Art Theft : Bring it On.

Checked the Times today?

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/12/world/europe/12swiss.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin

Armed robbers have taken 4 Impressionist paintings from a museum in Zurich, Switzerland. They are worth lots of money. A Van Gogh, Cezanne, Degas, and a Monet… now stolen from the art-loving public’s eye. Aside from creating a big stir of publicity, these thieves have deprived the world, at least for a duration of time, from viewing four masterpieces of Impressionist Art in person.

Let’s face it. Art Theft is unlike any other crime. We are not talking about the immoral depravation of personal property or assets. We are talking about Art, privately owned by museums, publicly ‘owned’ by the the world. Sure, the thieves will bank on this job, but ultimately, whoever hired them is not going to be able to make money off of these objects. They’re flagged! Sure, there’s a black market, but the paintings aren’t going to circulate for long before they reach the source – and this is where things get cool.

Someone is risking their lives to get at a few yards of canvass, and what’s driving them is dedication, appreciation, love, obsession, and a dangerous collector’s mentality (ok, and greed, selfishness, public disregard…). The fact that people value works of art in this criminal manner actually gets me excited – while these thieves may not be a cut above, they are certainly from a different dimension than your average bank robber, who is in it for the financial gain.

What does an art thief stand to gain from their spoils? In the end, it’s not financial... and unless there is an as-of-yet unknown mystical power imbued in these paintings, like the Nazi’s felt there was in the Ark of the Covenant, it’s not about medicine, power or world domination. The only borderline lame motivator might be status & thrill… a collector could possibly have no interest whatsoever in a particular artist, or art in general, but crave the attention afforded by the media and general public surrounding the outrage and mystery behind such a heist. But even this must be kept private, or at least divulged in only the inner most circles of our thief. In order to keep the mystery going, one must remain anonymous. On the subject of thrills – these types are found in all walks of robberies, but there is something both poetic and impressive about the art thief, who stands to gain symbols of history and culture, and is up against very sophisticated security systems.

So that leaves a dangerously intense passion for artwork. In reality, if anyone did possess this passion – and this passion alone – one would be stealing/acquiring anything deemed personally valuable, not just famous and extremely expensive Impressionist works hanging in museums. But this motivating factor is still more honorable, or at least admirable, than the desire for financial gain.

It is this factor that makes the entire heist more of a game played against the legal powers of the world… much like in the movie the Thomas Crown Affair (1999 – the original did not involve an art theft). I’m not saying that I admire billionaires who have nothing better to do than rob the world of it’s cultural treasures, but I am saying that reading about a successful heist of this nature does bring a smile to my face, whereas other accounts of robbery that involve money or the eventual promise of financial gain do not.

I mean, think about it! Those paintings are out there, and no one knows where. How the hell do they get away with that!? And now there will be hoax copies reproduced by those who do want to make money… and authenticators will have their work cut out for them. And who even CARES about the entire event other than a small portion of the population who appreciates art in museums?

On an interesting side note, The Thomas Crown Affair (1999) features a robbery based on a 1961 robbery of the Louvre, in which 7 Renoir paintings were supposedly taken via a dune buggy by a certain Thomas Van Der Heijden. There really is no information on this event other than in reference to the movie, and a short Wikipedia Article with no references.
Here’s an account of two researchers on the subject:

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080127114619AAjFjwu