Talk:Vienna Secession

The House of Sucession" is (not) better know as Vienna's Museum of Art History.
I believe that I am correct in saying that "the House of Sucession" is in Vienna and is called the Kunsthistorishes (sorry about my inability to spell in German), or Museum of Art History. I did not see these things mentioned in the article. I, however, am no expert. Just thought I would point this out and maybe someone else would be4 interested in editing the currect article.68.119.206.201 02:30, 21 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Definitely not identic! --R.P.D. 09:08, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
 * That is an error. You confused the Kunsthistorisches Museum with the Sezession. -- Rob C (Alarob)

Founders of Vienna Secession
what is a secession Otto Wagner not a founding member of secession. I believe he joined later, in 1899. Most likely because of his long association with the Künstlerhaus. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Meaddixon (talk • contribs) 05:19, 14 May 2007 (UTC).

Proposed merger?
This article should be part of the greater "Art nouveau" / "Jugendstil" article, because Wien was not an isolated place, but rather an integral part of european cultural exchange. 91.83.4.250 (talk) 16:59, 12 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Vienna Secession certainly has plenty to offer on its own, although a briefer survey will be part of the Art Nouveau article as well. This article does need to more emphatically make the connection, however. --Stomme (talk) 23:17, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Art Nouveau / Vienna Secession
I would really like to have some more discussion in the article about the relationship between Art Nouveau and Vienna Secession (especially as regards architecture). Is Vienna Secession part of the Art Nouveau movement? --Eleassar my talk 09:41, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Vienna Secession. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051215133839/http://www.woka.com/infos/english/designer/hoffmann.asp to http://woka.com/infos/english/designer/hoffmann.asp
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060223015221/http://woka.com/infos/index.asp?go=english%2Fdesigner%2Fww.asp to http://woka.com/infos/index.asp?go=english%2Fdesigner%2Fww.asp
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20041209160147/http://woka.com/infos/index.asp?go=english%2Fdesigner%2Findex.asp to http://woka.com/infos/index.asp?go=english%2Fdesigner%2Findex.asp

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 12:19, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

Copyright problem removed
Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: http://www.theviennasecession.com/vienna-secession/. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.)

For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, and, if allowed under fair use, may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, providing it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Therefore, such paraphrased portions must provide their source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. Alpha3031 (t • c) 07:32, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

Dates with recent edits
Dear SiefkinDR, with your hundreds of recent edits you not only brought new useful information to the article but also some incorrect contradictions, too. I have dealt with some of them but not with everything. E.g. in the images of the lead it is said that Beethoven Frieze is of 1902, later it is reffered to 1905. Please check the dates you put in the article once again and remove contradictions. Improver 03 04 (talk) 15:59, 16 August 2019 (UTC)


 * I also would like to draw your attention that the problem with triple spaces (discussed at Talk:Art Nouveau/Archive 1) is still present at your edits. Improver 03 04 (talk) 14:31, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

Recent edits
Dear Improver. I appreciate your comments, recent edits and additions to the article. I just have a few questions.

I think you added this text.

"Otto Wagner's Majolika Haus in Vienna (c. 1898), part of Complex at Linke Wienzeile, is a significant example of the Austrian use of line."

Can you explain what that means? What is the "Austrian use of line?"

Also, can you explain this sentence?

"Wagner's way of modifying Art Nouveau decoration in a classical manner did not find favour with some of his pupils who broke away to form the Secessionists. One was Josef Hoffmann who left to form the Wiener Werkstätte. A good example of his work is the Stoclet Palace in Brussels (1905-1911).[6]"

My understanding is that Wagner and Hoffmann were both in the Secession, left the Secession together, and that that their relationship was very good. Also, how did Wagner "modify Art Nouveau decoration in a classical manner?" Is that a reference to using geometric lines and cubic forms rather than curved lines? Can you clarify this?

Cordially, SiefkinDR (talk) 17:25, 16 August 2019 (UTC)


 * No, it was not me who added these sentences. I see you already removed them from the article. Improver 03 04 (talk) 13:57, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

Joseph Maria Olbrich and referencing him to Secession
I see at the article that all works of Joseph Maria Olbrich are referenced to Vienna Secession. I am not against it when it comes to an earlier period of his career, when Vienna Secession was formed and Secession Hall was built. But I don't think it is correct to refer his later works of Darmstadt Artists' Colony to Vienna Secession. I failed to find a date when he left Secession (unlike e.g. Klimt and Moser, whose leaving is well-known). But also I failed to find any evidence that he was still taking part in the movement after he left Austria and started working in Germany.

Darmstadt Artists' Colony is part of Jugendstil. Joseph Maria Olbrich was working in the colony not alone and attributing his cooperation with Germans (who have no relation to Vienna Secession) at Germany to Vienna Secession is wrong. But if facts with references are presented, I would change my mind. Improver 03 04 (talk) 14:12, 19 August 2019 (UTC)


 * My understanding, according to Fahr-Becker, is that he was a founding member of the Secession in 1897, moved to Darmstadt in 1899, and co-founded the Werkebund in Munich in 1907, so I suppose he was a member of all three movements. Cordially, SiefkinDR (talk) 16:26, 19 August 2019 (UTC)


 * Do you mean that the same works of that period should be attributed to all three different movements? That would be crazy, in my opinion. All in all, he didn't have to formally leave other movements to concentrate on a new venture. Improver 03 04 (talk) 08:19, 21 August 2019 (UTC)