Page:Modern and contemporary Czech art (1924).pdf/100

 the threshold of a period which was already beginning to look upon itself as ‘modern’ and the interest it offers is mainly historic, for here we see the meeting of ideas and currents which appear, some for the first, others for the last time”

To-day, it is clear that the Prague National Theatre is the culminating point of the Neo-Renaissance in Bohemia, although, at the time it was built, that style seemed to be preparing for a still more magnificent flight. The enthusiasm of master-builders, the ever-growing number of architects loyal to the Renaissance creed, all seemed to foreshadow for Czech architecture a golden age, which the development of this style seemed certain to ensure. Nevertheless, true inspiration had ended with Zítek. The Bohemian Museum by Schulz in the Wenceslaus Square, despite its happy situation and ample dimensions, cannot hold a candle to the National Theatre; its design is ineffective, the masses are badly arranged, the whole aspect is cold and uninviting.

With Zítek and Schulz, the Renaissance style had become the national one par excellence in Bohemia, and favourable circumstances enabled it to show itself to full advantage. In the workshops of the two masters, as well as in their class-rooms at the two Prague Polytechnics (the Czech and the German) a generation of successors was already springing up, destined to spread the gospel of this more or less official architecture. Moreover there were still some architects influenced now directly by Vienna, now indirectly by Zítek, whose devotion to the Renaissance style they shared. Some, like František Schmoranz, though showing little boldness or originality, did good journeyman-work in the applied arts and in minor architecture. They were as a rule well-versed in theory, and their wide studies led them to borrow from the architecture of other lands in all ages. This eclecticism tended to break up and disperse all unity of style, as was indeed inevitable for purposes of evolution. The