“You have betrayed us for a little dirty money!” The Prague Spring as seen by primary school teachers

Abstract

This study focuses on the everyday operation of primary schools in Czechoslovakia during the so-called Prague Spring and the subsequent communist political clampdown after the invasion by the Warsaw Pact forces. The authors focus primarily on the experiences of teachers, how events in this complex period affected their professional lives, and how the renewal of totalitarian power was reflected in their work. The research is based on oral history as a method which enabled us to acquire unique knowledge concerning the work and life of teachers in the period under study. Findings from extensive archival research are also an important part of the research. These show that during the Prague Spring, as in Czechoslovak society as a whole, the socio-political climate in primary schools relaxed and communist power weakened, as reflected both in school operation and in-class instruction. After the Warsaw Pact invasion in August 1968, the regime became stricter again in schools and elsewhere (similar to before the onset of the Prague Spring). This was manifested especially in the constant control of teachers’ activities during the Prague Spring, in their persecution, and through the increasing emphasis on ideological aspects of teacher training and pupil formation through instruction.

Keywords:

• Primary school
• Prague Spring
• normalisation
• Czechoslovakia
• oral history

Notes

¹ George A. Kennedy, Quintilian: A Roman Educator and his Quest for the Perfect Orator (London: Sophron, 2013), 13–14. Stanley F. Bonner, Education in Ancient Rome: From the Elder Cato to the Younger Pliny (London: Routledge, 2012), 146–62.

² Kennedy, Quintilian; Bonner, Education in Ancient Rome.

³ See, for example, Hannah Arendt, Origins of Totalitarianism (Lexington: Ulan Press, 2012); Stanislav Balík and Michal Kubát, Teorie a praxe totalitních a autoritativních režimů [Theory and practice of totalitarian and authoritative regimes] (Prague: Dokořán, 2004); Lisa Pine, Education in Nazi Germany (Oxford: Berg, 2010).

⁴ For more details see, for example: Martin Klimke, Jacco Pekelder, and Joachim Scharloth, Between Prague Spring and French May: Opposition and Revolt in Europe, 1960–1980 (New York: Berghahn Books, 2011); Maud Bracke, Which Socialism, Whose Détente? West European Communism and the Czechoslovak Crisis of 1968 (New York: Central European University Press, 2007).

⁵ For more on the topic see, for example: Klimke, Pekelder, and Scharloth, Between Prague Spring and French May; Robert Gildea, “The Long March of Oral History: Around 1968 in France,” Oral History 38, no. 1 (2010): 68–80.

⁶ Contemporary history may be defined – in agreement with many authors – as history whose witnesses are still alive. It therefore spans approximately the most recent 70–80 years. For more details see, for example, Jiří Pešek, Napříč kontinentem soudobých dějin: evropská historiografie po konci studené války [Across the continent of current history: European historiography after the end of the Cold War] (Prague: Argo, 2013). We define the contemporary history of Czech pedagogy and education likewise.

⁷ A good example is, for example, the Hungarian revolution against the Stalinist dictatorship and its violent suppression in 1956 (for details see, for example, Litvan Gyorgy, The Hungarian Revolution of 1956: Reform, Revolt and Repression 1953–1963 (London: Longman, 1996).

⁸ For example, Günter Bischof, Stefan Karner, and Peter Ruggenthaler, The Prague Spring and the Warsaw Pact Invasion of Czechoslovakia in 1968 (Lanham, MD: Lexington Books, 2010); Renée de Nevers, Comrades No More: The Seeds of Political Change in Eastern Europe (London: MIT Press, 2003); Rick Fawn, The Czech Republic: A Nation of Velvet (London: Routledge, 2004); Jan Kavan, “Czechoslovakia 1968: Revolt or Reform? 1968 – A Year of Hope and Non-understanding,” Critique 36, no. 2 (2008): 289–301; Dieter Segert, “An Unexpected Dawn: The Prague Spring and the Mechanism of Change in State Socialism,” Journal of Contemporary Central and Eastern Europe 16, no. 2 (2008): 203–11; Kieran Williams, The Prague Spring and its Aftermath: Czechoslovak Politics, 1968–1970 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997), etc.

⁹ Paulina Bren, The Greengrocer and his TV: The Culture of Communism after the 1968 Prague Spring (New York: Cornell University Press, 2010); Hynek Fajmon, Sovětská okupace Československa a její oběti [Soviet occupation of Czechoslovakia and its victims] (Brno: Centrum pro studium demokracie a kultury, 2005); Karel Boček, Ani gram uranu okupantům! [Not a single gram of uranium for the occupants!] (Prague: Akropolis, 2005).

¹⁰ “The Everyday Life of Primary Schools in the Normalisation Period as Seen by Teachers: Applying Oral History to Research in the History of Contemporary Education” (the project is supported by the Czech Science Foundation, no. 14-05926S).

¹¹ For more on the historiographic approach to “history from below”, see, for example, James Sharpe, “History From Below,” in New Perspectives on Historical Writing, ed. Peter Burke (Cambridge: Polity Press, 1991), 25–41; Eric J. Hobsbawm, “The Revival of Narrative: Some Comments,” in Past and Present 86, no. 1 (1980): 3–8; Alf Lüdtke, “Alltagsgeschichte – ein Bericht von Unterwegs,” Historische Antropologie 11, no. 2 (2003): 278–95.

¹² Miroslav Vaněk and Pavel Mücke, Třetí strana trojúhelníku: teorie a praxe orální historie [The third side of a triangle: theory and practice of oral history] (Prague: FHS UK – ÚSD AV ČR, 2015), 14. For more on oral history see, for example, Lynn Abrams, Oral History Theory (London: Routledge, 2010); Burke, New Perspectives on Historical Writing; Gary McCulloch, The Struggle for the History of Education (New York: Routledge, 2011); Werner Fuchs-Henritz, Biographische Forschung. Eine Einführung in Praxis und Methoden (Opladen/Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, 2000); Philip Gardner, “Oral History in Education: Teacher’s Memory and Teachers’ History,” History of Education: Journal of the History of Education Society 32, no. 2 (2003): 175–88; Donald A. Ritchie, Doing Oral History (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002); Donald A. Ritchie, The Oxford Handbook of Oral History (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011); Paul Thompson, The Voice of the Past: Oral History (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000).

¹³ Recent sources may be unavailable in the Czech Republic due to the Law on Archives and Reporting Service and amendments to some previous laws (No. 499/2004 Sb.), which says in Section 37 (Par. 1): “Only archival materials older than 30 years are available for inspection in archives, unless stipulated otherwise.” For more details see Law No. 499/2004 Sb., on Archives and Reporting Service and amendments to some previous laws, ASPI (Prague: Wolters Kluwer ČR, 2016-02-02). Another reason is that many materials have been disposed of.

¹⁴ Jacques Le Goff, “Later History,” Past and Present 100, no. 1 (1983): 14–28.

¹⁵ The south-east part of the current Czech Republic. The administrative centre was the city of Brno.

¹⁶ There are currently 53 interviews with 37 respondents with a total duration of 74 hours. The interviews were conducted between 2014 and 2016.

¹⁷ The name of this teacher, just like the names of all the other speakers in the text, have been anonymised for ethical reasons. The same holds for names of towns and cities featured in the reports by our respondents.

¹⁸ It is necessary to mention in this context that we have not succeeded in recruiting a respondent who had to leave the teaching profession during Normalisation due to their attitude towards the communist regime. We can only speculate about the reasons for this. Interviews with other witnesses nevertheless suggest that even after a long time has elapsed, remembering some life events can be unpleasant or even painful (see, for example, the interview with a respondent called Nora). Witnesses are therefore reluctant to revisit these times in their lives, let alone cooperate in the research. This is also one of the limitations of oral history as a method, which is very difficult to overcome. However, we need to add here that the goal of our research was to learn about the lives of basic schools and their teachers under Normalisation. For this reason we were looking for witnesses with long-term experience teaching during the Normalisation period.

¹⁹ Our sample population contained orators who had taught in lower basic school (ISCED 1) as well as orators who had taught in higher basic school (ISCED 2) subjects such as mathematics, physics, geography, Czech language and literature, history, music, or Russian.

²⁰ A feature typical of this period were the trumped-up lawsuits in which various, often only alleged, adversaries of the regime or other persons disliked by the regime were taken to court (and sometimes even executed) regardless of their real actions. For more details see, for example, Balázs Szalontai, “Show Trials,” in Encyclopedia of the Cold War, ed. Ruud van Dijk et al. (London: Routledge, 2008), 783–6.

²¹ Zpráva o vývoji, problémech a perspektivách československého školství [Report on the development, problems and perspectives of the Czechoslovak system of education] Národní archiv, fond Ideová komise ÚV KSČ 1969–1971, (sv. 1, ar. j. 1, b. 2 IK 11/1971-nový seznam), f. v. 20.

²² Sylva Sklenářová, Pedagogický institut: Jeden z pokusů o vzdělávání učitelů základních škol (1959–1964) [Pedagogical Institute: one of the attempts to train primary school teachers (1959–1964)] (Ústí nad Orlicí: Oftis, 2010).

²³ For more detail see Jiří Zounek, Michal Šimáně, and Dana Knotová, “Primary School Teachers as a Tool of Secularisation of Society in Communist Czechoslovakia,” History of Education 46, no. 4 (2017): 480–97.

²⁴ Jiří Zounek, Michal Šimáně, and Dana Knotová, “Cesta k učitelství v socialistickém Československu pohledem pamětníků” [The path towards the teaching profession in socialist Czechoslovakia through the eyes of witnesses] Studia paedagogica 21, no. 3 (2016): 131–58.

²⁵ Institutions of higher education focusing primarily on training primary and secondary school teachers.

²⁶ Following the CPCZ rise to power, pedagogical faculties were closed in 1953 (a mere five years after their establishment) and teacher training took place only at secondary schools.

²⁷ The subject involved, for instance, lectures on Marxist philosophy, the history of the individual assemblies of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union and Czechoslovakia, and the origins and development of the international workers’ movement, etc.

²⁸ For more details see, for example: Fawn, The Czech Republic, 18; Bracke, Which Socialism, Whose Détente?, 131.

²⁹ Antonín Novotný, as CPCZ First Secretary and President of the Republic, held at that time the two most important positions, giving him the power to influence CPCZ policies in an important way, unlike, for instance, the prime minister.

³⁰ Fawn, The Czech Republic, 18; Bracke, Which Socialism, Whose Détente?, 131.

³¹ Bracke, Which Socialism, Whose Détente?, 139–43; František Janáček and Jan Moravec, “Mezník i rozcestí reformního hnutí (duben-květen)” [A milestone and a crossroads in the reform movement, April–May], in Československo roku 1968. 1. díl: obrodný proces [Czechoslovakia in 1968, vol. 1, rejuvenation], ed. Václav Kural (Prague: Parta, 1993), 63–110.

³² Fund G 593 KSČ JmK, “Analýza činnosti a vývoje na školách I. a II. cyklu 1965–1969” [Analysis of activities and development in primary and secondary schools] (k. 352), f. 1, Moravský zemský archiv, Brno.

³³ Ibid.

³⁴ The ideological education (and propaganda) also required notice boards in classrooms, usually to document a topical anniversary in the history of communism, or an event related to a communist movement figure (such as the birthday of V.I. Lenin or J.V. Stalin, the anniversary of the Great October Revolution, etc.).

³⁵ Fund G 593 KSČ JmK, “Analýza činnosti” [Analysis of activities], f. 5.

³⁶ Tomáš Garrigue Masaryk was a founding father and first president of the democratic Czechoslovak Republic (1918–38).

³⁷ Fund G 593 KSČ JmK, “Analýza činnosti” [Analysis of activities], f. 7.

³⁸ Secretariat of the Ministry, Ministry of Education Fund (MŠMT) 1967–1992, “Zpráva o celkových výsledcích odborného hodnocení školských pracovníků a o kádrových opatřeních provedených k očistě a k politickému zpevnění orgánů školské správy NV, škol a výchovných zařízení I. a II. cyklu v ČSR za období 1. 9. 1969 do 1. 3. 1971” [Report on the overall results of the professional evaluation of school staff and personnel measures for purposes of the cleansing and political strengthening of school administration bodies …], 1–16, Národní archiv, Prague.

³⁹ Fund G 593 KSČ JmK, “Hodnocení současného stavu konsolidace na školách I. a II. cyklu,” [Evaluation of the current state of consolidation in primary and secondary schools] (k. 352), 6, Moravský zemský archiv, Brno.

⁴⁰ The reason given by the communists was greater cohesion of rural teachers “with creating socialist manufacturing relations in rural areas”, which helped them avoid falling prey to distortions of opinion (ibid., 6). This was, again, a statement typical of the period and commonly found among archival materials evidencing the communist era in general. The historian using materials from this period must therefore approach materials very carefully and treat the information very critically.

⁴¹ For more, see Bischof, Karner, and Ruggenthaler, The Prague Spring; Segert, “An Unexpected Dawn”; Williams, The Prague Spring.

⁴² The summer holiday in Czechoslovakia lasted from 1 July until 31 August. The school year started on 1 September.

⁴³ Originally called Protokol o jednání delegace ČSSR a SSSR [Protocol on the negotiations of Czechoslovak and Soviet delegations].

⁴⁴ For example, Alexander Dubček, Josef Smrkovský, František Kriegel, Oldřich Černík.

⁴⁵ Antonín Benčík and Václav Kural, “Intervence” [Intervention], in Kural, ed., Československo roku 1968, 141–96.

⁴⁶ “Protokol o rozhovorech delegací Svazu sovětských socialistických republik a Československé socialistické republiky” [Protocol on the negotiations of Czechoslovak and Soviet delegations], in ibid., 202.

⁴⁷ For example, by October 1970, 67,147 members (4.5%) of the CPCZ had been expelled and the membership of 259,670 communists (17.2%) was temporarily suspended (for details see Jiří Maňák, “Čistky v Komunistické straně Československa” [Purges in the Communist Party of Czechoslovakia], Sešity Ústavu pro soudobé dějiny AV ČR 28 (1997): 45. A total of 17,966 pedagogical staff were punished in the purges, i.e. nearly 14% of the total number of primary school teachers (Secretariat of the Ministry, “Zpráva o celkových výsledcích odborného hodnocení” [Report on the overall results of the professional evaluation], 5).

⁴⁸ Fund G 593 KSČ JmK, “Hodnocení” [Evaluation], 4.

⁴⁹ Fund G 593 KSČ JmK, “Analýza činnosti” [Analysis of activities], f. 14.

⁵⁰ Fund G 593 KSČ JmK, “Závěrečná zpráva o plnění usnesení vlády č. 213/70 v Jihomoravském kraji” [Final report on fulfilling Government resolution 213/70 in the South Moravia Region] (k. 352), f. 82, Moravský zemský archiv, Brno; Fund G 593 KSČ JmK, “Pokyny k dokončení očisty ve složení aparátu v organizacích přímo řízených odbory školství KNV, NV měst Prahy, Plzeň, Brno, Ostrava a ONV” [Guidelines for completing the cleansing] (k. 352), 2, Moravský zemský archiv, Brno.

⁵¹ Miloš Bárta, “Pokus o záchranu reformního hnutí” [An attempt to save the reform movement], in Československo roku 1968: II. díl: počátky normalizace [Czechoslovakia in 1968, vol. 2, the beginnings of normalization], ed. Miloš Bárta (Prague: Parta, 1993), 16.

⁵² Fund G 593 KSČ JmK, “Závěrečná zpráva o plnění usnesení” [Final report on fulfilling Government resolution 213/70], f. 82.

⁵³ Secretariat of the Ministry, Ministry of Education Fund (MŠMT) 1967–1992, “Přehled o kádrových změnách podle kategorií pedagogických pracovníků na školách I. a II. cyklu v ČSR” [Overview of personnel changes by categories of pedagogical staff in primary and secondary schools in Czechoslovakia], Národní archiv, Prague.

⁵⁴ Ibid.

⁵⁵ Secretariat of the Ministry, “Report on Overall Results of the Professional Evaluation,” 5.

⁵⁶ Fund G 593 KSČ JmK, “Zpráva o celkových výsledcích politicko-odborného hodnocení konsolidace výchovných zařízeních I. a II. cyklu” [Report on overall results of the political and professional evaluation of the consolidation (personnel stocktaking), development in consolidation and achieved results of education and upbringing in schools and educational institutions in primary and secondary schools] (k. 352), f. 190, Moravský zemský archiv, Brno. The document, however, does not state to what extent the teachers were successful. It only states that courts always obeyed the binding statutes.

⁵⁷ Secretariat of the Ministry, Ministry of Education (MŠMT) Fund 1967–1992, “Pokyny pro postup při rozvazování pracovních poměrů s učiteli a jinými školskými pracovníky podle zákoníku práce a zákonného opatření” [Instructions for the procedure of terminating employment relationships with teachers and other educational workers under the Labour Code and statutory measures], č. 99/1969 Sb. (21.11.1969), 1, Národní archiv, Prague.

⁵⁸ Ibid., 1.

⁵⁹ Fund G 593 KSČ JmK, “Pokyny k dokončení očisty” [Guidelines for completing the cleansing], 2.

⁶⁰ Fund G 593 KSČ JmK, “Hodnocení” [Evaluation], 1.

⁶¹ Secretariat of the Ministry, Ministry of Education (MŠMT) Fund 1967–1992, “Rozbor některých aktuálních problémů v oblasti školství – předložení předsednictvu ÚV KSČ” [Analysis of some topical issues in education to be submitted to the Central Committee of the Communist Party], 32, Národní archiv, Prague.

⁶² Ibid., 7.

⁶³ Zápisy o schůzích komise školství a kultury [Minutes of meetings of the Committee for Education and Culture], Fund R 149 KSČ–MV Brno 1949–1989, “Stav politické a kádrové konsolidace, úroveň politicko-výchovné činnosti práce na školách I. a II. cyklu řízených NVmB” [The situation in political and personnel consolidation, level of political and educational activities in primary and secondary schools] (kart. 6), Archiv města Brna, Brno.

⁶⁴ Ibid. See note 34 above.