Databáze uměleckých výstav v českých zemích 1820 – 1950

The decision to hold a second competition for the curtain and frieze above the proscenium of the National Theatre was made after two curtain designs submitted to the first competition were deemed unsatisfactory. It was announced on February 23, 1879, as reported by newspapers such as Posel z Prahy and Epoche, with a deadline for submissions at the end of May. Because some artists (painters Emanuel Krescenc Liška, Adolf Seifert, and Hanuš Knöchel from Munich) requested an extension, the deadline was postponed to July 15 – this information appeared in Čech on April 22. [Anonymous author 1879a] The thirteen submitted designs were exhibited in the upper rooms of the Žofín Palace from Sunday, July 27, for fourteen days, presumably until August 10.

The competition and exhibition received exceptionally detailed press coverage – extensive discussion of the designs appeared in eight periodicals: Bohemia and Národní listy published articles on July 28, Politik published Vilém Weitenweber’s report on July 30, České noviny published a review on July 31, and a shorter text appeared in Prager Abendblatt on August 2, followed by a longer article in the supplement to Prager Tagblatt on August 5. Světozor published a review on August 8. Renáta Tyršová’s text in Ženské listy did not come out until November 1879.

Since there was no winner in this competition, the participating artists remained anonymous. Only four designs have been identified to date – those by Felix Jenewein (Museum of the City of Prague), Petr Maixner (Museum of Prague and National Gallery Prague), Bartoloměj Hlavín (National Gallery Prague), and presumably Emanuel Krescenc Liška (National Gallery Prague and Museum of Prague). The authorship of the last design is hypothetical; according to Antonín Matějček, Liška claimed authorship of a different design, which he created in Munich in collaboration with Alfred Seifert [Matějček 1954, p. 117]. In the case of the remaining nine designs, the only information about their content and execution comes from the descriptions in the press. The exhibition was divided into three sections, but the designs were installed without an apparent categorization system. Some reviewers wrote about the designs in the order they appeared in the exhibition, while most began with the most interesting designs and ended with the least successful ones.

The most highly rated proposals included the designs marked with a pentagram (described in some reviews as crow's feet or two crossed triangles), an ivy leaf on a palette, and a triangle in a circle (the work of Petr Maixner). The critics all agreed that the design marked with a leaf in a circle depicting the procession of Lada, and the design signed with the letters H. B. were the weakest in the exhibition. The committee specified the required content loosely, envisioning a figural composition that corresponded to the character of the National Theatre and displayed a "patriotic tendency." According to reviewers from Národní listy and České noviny, the artists focused all their attention on this requirement, "forgetting everything else. Thus, we find figures almost everywhere, with no architecture or refreshing landscape scenery. Only rarely is there a bit of ornamentation." [Anonymous author 1879b] Prager Tagblatt offered the sharpest critique of all the designs, noting a fundamental flaw in the overabundance of allegory, "which remains largely unclear, requiring a detailed explanation to make the pictorial representation accessible to the viewer. Wherever one looks, there is an excessive number of figures, mostly from Slavic mythology, Czech legends, and history: genii with and without torches, garlands, wreaths, female figures with lyres, weeping and laughing masks, etc., etc." [Anonymous author 1879c]

Most designs indeed involved complex allegories, personifications of artistic and theatrical forms and genres, national symbols, and historical figures. The compositions often alluded to the notion of revival, the rebirth of the nation, depicted through the return of the muses (the design signed with the harp and star mark), the people collecting money for the new theatre (the V. H. mark), the victory of light over darkness (the red flower mark), and other themes. Based on the mentions in the press, some designs included detailed descriptions of the composition, while in others the descriptions were missing. The editor of Světozor offered an additional perspective, evaluating the designs based on their decorative purpose – he wrote that some of them were beautifully executed, but "too representational." Stylistic comparisons appear only rarely in the reviews. Josef Mánes is mentioned twice as a point of reference: for example, the frieze in the pentagram cipher design is described as "Mánes-Ženíšek-esque." [Anonymous author 1879d] The reviewer from Prager Abendblatt was the only one to make more cosmopolitan comparisons, finding "Titianesque colouring" or "a mood à la Guido Reni or Cabanel" in the most interesting designs. [Anonymous author 1879e]

Overall, the reviewers agreed that despite numerous shortcomings, the competition designs displayed many good ideas and artistic talent, but none could be realized without further modifications. The committee did not meet to assess the designs until October 16, 1880. There was a minor change in its composition when Petr Maixner withdrew (because he wanted to participate in the competition) and Jan Swerts died. At the August 1879 meeting, Josef Vojtěch Hellich and (somewhat controversially) František Ženíšek replaced these two members. The committee's decision to announce a third competition and this time invite only specific artists suggested that the members shared the concerns expressed in the press. This also confirmed that the authors of the designs would not be made public. By the time the new competition was announced, Renáta Tyršová had published an article, in which she stated that "the names of the artists are common knowledge, and we could easily point to them. Almost all of them are the youngest artistic forces." [Tyršová 1879, p. 169] She expressed hope that this difficult task would finally be resolved the second (or third) time around.

Markéta Vondrová

Works Cited

Anonymous author 1879a: Anonymous author, Národní divadlo, Čech XI, 1879, no. 92, 22. 4., p. 3

Anonymous author 1879b: Anonymous author, Výstava konkursních maleb pro oponu Národního divadla, Národní listy XIX, 1879, no. 179, 28. 7., p. 2

Anonymous author 1879c: Anonymous author, Ausstellung von Concurrenzskizzen für den Hauptvorhang des Nationaltheaters im oberen Saale der Sophieninsel, Prager Tagblatt [III], 1879, no. 215, 5. 8., supplement, pp. 7–8

Anonymous author 1879d: Anonymous author, Výstava projektů pro oponu a frýz nad prosceniem Národního divadla, Světozor XIII, 1879, no. 32, 8. 8., pp. 377–378

Anonymous author 1879e: Anonymous author, Skizzenausstellung, Prager Abendblatt [XIII], 1879, 2. 8., p. 2

Matějček 1954: Antonín Matějček, Národní divadlo a jeho výtvarníci, Praha 1954

Tyršová 1879: Renáta Tyršová, Konkurenční návrhy pro oponu divadla národního, Ženské listy VII, 1879, no. 11, 1. 11., pp. 168–170

Further Reading

Anonymous author, Böhm. Nationaltheater, Epoche [II], 1879, no. 53, 23. 2., p. 4

Anonymous author, Národní divadlo, Posel z Prahy [XXIII], 1879, no. 46, 23. 2., p. 3

Anonymous author, Jednatelská zpráva výboru sboru pro zřízení českého národního divadla v Praze, Praha 1880

Roman Prahl, The „Nation for Itself“ in the Curtain for the Czech National Theatre, Umění XLIV, 1996, pp. 520–536

Anonymous author, Die Ausstellung, Prager Tagblatt [III], 1879, no. 205, 26. 7., p. 4

Anonymous author, Výstava konkurenčních prací malířských, České noviny 1879, no. 177, 26. 7., p. 2

Anonymous author, Výstava konkurenčních prací malířských, Čech XI, 1879, no. 170, 28. 7., p. 2

Anonymous author, Výtvarná umění, Světozor XIII, 1879, no. 31, 1. 8., p. 371

Anonymous author, Literatura a umění, Ženské listy VII, 1879, no. 9, p. 133