Art (theft) for art's sake?

Thieves stole a Cezanne, a Degas, a van Gogh, and a Monet from a private museum in Zurich Monday. Together they are worth $163 million.

The universal first reaction is to puzzle over why anyone would want to own a painting so obviously hot that it could never sell. Personally, I easily see why. For a thief, driving a van with $100-million of French impressionism in the back would be far more thrilling and professionally satisfying than driving a similarly valuable load of, say, stolen bearer-bonds or gold ingots. Money is money, everywhere. But every Econoline van full of Cezannes is unique.

Suppose, though, that the thieves do not share my love of post-Impressionism and the Ford E-Series. Why want the paintings? Here's one intriguing possibility. Criminals have, in past, tried to exchange stolen works of art for lenience in sentencing for other crimes. "I'll help you find the Rubens, if you put me in jail for five years instead of ten for robbing that bank." This perverse incentive probably isn't at work here, but it does show how a canvas with only sentimental value to the honest might have considerable value for those who live outside the law. — Graeme Wood

By using this Service you agree not to post material that is obscene, harassing, defamatory, or otherwise objectionable. Although The Current does not monitor comments posted to this site (and has no obligation to), it reserves the right to delete, edit, or move any material that it deems to be in violation of this rule.

Art (theft) for art's sake?

Pictures not at an exhibition

Not so priceless after all

A professional job