The university system in Central Europe has been the focus of historical and institutional research for some time, with a particular interest in the educational institutions in the Bohemian lands. In this context, the oldest university in the region, Prague's Charles University, is logically at the center of research. In fact, the university in Prague is a peculiarity, as it has a long tradition since 1348 and, since the division in 1882 into a Czech and a German institution, it is considered a “double” university, which has always been involved in national and political controversies and conflicts. Most recently, the Prague historian Ota Konrád has presented a study of the humanities at Prague's German University, which, through its departments of History, German Studies, and Slavic Studies, had a special relationship to national linguistic and cultural contexts (Geisteswissenschaften im Umbruch. Die Fächer Geschichte, Germanistik und Slawistik an der Deutschen Universität Prag 1918-1945 [2020]).

The present study differs from these works, which are more oriented toward the history of science and organization, in that it focuses on the university system as a whole. Furthermore, the authors are interested in analyzing the current challenges of the Central European university. Therefore, the book deals with historical as well as current topics concerning the system of universities in Central Europe: The first topic is “the contradiction between unavoidable internationalization”—the authors mention the use of English, exchange visits of teachers and students, guest lecturers, one could add international research programs—“and maintaining a distinct national character” of the institutions (9). The second challenge is “the contradiction between unavoidable reforms which are required through changes in our understanding of education, economic pressure and the needs of society, and the necessity to preserve traditions which allow the university to settle in a specific region and area” (9). Then there is the contradiction between “specific disciplines and their methodologies” and the favored idea of interdisciplinarity, “which is required in relation to project and grant policies” (9). And finally, “the contradiction between the requirements of scientific research and teaching—i.e. the relationship between them” (9). However, these are topics or challenges not only for Central European universities, but for universities as a whole. The authors want to understand university history and attempt to analyze individual aspects in more detail. For this reason, reference is made to the different myths that still characterize the university system today.

These myths are the myth of university freedom, the Humboldtian myth, the myth of the united university, the myth of indisputable foundations, the myth of contributing to society, the myth of autonomous university governance, and the myth of territory. With the method of deconstructing these myths, the authors intend to reconstruct the history of university culture or, in other words, to offer a cultural analysis of specific university milieus, in which the mentioned myths succeed in linking the present academic sphere with the past. Based on C. G. Jung's concept of the archetype, according to the central thesis, an imprinting of the institution and its members takes place. In concrete terms, it is thus a matter of university symbols and rituals, of memory strategies, from which the specific forms of appearance of Central European universities can be derived. In this context, a contradiction between Humboldtian ideals and the modern demands of “academic” capitalism is also apparent at Central European universities.

Going into some of the analysis in detail, important considerations emerge, for example, on the fatal role of intellectuals and their misperceptions. One recognizes different ideological and organizational influences in the tension between Soviet and U.S. concepts of the university. One can see the tension in an institution that is caught between the positions of a critical distance from society, the understanding of the institution as a training facility and service center, and at least a “starting point for entry into [the] establishment” (126). Within this framework, the authors observe a debate about “the usefulness of the university” especially in the Czech Republic, which is the “result of institutions, disciplines and individuals searching for their place within a system of differentiated higher education” (157). The problem is that the “system has emerged without clear goals, without defined objectives” (157). In the final analysis, the two authors formulate a justified unease about an increasing economization of the institution of the university as well as of the entire system of higher education, which ultimately the emergence of academic capitalism. This transformation becomes clear in a humorous survey in which a globalized discourse on education is juxtaposed with a traditional and locally anchored one.

In the end, the authors recognize a conflict between public pressure on the one hand, and the idea of ivory tower on the other.

Finally, the authors develop some recommendations for how the institution of the university should act in future. In summary, it can be said that this study provides important impulses for a future discussion about the value of higher education, and that it is recommended reading especially for those holding positions of responsibility in academic institutions.