5 ms·

Stealing renowned art like this is an interesting phenomenon as it becomes largely impossible to ever display it or claim it let alone sell it. There are some c

by jmyeet 3y ago

Stealing renowned art like this is an interesting phenomenon as it becomes largely impossible to ever display it or claim it let alone sell it. There are some cases whre the motive doesn't seem to be theft for the black market (eg the ransom case mentioned). So the psychology is that someone with a lot of money wants to pay to take an artwork and put it in a vault, never displaying it. So the reward is to know something other people don't (ie the art's location) and to exert power over people by denying them the ability to see that art. That paints what seems to be a fairly accurate psychological profile of the ultra-wealthy as a whole. The other side of art theft is looting, usually in war and particularly by the Nazis in WW2. The interesting part of this one is how the art and auction world enabled and profited off this trade where they willingly participated in the resale of stolen artwork even though there's clear provenance back to the original owners that no one involved in auctions seemed inclined to ever research and find out. Never ask a question you don't want the answer to. Greed is such a powerful motivator.

riffraff 3y ago
Basically all museums beyond galleries are filled with stolen stuff (Elgin marbles anyone?). I don't think _anyone_ other than the owners who suffered the theft cared about "legit origins" until very recent times.
- toyg 3y ago
  That's not really true. You know about the Elgin marbles precisely because they're vigorously contested - unlike 90% of artefacts that left Greece, Egypt, Italy, etc in perfectly legal circumstances. It's true that colonial powers (chiefly Britain and France) have a particularly bad record, but not "all museums" contain looted stuff.
  - riffraff 3y ago
    but a lot of the artefacts left their countries in circumstances which sounded legal but were not. Consider the example of Euphronios Krater[0] which the Metropolitan Museum of New York "legally" acquired, and it took 40 years to convince the museum that it was not actually legal. Or the Ishtar Gate[1] parts which were smuggled out of Egypt by the germans and then bits were sent off to museums in the US, Denmark, Canada etc. Or the parthenon marbles owned by the Vatican and recently "gifted back". And that's big stuff! The smaller stuff is just less noticeable, but it's obvious if you think about it that a lot of stuff acquired before 1900 has not being acquired in a way that would be considered "proper" today. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euphronios_Krater https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euphronios_Krater [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ishtar_Gate https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ishtar_Gate
archagon 3y ago
I imagine a number of stolen works are hanging in powerful people's penthouse suites. None of their confidants are going to rat them out.
- poisonborz 3y ago
  A number? Likely all of them. These paintings in the end are only important enough for those who can buy it, or who can steal them for themselves (museum employees).
  - ender341341 3y ago
    I imagine a good number of stolen art ends up destroyed or abandoned/lost after a generation or two.
    - walthamstow 3y ago
      Even the stuff bought legitimately is stashed away in tax-friendly warehouses, maybe never to be seen by human eyes again https://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/29/arts/design/one-of-the-worlds-greatest-art-collections-hides-behind-this-fence.html https://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/29/arts/design/one-of-the-wo...
fcknzs 3y ago
It is crazy how the German Nazis looted German paintings.
- self_awareness 3y ago
  It's more crazy that "German Nazis" are sometimes described as an alien, non-german race, that came from the moon. Nazis were German.
  - porkbeer 3y ago
    But even at the time, most germans were not nazis.
    - self_awareness 3y ago
      Germans who supported nazism were elected by german citizens by a democratic vote. Nazis came to power in a democratic system. Millions of germans voted for them.
      - orwin 3y ago
        They lied, didn't implement most of their program except the racist and nationalist parts, and still weren't the majority party in the end. The bourgeoisie, as usual, when in front of the choice to govern with fascists or socialists/union leaders, will always (almost always) choose the fascists. The only time they didn't was because they saw what happened in Germany and Italy a few years prior (it didn't end well either, but at least Spain can say they didn't choose Franco).
        self_awareness 3y ago
        > didn't implement most of their program except the racist and nationalist parts So if they would implement the other parts of the program, then the existence of the "racist and nationalist" part would be all fine? I mean, Germany had a lot of profit from the wars anyway. The construction of Autobahns, for example, was heavily accelerated during Nazi rule, in order to help to move nazi tanks across the country. I don't recall anyone complaining about autobahns today.
jpalomaki 3y ago
I remember an article/documentary about a criminal, who explained he wanted to have a piece of art as his personal insurance. A highly valued piece of art is irreplaceable. No matter how much money you spend, you won't get that specific piece back. Logic of this person was, that governments could go to extremes in order to get such work back to the museum so this could act as his "get out of jail" -card. Quite likely it was this documentary, but it is hard to find the details. https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b09pqx4r https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b09pqx4r
wolverine876 3y ago
> So the psychology is that someone with a lot of money wants to pay to take an artwork and put it in a vault, never displaying it. From what I've read, much contemporary art is purchased with that in mind. Some collectors have warehouses filled with artwork that nobody sees. It's like collecting baseball cards. Edit: See: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40000250 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40000250

by jmyeet 3y ago

riffraff 3y ago

Basically all museums beyond galleries are filled with stolen stuff (Elgin marbles anyone?). I don't think _anyone_ other than the owners who suffered the theft cared about "legit origins" until very recent times.

toyg 3y ago
That's not really true. You know about the Elgin marbles precisely because they're vigorously contested - unlike 90% of artefacts that left Greece, Egypt, Italy, etc in perfectly legal circumstances. It's true that colonial powers (chiefly Britain and France) have a particularly bad record, but not "all museums" contain looted stuff.
- riffraff 3y ago
  but a lot of the artefacts left their countries in circumstances which sounded legal but were not. Consider the example of Euphronios Krater[0] which the Metropolitan Museum of New York "legally" acquired, and it took 40 years to convince the museum that it was not actually legal. Or the Ishtar Gate[1] parts which were smuggled out of Egypt by the germans and then bits were sent off to museums in the US, Denmark, Canada etc. Or the parthenon marbles owned by the Vatican and recently "gifted back". And that's big stuff! The smaller stuff is just less noticeable, but it's obvious if you think about it that a lot of stuff acquired before 1900 has not being acquired in a way that would be considered "proper" today. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euphronios_Krater https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euphronios_Krater [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ishtar_Gate https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ishtar_Gate

archagon 3y ago

I imagine a number of stolen works are hanging in powerful people's penthouse suites. None of their confidants are going to rat them out.

poisonborz 3y ago
A number? Likely all of them. These paintings in the end are only important enough for those who can buy it, or who can steal them for themselves (museum employees).
- ender341341 3y ago
  I imagine a good number of stolen art ends up destroyed or abandoned/lost after a generation or two.
  - walthamstow 3y ago
    Even the stuff bought legitimately is stashed away in tax-friendly warehouses, maybe never to be seen by human eyes again https://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/29/arts/design/one-of-the-worlds-greatest-art-collections-hides-behind-this-fence.html https://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/29/arts/design/one-of-the-wo...

fcknzs 3y ago

It is crazy how the German Nazis looted German paintings.

self_awareness 3y ago
It's more crazy that "German Nazis" are sometimes described as an alien, non-german race, that came from the moon. Nazis were German.
- porkbeer 3y ago
  But even at the time, most germans were not nazis.
  - self_awareness 3y ago
    Germans who supported nazism were elected by german citizens by a democratic vote. Nazis came to power in a democratic system. Millions of germans voted for them.
    - orwin 3y ago
      They lied, didn't implement most of their program except the racist and nationalist parts, and still weren't the majority party in the end. The bourgeoisie, as usual, when in front of the choice to govern with fascists or socialists/union leaders, will always (almost always) choose the fascists. The only time they didn't was because they saw what happened in Germany and Italy a few years prior (it didn't end well either, but at least Spain can say they didn't choose Franco).
      - self_awareness 3y ago
        > didn't implement most of their program except the racist and nationalist parts So if they would implement the other parts of the program, then the existence of the "racist and nationalist" part would be all fine? I mean, Germany had a lot of profit from the wars anyway. The construction of Autobahns, for example, was heavily accelerated during Nazi rule, in order to help to move nazi tanks across the country. I don't recall anyone complaining about autobahns today.

jpalomaki 3y ago

I remember an article/documentary about a criminal, who explained he wanted to have a piece of art as his personal insurance. A highly valued piece of art is irreplaceable. No matter how much money you spend, you won't get that specific piece back. Logic of this person was, that governments could go to extremes in order to get such work back to the museum so this could act as his "get out of jail" -card. Quite likely it was this documentary, but it is hard to find the details. https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b09pqx4r https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b09pqx4r

wolverine876 3y ago

> So the psychology is that someone with a lot of money wants to pay to take an artwork and put it in a vault, never displaying it. From what I've read, much contemporary art is purchased with that in mind. Some collectors have warehouses filled with artwork that nobody sees. It's like collecting baseball cards. Edit: See: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40000250 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40000250