Foreign Policy magazine has a web interview with an underworld art informant. According to the article, museums often have to resort to dealing the criminal underworld in order to recover stolen art and artifacts. Now I believe Foreign Policy is a rather unusual source for a post on the Appraiser Workshops blog, but there is no denying the interview with the "art informant" is interesting and certainly enlightening with comments such as "For every Picasso that’s stolen, there are hundreds of paintings worth $20,000 or so rather than $20 million." It also mentions the the risk of stealing art is less then robbing a bank, and if caught, the punishment is less severe. I do question how reliable a confidential source is in the article who goes by the name "Art Hostage" (Foreign Policy states they confirmed his identity and background) but that makes the interview no less intriguing.Excerpt from the Foreign Policy Interview:
Seven Questions: A Reformed Stolen-Art Dealer Tells All
FP: So stolen art is like a form of currency?
AH: Yes, it is. I mean, the mainstream media whores always run out the same line that, “Oh, they’ll never be able to sell it. There’s no market.” I understand why they do that, but it’s a bit disingenuous. Sure, they won’t sell famous art for market value. But if you’ve got four men who steal four pictures in a half-hour heist, plus planning, and sell it for a million, that’s $250,000 for a very small amount of work. Robbers that used to go into a bank or hold up an armored truck found it very difficult to escape and found that they would get very big sentences. But if an armed robber goes into a museum and makes off with art, he can get a similar type of return for a lot less risk, and if he gets caught, the actual penalties are a slap on the wrist. Those guys who took The Scream in Norway? One guy got six years, and one got four years. That’s not really a deterrent, is it?
To read the full interview click HERE. "Art Hostage" also has a blog, click HERE to read.
No comments:
Post a Comment