Ing. Arch. Jan Kasl architect and former mayor of Prague:
When in 1987, we took part in the last competition for the finishing of The Old Town Hall, personally, it seemed impossible to me not to go back to the historical roots of Kren´s House and not to half close Pařížská Street as well as bring back the original dimension to the space in front of St. Nicolas Church. This effort led to some kind of fitfulness of the proposal. The glassed-in annex of Kren´s House was meant to „close“Pařížská Street, but at the same time it should leave it transparent. And we designed a modern The Marian Column in the axis of a circle which copied the facade of the annex…
Today, after 20 years, I think that it was a mistake and that even a historical trace can change over centuries. If we go back against the current, it leads to picturesqueness and false insincerity. It is good to bear in mind the historical context but at the same time, it is good to respect the new reality. The effort to renew The Marian Column is one of those attempts to renew something that no longer exists – as opposed to Kranner´s Fountain with the statue of Francis I, which was deposited in Lapidarium or Marshal Radecký´s Monument, which has been deposited in Lapidarium until now, there has been nothing left of the The Marian Column with the statue of Virgin Mary so we are only talking about a newly realized historicizing sculpture.
I can regret the wild destruction of religious icons after the First World War, elimination of everything relating to Austro-Hungaria?! or I can, on the other hand, think that the gratitude for Prague not having been seized by the Swedes is misplaced – how would the Czech Kingdom have evolved with Protestantism as the official doctrine? But I don´t see a reason, why Prague should take the path of post-war renewal of Warsaw or German towns, where it was necessary to renew the past because there was no past preserved. Prague, however, is authentic, Prague does not need a pseudo-monument, it can easily afford to build a new modern The Marian Column somewhere else – after all, it is standing under Strahov Monastery. I am not concerned with Catholic or Czech heresy conflicts of interests and I do not want to derogate the Marian cult but I don´t want to create pseudo-history.
Ing. Mgr. Miroslav Poche, the chair of the Infrastructure Committee of Prague City Assembly:
I am afraid that I cannot give a definite answer. I suppose, that there will be an important expert discussion on this topic within the workgroup for revitalization of the Old Town Square, as the location in question is of a great historical significance.
Nonetheless, I agree with the standpoint of the Monument Preservation Section of the City Hall from 1992. Under the given circumstances, I tend to position myself against the return to the Old Town Square, mainly for history-of-art reasons. Due to missing documentation, it is not possible to fully reconstruct the monument. At the same time, it is necessary to take into account the changes which have happened in that area since 1918 and consider carefully, whether the column would still have a place in the square. This question should be also answered by the above mentioned workgroup.
PhDr. Petra Hoftichová, director of the City Gallery Prague
If the question is a clear yes/no question, then my answer is no: The issue of the whole Old Town Square has not been sorted out yet, so it is not appropriate to fill it up with individual things without an overall conception.
However, if eventually the whole square is revitalised, the issue of the Town Hall block will be solved and the return of Krocín´s Fountain might be considered just as the return of the column – after all, even the Hus conception included a column. And thus the square will definitely be nicer than any giant amusement attraction. Yet there is a problem that the square is a natural gathering centre and every sculpture is in fact an obstruction, and there will be a risk of damage. This, however, should be tackled by somebody else. So my answer is: yes, maybe, under some conditions…
Dušan Hejbal, Old Catholic Church bishop:
The Old Catholic Church in the CR has not adopted a standpoint on the matter of the new construction of The Marian Column in the Old Town Square in Prague and I would say that it does not intend to adopt one. I can only express my own view: The Marian Column was built more than 350 years ago to commemorate the protection of Prague from Swedish troupes, so it has nothing to do with the Battle on White Hill and the subsequent forced recatholization. Its destruction in 1918 was a mistake of a disorderly crowd. If I take into consideration, that Master John Hus himself honoured the Virgin Mary, then I see the combination of the monument and The Marian Column as appropriate.
Mgr. Aleš PIŠTORA, press department of Prague Archbishopric:
The return of The Marian Column to the Old Town Square is not our priority, although we would welcome it. However, we would be glad if this happened with the support of the inhabitants of Prague and in an ecumenical context.
Milan Richter, Prague City Councillor for Culture:
It is difficult for me to discuss The Marian Column in the Old town Square, when the arrangement of the whole square has not been sorted out yet. It might be solved by the participants of the competition. In the past proposals, there have been attempts to renew or rather to make use of the place where The Marian Column used to stand. I am not even sure, if, in case that the column is renewed, it should look like the original one. There are some modern sculptures on this topic and it is possible, that similar ones will appeal in some of the proposals for the competition how to renew the Old Town Square. However, my feeling is that it should not be politicians who decide on this matter, although the destruction of the column was a political act. It should be experts – historians of art, urbanists and architects. It should also be added that in June 1992 the Monument Preservation Section issued a binding negative standpoint no. OPP 246/92 from 23rd June 1992, which is still valid and effective and which was not appealed.