DSpace Kolekce:http://hdl.handle.net/11025/63592024-03-28T21:09:23Z2024-03-28T21:09:23ZDrama and Democracy: An Exploration of Democracy in Arthur Miller's Plays on Pilsen StagesMišterová, Ivonahttp://hdl.handle.net/11025/63752021-09-22T08:35:30Z2011-01-01T00:00:00ZNázev: Drama and Democracy: An Exploration of Democracy in Arthur Miller's Plays on Pilsen Stages
Autoři: Mišterová, Ivona
Abstrakt: The aim of this article is to analyse the rendition of democracy in Miller's plays performed
on Pilsen stages in terms of the signifi cant social and political events and developments in
the second half of the 20th century. Not long after World War II, the formerly tense wartime
atmosphere seemed to come back to life on the stage. To state a particular instance, All My
Sons, produced on September 25, 1948 under the direction of Zdeněk Hofb auer with Ota
Ornest's translation, not only mirrored the wartime era, but, in some respects, also anticipated
the era that was to come. The next production of a play by Miller, A View from the
Bridge, under the direction of Jiří Dalík using Jan Grossman's translation, had its premiere
only in 1962. It was staged during the directorship of Václav Špidla (1959–1963), whose
version of Macbeth (1963) established a short, new theatrical era in Pilsen Theatre. During
Jan Fišer's directorship (1963–1969), two productions of Miller's plays were staged: Incident
at Vichy (1965) and The Crucible (1967). With respect to the socio-political climate,
both interpretations might have anticipated the loosening of the political atmosphere towards
the late 1960s, which was nevertheless disrupted by “normalization”. It is thus
possible to suppose that democracy might have constituted a distinguishing feature of both2011-01-01T00:00:00ZMišterová, IvonaVzpomínky na Šulgiho: obraz proslulého panovníka v mezopotámském písemnictví po pádu III. dynastie urskéVacín, Luděkhttp://hdl.handle.net/11025/63742021-09-22T08:35:30Z2011-01-01T00:00:00ZNázev: Vzpomínky na Šulgiho: obraz proslulého panovníka v mezopotámském písemnictví po pádu III. dynastie urské
Autoři: Vacín, Luděk
Abstrakt: The present paper examines the image of the most illustrious ruler of the Ur III Dynasty
(2012 – 2004 B.C.), Šulgi, in later periods of Mesopotamian history. It deals with all attested
ways in which the memory of some of Šulgi's ideological and military achievements was
preserved. Further, it scrutinizes the contexts in which his name was recalled and attempts
to uncover the purposes to which such an undertaking may have served in later Mesopotamia.
The paper does not examine the numerous royal hymns of Šulgi, although these are
preserved not in Ur III but in Old Babylonian manuscripts, because the present author understands
these texts as a product of the former era, the lack of contemporary copies notwithstanding.
Thus, the article rather focuses on later copies of Šulgi's original royal inscriptions
and letters but above all on his image in post-Ur III literary works such as omens,
chronicles, and a ‘prophecy’, as well as on interesting mentions of Šulgi in the inscriptions
of kings Nebuchadnezzar II and Nabonidus.2011-01-01T00:00:00ZVacín, LuděkŠma Jisra'elTydlitátová, Věrahttp://hdl.handle.net/11025/63732021-09-22T08:35:30Z2011-01-01T00:00:00ZNázev: Šma Jisra'el
Autoři: Tydlitátová, Věra2011-01-01T00:00:00ZTydlitátová, VěraVztah vědy a umění v myšlení Jana PatočkyŠevčík, Milošhttp://hdl.handle.net/11025/63722021-09-22T08:35:30Z2011-01-01T00:00:00ZNázev: Vztah vědy a umění v myšlení Jana Patočky
Autoři: Ševčík, Miloš
Abstrakt: The study follows Jan Patočka's considerations on the mutual relation of science and art
as two important ways of the comprehension of reality. Patočka states that the science
presents the tool of revealing the objective and binding truth and the art is able to reveal
the subjective and individual truth. The art thus presents a corrective of the dominance of
science. However, the art as such emerges only in the time of the dominance of science.
The study stresses that, along these lines, the mutual relations of art and science should
be conceived as dialectical.2011-01-01T00:00:00ZŠevčík, Miloš