This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Visual arts, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage ofvisual arts on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.Visual artsWikipedia:WikiProject Visual artsTemplate:WikiProject Visual artsvisual arts
This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Germany, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage ofGermany on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.GermanyWikipedia:WikiProject GermanyTemplate:WikiProject GermanyGermany
... thatMax Beckmann paintedTraum von Monte Carlo(pictured) while exiled in Amsterdam, portraying a casino he once visited as an allegorical vision of destruction and moral decay?
Interesting painting, well covered on good sources, offline sources accepted AGF, no copyvio obvious. Before we get into detail we need to talk about the title. The article was moved to an English title, not by the creator, but I don't see referenes used mentioning that title, and we should not invent one.TouchedWithFire, what do you think? - Of the two hooks, I prefer ALT1, and I love seeing the image, which is licensed. --Gerda Arendt (talk)21:15, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Gerda Arendt: I agree with you regarding the title, Traum von Monte Carlo is the the title given to it by Beckmann, and even if it can be translated, that doesn't mean that it should. The only sources I see that use "Dream of Monte Carlo" are websites which sell reproductions, hardly reliable sources... And regarding the hook, Alt 1 is fine, in fact it was originally my first choice too.TouchedWithFire (talk)07:29, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I am the main contributor of the German-language articleTraum von Monte Carlo, seehere. The translation (into EN) and the abridgement was probably based on the article I wrote. Is this recorded anywhere?
I have now skimmed through the English article. In my opinion, this article is incorrect in some places.
Max Beckmann was not a expressionist. He rightly resisted such a classification. Art history also takes a much more nuanced view.
Beckmann did not go from Frankfurt to Amsterdam. He left Frankfurt to live in Berlin for several years. From Berlin, he went to Amsterdam in 1937.
The painting was not purchased by a private collector.Helmuth Lütjens [de] bought it from Beckmann in 1945. Eleven years later, he sold it to the Staatsgalerie Stuttgart. Lütjens represented an eminently important gallery, the Paul Cassirer Art Salon. For more information on the significance of this salon, seehere.
The art dealer Maria Almas-Dietrich was not an employee of Lohse; she occasionally collaborated with him. That's something else.
In my opinion, these inaccuracies and errors mean that the article is not ready for presentation on the main page.
Thank you for the information. I'm not the author, but looked at both versions, saw that it looks like at least a partial translation, and added a template to the talk page. A translation should also be mentioned in the initial edit, - if that was missed in a later edit. - I changed your direct links into the German Wikipedia to interlanguage links, because blind people would get confused. - I'll wait forTouchedWithFire. --Gerda Arendt (talk)18:28, 23 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Atomiccocktail, thank you for your comments. You are right about the attribution, I regret to say that I only recently learned that translating articles requires attribution to the original language, and I apologize for the mistake. Thank you for your contributions which made this article possible, and many thanks toGerda Arendt for bringing it to my attention and adding the template to the talk page. As for your comments, I find them somewhat puzzling. I'll tell you what I mean:
Max Beckmann was not a expressionist - according to most of the English sources I have seen, including the Encyclopedia Britannica, he is defined as an Expressionist, and that is also how he is described in the Wikipedia article about him. I understand that it would no doubt cause him quite a bit of discomfort if he knew that he would be labeled as such, but the fact remains that he was influenced by expressionism, and his art shares too much with it to be ignored. See Carrie Robbins' essay on him for the nuances of this definition.[1] I will provide additional sources in the article.
Beckmann did not go from Frankfurt to Amsterdam - thank you for the comment, the sentence was wrong, and I have corrected it. Though if you meant that it is necessary for Beckmann's years in Berlin to be mentioned - the sources I've seen, including the Britannica ("Finding the conditions in Germany intolerable, he fled to Amsterdam in 1937."), The Tate Museum article about Beckmann ("Under the Nazi regime Beckmann was classified as a 'degenerate' artist and fled to Amsterdam in 1937."), the Kallir Research Institute article about Beckmann ("Beckmann was dismissed from the Städelschule and vilified by the Nazis as soon as Hitler came to power in 1933. His works hung in the first room of the “Degenerate Art” exhibition in 1937. The day of the show’s opening, the artist and his wife fled to Amsterdam, where they lived out the war.") and the Guggenheim article about Beckmann ("The day after the show opened in July in Munich, the artist left Germany for Amsterdam, where he remained until 1947.") do not go down to that resolution, and do not mention his years in Berlin. Please provide a source so I may include them.
The painting was not purchased by a private collector. Based on the sources available to me, the painting was acquired by Lütjens,[2] I am fine with calling him an art dealer as opposed to a collector, though it is my understanding that it was for his own private collection. I cannot find evidence that it was purchased for the Paul Cassirer Art Salon, and it is not mentioned among the pieces with Cassirer provenance in the article on the Berlin Museum's website.[3] That being said the date of purchase in the article is incorrect and will be fixed.
The art dealer Maria Almas-Dietrich was not an employee of Lohse - I don't understand, the only mention of her in the article calls her a collaborator and not an employee...
I look forward to further comments, and of course a collaboration to make the article better would be welcome. Once everything is resolved I would like to continue the DYK process. Thank you!
Interesting painting, well covered on good sources, offline sources accepted AGF, no copyvio obvious. Before we get into detail we need to talk about the title. The article was moved to an English title, not by the creator, but I don't see referenes used mentioning that title, and we should not invent one.TouchedWithFire, what do you think? - Of the two hooks, I prefer ALT1, and I love seeing the image, which is licensed. --Gerda Arendt (talk)21:15, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
ALT1 preferred. --Gerda Arendt (talk)20:00, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
