1998): Zkapitol české programové kritiky: F. X. Šalda aJaroslav Vrchlický [From the Chapters of Czech Programme Criticism. F. X. Š. and J. V.].– In: Česká literatura [Czech Literature] 46/3, 229–235. Petrbok, Václav/Smyčka, Václav/Turek, Matouš/Futtera, Ladislav (eds.) (2019): Jak psát transkultur‑ ní literární dějiny? [How to Write Transcultural History of Literature?] Prague: Akropolis. Petrbok, Václav/Stašková, Alice/Zbytovský, Štěpán (eds.) (2020): Otokar Fischer (1883–1938). Ein Prager Intellektueller zwischen Dichtung und Wissenschaft. Vienna, Cologne, Weimar: Böhlau Verlag. Petrbok, Václav (ed.) (2021): Čtení oOtokaru Fischerovi. Stopovat kentaura [Reading about Otokar Fischer. To Trace aCentaure]. Prague: Institut pro studium literatury. Picard, Edmond (1897):L’âme belge [The Belgian Soul]. – In: Revue Encyclopédique, 24 July 1897, 595–599. Pynsent, Robert B. (1987): Šaldovy Loutky iDělníci Boží. – In:Česká Literatura35/5–6, 425–432. Pynsent, Robert. B. (ed.) (1989): Decadence and Innovation. Austro ‑Hungarian Life and Art at the Turn of the Century. London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson. Quaghebeur, Marc (1990): Lettres Belges entre absence et magie [Belgian Literature between Absence and Magic]. Bruxelles,Loverval: Labor. Reznikow, Stéphane (2002): Francophilie et identité tchèque (1848–1914). Paris: Honoré Champion. Rensen, Marleen (2015): Writing European Lives: Stefan Zweig as aBiographer of Verhaeren, Rolland and Erasmus. – In: European Journal of Life Writing 4, 1–29. Roig -Sanz, Fólica/Caristia (eds.) (2020): Literary Translation in Periodicals. Methodological Challen‑ ges for aTransnational Approach. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Roland, Hubert (2004): Âme belge, ‘entre -deux’ et microcosme: d’une fin de siècle à l’autre. – In: Textyles 24. URL: https://journals.openedition.org/textyles/699 [1 August 2022]. Roland, Hubert (2012): Maeterlinck et les pays de langue allemande [extended review of Strohmann 2006]. – In:Textyles41. URL: http://journals.openedition.org/textyles/1519 [1July 2022]. Roland, Hubert (2013): La Flamenpolitik de l’occupant allemande en 1914–1918. Un tournant dans l’histoire des relations interculturelles en Belgique et une question franco -allemande. – In: Deshoulières, Valérie/Lüsebrink, Hans -Jürgen/Vatter, Christoph (eds.), Europa zwischen Text und Ort– L’Europe entre Texte et Lieu/ Interkulturalität in Kriegszeiten (1914–1954) (=Jahrbuch des Frankreichzentrums der Universität des Saarlandes, 12). Bielefeld: Transcript Verlag, 111–125. Roland, Hubert (2016): Un Verhaeren expressionniste. La traduction allemande des Blés mouvants (Die wogende Saat, 1914/1917) par Paul Zech. – In: Textyles 50–51, 89–102. Royer, Clara/Marès, Antoine (eds.) (2022): Lettres françaises en Europe centrale. Flux et transferts au 20e siècle (to be published). Simonek, Stefan (2021): Hugo von Hofmannsthal’sAmbiguous Reception in Czech Literature (1898–1914). – In: James, Petra/Mitterbauer, Helga (eds.), Vorstellung vom Anderen in der tsche‑ chisch‑ und deutschsprachigen Literatur. Imaginationen und Interrelationen. Berlin: Frank & Timme, 51–62. Součková, Milada (1964): The Parnassian Jaroslav Vrchlický. The Hague: Mouton & Co., 86–88. Strohmann, Dirk (2006): Die Rezeption Maurice Maeterlincks in den deutschsprachigen Ländern (1891–1914). Bern: Peter Lang. Stupka, Vladimír (1960): Studie verhaerenovské [Verhaerenian Studies]. Habiliation thesis. Brno: Masaryk University. Stupka, Vladimír (1976): Émile Verhaeren. – In: Fischer, Jan Otokar (ed.), Dějiny francouzské literatury 19. a20. století [History of French Literature of the 19th and 20th Centuries]. Vol. 2: 1870–1930. Prague: Academia, 344–361. Šalda, F. X. (1909): Stefan Zweig oBřezinovi [S. Z. on Otakar Březina]. – In: Novina 2/14, 447–448.
139PETRA JAMES Šalda, F. X. (1917): Émile Verhaeren. Odpověď na otázku po smyslu jeho díla [Émile Verhaeren: Answer to the Question of the Meaning of his Work]. – In: Verhaeren, Émile, Mnohonásobný lesk [La Multiple Splendeur], Czech translation František Tichý. Prague: B.Kočí, 5–47. Šalda, F. X. (1930–1931): Návrat kVerhaerenovi [The Return to Verhaeren]. – In: Šaldův zápisník3, 419–425. Šalda, F. X. (1962 [1917]): Émile Verhaeren. Odpověď na otázku po smyslu jeho díla [Émile Verhaeren. Answer to the Question of the Meaning of his Work]. – In: Verhaeren, Émile: Básně [Poems], Czech transl. Jiří Konůpek/Jan Zábrana. Prague: SNKLU, 7–37. Tichý, František [signed Zdeněk Broman] (1912): Poslední kniha Verhaerenova [Verhaeren’sLatest Book].– In: Novina 5/13, 407f. Tille, Václav (2022): Deníky [Private Journals]. vol. 1, 1927–1931. Ed. Lukáš Holeček. Prague: NLN (to be published). Van de Kerckhove, Fabrice (ed.) (1996): Émile et Marthe Verhaeren– Stefan Zweig. Correspondance (1900–1926). Bruxelles: Labor et Archives et Musée de la Littérature (AML). Vimr, Ondřej (2014): Historie překladatele:Cesty skandinávských literatur do češtiny 1890–1950. Prague: Pistorius & Olšanská. Verhaeren, Émile (1905): Svítání [The Dawn]. Czech translation Stanislav Kostka Neumann. Prague: Knihy dobrých autorů. Verhaeren, Émile (1909): Sláva nebes. Chvála těla lidského [To the Glory of the Heavens. The Praise of the Human Body]. Czech translation Zdeněk Broman (pseudonyme of František Tichý).– In: Novina 2/8, 232–234. Verhaeren, Émile (1917): Mnohonásobný lesk [Multiple Shine]. Ed. and translation František Tichý. Praha: B. Kočí. Verhaeren, Émile (1960): Žárné chorály, Czech transl. and edition Jiří Konůpek. Prague: Mladá fronta. Verhaeren, Émile (1962): Básně, Czech transl. Jiří Konůpek/Jan Zábrana. Prague: SNKLU. Vojtěch, Daniel (2008): Vášeň aideál. Na křižovatkách moderny [Passion and Ideal. Crossroads of Modernism]. Prague: Academia. Vrchlický, Jaroslav (1888): Parnas mladé Belgie [Parnasse of the Young Belgium]. – In: Hlas národa 3/64, literary supplement Nedělní listy, non -paged. Vrchlický, Jaroslav (1893): Moderní básníci francouzští [Modern French Poets]. Prague: J. R. Vilímek. Wiendl, Jan (2007): Vizionáři avyznavači [Visionaries and Devotees]. Prague, Podlesí: Dauphin. Zach, Aleš (2008): Slovník českých nakladatelství 1849–1949. URL: https://www.slovnik- -nakladatelstvi.cz/ [12 October 2022]. Zajas, Paweł (2014): Polen, Duitsland, Vlaanderen. Over Eugen Diederichs, Anton Kippenberg en de Poolse vertaler van Georges Eekhoud in de Eerste Wereldoorlog [On Eugen Diederichs, Anton Kippenberg and Georges Eekhoud’sPolish Translator in World War I]. – In: Zacht lawijd 13/3, 286–299. Zweig, Stefan (1909): Báseň Verhaerenova ajejí architektonika [Verhaeren’sPoetry and its Architecture]. Czech transl. Zdeněk Broman. – In: Novina 2/21, 641–645; 2/22, 682–686. Zweig, Stefan (2013 [1910]): Émile Verhaeren. Sa vie, son œuvre. French translation by Paul Morisse and Henri Chervet. Paris: LGF.