Talk:George Krugers

Comment

What does the G stand for? Shii (tock) 23:09, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

• Not in any of the references. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:43, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Not sure whether I have any meaningful Wikipedia:Conflict of interest, but I am distant family. I can probably find out what the "G" stands for because of this, but of course providing reliable reference for that is a different matter. Andries (talk) 07:38, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

• Birth records (if available) would be citeable, or a passport. As he has been deceased for years, a digital scan may or may not be worthwhile. Thanks again, Andries. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:46, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

A family tree would likely work too. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:48, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

Name and profession

Some remarks about the name and possible other field of work:

• This newspaper of 1933, used as a reference in the article, spells his name with a diaeresis as "G. E. A. Krügers": [1]
• This newspaper of 1912 writes that a "G. E. A. Krügers", with a diaeresis, is appointed inspector of water management and civil public works (opzichter bij den waterstaat en 's lands burgerlijke openbare werken) in the Dutch East Indies: [2]
• These address books of 1926, 1934, and 1938 list a "G. E. A. Krugers", without diaeresis, as civil engineer (bouwkundige) from Surabaya: [3] [4] [5]

Are there suggestions in other sources that Krugers/Krügers is the same person as the inspector and as the engineer from Surabaya? Was it possible to earn a living with film making alone in the early 20th century or is it likely that he had another job? – Editør (talk) 14:04, 1 August 2015 (UTC)

Sources in the article put this Krugers in Bandung in 1926, which is across the island of Java; it's highly unlikely that he could hold both positions at the same time. The commute, even with trains, would have been a full day each way. This modern source only uses the G. Krugers, and outside of that one reference you've listed above I haven't seen any evidence he used the name G. E. A. Krugers (even when he was involved in a court case for going against the censorship board). — Chris Woodrich (talk) 14:12, 1 August 2015 (UTC)

About his name

I think we can agree that it is unlikely that "G. Krugers", "G. E. A. Krugers", and "G. E. A. Krügers" were all his official names at the same time. From your comments it is unclear why "G. E. A. Krugers" is used as his 'full' name in the article. This 1933 news article [6] is about the court case and it does use the name "G. E. A. Krügers", i.e. with the three initials and the diaeresis. Considering the official nature of a court case, this could mean that this is his official name from which he had dropped the middle initials E. A. and the umlaut in everyday use. The name "G. Krugers" was used in these 1928 news articles about the screening of his Mecca film in the Netherlands: [7] [8].

In this 2012 article, he is called "G. Krugers": [9], but it is dated October 2012, which is two months after this Wikipedia article became a Good Article, so it is more than likely that the author(s) have seen this WP article. The cached version you referred to [10] is dated October 2013, which is more than a year after this WP article reached GA status. In this 2014 article, he is called "G. Krugers" [11], but it explicitly links to this Wikipedia article in a see also section, so it cannot be considered an independent source. However, it is interesting to see that a "J. Krugers" is mentioned as G. Krugers youngest son. – Editør (talk) 15:38, 1 August 2015 (UTC)

About his residence and profession

I agree that it is unlikely that he could have lived in Surabaya and commuted to Bandung every day. However, without evidence one could speculate that sometimes men were away from their family homes for longer periods of time to work elsewhere. I have no idea whether film maker was recognized as a real profession at the time and whether this would have been used in an address book. It is not unlikely that Jacobus Anthonie Meessen wasn't considered a photographer either at the time, since he also had worked in more traditional professions such as carpenter and inspector. – Editør (talk) 15:38, 1 August 2015 (UTC)

Based on what I've read about other film producers at the time, it wasn't necessarily possible to live off film activities in the 1920s. Jo Eng Sek of Si Tjonat for instance was a businessman. The film producers also didn't necessarily have formal film training, so it could be possible for him to go straight into film work from being a civil engineer.

You're right about the article. My apologies; the baby was crying so I had to write based off memory really quickly.

Krugers' name has been difficult to pin. This source gives "Kreuger" (and it's definitely the same person, since the censorship case is the same). So we've got four variations based in various sources on this page alone: Kruger, Krügers, Krugers, and Kreuger. Which one did he use? The majority of sources use Krugers, but short of an official document I don't think we can be sure. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:16, 2 August 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for your comment about film making as a profession. About the name, it is not uncommon to spell 'ü' as 'ue' but not as 'eu', although I can understand the mix-up, because 'ue' is not a combination normally used in Dutch, while 'eu' is. I hope we will find some more of less official documents to source the article. – Editør (talk) 10:07, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

• I heard from his son that he moved to the Netherlands from Hong Kong. He did not die in Hong Kong. He worked in the Netherlands as an architect. Sorry no reputable sources for that, but I have a problem with this article listed as a good article. Andries (talk) 16:58, 1 August 2015 (UTC)

• Andries, I've got a book on the cinema of the Dutch East Indies coming out in a couple months, and I've still got time to revise the manuscript. If you don't mind emailing me contact information for his son, I'd be able to interview him and we could use the book as a source (this is allowed per WP:SELFCITE). That wouldn't be the only information in this article that this book changes / argues against; it also considers the possibility that Karnadi Anemer Bangkong was released under a different title.

The information about Hong Kong, which is all we have sourceable at the moment, is from the Misbach source, which was based on interviews with people like Bachtiar Effendi more than 30 or 40 years after the fact. There are issues, as with all historiography based on interviews, especially when it comes to the fates of people who left the Indies before the war, and being able to refine the information would be very useful. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:16, 2 August 2015 (UTC)

Note on Biran source: he cites an interview with Joshua Wong, of the Wong brothers. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 15:03, 2 August 2015 (UTC)

Atma de Vischer

A minor thing, considering the film title Atma de Vischer, but not knowing what the film is about, the translation 'Atma of the Vischers' seems odd. Wouldn't it be either a person's full name 'Atma (first name) de Vischer (last name)' or mean 'Atma, the fisherman' using an alternative spelling of visser? – Editør (talk) 10:28, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

• I could have sworn I'd removed that 'translation'. Have done so again. I was never happy with it. We do have "which followed Queen Wilhelmina and Prince Hendrik on a trip through the Hague" describing the film. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 11:22, 4 August 2015 (UTC)