MASARYK UNIVERSITY BRNO FACULTY OF EDUCATION
Department of English Language and Literature The citizens of the „Podluží” district fighting in the RAF, study of literature and oral history Bachelor Thesis Brno 2007 Supervisor: PhDr. Pavel Doležel, CSc. Written by: Svatoslava Tomanová 2 Declaration:
I declare that I have written my bachelor thesis myself and used only the sources listed in the enclosed bibliography. I agree with this bachelor thesis being deposited in the Library of the Faculty of Education at the Masaryk University and with its being made available for academic purposes. 8. 8. 2007 Svatoslava Tomanová …………………………………….. ……………………………………….. 3
Acknowledgements :
I would like to express my thanks to PhDr. Pavel Doležel, CSc. I am grateful for his guidance and professional advice on writing the thesis. I would like to express my thanks also to my father for his granted experience. 4 Table of contents Introduction…………………………………………………………….p. 5 1. Podluží………………………………………………………………p. 7 1.1 Rudolf Bolfík……………………………………………………p. 9 1.2 Vladimír Sobotka……………………………………………….p. 18 1.3 Josef Geier……………………………………………………....p. 23 1.4 Pavel Dřevěný…………………………………………………..p. 27 1.5 Josef Taláb………………………………………………………p. 30 1.6 Štěpán Štětka …….…………………………………………….p. 33 2. From the History of the RAF………………………………………...p. 39 3. Conclusion……………………………………………………………p. 42 Bibliography………………………………………………………….p. 47 Resume……………………………………………………………….p. 51 Table of photographs, copies of documents, maps……………………..p. 53 Appendix 5 Introduction The reason why I decided to write about Czechoslovak pilots fighting in the RAF during the World War II was quite simple. For a long time during my life I learnt about the events of WWII in two ways, at school and at home from my parents and grandparents, but information that I got at home was quite different. I realised early on that there were two war fronts; people were fighting against Germany and its allies in the east and also in the west. I remember from my childhood that teachers at school spoke about heroes, brave soldiers and volunteers fighting in the Red Army. There were many films about the heroism of Soviet soldiers and about our people who helped them. At the same time I listened to stories about people from our village who fought with western Allies. Later my parents and grandparents told me more about people who did not hesitate to risk their lives and who collaborated with the Resistance, with Czechoslovak government in Great Britain and with those who fought abroad, e.g. in France and Great Britain. Very close friends of my parents were members of the resistance group “Clay Eva” and I did not understand why my parents were not too willing to speak about them. My father was interested in the fate of people from our village. He collected information about locals who left the village and lived, worked or fought abroad. Among them were some very interesting, talented, and brave men and women. From time to time some of his articles about these people would be published in magazines or newspapers, but only about those who were dead. Over the course of time I understood why it was not possible to commemorate the heroism of some people fighting against fascism, and why it was not possible to admire and appreciate the heroism of those who fought alongside the western Allies. The new regime did not consider their merits worth mentioning. Now I am an adult and I have learnt about injustices, and about the perception that people who were fighting from the west were branded as traitors. Those who fought for our freedom were arrested and spent many years in jail. Nothing can justify such travesty. We must tell their stories again and again. I hope that the heroism of ordinary people, whose relatives still live among us, can be a lesson for us all. I think that we are more affected by the deeds of real people who were grandfathers, uncles or brothers of somebody we know, somebody who lives in our village or neighbouring villages. Our children admire fictitious heroes from science fiction films. They are too far from real human qualities such as bravery, courage, and reliability. This new generation of children lives in a cyber world and it is our task to bring them back to reality, to teach them to appreciate real values and virtue. 6 A study of the literature concerning the topic brought a problem arising from differences in objectivity of the literature. My work is intended to evaluate articles of a regional and non fictional character (my main source), narratives and contemporary accounts of the events and literature influenced by censorship during the era of socialism in Czechoslovakia. I am going to discuss whether or not articles of a regional character are restricted to a local use, whether mere facts are sufficiently understandable for the young generation. I will try to approach the subject of non fiction literature from a practical viewpoint and explain my tendency to use non fiction literature as a basic resource for didactically orientated work. I also plan to devote attention to the attractiveness of the mentioned literature, the validity of the information, and the usefulness or correspondence of the author’s comments with described events. Another task of my thesis is to judge the contribution of this literature to better understanding the past and to bring attention to information that can be misleading. The aim of this thesis is to deal with aspects of the literature that are suitable or, on the contrary, unsuitable for the aforementioned purposes. The main task is to show what kind of literature is a source of reliable information and can be used didactically. The main aims of the work: 1. To compare non fiction literature and literature that cannot be considered non fiction. 2. To judge the advantages and disadvantages of non fiction and regional literature for didactic purposes. 3. To pass judgement on the quality of sources and access to them. 4. To consider the possibility of making material more attractive for the younger generation and to find a way of integrating regional history with teaching language and other school subjects. 5. To think about technical support and new didactic methods along with traditional teaching in the context of the focused subject. 7 1. Podluží. The birthplaces of the men whose fate is recorded in this work are concentrated in a small district called “Podluží” situated in a fertile valley of the Morava and Dyje rivers. The place is one of the most beautiful parts of the Czech Republic in the southernmost tip of the country, bordering Austria and Slovakia. The location of the district is valued not only for fertile soil but for the fact that it is in the neighbourhood of Austria and Slovakia. Much of the countryside is flat, with a warm climate. Thanks to very good conditions, there is a highly developed agriculture, specialising in the cultivation of vines, sugar beet, maize, vegetables, and fruit trees, especially peach, apricot or cherry trees. This part of the country is sometimes referred to as “painted” because of its folk traditions. The beautiful countryside and picturesque folk architecture complement one another. Visitors can enjoy entrancing views of colourful meadows, and beautiful floodplain forests with nesting places of storks and herons. They can admire the beauty of folk costumes, music, painted chapels, vicarages, village council buildings, old houses and wine cellars. Folk feasts with enchanting music and young men and women in charming folk costumes, festivals, celebrations, competitions in folk music and dance have a long tradition here. Crafts are inherited from ancestors. The people of “Podluží” are not only handy and industrious, but they are also hearty, spontaneous, and hospitable. Archaeological excavations here prove the long past existence of a powerful empire from the 9 th century. People from this region are very proud of their ancestors and cultural heritage. Czechoslovakia became independent after WWI. At long last people had their own democratic state. It was prosperous and civilized, and valued its happy way of life. Young people were brought up to be patriots, to love their country, to be proud, virtuous, courageous and honest. The inhabitants of the district, as well as the inhabitants of the whole country, were prepared to defend their homes and newfound freedom. It is apparent that German aggression during WWI was forgotten by Europe because Germany was allowed to be a member in the League against aggression after WWI, but it was not forgotten by the Czech families who had lost their sons and fathers in this war. Bad memories of the war were still alive. People of the district of Podluží were aware of their powerful neighbour, the formerly superior Austria. New anxiety about the future came as a result of Hitler’s claims to Czechoslovak territory and the fatal agreement made at Munich between Chamberlain and 8 Hitler to hand over the Sudetenland to Germany. It was a great disappointment for people in all parts of the Czech Republic, including the citizens of the district of Podluží. Czech soldiers had to leave the fortresses that they had decided to protect from the enemy. According to witnesses, they went with their fists clenched and with tears in their eyes. At the time when Hitler’s activities led to the formation of an Alliance against him, many Czech people were in the Resistance, an organization that secretly fought against the enemy. Many of them left the country and underwent a stressful journey through many countries to join France or England and to help defeat Germany on this side of front. Among them also were men of the district mentioned above. What was the real reason for making a decision to leave this magnificent piece of land and go to fight somewhere abroad? What kind of sources can give us the right answer to this question? And here comes the first task: to investigate literature and documents written by contemporaries or participants in the events of WWII. The analysis is based mainly on a comparison of the articles written by a local chronicler Svatopluk Rutar and a book written by one of the pilots of the RAF, Vincenc Kocman. We can suppose that authors living in the period of history in focus will provide exact and true information. The articles of Svatopluk Rutar do not deal with detailed description of the situation; only necessary facts concerning the activities of the main characters are used. No comments are included. As far as the description of the political situation during the war period is concerned, we find that the introduction of Vincenc Kocman’s book, written by Ota Falta, presents information that cannot be used due to its evident inaccuracy and falsity. By rough comparison with a highly objective book The Origins of the Second World War written by A.J.P. Taylor, we can come to the conclusion that his description of the political situation is absolutely unacceptable and is in disagreement with the facts. The author of this introduction (Ota Falta) criticised the USA, Britain and France for agreements and concessions made to Hitler, but he obviously omitted the negotiations between Hitler and Stalin. The Soviet Union according to him represents a positive hero, without any mistakes, without any attempts to control other countries. These statements and other discrepancies between political propaganda and fact are the serious obstacles to using this book for didactic purposes, even though it is directed chiefly towards the young reader. Vincenc Kocman, however, was an outright participant in the events and we can postulate that his memories are valuable for their immediacy. It is this hypothesis that is the subject of further investigation. 9 1.1 Rudolf Bolfík “A sensible young man, loving virtue and truth, hating violence in this way Rudolf was known among friends in his native village of Mikulčice and also according to witnesses from his fellow soldiers from Spain or even from Squadron 311 in Great Britain.” (Rutar 306) The author considered it important to mention opinions on the character features of Rudolph Bolfík expressed by inhabitants of his native village and by his friends. This means that Rudolf was evidently a man of high moral character. We can see that his character was not formed only during war time, but, without a doubt, that his qualities were the result of his upbringing. “Members of the International Brigade undertook the hard school of communist education. They went out from all fights and every painful harm or disappointment unbeaten… in spite of their small number, their share of the final victory was big.” (Kocman 146) Here Vincenc Kocman generalized and promoted members of International Brigade – from Communists to the best fighters against fascism. This is a rather problematic statement considering the millions of people who fought against Germany. Rudolph Bolfík fought in Spain thanks to the International Brigade, and yet he we cannot actually prove that he was a Communist; his concealed membership of the Communist Party since his stay in France was only mentioned by a later writer Petr Radosta. “Rudolph Bolfík was born on 13 March 1913 in Mikučice near Hodonín. He was apprenticed as a mechanic electrician. He loved engines and this is the reason why he entered the school for pilot specialists in Prostějov. After leaving the school he continued at the NCO school in Milovice and on 1 October he was directed to the 82 nd wing of the 5 th air regiment in Prague Kbely. From 1 October 1934 he became an air mechanic of the 1 st class and an air gunner. In 1935, on 1 April he ended his military service because of his mother insisting it.” (Rutar 306) From the abovementioned note about Rudolph’s mother we can deduce that she worried about her son. His parents were not too ambitious for their sons, they preferred living together, and they wished only that their son Rudolph would get a permanent job in the state service. 10 “Rudolph was not able to find any adequate work at home; he was helping his parents working in the fields. A great desire to help oppressed people forced him to leave the country. His friend Soběslavský mentioned his participation in the fight of the Abyssinians against Italian fascists, but it is not sufficiently proved. On the other hand, information about his journey to Spain is sufficient. On 27 May 1937 he got to the borders of France through Austria and Switzerland, but he didn’t manage to cross the borders and he came back to Prague. His new job as a policeman, which his father found for him, did not satisfy him. He refused to act against striking workers and he left the position.” (Rutar 306) There is no evidence referring to Rudolph’s link to the Communist Party in this part of his life, though we must surely see that Rudolph felt for suffering people and that he experienced sympathy with the working class fighting for better living conditions. He was young and his sense for justice was strong. Maybe the true motivation for his decision to leave home was simply a desire to change his quiet way of life in the village and to rise to the challenge of helping other people. “In the autumn of 1937 he illegally entered Austria. He intended to get to Spain where he wanted to fight against fascist forces headed by Franco. But he was detained in Switzerland and repatriated. He was sentenced to two month imprisonment by a military court. They demoted him to the rank of a private. Before Easter 1938 he came back home. But his father had lost all respect for him. So Rudolph decided for the third time ‘to find the way to Spain’. The Communist Party organised help for Spain, and so Rudolph could finally get to France and then to Spain along with other members of the International Brigade. In Cambril near Taragona new formations were made and Rudolph Bolfík was put into the troop led by Alois Soběslavský. Later the troop was expanded to a company of 130 men.” (Rutar 306) The interesting finding is that Vincenc Kocman never mentioned Bolfík in his book, though we know from Rudolph’s letters that they were friends and that they both fought in Spain. “In August the 129 th International Brigade participated in fights near Gandesa at the Aragon Iberico front. Soldiers of the International Brigade faced the fascist army, superior in numbers and equipment. During one of the attacks some fascists got into the trench and Rudolph was wounded and his fellow soldiers had to withdraw. Though seriously injured, Rudolph crawled to safety to his friends during the night. He was transported to hospital in 11 Vichy where he was cured, staying there untill 26 October 1938. In the fights by the river Ebro most of the soldiers died and only 30 men survived. On 28 October 1938 the International Brigade was dissolved. Some of the men, including Rudolph Bolfík, remained in Spain to defend Barcelona. Defending the city, his friend Pavel Antoš from Rohatec perished on 2 February 1939.” (Rutar 306) Vincenc Kocman described the situation in Spain in this way: “The army’s system of supply was absolutely paralysed. Soldiers were starving. There was no other possibility than to withdraw to the borders of France, join the refugees and wait with them for the forthcoming events.” (Kocman 19) Some of the men remained to defend Barcelona (Rudolph Bolfík being among them) even after the dissolution of the International Brigade. In spite of the fact that they remained there, willing to sacrifice their lives for Spain, Vincenc Kocman did not write a word about them. “At the end of the year of 1939 Bolfík with the last soldiers and some Spanish Republicans left Spain for France. Three refugee camps were prepared for thousands of soldiers and French refugees. Our soldiers of the International Brigade were concentrated in Saint Cyprien and in Argeles sur Mér, where Rudolph Bolfík was placed. Living conditions in the camps were very bad due to the lack of food, spreading illnesses etc. Only after twelve days were the captive soldiers and refugees supplied with food.” (Rutar 306) Rudolph Bolfík wrote in his letter without any pathos “I was in a difficult situation; I was in a concentration camp from my arrival in France untill December…” In the same article written by Svatopluk Rutar, two of the members of the International Brigade Šimaček and Vláčil remembered Rudolph as a very honest and reliable man who had the best personal qualities. Vláčil mentioned his collaboration in an illegal camp committee. (Rutar 1983, 4) On the contrary, Vincenc Kocman (43 50) devoted a large part of his book to writing about conditions in the camp, and he provided readers with detailed information. Thanks to him we can imagine how hard and oppressive the situation in the camp was. The plain was without any shelter from bad weather, open to strong wind and sand, and was full of starving people. The lack of food, drinkable water, and sanitary facilities led to the spread of illnesses such as typhus, scabies and other very serious diseases. Kocman criticised the bad organisation of the food supply system. He accused the French government of treating refugees as if they were ‘dangerous political elements’ and of planning to separate them from 12 the rest of the world. To some extent, this was true, because western democracies were apprehensive about strengthening the communist movement. (Kocman 43 44) We must admire all those who were able to survive in the camp. Furthermore they were able to help others and to improve conditions there. According to Vincenc Kocman such men solely constituted from the International Brigade. He was very critical and suspicious of anyone who was not a Communist or a supporter of the international proletarian movement. He accused Czechoslovak officers of bad intentions and immoral acts. Kocman considered the gesture of reconciliation (made by the Czechoslovak colonel Osuský), attempting to get Czechoslovak soldiers from the camp, insufficient and insincere. Kocman wrote without any respect about Dr. E. Beneš and his letter for the members of International Brigade sent to France. Summing up, reputation was evidently more important for communists than any alliance with other anti fascistic movements. “At the beginning of May Czech soldiers moved to a new camp near the Pyrenees to the district of Pau near Orolon. The camp was named after the neighbouring village of Gurs. All 570 Czech soldiers were accommodated in one part of the camp. Rudolph took part in the organization of camp activities. He organized sport competitions and entertainment programmes and he attended the camp school.” (Rutar 307) Rudolph Bolfík never complained about the stay in this camp in his letters, though the conditions must have been very bad. We can deduce either that he was well prepared to bear all difficulties or that he could not write about details in his letters because of censorship. During the stay there he was told about the death of his father. (Rutar 1983, 3) “When young men were recruited into the Czechoslovak army abroad, Bolfík was registered among the very first. On 18 December 1939 he was enlisted and on 20 December he presented himself at the reserve formation in Agde near Montpellier.”(Rutar 307) Thanks to the very critical description (made by Kocman) of the new army camp, we have a very vivid picture of life in the camp. Vincenc Kocman compared conditions in the camp to conditions in a concentration camp and found them the same. Accommodation in barracks was bad, uniforms uncomfortable and comical, officers strict and hostile to communists. (Kocman 52) It is very hard to separate trustworthy facts from subjective assessments. To what extent can readers believe that everything was exactly as Kocman described? It is obvious that relations between communists and other participants in the resistance were influenced by the evident hostility of the communists towards everybody who had different ideas about the 13 social organisation of society. Two whole chapters (7 and 8) are devoted to the main task of the Communists – fighting against other members of the Resistance. Kocman presents commanders as incapable, unfair and hostile towards members of the International Brigade, especially the Communists. Kocman stated that all diplomatic efforts to unite soldiers against their common enemy Germany and fascism were an attack on members of the International Brigade and the Communists. Readers of his book must surely recognise that behaviour of the Communists was rather incomprehensible in a wartime situation. “Rudolph Bolfík and his friend Vincenc Kocman were directed to the air forces as pilots. “When I came to Agde a month later, I found Bolfík in the air force group but still without aeroplanes. They were wearing air force uniforms, but they were not allowed to fly,” remembers Alois Soběslavský.” (Rutar 307) “…the order came; they commanded me to join the air force group in Agde. Maybe some friends of mine in the group called attention to the fact that I had trained as a pilot…My political mentor persuaded me that it was necessary to go there because there were no ‘Spainers’ (those who had fought in Spain)… I promised my former commander from Spain that I would be an example of ‘a Spainer – Communist’ even in the air force group.” (Kocman 62 63) Unlike Rudolph Bolfík, Kocman never named his friends, his companions from Spain in his book. What was his reason for doing this? Rudolph Bolfík wrote that he came to the air force with ‘his friend’ Vincenc Kocman. But Kocman denied the presence of any fighters from Spain among the pilots at that time. Such treatment of the facts makes readers distrustful. On the other hand, Kocman did not omit the chance to name a warrant officer in charge: Kamenický. Kocman called him a traitor to the members of the International Brigade and wrote how urgent was to inform members of the air force group about Kamenický and his fascist thinking. The evidence for his statement was that Kamenický had articles from protectorate magazines placed on the walls of the office. (Kocman 63) Can we accept such an accusation without any doubts? “On 7 March 1940 we pledged allegiance to our country in front of General Ingr. We are many here who have decided to sacrifice our lives,” Bolfík writes in a letter to his friend. (Rutar 307) Svatopluk Rutar manages to express Rudolph’s attitude to his role in the war by using just two sentences from his letter. 14 “On 12 th April the air force group organised entertainment for the soldiers in Agde. Only on 1 July was Rudolph placed in the 1 st squadron of the French fighter air force in Chartres, south west of Paris.” (Rutar 1983, 4) The impatience of the pilots whenever there was a delay in giving them a chance to fight is expressed very simply here – by dates. It is a short but sufficient way of expressing pilots’ feelings. The political background is too wide a topic for a short article; further explanation can be added for a didactic use. As usual, Vincenc Kocman described the life among pilots very critically. A detailed account of the environment, conditions, and uniforms is debased by focussed attention on the mistakes of commanders, their hostility towards members of the International Brigade, persecution of Communists and injustice. The staff of the camp were suspected by the Communists of wanting to abuse Czech soldiers by sending them against the Soviet Union in Finland. (Kocman 64 70) Kocman did not present any concrete proof for such a statement. The information that “Spainers launched a campaign and asked to be sent to the war front against German fascism” (Kocman 71) sounds rather comical. From this part of the book the reader could get the impression that France considered the danger of communist ideology more important than Hitler and his expansionism. This hesitation to take the offensive against Germany was criticised by many people – soldiers, citizens, politicians, among them by E. Beneš. According to Kocman, the members of the International Brigade and the Communists were the only ones who were enlightened and able to make the right decisions and fight against fascism. “But the enemy seized control of Paris on 14 June 1940, and on 22 June the government headed by marshal Pétain, made a treaty with Germany. Rudolph Bolfík left France in the transport of a chief of staff E. Bušina. They left the port of Port Vendres on 29 June. Their ship sailed through Gibraltar and landed on the shores of Africa at Casablanca. Then turning to the north, it went to England. On 7 July the ship reached Liverpool.” (Rutar 1983, 4) Svatopluk Rutar omitted information about the invitation of the pilots by English people, and the course of events concerning the temporary accommodation of pilots and other refugees from France. Vincenc Kocman provided a detailed account accompanied by his usual criticism of unequal treatment for common soldiers and commanders. Maybe, we can accept his description of the contacts with British inhabitants. 15 “The Czech airmen were concentrated at the Czech air force depot at Cosford near Wolverhampton. They got uniforms and began training. On 26 July they pledged allegiance to Czech President and later to the King of Britain. On 29 July they were transported to the largest bomber airport at Honington in Norfolk.” (Rutar 309) For the first time Vincenc Kocman praised the commanders of the western army allies. “Instructors did not shout to soldiers. Quiet commands were made in no hurry, with a patience and politeness which had a good influence on training, and also on discipline and morale.” (Kocman 94) “On 2 August 1940 they became members of the bomber Squadron 311 of the Royal Air Force. Rudolph and other airmen were sorted into courses according to the position they were to serve in. Rudolph was set to practising on shooting just in Honington. On 18 August he was ranked as a sergeant of the RAF.” (Rutar 309) “On 16 September the bomber squadron was moved to the airfield in East Wrentham near Thetford. The East Wrentham airfield was hurriedly brought into service during the early years of WWII with No. 311 Czech Squadron transferring from RAF Honington on 29 July 1940. The squadron operated from the airfield until April 1942.“ (Royal Air Force 2001) “The division of the pilots into groups, troops, wings and staff made by the inspectorate showed evidently their class and the political structure. Fighter pilots were mostly of proletarian and rural origins.” (Kocman 101) Confirmation of this information is, of course, very problematic and the question at hand is whether it was really possible to deduce such information by observation alone. We can appreciate the exact description of the environment, equipment and operations of the fighter and bomber wings in the book of Vincenc Kocman. We must admit that some of his critical notes were correct, but his continual criticism and his constant attacks upon everybody who was a political opponent degrades the book and makes it tiresome and too subjective. “Rudolph Bolfík was commissioned as a Flight Sergeant on 28 October 1940. He began operating in renewed fights on 9 December 1940. After Christmas the squadron was given a command to attack the harbour in Wilhelmshaven which was defended with very strong anti aircraft weapons and protected by batteries of searchlights. German fighters were continuously guarding over the harbour. After one of the operational flights to this port on 16 January 1941, the crew of Flight Lieutenant Antonín Kubizňák did not come back. They realized the attack on the port, but Flight Lieutenant Antonín Kubizňák, Warrant Officer Bohumil Baumruk, a pilot, Flight Sergeant Rudolph Bolfík, a front air gunner, Pilot Officer 16 Jindřich Leskauer and Pilot Officer Jaromír Král died on their way back to the airfield. Their last SOS was recorded at 10.18 p.m. and the fighter was only 35 km off the British coast.” (Rutar 309) The factual account of the story of the Czech pilot Rudolph Bolfík written by Svatopluk Rutar is the proper way of recording all the important events and moments of his life. It is the suitable way to commemorate this hero in local magazines or newspapers. However, literature for the young readers asks for something more. Vivid narratives, direct speech, a reconstruction of the situations based on true facts, a high level of objectivity – these features were not found even in the book written by Vincenc Kocman. In contrast to this book, the narrative written by the later author Petr Radosta, is more vivid. Petr Radosta was not an outright participant in the events; he collected information from various sources, including some commanders and pilots of the Czech Wings of the RAF. Though the book was written during the period when Czechoslovakia was under the control of the Communist Party, the author attempted to be more objective. This was a probable cause of a prohibition on its being published. To make a comparison, I present here a shortened extract from the book ‘ Nights over Germany’ by Petr Radosta: On that day, l6 January 1941, the aircraft that took off the fifth in line in the group of five Wellingtons never came back to the base. Thanks to the report of Doctor Jan Geller, a Canadian of Czech origin, who flew his first operational flight as a radio operator and was able to hear the last talk of the crew of the Wellington KX Y, it was possible to reconstruct the last minutes of the brave men in the Wellington… The Wellington KX Y was just on his way back from a successful bombing operation in Wilhelmshaven when the back gunner Rudolph Bolfík suddenly reported: “An unknown aircraft behind us!” The six men changed into a personified concentration. Their survival was dependant on every man, on their team work, on steel nerves, but also on a piece of a fortune. “Rudolph I understand” calmly answered the skilled and experienced Kubizňák… “It is a Messerschmidt 110” announced Bolfík. “Follow it! Keep your eyes on it!” This was the main condition of their successful manoeuvring and victory. Kubizňák could not be any prouder of his crew… Bolfík was respected by the other men, he was the oldest 17 and the most experienced and he was a reliable man… After the next attack the Messerschmitt was struck but also one of the engines of the Wellington was hit and stopped working. The Wellington, flying only with one engine, had little chance of reaching the coast of Britain. In the cockpit of the Messerschmitt there was a Flying Officer Egmont princ zur Lippe Weissenfeld, later one of the most successful night fighters. He was young and ambitious and he later stated that he could not give up fighting. It could be considered non realisation of the command, disobedience or cowardice. Another attack damaged the British aircraft and caused light injury to some men. But the last combat was uneven. Bolfík fought bravely but his machine guns were not sufficient against the cannons of the German fighter. According to the report of the prince zur Lippe Weissenfeld, after the second engine of the Wellington was struck, it turned upside down and, burning, it fell down into the sea water… When Pilot Lieutenant Kubizňák announced that the aircraft was flying with only one engine, it was 21:39. At the time of the second reported attack, at 22:18, the aircraft was located about 35 miles off the eastern coast of England. During the night between 16 and 17 January there was a big snow storm and the sea surged and thus it was not possible to send a rescue aircraft or a boat to safe the crew of the Wellington KX Y. The bad weather improved only after three day and it was too late to search for the lost airmen. (Radosta Petr) This reconstruction of the last fighting operation, created on the basis of truthful records and witnessed by the radio operator, is very valuable. The character of the situation eliminates any possibility of misleading or subjective comments. There is no space for speculation and that is why I consider such parts of the book a suitable complement to non fictional literature used for didactic purposes. “On 6 March 1941 Rudolph Bolfík was posthumously awarded a medal For Bravery and in 1946 he was promoted to Warrant Officer and was awarded the Czechoslovak War Cross from 1939 and on 11 November 1949 he got posthumously The Gold Star of the Czechoslovak Military Order for his participation in the Resistance and the fight for freedom.” (Rutar 309) 18 “The names of 25,000 members of the RAF whose graves are unknown can be found on the marble columns of the memorial to those who died. At Runnymede near the Windsor Palace, on column No. 39 there is also the name of a native to Mikulčice, Rudolph Bolfík, and his fellows of the Wellington KX Y 2519’ crew…” (Rutar 309) Svatopluk Rutar could not mention the fact that an idea of the inhabitants of Mikulčice to place a commemorative plaque on the school building was not realised. During the preparations an official prohibition was announced. The only reason was that Bolfík had worked as a policeman. Several months in this service (which was his father’s wish) were considered by the political forces of the time to be a serious obstacle to the appreciation of his later heroic deeds. “Our members of the International Brigade after their return to their native country joined together in building of a new society… The Communist Party knew that these fighters were of a high moral character and that were reliable…” (Kocman 146) Can we believe this statement after historical experience of the years after WWII? 1.2 Vladimír Sobotka “Vladimír Sobotka was born in Moravská Nová Ves immediately before the beginning of World War I on 11 April 1914. He was the first son of Joseph Sobotka and his wife Maria. Vladimir attended the school in Lanžhot and was apprenticed to a colonial goods trader. Meanwhile his father moved to Březová where he hired a mill. Vladimír went to his father and helped him in the mill. In 1936 Vladimír got married to Maria Čechová from Hrušky. The family moved to Moravské Lieskové where Joseph Sobotka built a new mill.” (Rutar 4) This article begins with basic data from the curriculum vitae of Vladimír Sobotka, which is not only an obligatory element of remembrance articles, but is also an important element of regional writing that is directed chiefly towards local readers, descendants and their relatives. It is obvious that the local inhabitants and even some pupils at school showed an interest in the history of their village and their ancestors and one of the tasks of teachers is to keep and support this phenomenon even though that it appears increasingly difficult. “The agreement made in Munich and the occupation of the Czechoslovak borderland brought Vladimír Sobotka back to Moravia. He worked in the mill of Jan Vrána in Moravská 19 Nová Ves for some time, but later he went back to Kopanice and rented a mill there. He joined in with illegal activities and he helped Czech patriots that Germans were chasing to cross the borders into Slovakia. When he heard that the Gestapo were trying to obtain information about him, he left for Moravská Nová Ves. The Gestapo searched for him in Březová and that was the reason why he decided to leave the Protectorate. On l March 1940 he crossed the river of Morava at Lanžhot and from Slovakia he hurried to Hungary. He was captured and transported to prison in Nitra. He managed to escape and to cross the border into Hungary. In Budapest he sought out the French Embassy where he applied for documents and then he travelled to France, through Yugoslavia, Greece, Syria and the Mediterranean Sea.” (Rutar 4) A review of the historical background is evidently missing in this article. Only factual notes link the story with the historical context. The author presupposes common knowledge of this historical period. Nevertheless, the interested readers or skilled teachers would be able to supplement the text by further reliable information . “By 6 May 1940 Vladimír Sobotka was already present at the Czechoslovak Army base in Agde near Montpellier on the coast of the Mediterranean Sea. Directed to an air force group, pilots only undertook just basic training and guarding service here.” (Rutar 4) “On 7 June Vladimír was transferred to the base at Bordeaux Merignac, where a certain number of pilots had already been moved to from Agde. All the pilots were building an air raid shelter and doing guard duty at the nearby aerodrome. When Vladimír arrived there, pilots were accommodated in a poultry farm and they were working hard at clearing for the preparation of a new airfield. But their work remained unfinished.” (Rutar 4) The author does not attach any significance to the situation and the work the pilots were entrusted with at Bordeaux Merignac. It was, of course, a common thing that even specialised soldiers had to dig trenches. Nevertheless, we can understand their disappointment that instead of receiving a basic pilot training they had to work hard making trenches and shelter. But it is a rather naïve and subjective explanation given by Vincenc Kocman that the work was punishment for their friendship with the Senegalese soldiers. (Kocman 74) The Czech soldiers were probably considered the most suitable for the work of making trenches because although they had not been trained as pilots yet, they were industrious and good workers. “France made a treaty with Germany and the pilots had to evacuate to Great Britain. On 19 June they were transported by truck to the port of Bordeaux where they looked for a 20 ship that would take them to England. Vincenc Kocman found a Spanish soldier of the International Brigade on one of the ships. The soldier persuaded the captain of the ship to take the pilots and the other soldiers to England. A shabby old steamer, which usually carried coal, left the coast of France with 280 Czechs and Poles on the board just in time, because the Germans started to attack the ships anchored at the port. The steamer sailed far out into the Atlantic Ocean to avoid the bombing and attacks of the German submarines.” (Rutar 4) What cannot be denied that is the fact that members of the International Brigade helped each other even when they did not know each other personally. Thanks to this Vincenc Kocman managed to help many soldiers leave France for Britain. However this event was abused by Vincenc Kocman for the purposes of political propaganda. According to him, the members of the International Brigade had a good chance to persuade the people on board the ship about the truth of their cause, about the wickedness of the commanders and the leaders of the Czechoslovak resistance abroad. Vincenc Kocman proved this statement by presenting some examples of the unmoral behaviour of commanders during the escape from France. (Kocman 84 85) But again: ‘The characters without any names’ make his account less trustworthy and shift it more towards a work of fiction. “After a four day journey the steamer approached the coast of south east England and on 22 June it entered the port at Falmouth. The newcomers were welcomed and accommodated in the local cinema. On the next day they left Falmouth for the RAF base ‘Insworth Lane’ near the town of Gloucester in the Bristol Bay. During their short stay here, the members of the air forces were equipped and sorted according to their training and profession. Vladimír, who was not a soldier in the Czech Republic, served as a driver and that was the reason why he was assigned as an assistant mechanic.” (Rutar 4) Svatopluk Rutar has omitted any detailed description of their training. This part of the Vincenc Kocman’s account made by was surprisingly without any criticism the British instructors were even praised by him for their patience and their quiet approach to the soldiers. “On 10 July at 09.00 all members of the air force group were marshalled together to be informed that they had become members of the fighting Squadron 310 of the Royal Air Force. The Squadron moved to the base at Duxford. Vladimír went there on 17 July and helped to prepare Hawker Hurricane aircrafts for fighting purposes.” (Rutar 4) “In the spring of 1941 Vladimír Sobotka was sent to the training centre (Czechoslovak Depot) in Cosford for the purpose of air gunner training. The course lasted from 24 April to 6 21 June. After l finishing successfully, he was promoted to the rank of Leading Aircraftman and he became a member of the bomber Squadron 311. At the time the squadron was operating from the airport East Wretham in south east England. In the summer of 1941 the targets of the night flights were the ports of Hamburg, Bremerhaven, Ostende and Münster and several times the bombers attacked German battle ships in Brest. On 14 September Vladimír was awarded the Czechoslovak War Cross from 1939 and on 28 October he was promoted to the rank of Sergeant. He participated in successful attacks against Italy where Turin and the port of Janova were bombed. The medal For Bravery was given to Vladimír Sobotka on 7 October and the Czechoslovak War Cross from 1939 was given to him on 14 November 1941.” (Rutar 4) The organisation and activities of the training centre in Cosford is documented by Vincenc Kocman using his mastery of political propaganda. Comfortable accommodation, very good food and the use of civil personnel for cleaning services was explained by Kocman in this way: “Before the war it was mostly rich sons who served in the air forces. They considered their duty a sport… Of course, it was necessary to establish comfort bases for them so that they could feel satisfied there. During the war there was a need to enlist many volunteers and it was supposed that they would refuse to serve in bad conditions.” (Kocman 95) It is rather debatable whether volunteers in the middle of the war were looking for comfort in the army service. The main task of the Intelligence Service was, according to Vincenc Kocman, “to gain the Czechoslovaks for the political uses of the ruling class”. They prepared lectures for them; they would take them to rich local families and so “they changed them into their helpers”. (Kocman 96) We must admit that the role of the Intelligence Service was very problematic and at many times controversial, not only in Britain and not only during WWII. But the proof given by Vincenc Kocman is insufficient and the accusation is evidently subjective. “In the groups of native servicemen most of the pilots were honest men of the resistance …but at so called headquarters and inspectorates there were quite different people who were without any fighting merit, but who held high positions.” (Kocman 97) It would seem that Czechoslovak pilots were not enlisted into the British air force to fight against Hitler and fascism but to enforce the ‘ruling class’ and become ‘capitalists’. This was the fixed idea of Vincenc Kocman and his political associates. 22 “At the beginning of 1942 intensive bombing continued and the number of dead men was increasing. It was obvious that the old types of aircraft were not suitable any longer… On 28 April 1942 the bomber Squadron 311 was moved from East Wretham to the base in Adlergrowe in Northern Ireland, where the members of the Squadron prepared for new operations under the leadership of the Headquarters of the coastal air force. Their duties were guarding over the Atlantic Ocean and disrupting enemy naval transport. The soldiers worked hard preparing for their new roles and Vladimír was trained to shoot his new targets. On 10 June they were sent to southern Wales to the base of Talbenny to join the battle over the Atlantic Ocean and on 23 June the Squadron began their new operation sorties – long hours of guarding over the Atlantic. Their target was unknown; they were only appointed a particular area to patrol. Some of the aircrafts even after many reconnaissance flights did not detect a single submarine or ship, but a danger was still very near.” (Rutar 4) A desire to expose the class discrimination between pilots and commanders, the bad treating of pilots and the bad living conditions at the base of East Wrethem has modified the Vincenc Kocman’s narrative of (102 103) in a very significant way. Reading about East Wrethem in his book, we get the impression that pilots devoted most of their energy to the fight against their commanders and the ‘class enemy’. It is a great pity that the brave deeds, devotion and skill of our pilots and mechanics are quite lost in the permanent criticism, gossip, and hostility addressed towards the commanders, the British and Czechoslovak governments, and the political opponents of the Communists. “On 18 August 1942 the crew of the Wellington KX B set off for a reconnaissance flight over the Biscay Bay. The flight went on without difficulties until 24:15 when the coastal station received some signals and the announcement ‘Attacked by an enemy fighter’. The same report was recorded 15 minutes later. Whenever failed to come back from their flight by the appointed time did not usually come at all. On 18 August 1941 the Atlantic Ocean became a grave for the crew of the Wellington KX B. The men that died that day in the Biscay Bay were: Warrant Officer Vladimír Sobotka, Flying Officer Karel Bečvář, Sergeant Jaromír Drmelka, Warrant Officer Jan Lenc, Warrant Officer František Šipula and Warrant Officer Pavel Tofel. Their names are engraved on the marble columns of the memorial in Runnymede near London.” (Rutar 4) These sentences commemorate in a simple way a brave man Vladimír Sobotka, who sacrificed his life. It was not important to emphasize his motivation for such a decision for the people who knew him personally. The author of the article did not consider it important to 23 comment on this because the sensitive readers can form an opinion on this man from his behaviour during war time. “After World War II, on 1 February 1947, Vladimír Sobotka was promoted to the rank of Warrant Officer in memoriam and he was awarded a Czechoslovak medal For Bravery and a War Cross from 1939.” (Rutar 4) 1.3 Geier Josef “A glassmaker, a member of the Czechoslovak Army abroad, a participant in the Middle East fights and a pilot of the bomber Squadron 311 of the RAF in Britain, awarded two Czechoslovak War Crosses from 1939, two medals For Bravery and a Czechoslovak medal For Services to Society.” (Rutar 2005, 16) In this way Svatopluk Rutar begins the article about Geier Josef, written for the bulletin of the village of Lužice devoted to celebrated local inhabitants fighting against fascism during WWII. “Josef was born on 30 January 1915 in a small village called Dubňany. He spent his childhood in Lužice where he attended a local elementary school. After eight years of compulsory education he was apprenticed as a glassmaker. He continued learning at school in Hodonín.” (Rutar 2005, 16) Information about his education is quite important here, because becoming a member of the Royal Air Force required good hard training for Josef who was not highly educated. It makes an interesting read to follow his path to the RAF. “Like his father, he worked in Jindřich’s smelting works, a glass making factory in Lužice. In 1933 all 276 employees were dismissed and became unemployed. The father and his son Gaier remained out of work. When the first chance to work appeared in distant Egypt, they both decided to go there. In 1934 the first group of twenty glassmakers left Lužice for Egypt. They worked in a glassmaking factory in the suburb of Cairo.” (Rutar 2005, 16) From this short paragraph of the article we may recognise that the economic situation in the Czech Republic was not very good before WWII. The concision of the information is an exciting challenge for readers to seek for more details, or for teachers to explain the necessary circumstances of the events to their pupils. 24 “When the Second World War broke out Josef Geier enlisted in the foreign Czechoslovak army at the Czechoslovak Embassy in Cairo on 7 January 1940. Only in October was he presented for active military service. He signed the proclamation about joining the Czechoslovak foreign army and on 28 October he pledged allegiance to the Republic. He was assigned to the 3 rd troop, later to the 1 st troop of the 11th Czechoslovak Eastern battalion. On 31 May he went ‘into the field’. In that time the battalion did guard duty in the Western desert and later it was transported to north west Syria, where the main task was to guard and defend borders, road bridges and railway bridges. In October 1941 the 11th Eastern Czechoslovak battalion was formed to take part in the biggest action in the Middle East, the defence of Tobruk. Among the Czechoslovak soldiers fought also a citizen of Lužice, Josef Geier.” (Rutar 2005, 16) Recruitment into the Czechoslovak army could be seen like a natural process during the time of the German occupation of Czechoslovakia. But Vincenc Kocman saw it in a special way. In his book he wrote about the great problems they were gaining new volunteers for the army because of a very bad treatment there. “…many of the patriots were discouraged by such treatment from entering the army. That was the reason why commanders also began to recruit members of the International Brigade in concentration camps.” (Kocman 56) In actual fact, gaining new volunteers or recruiting new men into the army was a necessity caused by the general situation and the course of the war. “In 1942 Josef Geier passed a course for mine thrower gunners and in St. Jean, a course in anti aircraft defence. At that time the Czechoslovak battalion had been reorganised and it was renamed the Czechoslovak light anti aircraft regiment 200. Josef Geier was directed to the 1 st troop of the Czechoslovak Eastern anti aircraft battalion 500. On 20 January 1942 Josef Geier was awarded the Czechoslovak medal for Bravery and on 1 July he was ranked as a Private First Class.”(Rutar 2005, 17) (PFC was a rank of the Czechoslovak Army.) “When in the summer of 1942 soldiers were recruited into the Czechoslovak air force in Britain Josef Geier was among the 247 chosen ones. On 23 October he got on the ship of Santa Maria de Orduna in Suez. The ship navigated past South Africa into Gibraltar and from there it sailed with a fleet and landed in the British port of Greenock near Glasgow on 1 January 1943. Soldiers were transported by train to St. Athan on 2 January. In St. Athan was the Czechoslovak training reserve unit. Josef Geier was enlisted into the RAF VR (Volunteer 25 deserves of the RAF) as an AC 2 (an aircraftman 2 nd class). He got the number 788444.” (Rutar 2005, 16 17) “He attended a basic training course and passed his tests and exams. He undertook a strict medical and became a radio telegraph operator and a gunner. Together with 55 other pilots they were transported to the 1 st radiotelegraphic school in Cranwell in Lincolnshire. After five months of theoretical and practical training on planes he finished school and was promoted to the rank of corporal. In January 1944 Josef Geier was despatched to Evanton in Scotland to a training course in shooting. Having finished, he was promoted to the British army rank of Sergeant. But this was not the end of his training. It was necessary to instruct him in cooperating with the operational crew because at that time the Squadron 311 was equipped with heavy bombers Liberator B 24, with a crew of 10 and four engines. He undertook training at the operational unit 111 in Nassau in the Bahamas.” (Rutar 2005, 17) Here we must compare the approach to the problem of equipment in the Czechoslovak Squadron made by the two authors. Svatopluk Rutar simply mentions the change in the equipment of the wing. Squadron 311 began to use more reliable modern bombers, which we can see as a result of communal effort by all countries participating in the war. “All aircraft, equipment and arms given to Czech air force groups in England were paid for by Czechoslovakia at purchase cost in spite of the fact that everything was old,” explained Vincenc Kocman and thus revealing the unmoral behaviour of the British ally. Several pages later Kocman gives readers another proof of the Communists’ bravery. They organised a strike to protest about the bad conditions. The pilots achieved many changes for the better and Kocman comments on it in this way: “these actions were good demonstration of the work of the Communists, showing that it is necessary to began with agitation…” (Kocman 120 129) Reading this part of the book we have a strong impression that we are reading a political lampoon, not an account of historical events. “In the crew no. 21 of Josef Tichý he passed the course for radio telegraphers and gunners. Training was provided on the planes B 25 Mitchel and B 24 Liberator. Josef Geier flew on Liberators till the end of the war.” (Rutar 2005, 18) It is wonder that Vincenc Kocman considered the new fighter equipment for Squadron 311 to be the result of their pilots’ success in fighting. It is obvious that in chapter 23 of his book Vincenc Kocman forgot about his main role as Communist agitator and for a while was purely a pilot. We can share his great excitement of the perfection of the Liberators – new 26 bomber fighters. (Kocman 135) We can only regret that the whole book was not written in this way. “After their return to England the whole of Josef Tichý’s screw was directed to Squadron 311 of the Czechoslovak bomber wing. The wing fought under the command of the headquarters of the coastal air force, operated from the airport of Tain in north east Scotland. The bombers of Squadron 311 were given the role of reconnaissance, i.e. to obtain information about the position of German submarines.” (Rutar 2005, 18) Very interesting is the description of a new ‘secret’ weapon developed and used by the British against German submarines in Kocman’s book. (Kocman 135) This skilled and expert exposition, which was used very rarely, could be one of most potent aspects of this author. “Joseph Geier first operated on the Liberator GR V. The officer of the crew was the officer of the wing, Alois Šedivý; the other pilot was Josef Tichý, Geier’s training staff officer. Besides these two men mentioned, the flying staff was formed of five radio telegraphers, two navigators and one flight engineer. The first flight lasted 13 hours. Another reconnaissance mission finding out the position of German submarines took place on 2 November. The reconnaissance flights were realised in the demarcated sectors over the Atlantic Ocean, the North Sea, the Baltic and the Norwegian Sea. The flights lasted 13 hours on average and 1700 nautical miles were flown. Josef Geier went into action 8 times until the end of the year 1944. In 1945 (from 3 January to 3 June) he operated 10 times.” (Rutar 2005, 18) The author’s simple enumeration of the operations realised by Joseph Geier is a suitable form for a short article directed to non specialists and common readers. But it could be unattractive for young readers and it is necessary to complete it with reliable, truthful reconstructions and descriptions of some actions when used for young listeners or readers. Joseph Geier was lucky, avoiding danger. The aeroplane of his crew was never attacked by the enemy. They were only forced to go back to the airfield three times: once because of the bad weather, once on account of the illness of the navigator and the last reason was the breakdown of an important piece of apparatus. In 1945 Joseph Geier was ranked as a Flight Sergeant, and after the war on 15 July he was ranked Sergeant in the Czech Army.” (Rutar 2005, 18) “The last flight of Tichý’s crew, at the same time the last flight of the Czech Squadron 311 at all (aeroplane T 872), was realised on 3 June 1945. This flight meant the end of Joseph Geier’s career in the RAF. Joseph Geier was given awards for his fighting for freedom after 27 the war. On 6 October 1945 he was awarded the Czech Medal for Bravery, on 19 January 1946 he got the Czech Medal for Merits of the First Grade and on 19 March 1946 the president awarded him his first War Cross 1939 and he got his second War Cross 1939 on 2 March 1946. From 1 January 1946 onwards Joseph Geirer was ranked as an Adjutant of the air force reserves.” (Rutar 2005, 18) “Joseph Geier came back to his country on 12 August 1945. He was demobilised on 18 October 1946. He settled in Lužice and got married to Otylia Hrbáčková in 1946. They had a son and a daughter. He worked as a telegraph operator at the Czechoslovak State Railways in Brno. Later he was employed at the Local National Committee in Pouzdřany. He died at the age of 57 on 13 March 1962.” (Rutar 2005, 18) “Joseph Geier was not mentioned on the list of pilots fighting in the WWII on the western front in the moral rehabilitation of 1990.” (Rutar 2005, 18) The author did not manage to get any further information on the life of Joseph Geier after WWII. We may suppose that he was one of the lucky pilots who were not persecuted for their participation in the resistance organised by our government in London. But on the other hand, we can understand that Joseph Geier and his relatives would not have been willing to give such information during the rule of the Communist Party in Czechoslovakia. The note about the fact that he was not rehabilitated could be proof that he was not persecuted. It would be useful to complete the details and specify this part of his curriculum vitae. 1.4 Pavel Dřevěný „More than fifty years ago a native citizen from Dolní Bojanovice Pavel Dřevěný died when he served with Squadron 311 of The Royal Air Force.” (Rutar 1993, 10) “He was born on 8 February 1916. The Dřevěný family along with the Lekavý, Mikuš and Mikulica families followed the previous emigrant Florián Pšovský to Canada because of the bad economic situation in the Czech Republic. Pavel Dřevěný was 11 when the family settled in the Canadian province of Saskatchewan, in a small settlement called Margo. Hard work was ahead of them. They had to cut down the forest and in this way gain some land for farming. The Czech people there grew corn and they bred cattle on the farm. Winters were 28 very long and it was possible to sow corn only in the latter half of May, with snow then often coming in September during the harvest. Not all the families were able to overcome these difficulties. But those who managed to ride it out bought new equipment for farming and began to prosper.” (Rutar 1993, 10) The narrative of their journey to Canada apparently seems unrelated to the context. Bad living conditions and the necessity of overcoming such difficulties influenced Pavel to become a handy, industrious and a reliable man. The author wanted to show that a family and living conditions can modify character features very significantly. “Pavel as well as his brothers Vladimír, Jan and sister Rose were very good singers after their mother. Pavel was a good dancer; he played the guitar and the mouth organ. After leaving school he worked as a mechanic in a wood working factory called ‘Pacific Ocean’. To maintain their traditional culture and to have a chance to meet, Czech compatriots bought a plot of land in 1939 where they built a “Czech Hall”. Unfortunately, World War II broke out and Pavel began to work in an armoury factory in Toronto.” (Rutar 1993, 10) This paragraph brings attention to the relations between Czech emigrants and their native country. Though living so far from their birthplace, their connection was still very strong. “Some Czech compatriots joined in with actions to help their native country. They were members of the 29 th section of the Czechoslovak National Association in Canada. Their section organized collections of money and other activities to gain money for their native country and for Czech soldiers fighting in England and Russia. On 26 June 1942 the group captain of the Headquarters Čeněk Hutník, the commander of the Czechoslovak Military Mission in Montreal, visited the compatriots in Margo and spoke about the lack of soldiers in the Czech troop in England. Pavel Dřevěný and his friend Josef Kubát were the first volunteers to enter military service. In December 1942 Pavel left home taking his house key with him. He believed that the key would bring him good luck and that he would come back home. But his decision to fight was fateful.” (Rutar 1993, 10) The patriotism of the Czech emigrants expressed in this paragraph is not the right way of explaining their motivation to go and fight against the enemy of their native country to younger generations. Today patriotism stands aside because of the continuing integration of the world. Meanwhile the older generation can understand such motives; the younger generation will be open to an examination of their motives from the viewpoint of personal 29 qualities. Only people of a high moral character are able to leave their safe homes and help people in danger. The activities of the Czech emigrants, helping and supporting citizens in an occupied country, show their good character features. As a result we can consider this part of the article useful and suitable for use as didactic literature. “He enlisted in the army on 1 January 1943 in Montreal and along with his friend Josef Kubát he set off for England. After finishing the basic training course they were both relocated to the Bahamas. The airfield named ‘Windsor Field’ was the place where they started to train in four engine Liberators. The Czech pilots were on parade in the presence of the Duke of Windsor, the governor of the Bahamas, who visited the airfield. Pavel Dřevěný returned to England and joined the bomber Squadron 311 in Predannack in the county of Cornwall.” (Rutar 1993, 10) “Since the first days of the invasion of France aircrafts had been on guard over the Channel. After a successful landing by the Allied forces in Normandy, the submarine operations were transferred to the North Sea and that was the reason why Squadron 311 changed position and moved to the base of Tain. The role of the air force there was to protect convoys sailing through the North Sea to the Soviet Union. Four days after their arrival, the Liberator L BZ 717 took off for reconnaissance. On the way back to the airfield the aircraft lost the way in a heavy fog and fell down near Exeter. All the men in the crew died. Pavel Dřevěný, V. Čapek, J. Filip, J.Hornung, L Košek, M. Maňásek, R. Němeček, K. Novotný and V. Tarantík were buried in the cemetery of Weston Mill in Plymouth.” (Rutar 1993, 10) The role of protecting convoys was very significant and it was a result of the very good reputation of the Czech pilots operating in the RAF. Such appreciation of Czech pilots we can be found in many official reports, even in the book written by Vincenc Kocman (Kocman 135) This appreciation, added to the article, would improve the rather rigorous account of the operations in which Pavel Dřevěný took part. “Corporal Pavel Dřevěný was ranked as Warrant Officer in memoriam. On 1 June 1991, the soldiers who had fought on the Western Front during World War II were rehabilitated. Pavel Dřevěný was among the rehabilitated soldiers and by order of the Ministry of Defence he was promoted to the position of Squadron Leader in memoriam.” (Rutar 1993, 10) This article written by Svatopluk Rutar in 1993 is a proof that people in villages remember their significant citizens (even those who were living abroad). In accordance with 30 the positive reaction of the readers we may judge that there are still people among us interested in the past of their ancestors. 1.5 Josef Taláb “Josef Taláb was born on 16 July 1909 in Hrušky, in the house number 167. He was the oldest son of Rudolph Taláb and his wife Terezia. He attended the secondary school of economics in Břeclav and then worked as a clerk on Kuffner’s farm in Prušánky and later in Břeclav. In 1929 Joseph Taláb took up military service in the riding regiment at Uherské Hradiště. He attained the rank of a sergeant and he remained there longer. He was promoted to the rank of staff sergeant. During his military service he passed several courses for radio telegraph operators and became commander of the wireless operators. He was judged as being a very good rider and instructor. He left military service on 31 December 1937 and he worked for the firm Kunc Lutín for a short while.” (Rutar, 8) This information about Joseph’s activities in the military service and his skills acquired during service may explain his rather uncomplicated release from the French Foreign Legion and his enlistment in the Czechoslovak army in France as follows. “After an escape from the protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia in the summer of 1939 he entered the French Foreign Legion in Krakow and was transported to France by boat. On 13 September 1939 the Czechoslovak soldiers were released from the French army because there was a new Czechoslovak unit forming. Josef Taláb was released too and was directed to the command troop of the 1 st regiment in Agde in the south of the country sixteen days later. In June 1940 Josef Taláb participated in defensive fights near Paris and after the defeat of France by the Germans he managed to sail to Great Britain.” (Rutar, 8) Svatopluk Rutar did not mention how Taláb managed to sail to Britain. Maybe it was the same ship that brought Vincenc Kocman and the other soldiers to Great Britain, but we can only guess this. What is evident is that they both spent some time in the camp for land forces in Cholmondeley “Placed in the army camp of the Czechoslovak land forces in Cholmondeley he was among the first to apply for a position in the newly forming bomber Squadron 311 of the Royal Air Force. Finally on 8 August 1940 he became a pilot of the RAF. In a pilot uniform, he pledged allegiance to the British king and was assigned to the Royal Air Force. He 31 successfully completed a course for wireless operators and returned to the bomber Squadron 311. In the meantime, Squadron 311 was transferred to the airfield in East Wrentham, from where they were realizing attacks against German industrial centres, mainly in the Ruhr area. They were escorting bombers to cities in this part of Germany, to important ports and to Berlin.” (Rutar, 8) Svatopluk Rutar omitted an account of the situation in Cholmondeley. We may understand his attitude towards this problem in two ways. Information about events from this period of the existence of the Czechoslovak Foreign Army varies very significantly according to the sources. Vincenc Kocman described events in his particular way. He defined the revolt of the ‘Spainers’ against their commanders as an example of rightful battle against traitors (he meant the commanders of the Czechoslovak Army) and accused president Beneš and general Ingr of unfairly punishing the members of the International Brigade by internment camp. (Kocman 89 90) Another writer Zdeněk Šmoldas, besides the conflict between the Inspectorate, the government and the members of the International Brigade, also presented a very detailed description about the complicated negotiations for the conditions of the Czech pilots undertaken by the Czechoslovak and British governments. The main point was a new concept of organisation in the Czechoslovak air force. (Šmoldas, 39 51) Opinion on the matter was disordered and yet it is presented subjectively by the author. To get reliable information from such a book presupposes possession of a very good knowledge of history. The lack of reliable resources and the width of the problem led Svatopluk Rutar to omit this problem. The question is whether to leave the problem up to historians, let alone the common reader, even today when we have enough objective information. “On 14 April 1942 seven staff of the bomber Squadron 311 began operations against a very significant target, the city of Dortmund in the Rhine area. The Wellington Z 1098 KX – U (Ursula) was the sixth in line to start. At 22:25 the bomber, under the command of the pilot, Sergeant Vladimír Pára, began the operation. The aircrew consisted of a Sergeant Oldřich Havlík, a second pilot, Flying Officer Milan Zapletal, a navigator, a Sergeant Joseph Taláb, a wireless navigator, a Sergeant Pavel Varjan, an air gunner and Jaroslav Klvaňa, a back air gunner. The flight over the Channel passed tranquilly. Burning Dortmund was an easy target to bomb. Going back to the airfield, the Wellington, illuminated by enemy searchlights, was struck by German gunners. One of the engines stopped working. Sergeant Pára attempted to remove the bomber from the light of the searchlights. Zapletal was wounded and Taláb helped him to stop bleeding. The bomber escaped from the range of the searchlights but a German 32 night fighter destroyed the airplane. The co pilot Havlík was shot dead. The bomber brushed against the tops of the trees and fell down to the ground. The second engine began to burn. Havlík, Varjan and Taláb died in the plane, and the seriously wounded Pára, Zapletal and Klvaňa were captured.” (Rutar, 8) The readers that have enough patience to cut trough the unsuccessful and subjective comments in the text of the book written by Vincenc Kocman can get a very interesting account of the bomber fighter operations of Squadron 311. Daily routine, difficulties during the realisation of operations, description of equipment and reports on free time activities are the parts of the book that are worth reading. (Kocman 109 113) The last part of the chapter (114) we must reject for its obvious subjectivity and political agitation. Another extract from Petr Radosta’s book is an example of how to make non fiction literature more vivid: The navigator of the Ursula Milan Zapletal remembers the last flight: A very long boring journey blunted the concentration and full attention that was so necessary over Germany! The quite easy task of bombing Dortmund was realised, the bombs struck their targets and the only thing to do was to get back to the airfield in Wretham. Suddenly hundreds of searchlights lit up our aircraft Ursula. To escape from the range of the searchlights was up to the pilot. The strong explosion under the bomber signalled that one of the engines had been destroyed. Pilot Pára tried to get the left engine faster and our chase after darkness continued. The darkness was our only hope of safety. The German anti aircraft defences intensified their shooting every second. The wireless navigator tried to connect to the base and inform about the situation. I wanted to get near to Joseph Taláb when I realised that there was a hole in the mantle of the aircraft and that my hand was bleeding. I tried to stop the bleeding with a small rubber hose from an oxygen mask but I did not manage to do it. I asked Joseph to help me and he did it immediately. Meanwhile we got connection to the airbase and we could announce our situation and location… (Petr Radosta, , shortened) 33 “Along with his companions, Warrant Officer Joseph Taláb was buried in the Dutch city of Eindhoven, in the suburb of Woensal in 1942. Joseph Taláb was awarded the Czechoslovak medal For Bravery. Two years later, he was awarded the Czechoslovak medal for foreign resistance F VB. In 1947 he was promoted to Pilot Officer and he was ranked as a Wink Commander in 1991.” (Rutar 8) “Immediately after World War II, on 25 August 1945, a commemorative plaque was unveiled on the school building in his birthplace Hrušky. Besides the name of Joseph Taláb there were the names of many other native citizens who fought in Great Britain during World War II.” (Rutar 8) The citizens of the village who fought in Great Britain were evidently luckier than Rudolph Bolfík, a hero born in Mikulčice. The fact that the plaque was unveiled before the year 1948 and that the Communists did not find anything out of order in their curricula vitae is an explanation why these citizens could be commemorated for their bravery. 1.6 Štěpán Štětka “In the second half of the 19th century a small village called Prušánky had maintained its agricultural character, but its continually increasing number of inhabitants (e.g. in 1869 1148 people lived there, but 365 people more lived there six years later) forced villagers to look for work abroad. The soil was not rich enough to sustain large families. Only the oldest sons could hope to receive property from their family and go on working in the family fields. The other children would leave their father’s house with small shares of inheritance. Very often they went abroad, especially to America.” (Rutar, not published) The fact that this article was not published in any regional press suggests that connection between Štěpán Štětka and citizens of the village Prušánky is not so close. The reason is that his family left the village in the 19 th century. “Part of the emigrants from South Moravia found their homes in the east, in imperial Russia. There were 23 families from Prušánky among them. The families settled in an area of Volhynia in the villages of Marjatá and Medziliska. Before leaving, they sold their property, including their fields, to a Jewish man called Hirsch Kuffner who owned a large farm in Prušánky.” (Rutar) 34 The article shows all the features of chronology that are typical for writing chronicles. But this style is attractive for people who are interested in the history of the described place and its inhabitants. It is also necessary, in order to fulfil the author’s intentions, to explain why he lined Štěpán Štětka up among the other pilots coming from the district of ‘Podluží’. “At the same time another eight families acted in a similar way, but they attempted to find homes in the south, in Croatia. These families were the families of Jan Křehula, Ludvík Duda, Vavřinec Tomanovsky, Kašpar Zálešák, František Hromek, Tomáš Křehula, Vavřín and Jan Štětka. This article focuses on the family of Štěpán Štětka because their grandson was a member of the bomber Squadron 311 in the RAF during World War II. He died fighting for the freedom of his grandparents’ native country.” (Rutar) We again feel strong patriotism in these lines of the article. As stated above, not only patriotism but also good character qualities led people to risk their lives fighting against evil. “In military registers, Prušánky was the recorded birthplace of Š těpán Štětka. The only reason for this was that thus he could be assigned to the Czechoslovak army in 1940 in France. Later, when he was a soldier of this army, he mentioned his home Tvrda Rjeka near Belovar in Croatia where he was born in the family of Ludvík Štětka on 23 May 1920. He attended five years of primary school, two years of secondary school and two years at a school for farmers. He referred to his profession as a farmer.” (Rutar) “At that time Hitler began his invasion, which was the beginning of World War II, attacking Poland in 1939. People from the whole of Europe joined the fight against fascist Germany. Among these people was Štěpán Štětka, who was only nineteen years old. He had already left Yugoslavia by 12 November 1939 and two months later he joined the Czechoslovak army. On 26 January 1940 he became a member of the troop that began to form in the south of France, in the small town of Agde.” (Rutar) He was probably one of the volunteers who were not afraid of military discipline and a bad treatment from the side of the commanders as mentioned by Kocman. (53 54) “He was posted to a cavalry squadron of the reconnaissance troop of the 1 st Czechoslovak Regiment, which was established in Agde. On 7 March he pledged allegiance to the Republic in the presence of general Ingr. Štěpán Štětka managed to pass a course for warrant officers, but at this time Hitler was heading for the west, crossing the borders of Luxembourg, Netherlands, Belgium and France. On 5 June the Germans turned to the south and approached Paris.” (Rutar) 35 The historical background is presented concisely, but it is sufficient to paint a picture of the dangerous situation in Europe. It is not difficult to complete this information with a map showing the position of the armies with an overhead projector. It is also possible to find further data on the Internet, which is a very attractive method for pupils. “The Czechoslovak Infantry Division hurried to help the French army defend the capital city Paris. The 1 st regiment, where was as Štěpán Štětka signed, took up their position at the bridge over the river Grand Morin. After a short fight the Czechoslovak regiment was able to secure the withdrawal of the main French forces. The regiment itself had to withdraw to Montereau. From 16 to 19 June the regiment held their positions and controlled the Loire and Gien river crossings where the Germans suffered heavy losses. Czechoslovak soldiers fighting against the enemy were praised for bravery by French main command. Nevertheless, the French capitulated on 22 June and the Czechoslovak army straggled, beating a fast retreat to the sea. From 19 to 23 June, after an exhausting march, thin lines of soldiers from the 1 st and 2 nd regiment met at Nontron and going through Narbonne they reached the port of Sete from where they tried to sail to Great Britain Š těpán Štětka., along with several hundreds of soldiers, managed to get to Great Britain on board the ship Mohamed Ali el Kebir.” (Rutar) We cannot say, how his journey from France proceeded,. From previous attempts to find an objective witness of direct participants in the events we can see that it is not a very easy task to evaluate literature written by the Czechoslovak pilots. Teachers are facing the challenge of persuading pupils to seek information from those who, thanks to new opportunities, technical equipment and international contacts, have already began. “After their arrival at the port city of Liverpool, soldiers were transported by train to Cholmondeley, where they were accommodated in tents in the castle gardens. The soldiers, among them being Štěpán Štětka, were given British uniforms and weapons. On 15 October they were transferred to winter training places in central England, in the county of Warwickshire. On 28 October Štěpán Štětka and the other soldiers pledged their allegiance and began their military training, guarding service and training to prevent the invasion of Great Britain.” (Rutar) We have already discussed the account of the camp in Cholmondeley given by Vincenc Kocman. We stated that to find objective and reliable information is very demanding. Skilled teachers can exploit this problem to create task based activities for pupils 36 during the lessons. A full exploration and comparison of resources would be interesting and would make an active contribution to learning. “In the next year Štětka passed the driving course and was promoted to the rank of Leading Aircraftmen. Disappointed, like many others that he could not fight against the enemy, he asked to be enlisted among the pilots of the RAF. Štěpán Štětka was transferred there on 10 August 1942, namely to the reserve unit in St. Athan where he undertook training focussed on airlifting. In 1943 he passed a course for air gunners and was promoted to the rank of Sergeant and finally in May he was transferred to Squadron 311 of the RAF.” (Rutar) “On 6 June 1944 when the Allied forces landed on the shores of Normandy, Squadron 311 were on patrol over the British and French coast. At that time Štěpán Štětka was flying with the crew of Liberator G BZ 720. But no submarine occurred. On 1 July Štětka was promoted to the British rank of Sergeant and on 7 August he was awarded the Czechoslovak medal from 1943 ‘F – VB’. On 21 July he was given the badge of a field air gunner.” (Rutar) To complete such a concise account of fighting operations with more details does not appear to be a problem, because even books which are not written very objectively provide quite truthful and reliable description in this case. The reason is that fighting operations do not leave much space for personal opinions, hesitation and arguments, and conclusions are arrived at from results and from the nature of the technical equipment. “After the invasion of northern France by the Allies, German submarines withdrew to ports in Germany and Norway, and thus the centre of the fight moved to the North Sea and consequently the bomber Squadron 311 was moved to Tain in Rossshire in northern Scotland.” (Rutar) “From the airfield in Tain crews of Liberators took off to guard the North Sea. Many times, even within the Arctic Circle, they defended the Allies’ convoys carrying goods through the north passage to the Soviet port of Murmansk. The main role of the squadron was to ensure security and to defend the Allies’ ships against the attacks of the German submarines. They took off day and night patrolling the demarked space. A radar operator informed them of contacts at short intervals and the aircraft had to verify them and find out whether it was a German submarine or an Allied ship. But meeting a German submarine was rare. The flights were especially dangerous because of the icy weather. To pilot a Liberator aircraft safely during the storm was exhausting work and of course equally exhausting was the psychological tension and concentration on the controls and other equipment.” (Rutar) 37 Most of the books on pilots are focussed on fighters and on bombers and little space is given to reconnaissance and guarding flights. But the flights behind the Arctic Circle must have been especially dangerous and technically demanding. Details of such flights could improve the quality of this article and make it more attractive for the young readers. “Only on 28 October did a new task live up to the expectations of Š těpán Štětka. Three of the most skilled crews of Squadron 311 were given the command to destroy a German submarine which had sailed into the shallow water near Flein Island in the Arctic Circle. Among these crews was the crew of Š těpán Štětka and thus he finally had a chance to use his shooting skills against a real target, but he was not fated to fight…” (Rutar) There were three Liberators taking off – H (Harry), G (George) and Y (York). They took off in this order on 29 October 1944 at 02.55. The night was rainy, dark and without moonlight. The control tower announced that they were allowed to take off and wished them good luck. The first aircraft started to roll along the runway followed by the other one and in a while the first one disappeared into the dark. Jiří Osolsobě remembers “We took off first, but just beyond the airfield we got into a heavy rain. We did not catch sight of the beacon Tarbatt Ness which was about ten kilometres in distance from the airfield and from which we were to plot the course. To be safe we went farther out to the sea and only when the radar operator announced that we were sufficiently distant from the coast did we turn and fly along the coast of Scotland to the northeast. We flew about five miles off the coast and about five minutes after plotting the course we saw a great fire on the left side and then we heard two violent explosions. One of our aircrafts broke down. It crashed into the shore and tanks full of petrol immediately caught fire… but there was no choice but to fly on and realise the task, we will be informed about it later… “(Rutar) “Before 9 am the Liberators found the submarine that they had been searching for and the Liberators ‘York’ and ‘Henry’ destroyed it with accurate gunfire. It was the only submarine destroyed by Squadron 311 during the take offs in Tain.” (Rutar) “It was a nice autumn afternoon when they landed again on the airfield and were informed about the aircraft G – ‘George’. The crew of this Liberator did not catch sight of the beacon in Tarbatt Ness and had plotted the course northeast earlier. They flew very near to the coast and crashed into the hillside about 30 km to the north of the airfield. The aircraft was torn in two and it caught fire. Fortunately some of the men from the crew survived.” (Rutar) 38 This part of the article betrays the fact that it was not written to order; it was not limited by space in any magazine or a newspaper. The author has widened it with a reconstruction of the last moments of the Liberator ‘G’ BZ 720, and so has made it more vivid and more suitable for a direct didactic use. “In the accident of the Liberator “G” BZ 720 five members of the crew, namely Štěpán Štětka, Rudolf Barvíř, Václav Černý, Josef Košťál and František Politzer, died. Those who survived were F. Korbel, K. Pospíchal, K. Šácha and V.Švec.” (Rutar) Štěpán Štětka, who was only 24, is buried in the cemetery of St. Duthus, Tain in Scotland. Štěpán Štětka was valued for his character. He was friendly, industrious; willing to learn new things and his commanders highly appreciated his reliability. He was a very good soldier. In 1947 after World War II Štěpán Štětka was promoted to the rank of an adjutant in memoriam and two years later, in 1949, to the rank of Warrant Officer.” (Rutar) 39 2. From the History of the RAF Squadron 311 One of the most well known Czechoslovak foreign air force formations during the Second World War was a squadron of bombers formed at Huntington, Suffolk, on 29 July 1940 from Czech Air Force personnel who had formerly served in France and had escaped to Britain at the time of the French collapse. By the second half of August l940, 932 Czechoslovak airmen had come to Britain. The bombers of the squadron first went into action in 1940 and continued in this role untill 1942 in Germany and occupied Western Europe. They took part in battles over the Atlantic Ocean and in North Germany. The squadron was also defending shipping routes in the North Sea. The training of the Czechoslovak airmen proceeded very fast so that the wings could go into action as soon as possible. The squadron was appreciated as one of the best squadrons of all. From the very first the situation was very dangerous. On average the squadron operated every fourth day and over 148 actions flew 1021 operational sorties, and dropping more than 1300 tonnes of bombs on enemy targets. During twenty months of operational activities 28 crews were shot down, killed or wounded. During the battle of Britain fighters of the Squadrons 310 and 312 in particular were successful but in autumn 1940 the bomber Squadron 311 got a very important role when they began operation sorties on the target of Brussels. Three Wellingtons dropped bombs on Brussels’ railway station and returned to the base in Honington. After that day the squadron began to fly over the enemy territory. All the flights were very dangerous. The anti aircraft defence of the German forces was well organised and strong. Many airmen died, were wounded or captured. 51 Czechoslovak pilots were captured in Germany; most of them were from Squadron 311 and many of them were placed in concentration camps, but fortunately all of them survived despite of the very bad conditions of captivity. On 23 September 1940 the squadron attacked Berlin for the first time. The main targets were gasworks and power stations. In the first months of 1941 fighting activity of 40 Squadron 311 increased considerably. The bombers continued their operation flights to centres of industry in Bremen, Wilhemshaven, and Köln and very often they attacked targets in the occupied countries of France, Belgium and the Netherlands. The bombers of Squadron 311 were very successful during the air raid over Hamm, the biggest railway junction. In spring 1941 Squadron 311 began a series of attacks against Brest, an important marine base of the German navy. The squadron was highly awarded for their damage of the German cruiser Princ Eugen which was put out of order for several months. The attacks against the German ports were part of the battle over the Atlantic. When Germany invaded the Soviet Union, the German air force concentrated its strength towards the east, so the British air force could renew its equipment and regenerate its energy and consequently transfer the fighting over to enemy territory. In the spring of 1942 Squadron 311 operated over Germany, bombing industry centres in the Ruhr area. At that time Squadron 311 suffered from heavy losses and a lack of trained reserves. The British Command decided to transfer the squadron to a new base. During that time, for 20 months, Squadron 311 realised 154 operational sorties in which 1000 aircraft took part. 1000 tonnes of bombs were dropped on targets in Germany, France, Belgium, the Netherlands and Italy. Squadron 311 lost 129 men, 23 crews out of 52 were shot down or lost, more then 50 per cent. Squadron 311 was highly valued by the chief commander; he proclaimed that Czechoslovak pilots and navigators proved to be the best men among the bomber groups of the RAF. Squadron 311 joined the Coastal Command in the spring of 1942 and it was given a new reconnaissance role. The aircrafts were to patrol and attack ships and submarines in the battle of the Atlantic in the Biscay Bay, the North Sea and the Baltic Sea. During the first few weeks Czech pilots attacked several submarines, but some men died when their aircraft was shot down by an enemy fighter (e.g. M.Šebela, J.Ocelka, the crew of J. Breicetl). The damage done to the German ship ‘Alsterufer’ in December 1943 was considered a great success. In March 1944 the crew of Warrant Officer O. Žanta, with the very skilled and admired Warrant Officer L. Kadlec, did not come back to the base from a reconnaissance flight. The Czechoslovak pilots also took part in the most important operation – the invasion of France by the Allies and the opening of a new war front in Europe. While fighters secured the invasion directly, the coastal air force, including Squadron 311, guarded over the Channel and searched for enemy submarines and war ships. 41 From August 1944, when the squadron was transferred to Scotland, the pilots were in a reconnaissance role over the Baltic and the North Sea and protected the convoys sailing to the coast of the Soviet Union. During its active military service, which ended on 4 July 1945, Squadron 311 realised 2000 flights. In June 1945, No.311 transferred to the Transport Command and began flights between the UK and Czechoslovakia. On 15 February 1946 the squadron was disbanded as an RAF unit. The Czechoslovak air force fought against Hitler and Germany for all six years of the war. Its contribution to the victory was definitely significant. But their triumphs and successes often cost the ultimate price. Many men made a sacrifice to mankind and lost their lives fighting against Hitler. 511 Czech pilots died and they were either lost at sea or were buried in graves in many countries abroad. The surviving members of Squadron 311 were welcomed home on 20 August 1945. 42 3. Conclusion 3.1 What is non fiction literature and what cannot be considered non fiction literature What we expect from non fiction literature that is truthful, reliable and objective information. It is not only the enumeration of the facts also a description of real people, places and events. We may suppose that the best data can be got from outright participants in the events, direct witnesses. But there is one danger here. It is the subjectivity of the author’s point of view. Marcus Aurelius once stated that “It is important to value information according by the sources from which they come from”. We must bear this statement in mind when considering sources for any further work. We must not only think about the author and have enough information about him, but we must also think about his motives and the circumstances by force of which he could be influenced. Two very different and contrastive examples of literature have been chosen for comparison. The main resources for the didactic material I have chosen are articles written by a local chronicler Svatopluk Rutar. Any description of the political situation has been avoided by the author in these articles. Keeping to the facts enabled the publication of the articles even during the era of socialism. The articles are collections of facts, hence they are worth reading, and without a doubt they have remained a valuable source of information. The articles are of a regional and non fictional character. The absence of comments guarantees their objectivity, unlike the literature that is debased by author’s loyalty to a political party in control of a country. These regional articles have been contrasted with the book that is obviously very subjective and can be considered more as a political pamphlet then as non fiction literature. The decision to choose just Kocman’s book was influenced by the fact that it was recommended on the radio recently. Besides that, the book can be a good illustration of the effect of political influence on people’s thinking and character traits. Vincenc Kocman is a warning example of a man who was strong enough to overcome difficult situations during the fight, but who was too weak to resist the great influence of his political party. After the conclusion of the treaty between the Soviet Union and Germany in 1939, the Soviet Union declared the western countries to be the main enemy. From the behaviour and thought processes of Vincenc Kocman we can see a very strong and naïve belief in the politics of the USSR and the Communist Party. This account, written under the influence of 43 the Communist Party by an author who was still convinced of the correctness of their politics, cannot be considered non fiction literature. It is a great pity that political pressure, maybe even a fear of future existence, has deprived us of direct witnesses of past events. Controversial themes such as politics must be investigated objectively whereas the work of Vincenc Kocman resembles an unreal story about the virtues of an ideal socialist system of government and the wickedness of the capitalist or democratic systems. The interests of the powerful countries, which very often ignored and neglected the interests of the common people, can be pursued in history independently of their political systems. That is the reason why Vincenc Kocman’s ‘black and white’ description of the political situation before and during WWII has an effect on the value of his book. It is common practice for skilled teachers with a good knowledge of history to use even such books as this. They find some parts valuable for their immediacy. Pupils and students are encouraged to take an investigative approach to learning. In the direction of this tendency we can suggest the use of such literature for advanced and critical reading or for task based discussions. 3.2 Advantages and disadvantages of non fictional regional literature for didactic purposes To operate with a model of a school that is open and that collaborates with the public, regional literature appears to be a suitable material for the student and pupil projects involving parents or local inhabitants. Students can search for further information to enrich the basic historical facts with more detail. They can ask for help from older people and local chroniclers and they can look for data in libraries and in old magazines. To solve the problem of a local partiality, it is possible to place the event into a wider context, e.g. into the context of WWII. Thus pupils can get beyond the borders of their birthplace and can look for information by means of the internet. Teachers as tutors must lead pupils to find reliable internet sources. The regional non fiction articles, written by Svatopluk Rutar, about six men fighting in the RAF can be considered a reliable base for further widening investigation. The concise details of the living conditions at the time of the accounts and the piecemeal information about the history can be a challenge for students, pupils and teachers as well; inviting investigative activities. 44 3.3. The quality of sources and access to them What we must admit is that a huge number of works dealing with the history of WWII appeared in the book shops after a long period of a hunger for a reliable historical literature. These books, mainly competing for a reputation for objectivity, can serve us as a comparative tool with which to judge previous sources. We must still be careful about their main motivations and about the attitude of the author to the events that are dealt with. The decision just to use material from the history of WWII in this thesis has not been influenced by a generally increasing interest in the history of WWII; it is to be considered only as an example of a regional literature. The main intention was to rely on a close connection between the dead and their living descendants. The stories of men who still have relatives and descendants in their native villages will be more attractive for pupils or students from those villages and will give them a chance to find out more about the men and their deeds. A need for further sources will bring pupils and students to local libraries, and will bring them into contact with chroniclers and senior citizens. Interviews, family photo albums, old magazines and newspapers will enrich and extend the number of sources. 3.4 The attractiveness of regional literature for the younger generation and the integration of regional history with teaching foreign languages and other school subjects An important component of internationalism in the curriculum, as recommended at schools today, is learning about the cultures of other nations. Many teachers have experienced that children know a lot about other cultures, but they often do not know anything about their own culture. It makes them unable to engage in dialogue with foreign pupils or students that are interested in our culture. There are many areas of interest that can be integrated into the teaching process. As an example I present an extracurricular group of young modellers at our school. Several generations of pupils have made models of trains, railway engines and fighter planes. The boys dealing with aircrafts show a vast and very detailed knowledge of planes and even of their role in the war. They are able to reconstruct real fighting operations and air force bases, including all the necessary equipment. The connection of a technical knowledge with real historical events and the stories about these fighter pilots could be enriching and interesting for them. This means integrating the subject matter of history and citizenship and using their foreign language skills for contact with foreign modellers and air force enthusiasts. The same 45 process is applicable to courses of folk dance, folk crafts, and ecological hobby groups. For all these areas of interest regional literature may be a good source of vital information and it can contribute to a better students’ knowledge of their subject of interest. 3.5 Technical support and new didactic methods along with traditional teaching in the context of the subject in focus To start project work in foreign language teaching means to prepare lead in activities. Valuable resources for such lead in activities can be based on the subject matter of other school subjects. For example, children learn about culture during lessons on citizenship. According to a new tendency in the school curriculum, the topic integrates learning about one’s own culture and learning and understanding other countries’ cultures: so called multicultural education. Culture is usually influenced by the history of a nation. Thus teachers of history, citizenship and language can cooperate and can prepare lesson plans on a common topic. In this way the educational area of ‘man and society’ is connected with language teaching by means of a cross section topic. In project work, a regional literature can serve as a device for shifting a topic into the real world and can increase the motivation and interest of students or pupils. Besides linguistic and non linguistic tasks (which in foreign language teaching mean writing, understanding of complex texts, or at least improving pupil’s attitude to language learning in general), project work represents many other activities. These activities enable students or pupils to work according to their individual abilities and give them a chance to use modern technology, e.g. they can use audio cassettes, microphones and recorders when they are in a role of an investigative reporter. Students enjoy using electronic information services, e books, interactive media, live or pre recorded programmes on TV, video cassettes, CDs, and DVDs when they are looking for information or want to record data. Making copies of documents is very common and making overhead transparencies to show texts, maps or pictures with overhead projector is very popular. Modern technology is useful for students, pupils or teachers at all stages of their project work. By means of this new technology teachers or students can examine the objectiveness or validity of literary sources, compare various sources, look for further information and share what they have discovered or what they have learnt with other, even foreign, students. 46 New technology and new teaching methods can breathe life into older, regional literature and can bring it back to schools, and maybe will also improve students’ and pupils’ attitude to their own culture and to learning languages as well. 47 Bibliography Podluží Kunc, Radimír. Clay Eva : volá Londýn [Clay Eve: London Calling] 2 nd ed. Brno: Kunc, 1948. Taylor, A.J.P. The Origins of the Second World War . 2nd ed. London: Penguin Group. 1964. Kocman, Vincenc. Boj bez slávy [The fight without the glory]. Brno: Krajské nakladatelství v Brně,1962. „Mikroregion Podluží“. Region Podluží, bulletin. Svazek obcí Mikroregion Podluží Royal Air Force [online]. 2001. 4 Oct. 2006. 10 Sept. 2006.
Rudolf Bolfík Rutar, Svatopluk. „ Rudolf Bolfík, bojovník proti fašismu “ [Rudolph Bolfik, fighter against fascism]. Vlastivědný sborník Jižní Morava 22, 1986: pp.305 309. Rutar, Svatopluk. „ Na křídlech za svobodou“ [On the wings to freedom]. Malovaný kraj 4, 1983: 3 Kocman, Vincenc. Boj bez slávy [The fight without the glory]. Brno: Krajské nakladatelství v Brně,1962. Radosta, Petr. Noci nad Německem [Nights over Germany]. Praha: Nadas, 1990. Bufka, Vilém. Bombardér T 2990 sa odmlčal [Bomber T 2990 stopped working]. Bratislava: Svoboda, 1967. Pros, Josef. Španělské víno [Spanish wine]. Prague: Naše Vojsko, 1987. Čejka, Eduard. Zlomená křídla [Broken Wings]. Prague: Naše vojsko, 1962. Hess, Alexandr. Byli jsme v boji o Anglii [We were in the battle of England] 2 nd ed. Prague: Československá obec legionářská, 1947. Nedoma, Rudolf. . Bombardovali jsmeNěmecko [We bombed Germany].Olomouc,1946. 48 Groehler, Olaf. Letecká válka 1939 1945 [Air Force War 1939/1945]. Prague: Panorama, 1981. Šimáček, Rudolf. Za ostnatými dráty [Behind the barbed wire]. Bulletin Antifacists of the region Břeclavsko remembering. Břeclav: SPB, 1967: 1 3. Liška, Antonín. Stíny na obloze [Shadows in the sky]. Prague: ed.R.Vilímek, 1946. Hošek, Jaroslav. Personal Interview. Prague. 7 May 1974. Šimáček, Rudolf. Personal Interview. Břeclav. 6 March 1982. Soběslavský, Alois, Personal Interview. Prague. 11 June 1974. Royal Air Force [online]. 2001. 4 Oct. 2006. 10 Sept. 2006.
Tato bakalářská práce je věnována problematice regionální literatury a jejího využití pro didaktické účely. Jako příklad regionální literatury byly vybrány články o osudu šesti mužů pocházejících z malých vesnic na Jižní Moravě, v oblasti zvané Podluží. Místní kronikář v nich popsal životní osudy těchto mužů během druhé světové války, kdy opustili své domovy a odešli do Velké Británie bojovat proti Německu jako piloti Britského královského letectva. Základní informace, které jsou převzaty z článků místního kronikáře, ze svědectví rodinných příslušníků, přátel a vlastní korespondence letců, byly ověřeny v knihách, dokumentech, článcích v tisku, zprávách. Podrobné informace o Letce č. 311 a její činnosti jsou čerpány z knih a internetových zdrojů. Tato práce je určena učitelům, kteří usilují o integraci učiva různých předmětů, multikulturní výchovu a využívají k tomu i výuku cizích jazyků. Hlavním záměrem této práce je posoudit regionální literaturu z hlediska jejího využití pro didaktické účely. To znamená zkoumat spolehlivost údajů, jejich celistvost a platnost, regionální omezení i atraktivnost této literatury. Cílem práce je uvedení regionální literatury zpět do života, do škol. Motivovat pedagogické pracovníky k využívání těchto zdrojů nejenom k poznávání vlastní kultury, ale také k propojení školy s veřejností, ke vzájemnému poznávání evropských kultur, ke komunikaci při sdělování informací o své vlastní kultuře, k výuce jazyků i k moderním způsobům vyhledávání doplňkových informací a jejich zpracování. 53 Appendices contents App. 1: The emblem of No. 311 (Czechoslovak) Squadron RAF App. 2: The flag of No. 311 Squadron; No. 311 Squadron RAF on the airfield of East Wrethem in 1940 App. 3: The military school for pilots – Prostějov in 1932; Wellington before the take off App. 4: Czechoslovak soldiers defending Paris in 1940; the embarking in Sete App. 5: The Czechoslovaks in the International Brigade App. 6: Rudolf Bolfík; his birthplace a village of Mikulčice App. 7: Rudolf Bolfík wounded in Spain in 1939 App. 8: The document of rehabilitation in 1991 (Bolfík promoted a lieutenant colonel in Memoriam) App. 9: Vladimír Sobotka and his birthplace of Moravská Nová Ves App. 10: The visit of Dr.Edward Beneš in Honington; a part of No. 311 Squadron App. 11: Geier and his friends of the Squadron No. 311; Czechoslovak War Cross 1939 App. 12: J. Geier and his living place of Lužice App 13: The glass works in Cairo; the camp of the Czechoslovak No. ll Batallion in Sidi Bishr App. 14: The battle formation in Tobruki; Gaier’s last landing, Ruzyně 1945 App. 15: Pavel Dřevěný and his birthplace of Dolní Bojanovice App. 16: Pavel Dřevěný with com patriots in Margo; the bomber Liberator App. 17: Military personal documentation – the register of Pavel Dřevěný. App. 18: The camp of Czechoslovak soldiers in Cholmondeley in 1940; the crew of Wellington App. 19: Josef Taláb and his birthplace of Hrušky App. 20: Warrant Officer Josef Taláb in 1931; the bomber aircraft Wellington App. 21: The memorial to Josef Taláb and Zdeněk Novosad in Hrušky App. 22: Štěpán Štětka and the birthplace of his grandparents App. 23: Personal military documentation – the register of Štěpán Štětka. App. 24: The memorial to pilots in Runnymede in Great Britain – 150 Czech and Slovak soldiers App. 25: The map of the location of the Czechoslovak RAF wings in Great Britain (1940 1945)