Observations on Art 8.10

To start I don't mean this to be rude or to sound like I'm making fun of the writer, I don't mean to, it's just that when I first read this letter I couldn't stop laughing. I mean who even notices descriptions like the ones she is talking about and the first article was written over ten years ago. To me art thief is enough of a description, it doesn't matter if said thief is French, Romanian, or Samoan. Okay I might notice a Samoan art thief, that would be something special.

The letter was written to the editors of  The New York Times by Monica Syancu who had been an intern at the Romanian Mission to the United Nations. I'm posting it here for entirely innocent reasons, or for the links, or because I'm a snobby art bitch. Take your pick.

"You recently published an article about a Romanian mother who may have destroyed the works of art stolen by her son. In 2002, The Times presented a similar case that involved a French family. Although both articles covered art theft and destruction of property, the headlines have very different tones: "Your Stolen Art? I Threw Them Away, Dear" (lighthearted) for the French case and "Romanian’s Tale Has Art World Fearing Worst" (sensationalist) for the Eastern European case.

In the case involving the Romanian family, you quote Ernest Oberlander-Tarnoveanu, the director of Romania’s National History Museum, saying that if the stolen paintings were burned, it would be “a barbarian crime against humanity.”

While Stéphane Breitwieser, the French art thief, is described as a likable “self-taught art lover,” Radu Dogaru, the Romanian art thief, is described in another recent article, "Romanian Says Her Tale of Burning Art Treasures Was a Lie," as standing silently, “flexing his biceps,” during a hearing on his case.

Thus, Romanians are suggested to be backward while those in the West are civilized.

Headlines and articles of this nature fuel prejudice against Romanians at a time when they are already being discriminated against in Europe. The destruction of art is a great loss for our universal heritage. But there is something wrong when the same crime is presented in a more favorable light when carried out by French citizens and as a tragedy when carried out by Romanian citizens."

Basel, Switzerland, July 30, 2013

Observations on Art 10.18

Yes I know, yet another art heist post. The whole affair just intrigues me so I was reading what I could find about it and came across something I wanted to share. it's an opinion piece from The National which is the English publication of the Abu Dhabi Media Group. I know, now you are wondering what the hell I am doing reading a newspaper from the Emirates and I'll get to that after the opinion. I wanted to share this in its entirety because it says a lot of what I was trying to say and maybe says it better.

Painted Into A Corner
National Editorial
Oct 18, 2012

"Art heists capture the imagination like few other crimes do. Is there some secret cabal of art aficionados willing to pay millions for stolen masterpieces? It might make a good movie, but in real life, probably not. In fact, the thieves who lifted seven works, including paintings by Picasso, Gauguin, Monet and Matisse, from the Kunsthal museum in Rotterdam this week may well have been amateurs who knew their supposed value - in the tens of millions of dollars - but had no understanding of the art market.

While it's possible the paintings were stolen to order, either to pay off a debt or to satisfy somebody's personal whim, FBI art crime team founder Robert Wittman told The Atlantic magazine that even black-market buyers wouldn't touch such high-profile stolen goods - because their value resides to a great extent in ownership of legal title. If the works are offered for sale, the "buyer" could well be an undercover cop. More likely, Wittman says, they will sit in storage, for years or even decades, and will eventually be recovered. Or possibly destroyed.

This will be cold comfort to the Triton Foundation, which owns the paintings, but it will illustrate the chestnut that crime doesn't pay."

And why was I reading The National today? Because the United Arab Emirates, including Abu Dhabi and Dubai, probably have one of the largest concentrations of mega art collectors in the world. In the next few years branches of both the Guggenheim and the Louvre will open in Abu Dhabi and I wouldn't be at all surprised to see a Gagosian Gallery spring up somewhere in the region. Last November Sheikha Al-Mayassa bint Hamad bin Khalifa Al-Thani, the daughter of the Emir of Qatar and head of the Qatar Museum Board, was named the most powerful person in the art world by Art & Auction magazine. At about the same time that same board paid $250 million for Paul Cézanne's The Card Players from a group that included a secret partner rumored to be, that is correct, Larry Gagosian. So maybe now you can see why I check The National art section from time to time.

As for crime not paying, I'm not so sure I agree with that line in this situation. Personally I think there is more 'commissioned' art theft than anybody in the market wants to admit. There is just too damn much money involved for there not to be.

Observations on Art 10.17

The Thomas Crown Affair, 1999 remake, historically I don't think its ever actually happened quite like this. Still, it is a good scene and an awesome tune if you like classic jazz. Enjoy ....

link

In case you wondered, the tune is Nina Simone's Sinnerman.

Observations on Art 10.16

Claude Monet, Waterloo Bridge

I don't think I have ever written about an art heist before but last night's was a major topic of conversation today. I want to say from the start that, contrary to a twitter rumor spreading from Sweden, I had nothing to do with it. Around 3 AM thieves broke into Rotterdam's Kunsthal Museum and made off with seven paintings worth in excess of $100 million. They entered through the back of the museum, swiped the paintings, and were gone when police arrived just five minutes after the alarm sounded. This was one of the topics discussed, the growing trend of museums using just electronic security. It may save money but in the long run it just isn't enough as last night proved.

The Kunsthal may have state of the art electronic surveillance and alarms but it has no "down time" security officers. In contrast over half of The Louvre's staff of 2,000 are security related and the Museum of Modern Art just completed a huge security upgrade in anticipation of showing Edward Munch's The Scream beginning next week.
The Scream was sold in May for $120 million. Granted these two museums are in a league all their own but is one guard too much to ask?

Whatever the case the thieves had exceptionally good taste. The haul was made up of Picasso's Harlequin Head (1971), Monet's Waterloo Bridge and Charing Cross Bridge (both 1901), Matisse's Reading Girl in White and Yellow (1919), Paul Gauguin's Girl in Front of Open Window (1898), Meyer de Haan's Self-Portrait (1890), and Lucian Freud's Woman with Eyes Closed (2002). I don't understand the final one but than I had nothing to do with it. The Kunsthal has no collection of its own, all the paintings were on loan from the collection of the Cordia family.

When I write about art I like to try and teach something and here is the lesson for any budding art thieves out there. As I said the seven paintings are worth over $100 million but that is an auction/insurance figure. As far as the current 'owners' of the works are concerned they are all but worthless unless they have some totally immoral collector already lined up. That is always a possibility but more in the realm of Hollywood than in the real art world. Also unlikely, but still possible, is that the thieves will try and ransom the paintings through the insurers. One thing is certain, they wont be turning up at a flea market.

If not recovered quickly the paintings may not be seen for generations if ever. Over twenty years ago 13 paintings, including two Rembrandts, at the time worth $500 million were stolen from the Isabella Stewart Gardner museum in Boston. The museum offered a reward of $5 million for the paintings safe return, as always worded so that the thieves themselves aren't eligible to collect. None have ever been recovered in what is still the largest art heist in history.

And no, I was only 10 years old at the time.

10/17 update - There is a good article in today's New York Times that includes this; "Marc Masurovsky, a historian and an expert on plundered art in Washington, noted the possibility that the theft was "a contract job," adding: "These works were picked out. Could it be they had been targeted well before the theft, and the exhibit was the opportunity to strike?"'