he had co-founded. Göpel had written to the 13 Barbara and Erhard Göpel: artist in the US several times, as Beckmann’s wife confirmed in a letter from 1951 while also underscoring the old, friendly bond between A Convergence Beckmann and his “Eckermann.” “Neither I nor Beckmann,” she wrote, “have forgot- ten the ‘A.-Zeit’ [time in Amsterdam]—and I Von Eugen Blume The history of one of the most exemplary cata- hope and believe you sense and understand logues raisonnés in the area of classic modern- that, even if it was only greetings and imagi- ism had its start in the late 1920s. Erhard nary letters that were sent to Eckermann!” 3 Göpel, a young art historian from Leipzig who In 1948, three years after the end of the war, had actually dedicated himself to ancient art the forty-two-year-old Göpel was hired at his and, already as a fourteen-year-old, absorbed first permanent job, as an editor at the Prestel expert knowledge at C. G. Borner, an art deal- Verlag publishing house in Munich, which ership specializing in prints and drawings, was was to become his adopted hometown. A brief captivated by the work of Max Beckmann. It is time later, the “A .-Ze it ” began to catch up not known exactly when the fire was sparked. with him. The photograph that Peter Keetman Göpel may have seen the Beckmann retrospec- took of Göpel in front of a Munich window tive organized by Gustav Hartlaub at the Mann- display in 1954 (fig. 1) seems to illustrate the heim Kunsthalle in 1928. Four years later, he question that began circulating at the time made the artist’s acquaintance in Paris and vis- about his role as a Sonderbeauftragter (special ited him at his Berlin studio in 1934. Under the representative) for the so-called Führermuseum new regime in Germany, Beckmann had lost his in Linz. 4 When Ernst Buchner, the freshly professorship at the Städelschule in Frankfurt reappointed but controversial director general am Main. The impressive Beckmann space that of the Bayerische Staatsgemäldesammlungen, Ludwig Justi had installed on the upper level of wanted to hire Göpel, the German Ministry of the Museum der Gegenwart in the Kronprinzen- Culture and the boardroom of several news- palais, a branch of the Nationalgalerie, had papers, including the Süddeutsche Zeitung also been successively dismantled by the time and the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, Beckmann and his fellow artists were ultimately received copies of Göpel’s telegram to Martin denounced in 1937. The first of Göpel’s texts Bormann from April 1943, 5 in which he on Beckmann was published in 1934, on the proposed acquiring the looted French Jewish artist’s fiftieth birthday, in the Neue Leipziger Schoss family collection for Linz. As a result, Zeitung. It was the sole public tribute to a not only was Göpel’s hoped-for employment painter who just a few years earlier had been at the Staatsgemäldesammlungen permanent- celebrated as a genius. Göpel wrote at the time: ly suspended; the newspapers for which he “When the sixty-year-old looks back at 1934, regularly wrote also ceased to engage him there will be no doubt that he would again give further. Göpel was nonetheless apparently shape to today for tomorrow.” 1 The author of able to convince a few of his critics of his these lines could scarcely have anticipated that innocence and a brief time later felt “personally Beckmann would be living in exile in the Neth- and politically” rehabilitated, as he wrote in an erlands from 1937 on or how much he himself unpublished text. 6 What was he accused of? would be involved in the artist’s fate. How right he was in presuming that Beckmann would shape “today for tomorrow.” In Frankfurt the artist had already started his triptych Departure 3 Mathilde Q. Beckmann to Erhard Göpel, January (1934), a mythical prophecy of displacement 26, 1951, estate of Barbara Göpel, Max Beckmann and violence on a previously unknown scale. Archive, Bayerische Staatsgemäldesammlungen, Some seven years after Beckmann passed Munich. Published in Max Beckmann: Beiträge away, Göpel wrote an essay on the artist’s life 2019, Hefte des Max Beckmann Archivs 16, and work for the Propyläen-Verlag publishing ed. Christian Lenz (2019), p. 2. house. 2 He was among the first, following the 4 The photograph by Peter Keetman (1916–2005) years of defamation, to reintroduce Beckmann was made for the book München: Lebenskreise into the public consciousness. Together with einer Stadt, text by Erhard Göpel, photography the artist’s widow, Mathilde Q. Beckmann, by Peter Keetman (Lindau, 1955). then residing in the United States, he nego- tiated the publication of the artist’s diaries 5 In 1957 (?), in an undated letter to the then and was engaged with the idea of a catalogue director of the culture section of the Frankfurter raisonné, a task he proposed be undertaken Allgemeine Zeitung, Karl Korn, Erhard Göpel by the Max Beckmann Gesellschaft, which suspected that the Jewish journalist Susanne Carvin, who had returned from exile, along with the SPD politician and resistance fighter Walde- mar von Knoeringen had distributed the 1 Erhard Göpel, Max Beckmann: Berichte eines telegram. Cf. the typewritten copy of the letter, Augenzeugen, ed. Barbara Göpel (Frankfurt am estate of Barbara Göpel, Max Beckmann Archive, Main, 1984), p. 11. Bayerische Staatsgemäldesammlungen, Munich.

2 Cf. Erhard Göpel, “Max Beckmann–Mensch 6 Cf. typewritten manuscript, 14 pages, undated, und Werk,” ibid., pp. 12–35. ibid. 14 In 1939 the art historian Göpel (b. 1906 in sums made available by Hitler via the party One “rescued” oneself in work-by-the-book Leipzig) was drafted as a Sonderführer (special headquarters led by Martin Bormann. His oriented toward a higher ideal and smoothly leader) in the salary grade—though not the ser- credentials included above all his work as an served the system, operating fluently un- vice rank—of a captain in an interpreter platoon assistant to the great scholar and connoisseur der its regulations. Neither Posse, who was of an infantry replacement battalion. With Frits Lugt, who knew every collector and dealer already terminally ill at the time of Göpel’s that, his art-historical career appeared to be in the area of Old Masters in Europe. There appointment; his successor, Hermann Voss; temporary ended. In 1941 the art historian Göpel had worked in particular on the cata- nor the employees Gottfried Reimer and Robert Oertel, likewise a Leipzig native and a loguing of Netherlandish drawings from the Robert Oertel were committed National friend of Göpel’s then working, under Hans Louvre. 8 He spoke, among other languages, Socialists but, rather, conservative art his- Posse for the planned museum in Linz, at the fluent Dutch and had graduated with a disser- torians who saw themselves as apolitical. Gemäldegalerie Alte Meister in Dresden, tation, supervised by Theodor Hetzer, titled When Göpel arrived in Holland and moved recommended him as an expert for Old Ein Bildnisauftrag für van Dyck (A portrait into his office at the former Czechoslovakian Dutch art. Posse was no longer able to look commission for Van Dyck). embassy in The Hague, he was surrounded after this area himself due to health reasons. Preserved in several archives, the correspon- by military and secret service command posts. On April 16, 1942, Göpel was released from dence between Dresden and Göpel’s office He dealt with the Reichskommissar of the the army and starting May 1, ordered to in The Hague reveals how this art-histor- occupied Netherlands, Arthur Seyss-Inquart, the enterprise headquarters in Dresden. The ical procurement office perceived itself. In and was subordinate to General Commis- work he now began under Posse’s direction contrast to the gamblers in the entourage of sioner for Special Purposes Schmidt and, and, after the latter’s death, under that of Reichsmarschall Hermann Göring, dealers after his unexplained death, the SS member Hermann Voss, for the Special Commission like Karl Haberstock, and the racist function- Wilhelm Ritterbusch. The brutal occupation Linz at the Reichskommisar for the occu- aries around Alfred Rosenberg, the Special power immediately began interning the Jewish pied Netherlandish area in the Department Commission Linz apparently saw itself as an population at and successively deporting them for Special Questions of Art Acquisition in art historically serious enterprise that solely from the Westerbork transit camp. The task The Hague, was more than problematic. fulfilled Hitler’s assignment to procure a of viewing and acquiring artworks emotion- The surviving documents are a windfall for re- qualitatively superior art collection for the lessly, preferably at a distance via middlemen constructing this unprecedented undertaking, museum planned in the so-called Ostmark. or agencies, might have succeeded while at a although important questions remain unan- This becomes evident in a November 23, 1942 desk in Dresden. Göpel, however, was directly swered. Birgit Schwarz is to be credited for memorandum Göpel penned to his superi- confronted with the practices of the SD (Secu- her research rectifying the hitherto prevailing or in Holland, General Commissioner for rity Service) and the SS (Protective Echelon) myth about the scope of the museum project. Special Purposes Fritz Schmidt. Addressing on site. The reality exposed the lie of an She set the proportions of this enterprise on the article on art theft in Holland “What unpolitical art-historical task and was further a realistic scale. 7 Considerably more difficult a Country to Plunder!,” 9 which had been fraught by old friends and acquaintances who is forming an opinion about the people who published in the flyer Voice of the Nether- repeatedly approached Göpel and the Special worked as privileged functionaries on an lands, Göpel wrote: “Truth and exaggeration Commission with pleas to help their Jewish ambitious museum project, personally run are mixed here, but even so, the majority relatives and acquaintances. When, in a letter by Hitler, that was essentially based on art of facts is correct. From that perspective, from January 19, 1943, Mathilde Q. Beckmann theft. From the outset, the planned museum great importance must be placed on a clear asked Göpel to do something for the interned in Linz was a product of a war that, because and clean handling of the purchases.” 10 Jewish woman Ilse Leembruggen, she was of its racist dynamic, released Jewish bour- clearly speaking of mortal danger, not the Under the umbrella of a building project geois holdings of art as booty, especially in euphemistic work camps, and added: “It is to based on racist crimes, the practical art his- the west of Europe. Objects that a regulated you and this woman that [Max Beckmann] torical expertise was raised to a neutral realm. art market could only have acquired in the owes his life in these difficult years.” 11 Göpel One scanned both what the market offered rarest of cases suddenly became available. saw himself as a man of culture, as an homme and the confiscated Jewish property without Artworks of the highest caliber could be de lettres, as his friend Günther Busch re- any particular scruple, subsuming the current confiscated on the basis of German racial laws ferred to him. 12 In his role as “Sonderbeauf- transactions under the general history of and their owners blackmailed, expelled, or tragter of the Führer” he was on the one hand violence concerning artworks, which itself deported. Among those competing for the a knowledgeable and successful buyer of was treated like a given and irrevocable fact spoils were not just high-ranking National top-ranking Old Master works that mostly of the balance of power. Perhaps one recalled Socialists. The loot soon also fell into the derived from Jewish property. He was Napoleon and his European and Egyptian hands of the “Aryanized” and long-established sensitive when it came to matters of art, booty for the Louvre in Paris. Some ninety art trade, which was particularly revitalized extraordinarily ambitious, and, on the other percent of the official correspondence dis- in the Netherlands. Under the absolute power hand, clearly aware of the regime’s brutality. cusses the quality, the authenticity, possible of the so-called Führer’s prerogative, the Linz sellers, and the price of the works on offer, As a young man, Göpel had been engaged project aimed at securing the best works. mostly derived from the art trade, which had in an advisory role for typographical and Göpel’s entry into the service of Hitler’s vision been revived by the Special Commission. creative tasks by the intellectual department of building a museum in Linz to house art of store owner, Zionist, and publisher Salman the nineteenth century and the Old Masters gave the thirty-six-year-old art historian a high degree of privilege. His task was to travel 8 Cf. J. F. Heijbroek, Frits Lugt 1884–1970: through the Netherlands as well as, beginning Living for Art: A Biography (Paris and Bussum, 11 Mathilde Q. Beckmann to Erhard Göpel, January August 26, 1943, France and Belgium and 2012). On Erhard Göpel, see esp. pp. 375–78. 19, 1943, Erhard Göpel Papers, Correspondence, acquire first-class works of art using enormous 9 Cf. Voice of the Netherlands, Letters to E. Göpel, Department of Manuscripts, vol. 2, no. 5, September 19, 1942. Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Munich.

10 Erhard Göpel to General Commissioner for Spe- 12 Cf. Günther Busch, “Nachwort,” in Erhard Göpel, 7 Cf. Birgit Schwarz, Hitlers Museum: Die Foto- cial Purposes Fritz Schmidt, November 23, 1943, Max Beckmann: Berichte eines Augenzeugen, alben der Gemäldegalerie Linz: Dokumente zum Erhard Göpel Papers, Department of Manu- ed. Barbara Göpel (Frankfurt am Main, 1984), “Führermuseum,“ (Vienna et al., 2004). scripts, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Munich. pp. 223–28, here p. 226. Schocken and worked together with his archi- collectors, offered his services to locate im- would otherwise forego under such circum- 15 tect, Erich Mendelsohn. 13 Göpel was thus portant artworks in Switzerland and to alert stances. “My arguments,” Göpel wrote later, intimately familiar with the advantages of the Göpel about them in Holland. Göpel and Voss “could never be of a human nature, and I “Jewish intelligentsia” and their cosmopolitan worked toward organizing Katz’s departure always had to state how useful these people thinking. When he returned to occupied for Switzerland along with twenty-five family were for the supply of significant artworks.” 19 Holland in 1943, the Jewish collectors and art members. 16 The former helped a large num- In the writing of art history, opinions differ dealers whom Göpel, almost entirely through ber of people to trade pictures for exit travel about his involvement. The curator Beatrice Frits Lugt, had personally met and from documents or succeeded in placing them von Bormann has argued for taking the larger whom he profited intellectually were directly under the protection of the “Führerauftrag” context into account: threatened. And he now was returning as a (Führer commission). Göpel was more than Göpel’s double role during the war and his henchman of this inhuman regime, even aware of the plight of the Jewish sellers. Time significance for Beckmann are what make in the thankful eyes of his great hero, Max and again, he was able to delay deportation him such an exceptionally interesting Beckmann. dates in this “trade,” even attaining exemp- character. It does not do him justice to either tions from wearing the star to the extent that Göpel’s conscience apparently prompted him decline to mention his position during a few people were completely struck from to employ as many Jewish people as possible the war or to demonize him for it, as has the list. The deportation of the art dealer for the Special Commission. At times over been done in the past.20 Abraham Nijstad and his family, for instance, forty Jewish experts worked on his staff, was repeatedly postponed, until, in April 1943, Living in exile in Amsterdam from 1937 on, including such prominent names as Max J. they finally succeeded in obtaining an in- the artist Max Beckmann, was extremely Friedländer and Vitale Bloch. Friedländer’s definite release. 17 With information provided grateful to Göpel. The latter had twice rescued rescue is, however, attributed to the protection by his superior Voss, Göpel succeeded in him from being drafted into military service, of Göring, who had a great interest in getting a Swiss visa for the art dealer Pieter which would have devastated the artist be- Friedländer’s expert assessments, many of de Boer and his Jewish wife, Cornelia, along cause he suffered from a severe heart condi- which he had made for Alois Miedl. Miedl in with her parents, David and Berta Pressburger, tion. Beckmann also appreciated their many turn split Holland’s most prestigious Jewish in exchange for a painting by Salomon von conversations in front of his pictures, which art dealership—that of Jacques Goudstikker— Ruysdael, The Halt before the Inn. De Boer demonstrated to him that Göpel was one of with Göring in a simulated forced sale. This also offered four pictures by Jan Bruegel the the few people who understood his artistic left the craftsmen, conservators, frame build- Elder in exchange for his former business intentions. Yet Beckmann was also aware of ers, and their families in a precarious position; partner Otto Busch, who, together with his Göpel’s activity and even visited him several they were more difficult to retain and could at wife, Frieda, was to be deported on Septem- times at his office in The Hague, where de- any time be replaced by their “Aryan” Dutch ber 10, 1943. Göpel had already asked Voss livered artworks always stood waiting to be counterparts. 14 On October 18, 1943, Göpel to speed things up on September 6, 1943. In evaluated. Göpel, whom Beckmann referred had to explain the conspicuous number of his sentence, “Then I can at least achieve that to with curious pseudonyms in his Amster- Jewish employees to Seyss-Inquart, Busch and his wife remain in Holland,” 18 we dam diary, not only transported the artist’s SS-Brigadeführer Erich Nauman, and the sense the sympathy that one, for good reason, works to Germany but also bought paintings, director of the Department for the Jewish drawings, and graphics from Beckmann’s stu- Question, Sturmbannführer Wilhelm Zöpf, dio at Rokin 85 and thus contributed to safe- among others. Göpel had succeeded in 16 “I hereby confirm that the painting by Rem- guarding his existence. For him, Beckmann keeping a large number of the people listed brandt, Portrait of Roman, will be transferred was the leading artist of his time. by name and address in the minutes and even into the possession of the German Reich . . . as getting them exempted from wearing the Star Beckmann painted Göpel in 1944 (fig. 2). We soon as the twenty-five members of the Katz of David. Even so, with a stroke of a pencil, could regard the portrait as a courtesy piece, family have left the territory of the German Reich. other people were also released for deporta- or at least as a commissioned work done out The prerequisite for this is that the picture be tion and so-called mixed marriages divided. 15 of gratitude, if it weren’t for something that paid for with the assets of Nathan and Benjamin deeply troubled the sitter himself. Here, Beck- Göpel consulted with art dealers on how to Katz, which are being made available until Octo- mann held a mirror up to his friend into which obtain a visa in exchange for art and to nego- ber 1, 1942.” Nathan Katz to Erhard Göpel, Au- he would probably have preferred not to gaze. tiate emigrating together with one’s relatives gust 19, 1942, Erhard Göpel Papers, Department Beckmann initially drew Göpel on January 23, and household goods. The art dealer Nathan of Manuscripts, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek. 1944, to the music of Maurice Ravel, as he Katz, with his excellent connections to Dutch 17 Abraham Nijstad, his wife, and their children confided to his diary. Prior to that, as hefur - survived the Holocaust. In the public debate, ther noted, he had shown Göpel “some Faust 5,” Göpel has been accused of exploiting the pre- which, as he put it, Göpel had to “chew 13 Cf. the archival materials on Erhard Göpel dicament and trading lives for information and through laboriously.” 21 Thus, from the very and Salman Schocken, Erhard Göpel Papers, works of art. The accusation fails to recognize, Department of Manuscripts, Bayerische however, that Nijstad and his family (like others Staatsbibliothek, Munich. 19 Typewritten manuscript, 14 pages, undated, ibid. as well) only survived through their willingness 14 The Jewish conservators Hartog Cohen and Lion to work as an agent for the Special Commission 20 Beatrice von Bormann, “Decade in ‘Ironing Morpurgo along with their families, were depor- Linz. Whether this involvement in fact signified Board Land’: Max Beckmann in Dutch Exile,” in ted to Theresienstadt on January 18, 1944. There an effective collaboration by, for instance, Nijstad, Max Beckmann: Exile in Amsterdam, ed. Carla they set up a workshop to restore pieces for the remains the subject of future research. Proble- Schulz-Hoffmann, Christian Lenz, and Beatrice Special Commission. Cf. letter from Sturmbann- matizing this “trade” between Nijstad as well as von Bormann, exh. cat. Van Gogh Museum, führer Wilhelm Zöpf, January 14, 1944, copy other Jewish people such as Max J. Friedländer Amsterdam; Pinakothek der Moderne, Munich from the Nederlands Instituut voor Oorlogs- (who also produced expert reports for Hermann (Munich, 2007), pp. 107–33, here p. 127. documentatie (NIOD), estate of Barbara Göpel, Göring) and Göpel in ethical terms borders on 21 Max Beckmann, Tagebücher 1940–1950 (Mu- Max Beckmann Archive, Bayerische Staatsge- the cynical. Göpel’s only means of helping Jews nich, 1955), p. 68, entry from Sunday, January 23, mäldesammlungen, Munich. was the power of his office. 1944: “zeigte ihm etwas Faust 5. Akt—[the passage 15 Cf. memorandum about the meeting, October 18, 18 Erhard Göpel to Hermann Voss, September 6, “musste es mühsam fressen.” is missing in the 1943, Erhard Göpel Papers, Department of 1943, Erhard Göpel Papers, Department of Manu- first edition.] Dann zeichnete ich ihn noch unter Manuscripts, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Munich. scripts, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Munich. Klängen von Ravel.” 16 outset, the portrait has been closely linked with legs crossed, in a comfortable armchair. 26 Barbara Malwine Auguste was born on with Beckmann’s drawings to Goethe’s The legs are oddly misaligned, however, as if February 24, 1922, in the town of Arnsberg— Faust: The Second Part of the Tragedy. they cannot be kept still. Their almost dance- whence her father, as public prosecutor, had like position brings disquiet to the seated been transferred—as the only child of Hans We shouldn’t assume that it was the form of body and corresponds with the expression of and August Elisabeth Sperling from Berlin. the Faust drawings that Göpel was reluctant the eyes. They gesturally assume the inwardly Her father was a high-ranking lawyer, her to take in. He was familiar with and admired transferred terror that has struck into every mother an educated and open-minded person, Beckmann’s style. 22 What on the other hand limb of the young man’s body. The represent- who prudently managed the household wher- was difficult for him to digest was relating the ed person has no response to the message ever her husband happened to be stationed. “Faust complex,” and in particular Act Five, to conveyed to him so recklessly. No self-confi- In January 1934 the Sperling family returned himself and his activity. Göpel certainly must dent plea echoes through the room. The soft, to Berlin. Some ten years later, in April 1944, have grasped that he had made a pact with red child’s mouth signals silence; whatever the their house was completely destroyed by the devil; Beckmann had drawn nothing less figure is gazing at here, no comment is to be a bomb. Fortunately, Barbara’s father was into play. The fate of Philemon and Baucis expected. For the intellectual Göpel, a classic serving in the army at the time, and she was too reminiscent of the fate of the Europe- portrait depicting solely the head as the site of herself was in Paris. Her mother miraculous- an Jews, of Göpel’s ambivalent role in the theft thinking would have been an obvious choice. ly survived in a neighboring bunker. Even of pictures when Faust calls out: “So you have Beckmann, for good reason, chose an almost so, all their furniture, household goods, and turned deaf ears to me! I meant exchange, life-size picture. Why the monumentality? It family memorabilia were lost in the flames. not robbery.” 23 But in truth, Faust had com- was clear to Beckmann that, in Hitler’s service, Despite this irrevocable loss, and although she manded: “Go, then, and clear them from my the person Erhard Göpel whom he esteemed made Munich her home from 1950 on—Berlin sight!” 24 —which Mephistopheles understood had entered into a shadow empire from which was doubtlessly the city that Barbara Göpel as an order to kill. The devil just doesn’t make he could never again escape, which would felt particularly attached to. Her mother took any compromises. In the portrait, Beckmann continue to burden him after what was even her on excursions in the surrounding region, rendered Göpel in a manner typical of a short- then, in 1944, the foreseeable end of the war. especially to Potsdam to study the art and sighted man who has taken off his glasses to It was certain that the victor would call the architecture with her, with the primary aim examine the sheets he holds in his hand more regime and those who had served it to account. of furthering her daughter’s education. Along closely. This apparently was the volume of For that reason, Beckmann advocated for the with raising their daughter in a loving family Faust from the Bremer Presse on whose inter- whole person, showing him with all his contra- environment, Barbara’s parents instilled in her leaved pages Beckmann had been drawing. 25 dictions, as an art historian alarmed by his a traditional ethos exemplified by the precept incorrect engagement. Göpel is shown at the moment in which he upheld by the Prussian military commander has sat upright again after viewing the sheets It would be too simple to claim that Beck- Alfred von Schlieffen: “Avoid sticking out, close-up and, startled by his atrocious dis- mann was drawing our attention to a traitor give your all, and put substance above out- covery, harks inwardly. His realization is still of Faustian caliber. The picture’s hidden ward appearance.” In the late nineteenth reflected on his face; the red rising up from message is rather a cautionary note, a helpful century, her grandfather Heinrich Sperling the armchair appears to underscore his agita- psychological insight, meant for his friend had been a well-known painter of animals. tion. We sense the contemplative shock in his and not the general viewer. It is an unmistak- Famous for his depictions of dogs, he even eyes. His round face, his boyish physiognomy able psychograph by the man who for Göpel received a commission to paint the portrait of with the soft mouth, contrast sharply with the was the greatest artist of the twentieth century, the kaiser’s dogs. His son Claus Sperling lived reserved functionary in a suit. Yet, although a work that he took home with him after the and worked as a pastor in Demnitz from 1937 the picture indeed depicts real elements, it is turmoil of the war and hung in his library until his death. He initially followed in his fa- an invention. Nothing points to a naturalistic (fig. 3). Two years before his death, and twenty ther’s footsteps, becoming a noteworthy paint- portrait for which a photographically precise years after the portrait had been painted, er of animals and landscapes before turning rendering of the person would suffice. And Göpel was still not over this view of his char- to theology. As a member of the Confessing while the portrait manages without Beckmann’s acter. As he remarked in 1964: “To this day, I Church, he was briefly imprisoned by the have still not come to grips with the painting.” 27 National Socialists in 1937. usual symbolic program—objects such as candles or plants indicating the unconscious On his business trips to Paris, where at the Barbara was eleven years old when the Na- chasms that Beckmann so liked to use to German embassy he had to discuss his ac- tional Socialists came to power in 1933 and refer to the questionability of existence—an quisition travels in France and organizational seventeen when World War II broke out in uncanny shadow nevertheless looms over the matters, Göpel spoke briefly with a young, 1939. Given the mandatory, two-month labor figure. Beckmann set it, heavy and bulky, intelligent stenographer whom he apparently service also required of women since the start couldn’t get out of his mind. After the war, of the war, her father secured her a position while searching for publication opportunities, in occupied France. In May 1941 she went to he ran into her unexpectedly at the editorial Paris, where she worked as a stenographer 22 Erhard Göpel played an essential role in the print- office of the freshly established weekly mag- at the Palais Beauharnais, which housed the ing of Beckmann’s drawings to the Apocalypse. azine Die Zeit. He couldn’t have known at German embassy. Built in the early eighteenth Interestingly enough, the Apocalypse was printed the time that she would one day complete his century and sumptuously furnished in the on the same handmade paper at the Bauerschen great project of authoring a comprehensively Empire style, the embassy is still today consid- Giesserei typefoundry’s print shop, in Frankfurt annotated catalogue raisonné of Beckmann’s ered one of the world’s most beautiful. The am Main, as the photo album Hitler submitted oeuvre. Who was this young woman? view from Barbara’s room extended over the annually for the “Führermuseum” in Linz. Tuileries to the Louvre with its magnificent art 23 Faust in Johann Wolfgang Goethe, Faust: collections. It is easy to imagine that she, just A Tragedy, part 2, act 5, trans. Walter barely nineteen, might have felt like a young Arndt, ed. Cyrus Hamlin (New York and noble lady of the manor here, had she not 26 Werner Busch points out that in medieval iconog- London, 1976), p. 288, lines 11370–71. found herself in the midst of one of the most raphy crossed legs were seen as a sign of a liar. terrible wars in human history and in the 24 Ibid., p. 286, line 11275. 27 Erhard Göpel and Barbara Göpel, Max capital of a country occupied by the Germans. 25 Cf. Max Beckmann, Tagebücher 1940–1950 (Mu- Beckmann: Katalog der Gemälde, vol. 1 The German embassy was the political center nich, 1955), entry from June 17, 1943, note p. 410. (Bern, 1976), catalogue no. 660, p. 397. of the occupying power, and Otto Abetz, the Francophile ambassador and an admitted a secretarial post at the weekly newspaper Die year these important records went to press, 17 anti-Semite, was active in the plundering of Zeit, which had been published for the first he, together with Barbara Göpel, Carola Roth, Jewish property. At times the embassy was time just that February. The paper’s co-founder Lilly von Schnitzler, Theo Grave, and Peter a warehouse of stolen artworks. Function- and editor-in-chief, Richard Tüngel, was Beckmann, cofounded the first Max Beckmann aries like Alfred Rosenberg, Bruno Lohse, impressed by his young and prudent colleague. Gesellschaft. For Göpel, Beckmann was the Karl Haberstock, and also Barbara’s future Soon everyone in the editorial office, including paramount artist of his time, and he transmit- husband, Erhard Göpel, went in and out. 28 her boss, was affectionately calling her “Spatz” ted his conviction and enthusiasm to his wife. (sparrow). Thirsty for knowledge, Barbara ea- Although Barbara had never met Beckmann Among Barbara’s friends at the time was the gerly took in the broad range of topics covered (the artist passed away in 1950, the year art historian Ursula Lampe, likewise nineteen, by Die Zeit. Writing fascinated her, and she she married), she became one of the leading who taught German at the German Historical dreamed of becoming a journalist or even an connoisseurs of his oeuvre through her work Institute in Paris. She introduced Barbara to author. Working under Tüngel was by all on the catalogue raisonné, lending it funda- Ernst Jünger, who took “Lämpchen” (little means a valuable learning experience; a con- mental shape. She understood Beckmann lamp), as he affectionately called Ursula, along troversial boss, he was known as “helpful and above all with her eye. It was fascinating with Barbara and the art historian Fritz Baum- uncomfortable,” “brilliant, contradiction to hear her speak about the artist’s work. She gart on several visits to his artist friend Ernst personified, and [as having] an artistic tem- was aided in her approach by the original Wilhelm Nay, who was stationed in Le Mans. perament” 32 —in short, a challenging figure. paintings, drawings, and graphics that her Jünger was one of the most prominent oppo- His working hours were unpredictable, and husband had for the most part personally nents of Hitler, whom he disdainfully named he expected his secretary to be permanently acquired in Amsterdam. These included the “Kniébolo” in his Paris diary. 29 In the fall of ready to take dictation. Even so, whenever above-mentioned Portrait of Erhard Göpel, 1943, Barbara, as mentioned above, first en- her schedule allowed, Barbara would attend which Beckmann painted out of gratitude countered her future husband—with no flirting concerts; in her letters she enthused about in 1944, as well as his Self-Portrait in the whatsoever or the slightest inkling of their later the big names in music literature and had Bar, from 1942. 34 Up to Barbara’s death, the relationship. In connection with his official du- witnessed the great conductors Wilhelm latter work hung directly to the left of their ties for the Special Commission Linz, Göpel had Furtwängler and Sergiu Celibidache in action. fireplace, observing every visitor and at the business at the German embassy and was on same time placing them under the rigorous friendly terms with Jünger and Carlo Schmid, In 1950 Barbara married Erhard Göpel in gaze of a relentless psychologist. Indeed, she then stationed in Lille. 30 Even though very Celle, where her parents were living at the closely monitored whether her guests noticed young and on the lowest level of service, the time. Following a few intermediary stations, the picture or heedlessly turned their atten- employees of the Reich in the Foreign Office he had been engaged in Munich. From 1948 tion to something else. Her husband had didn’t fail to notice the dramatic proceedings on he had lived in the home of Carola Roth, acquired the picture at the artist’s Amsterdam in Paris: the introduction of the yellow star for whom Beckmann knew personally from his studio, despite Mathilde Q. Beckmann’s French Jews, the acceleration of deportations time in Frankfurt am Main. The artist had also resistance. It was her favorite self-portrait of at Abetz’s urging, the actions of the Résistance, painted her in a double portrait with Maria her husband, and hence the acquisition led to and also the events on July 20, 1944, when Swarzenski, the wife of Georg Swarzenski, a temporary disgruntlement, which, however, the chief military commander Carl-Heinrich director of the Städel Museum in Frankfurt completely dissipated a short time later. 35 von Stülpnagel had the upper SS ranks in from 1906 to 1933. 33 Along with Ursula Lampe, Paris arrested. 31 While Barbara came from Carola would become one of Barbara’s most The Göpels harbored the same concerns a family that sympathized with National important confidantes. Leaving her job at about the rehabilitation and rediscovery Socialism—as a high-ranking lawyer her father Die Zeit and moving to Bavaria were not of the artist Hans Purrmann, who lived in was a member of the NSDAP—it is not known easy for her. Once the couple had found an Montagnola, in the canton of Ticino. While what she thought and felt during this period. apartment in a garden house in Schwabing, paying a visit to Purrmann in 1955, during they first and foremost had to accommodate an educational trip through Italy—Barbara After having fled from the US troops in Au- Göpel’s library, consisting of several thou- drove the VW beetle she’d bought back in gust 1944, Barbara, now twenty-two, worked sand volumes still stored in Leipzig. An avid Hamburg and dubbed “Pünktchen” (dot)—the at the naval hospital in Eutin until the summer book collector, Göpel’s interests extended to couple acquired the landscape Houses and of 1946, when she was serendipitously offered typography and the characteristics of paper. Walls in Porto d’Ischia, from that year, which is now in the collection of the Nationalgalerie In addition to his work at Prestel Verlag, 28 Alfred Rosenberg was a racial ideologue and in Berlin. The picture is closely linked with writing auction reviews, and following other with his Einsatzstab Reichsleiter Rosenberg the death of Göpels’ son, Thomas, born in art-historical interests, Göpel pursued several (ERR; Reichsleiter Rosenberg taskforce) the chief 1952, who died in Munich during their Italy large projects in which he involved his sixteen- plunderer of Jewish property. Bruno Lohse, who sojourn. In 1959 Barbara traveled for a longer year-younger wife as an employee. He gave had the rank of SS Obersturmführer, was the particular priority to reintroducing Beckmann, deputy director of the ERR and on the move for who had passed away in New York in 1950, Göring’s art lootings in France. Karl Haberstock 34 Max Beckmann, Self-Portrait in the Bar (1942), into German art history. With permission was an art dealer and close advisor of Hitler’s catalogue no. 620 in the present volume; since from Mathilde Q. Beckmann, Göpel had for his museum project in Linz. 2017 at the Nationalgalerie, Staatliche Museen succeeded in publishing Beckmann’s diaries zu Berlin, as a bequest from Barbara Göpel. 29 Ernst Jünger, Strahlungen Zweiter Teil: Das from 1940 to 1950. In 1951, the zweite Pariser Tagebuch, in Sämtliche Werke, 35 In her unpublished diaries, Mathilde Q. vol. 3 (Stuttgart, n.d.), p. 11. Beckmann describes this—for her bitter—event, which led to a temporary falling out with Göpel. 30 The Göpels remained friends with Carlo Schmid, 32 Description by Josef Müller-Marein, cited in: On the other hand, she also describes the preemi- one of the founding fathers of the German https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_T%C3%B- nence that the relationship between Göpel constitution and member of the SPD, even after Cngel (last accessed May 18, 2020). and her husband took on. Beckmann felt that the war. 33 Max Beckmann, Double Portrait of Frau Göpel understood him, intellectually and 31 Carl-Heinrich von Stülpnagel was a member of Swarzenski and Carola Netter (1923), catalogue artistically. Both Beckmanns esteemed Göpel’s the German resistance and, following his failed no. 222, in the present volume. The painting sense of culture and humanity, as Mathilde Q. suicide attempt, he was executed at Plötzensee is in the collection of the Städel Museum, Beckmann repeatedly writes in her diary. Prison in 1944. Frankfurt am Main. Cf. Bormann 2007, pp. 127–29. 18 period, alone, to Montagnola, so Purrmann during which she became a chain smoker, century as a garden house, which lent her could paint her portrait. The famous Swiss exclusively to this major project, assisted apartment a charm all its own. The attentive photographer and documentary filmmaker by her reliable employee Elisabeth (“Beth”) visitor standing before the door would notice Kurt Blum recorded the encounter in impres- von Ow. She visited all the collectors and two unusual objects: a navigation lamp, like sive photographs. The intensive days Barbara museums that owned works by Beckmann those used on ships, mounted on the corner spent with Purrmann were a great experience and was in constant contact with Mathilde Q. of the house, and a mirror by the kitchen for her, especially observing the artist at work Beckmann, whom she visited several times in window. The ship’s lamp didn’t just provide and engaging in extensive conversations with New York, as well as with Beckmann’s son, light, it also referred to one of Barbara’s great him. In 1961 the Göpels published their first Peter, who was head physician at a clinic in passions—the sea and the “mariners,” as she joint book, on Hans Purrmann, prompting Murnau. In 1976 the two volumes finally went liked to call seamen. The window by the the poet and friend Günther Eich to telegraph to press (figs. 4–5)—to a great extent indebted kitchen was a purely practical item. Barbara his congratulations: “Truly great job!” 36 to the involvement of the art historian and art never wanted to greet a guest unprepared. dealer Eberhard W. Kornfeld in Bern, with Shortly after ringing the bell, one would hear Barbara was now becoming increasingly whom the Göpels had been on friendly terms her quick steps, even at an advanced age, as self-confident and revived her dream of be- throughout their lives. Barbara had asked she descended the steep staircase, before coming a writer. While her husband was still another friend of the couple’s, the typog- appearing at the door a second later, welcom- alive, she used her maiden name when pub- rapher and book designer Herbert Post, to ing her visitor with a friendly smile (fig. 6). lishing her highly expert exhibition reviews design the cover. He had previously designed and auction reports in the Süddeutschen Late one evening, a few days before her death, the cover of the joint volume on Purrmann. Zeitung and the Frankfurter Allgemeinen we spoke about Beckmann’s self-portrait Zeitung. In the now long-forgotten fashion- The catalogue raisonné was not only a great again. It was one of her “ready for press” lec- able magazine Gesellschaft (Society), later success among Beckmann scholars; it was in tures, which she had a knack for nonchalantly renamed Gesellschaft und Party (Society every respect exemplary and one of the best weaving into a normal conversation. She and party), she edited extensive texts on such oeuvre catalogues in the area of classical spoke about the form of the picture, in par- diverse subjects as religious icons, Jugendstil, modernism. One glance inside the volumes ticular about the hands, which she found Rococo commodes, or the attractions of Ven- is sufficient to get a sense of the immense dubious, and about the haunting, even slightly ice as well as a longer account of Purrmann’s workmanship that the catalogue demanded. fearful expression with which Beckmann had work on her portrait. For the French periodical Barbara spent most of her adult life con- gazed at her for so many years. It was a way La Revue des Voyages, she published several ducting research, beyond the range of the of bidding farewell. enchanting travel reports under the heading catalogue, into the life and work of Beckmann, “Kunstliebhaber auf Reisen” (Art lovers on the who never ceased to fascinate her. She wasn’t road). 37 At that time she also became friends one to pen texts open to multiple interpreta- with Ursula von Kardorff, who wrote for the tions, however, instead preferring unam- Süddeutsche Zeitung and had close ties to biguous facts, the true foundations of art the German resistance during World War II. 38 history. Barbara had too much respect for Barbara’s promising start in fine arts jour- writings with philosophical content to attempt nalism came to an end, though, when she such writing herself, although her early art- decided to continue work on the catalogue historical texts, annotations in the catalogue raisonné of Beckmann’s paintings started by raisonné, and extensive correspondence her husband, who passed away in 1966. That demonstrate her literary talent. Conspicuous same year, the Max Beckmann Gesellschaft are her close friendships with women authors officially commissioned Barbara to complete who in a subtle manner vicariously fulfilled the project. It was a huge undertaking, which her lifelong desire to write. Erhard Göpel had at most briefly outlined Barbara’s inexhaustible humor—which she at during his lifetime, and would demand all times also directed at herself when she felt she her strength before being ready for publica- didn’t live up to her demanding standards— tion. 39 Barbara devoted the next ten years, always provided a wonderful enhancement to

any conversation. She had no tolerance for weakness, not even her own. Sentimentality was utterly foreign to her, and, in that sense, 36 Cf. Erhard Göpel and Barbara Göpel, Leben she was thoroughly bound to the virtues of und Meinungen des Malers Hans Purrmann the old school, which for her had their origin (Wiesbaden, 1961). Telegram from Günther Eich, Image Captions in Berlin. It is therefore hardly surprising that August 22, 1961, Erhard Göpel Papers, she bequeathed so much of her estate to the Fig. 1: Erhard Göpel reflected in a display window, Department of Manuscripts, Bayerische Staats- City of Berlin. This included the portrait of Munich, 1954. Photo: Peter Keetmann bibliothek, Munich. her husband as well as the self-portrait of her Fig. 2: Max Beckmann, Portrait of Erhard Göpel, 37 Cf. inter alia, Barbara Göpel, “Venedig für great, lifelong hero painted during the same 1944, Nationalgalerie, Berlin. Bequest Fortgeschrittene,” Gesellschaft 4 (1961), p. 12; period in Amsterdam, which set the bench- Barbara Göpel “Kunstliebhaber auf Reisen,” La Revue des mark for each visitor to her apartment who felt Fig. 3: Portrait of Erhard Göpel in his library, Voyages: Die internationale Gesellschafts- und moved by it. 40 Everyone who visited Barbara n. d. Photo: Barbara Göpel Reisezeitschrift (Fall 1961), p. 20. will recall the courtyard of the Kaulbach- Fig. 4: Barbara Göpel with her catalogue raisonné strasse in Munich and the tall windows of the of Max Beckmann’s paintings. Photographer 38 Cf. Ursula von Kardorff, Berliner Aufzeich- former artist’s studio, built in the nineteenth unknown nungen 1942–1945 (Munich, 1992). Published Fig. 5: Barbara Göpel and Erhard Göpel, in English as Diary of a Nightmare: Berlin, Max Beckmann: Katalog der Gemälde, 1942–1945, trans. Ewan Butler (New York, 1965). 40 Cf. Max Beckmann: Das Vermächtnis Bar- cover of vol. 1, Bern, 1976 39 Cf. Erhard Göpel and Barbara Göpel, Max bara Göpel, ed. Andreas Schalhorn and Fig. 6: Barbara Göpel at home, before the painting Beckmann: Katalog der Gemälde, 2 vols. Petra Winter, exh. cat. Kupferstichkabinett, Self-Portrait in the Bar (1942), 2011. (Bern, 1976). Staatliche Museen zu Berlin (Berlin, 2018). Photo: Scarlet Berner