Inaugural Address of Dean of the Faculty of Architecture CTU Ladislav Lábus

Dean of the Faculty of Architecture of CTU, Prof. Ladislav Lábus, receiving the decree from the new rector of CTU, Prof. Petr Konvalinka; photo by Jiří Horský

Your Magnificence, esteemed Mr. Minister, magnificent rectors, spectabiles, honorabiles, your excellences, esteemed guests – ladies and gentlemen.

I have the honor of being elected as the Dean of the Faculty of Architecture of CTU and I have also been given the opportunity to speak on behalf of the deans of CTU at this ceremonial inauguration of the new rector of CTU and six out of eight deans of CTU. First and foremost, I would like to thank the previous leadership of the school and the faculties for the fact that we are taking over a consolidated and stable university, which has recently become increasingly established as a top technical university not only in the Czech Republic but also in the context of international European and global standards and criteria.
On this occasion, it is appropriate to emphasize the significance and tradition of our university, which is the alma mater of a large part of the Czech technical intelligentsia, and let us not forget the earlier German technical intelligentsia in the Czech lands, and to remind that we are part of this tradition.
Tradition is not inherited automatically but is adopted and cultivated, otherwise it withers. The meaning of the word tradition is "transmission"; it is not a burdensome weight hindering movement towards the necessary development, but an active process metaphorically resembling an intergenerational relay.
Without knowledge of the past, we cannot orient ourselves in the present, which is a necessary condition for making the right choices in our decisions that impact future developments. Knowledge of the past can thus indirectly influence whether we go down the path of development or, conversely, the path of retardation, caused by misunderstanding the current situation and the blindness invoked by focusing on short-term goals.
Continuity and the ability to connect and develop historical contexts are important values in architecture, the university environment, and society as a whole. In continuity are rooted the qualities of the cultural and civilizational level of the country and its inhabitants, as well as the fundamental values from which further development arises.
In my speech, I would therefore like to initially draw attention to the interconnectedness and various contexts of the history of the Czech Technical University and Charles University, which are closely tied to the Bethlehem Chapel, this cult place for the history of the Kingdom of Bohemia and the Republic. Let us recall some key moments surrounding the founding period of CTU and the preaching of Master Jan Hus in this chapel.
CTU is among the oldest technical universities in Europe, founded in 1707, 307 years ago by a rescript from Emperor Joseph I, but a long 359 years after the founding of Charles University by Emperor Charles IV. The histories of both universities are closely intertwined, build upon one another, and, at certain periods, even overlapped. For instance, at the turn of the 18th and 19th centuries, when our school was incorporated into the structure of Charles University for nearly 30 years before its reincarnation. It was precisely in the Bethlehem Chapel, 300 years before the founding of CTU, that Master Jan Hus served as preacher and rector of the then Prague University from 1402 to 1412.
Behind the stark numbers of historical dates, we often forget the background and atmosphere of that time. The freedom of universities in both the 15th and 18th centuries contrasted with the concept of serfdom, which characterizes this epoch in the rural environment. Both periods, the preaching of Master Jan Hus and the founding of CTU, are also connected by another factor: the tremendous development and truly European level of quality of Czech architecture and construction culture of that time.
In the time of Jan Hus, the appearance of Prague was changed by the pinnacle structures of Gothic architecture, realized by masters such as Peter Parléř and his son Jan, who died in 1406. The then building workshops founded for the technically unique constructions of medieval cathedrals, built over decades and centuries, were a precursor of technical schools and later technical universities.
When CTU was founded in Prague, splendid Baroque architectural and urban constructions were being built, such as the Church of St. Nicholas in the Lesser Town and others. During this period, the most prominent Baroque architects – Kryštof and Kilián Ignác Dienzenhofer and Jan Blažej Santini Aichl and others, as well as the leading sculptors who contributed to the Baroque appearance of the iconic Prague structure – Charles Bridge and other buildings, such as Ferdinand Maxmilián Brokof, Matyáš Bernard Braun, and others – worked here. The pinnacle Gothic and Baroque architecture was characterized by achieving a close intertwining of excellent construction performances – architecture and purely fine arts – such as sculpture and painting.
Gothic cathedrals represented the ultimate "gesamtkunstwerk," but also a "gesamttechnischewerk" of their time. The long-term strategy and continuity of the creative process and realization of cathedrals and other buildings is also remarkable. Charles Bridge is a unique example of gradual and long-term ideological and aesthetic transformation of an engineering structure, built during the founding of Charles University, which, through the addition of sculptures 350 years after the completion of the bridge, precisely during the establishment of CTU, gained a completely new dimension. The journey across the bridge thus became an unforgettable religious, cultural, and social experience, today also a tourist one.
All the aforementioned Baroque buildings and artworks were created as a manifestation of the recatholicization of the Czech lands. Later, we called this creatively enlightened period of Czech history of architecture and art the Dark Age. The term "dark" was often used to describe the medieval period as well.
I mention these paradoxes in the development of our society and culture to emphasize the need for humility in our ambitions to judge the past and present strictly, as well as the need for openness and simultaneously detachment in exploring and evaluating the surrounding world and in creative work. It may be directly related to one of the creative working methods of a scientist, an engineer, or an artist. If you seek the truth as a scientist and researcher, design a machine or a building as an engineer or architect, or uphold democracy as a citizen, you cannot reject the permanent presence of doubt about what you believe. Doubt, conducted in reasonable measure, is a source of living water for sustaining faith and hope and for seeking truth.
I cannot, in this context and in this space, free myself from associations with the preaching of the rector of Charles University, Jan Hus, and his words "truth prevails," which in 1920 found its way onto the flag of the President of the Czechoslovak Republic – by the way, in the same year CTU received its current name – and which in 1989 was transformed by President Václav Havel into the statement "truth and love win over lies and hatred."
When Jan Hus wrote "truth prevails" in 1413, he certainly did not doubt that the same applied to love for God and his neighbor. And the word love is also related to the expressions – hope and faith.
The surprising and even provocative nature of the words "truth prevails" lies in the fact that this statement, at first glance, contradicts experience. In hindsight, truth does indeed prevail, but usually only after years. Its triumph has great inertia because lies have short but quick legs, while truth catches up with you slowly, but perhaps surely.
And thus we have arrived at the reality of the present. This year, we celebrate several significant anniversaries of modern history that have directly or indirectly influenced the environment and the quality of universities and higher education in recent years.
First, I would recall an event from earlier times that, however, latently initiated modern changes. This year marks the 75th anniversary of the closure of Czech universities during the German occupation, as repression for the tumultuous celebrations of the anniversary of the founding of Czechoslovakia on October 28, and subsequently for the funeral of one of the victims, student Jan Opletal, on November 15, 1939.
We are also 25 years away from the Velvet Revolution, which began precisely with the intervention against the student demonstration held on November 17, 1989, which marked the 50th anniversary of the closure of Czech universities. A quarter of a century is a long time, and we should not continue to make excuses for previous misfortunes or absences of freedom. At the same time, we should not forget and be grateful for this fundamental change, for the restoration of freedom of speech, people, society, and the academic environment.
In relation to higher education, however, it was not only about the restoration of academic freedoms and the activities of self-governing bodies of universities and faculties but also about a fundamental change in the concept and intensity of the development of higher education, which had been occurring in Western Europe, North America, and Japan since the early 1970s. Higher education until that time had maintained a so-called "elitist" character; in 1989, only 14% of the population was studying at universities. During the 1990s, with a one-sided support for quantitative indicators for school funding, we transitioned into the so-called "mass" phase of tertiary education, with the goal of reaching a 50% share of the population accepted into the first stages of universities, a goal that had already been surpassed after 2000, and today the number of accepted students is regulated through university funding to approximately two-thirds of the population. This is also related to the efforts implemented in recent years to strengthen qualitative criteria in the evaluation and funding of schools.
This year marks 15 years since our entry into NATO, but two other events from that time had a more immediate impact on universities. In 1999, education ministers from European and other countries agreed on the harmonization of the European area in the field of higher education in the so-called Bologna Declaration, which primarily consisted of dividing higher education studies into three levels – bachelor's, master's, and doctoral. This principle was subsequently vigorously implemented into Czech legislation and, aside from exceptions, was realized in almost all study programs.
Shortly before that, in 1998, a new law on higher education was approved, which opened the opportunity for the establishment of private universities and brought further detachment of state universities from direct state influence – through the establishment of public universities and the transfer of state property, previously only managed by the schools, to these independent entities. The new law also removed the apparently unique power of the components of the university – faculties, which were elevated to independently operating entities by the "Velvet Law" on higher education from 1990. In the mental realm, the independence of faculties at some universities and faculties still survives.
If we want to compare ourselves with the best world universities, we must learn to be one university and not just a loose association or community of faculties. When I speak of the unity of the university in the 21st century, it certainly does not have to be a centrally hierarchically managed model. The modern form of unity can take on a heterogeneous shape corresponding to today’s time, a complexly intertwined matrix of relationships and connections, whose components always act in the spirit of common goals.
This year, we also celebrate ten years since our accession to the European Union, which had, among other things, a direct impact on the structure of some study programs with regulated performance of professions, such as architects, doctors, lawyers, etc.
Mentioning these key changes and the dynamics of development in the pedagogical activities of higher education institutions over the last 25 years would not be comprehensive without mentioning the turbulence in the financing of science, research, and artistic activities. Since the transition to grant systems, long-term research intentions, centers of excellence, etc., etc...
The entry into the EU set the investment roulette into motion for supporting science and research on an unprecedented scale, but initially also into an unprecedented direction, outside the traditional center of science and research in the Czech Republic. Accepting these existing rules of support will cost us a lot of resources and energy in the future. In the area of the development of science and research, fortunately, we are entering a new period of cooperation with the EU, and Prague universities will be able to draw on funds from structural funds as well.

On this occasion, we should also evaluate the rich history of our university, both the Czech and German elements of more than three hundred years of CTU development in Prague, with new European eyes and now with sufficient detachment.
Evaluating this rapid development over the last 25 years can be done from various positions and perspectives. I have already mentioned here that we should avoid the temptations of today’s time and take clear stances. When you realize, with hindsight, the extent, depth, force, and speed of changes in higher education, I find it admirable that we are where we are.
In this environment, with the often-changing basic conditions of activity and preferences of required priorities, it is not easy to be a navigator at the level of deans, let alone rectors. In the long term, the only successful method may be to keep our sensors focused on monitoring long-term goals and enduring values absorbed and dissolved in the hazy environment of the present. In the haze of partial demands and current needs or benefits and gains. Even in the current rapid period of development, universities should continue to uphold the traditional goal of their mission – responsibility for the quality and education of graduates as well as educators and the quality of the results of scientific, research, and artistic activities.
Today’s heterogeneous era is more similar to the diverse little structure of medieval Europe at the time of the founding of Charles University than to the absolutistically governed Europe at the time of CTU's founding. Today’s universities must seek the form of this heterogeneous coexistence of leadership and components as well as external actors, just as the current EU seeks the form of its integrity. It is not pre-given, but we constantly define and modify it to correspond to our commonly shared ideas.
If such a "free" heterogeneous yet uniformly purposefully reacting grouping is to function well, it greatly depends on how and by whom our commonly shared ideas are implemented and realized. It is here that our opinions may differ fundamentally. It is difficult to come to an agreement if we do not come from common roots and do not pursue common goals. It is difficult to come to an agreement if we emphasize what distinguishes us rather than seeking and, in this quarrelsome and scattered time, nurturing and cultivating what unites us.

Thank you for your attention.