Connect with us

Lifestyle

A few things to consider before committing a museum heist

Published

on

A few things to consider before committing a museum heist

A forensics officer examines the cut window and balcony of a gallery at the Louvre Museum which was the scene of a robbery on October 19 in Paris.

Kiran Ridley/Getty Images


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Kiran Ridley/Getty Images

The glamorous image of art heists often conjures up Bond-villain masterminds orchestrating elaborate schemes. Laure Beccuau, the lead prosecutor in the recent Louvre case involving the theft of more than $100 million worth of historic jewelry, suggested in an interview on French news channel BFMTV this week that the job could be the work of organized crime or commissioned by a major “sponsor.”

But lawyer Christopher Marinello, founder and CEO of Art Recovery International, a London and Venice-based group specializing in tracking down stolen works of art, dismisses the latter Hollywood scenario. “There have been questions about some sort of slippery Dr. No-type character who’s ordering these thefts from afar for his personal collection in his underwater lair,” said Marinello. “But in 39 years of working on art recovery cases, I have never seen a theft-to-order case.”

Stealing art can, in fact, be far from lucrative. No reputable buyer will touch recognizable stolen pieces, which typically sell for just a fraction of their true value on the black market. “If you steal a Picasso, you have to keep it a Picasso,” Marinello said. “It has to stay in one piece.”

Advertisement

However, Marinello said there’s a much bigger upside to stealing diamond tiaras and emerald necklaces because they can be broken up and sold off as individual gems. “That can be done as simply as sewing the stones inside a jacket, driving outside of France and going to a place like Tel Aviv or Antwerp where they have jewelry centers and experts who will recut larger stones into smaller stones,” Marinello said. “And then you’ve gotten away with the crime of the decade.”

Relatively light penalties add to the temptation. Stealing a major artwork from a U.S. museum carries a maximum 10-year sentence under federal law and a potential fine, with similar penalties in France. And many museums are also easy targets.

“For well-known pieces of artwork, because their black market value is so low, there’s already very little incentive for criminals to go after those pieces,” said Frederick Chen, an economics professor at Wake Forest University who has co-authored a paper on the economics of art heists. “And so there’s less incentive for museums to invest in security.”

Chen said museums are even less likely to protect artifacts that don’t drive ticket sales. “From the thieves’ perspective, you already know the museum isn’t going to have security that’s going to be as strong as going to, say, a Tiffany’s,” Chen said.

Myles Connor, an 82-year-old veteran art thief who stole a Rembrandt from Boston’s Museum of Fine Arts in 1975 among other crimes and served substantial prison time, agrees museums are vulnerable. “Most museums don’t have armed guards,” he said. “And so if you’re armed and determined, you can grab almost any painting out of almost any museum. And you can also do that with jewelry.”

Advertisement

But Connor says it’s a bad idea to break up valuable jewelry, like pieces found in museums. “If you break them up, you destroy the value of the items and you’d kind of be low-balling yourself,” he said.

Connor said there’s a better way to cash out. “When I stole paintings from museums, it was always with the intention of returning the painting and getting a reward.” Connor said he received $50,000—about $300,000 in today’s money—for returning the Rembrandt.

He said he hopes the Louvre thieves will follow his playbook, adding “I’m sure the reward will be substantial.”

The French government hasn’t yet announced any reward – though some experts, including Anthony Amore, the head of security and chief investigator at Boston’s Isabella Stewart Gardner Museum, itself a target of art theft, have publicly called for it.

Lifestyle

‘The Rest of Our Lives’ takes readers on a midlife crisis road trip

Published

on

‘The Rest of Our Lives’ takes readers on a midlife crisis road trip

The midlife crisis remains a rich vein for novelists, even as its sufferers skew ever older.

In Ben Markovits’ 12th novel,The Rest of Our Lives — which was a finalist for this year’s Booker Prize the narrator, 55-year-old Tom Layward, is trying to figure out what to do with his remaining time on this mortal coil. With his youngest child headed off to college, his health faltering, and both his marriage and law school teaching position on the rocks, he feels blocked by “undigested emotional material.”

So, what does he do? In the great American tradition, Markovits’ wayward Layward hits the road. After dropping off his daughter at college, he heads west into his past and what may be his sunset.

America’s literary highways are not quite bumper-to-bumper, but they are plenty crowded with middle-aged runaways fleeing lives that increasingly feel like a bad fit. Many are women, including the heroines of Anne Tyler’s Ladder of Years  and Miranda July’s All Fours. But there are men, too, like the hero of John Updike’s Rabbit, Run — the granddaddy of midlife crisis novels — which serves as a sort of template for Markovits’ novel (and, tellingly, is the subject of his narrator’s abandoned doctoral dissertation, which he tossed aside for the more dependable employment prospects of a law degree after meeting his “unusually beautiful” future wife, Amy.)

Advertisement

We meet Tom and Amy on the cusp of empty nesting. This is not a happy prospect. Tom has been biding his time for the last dozen years, since he learned of Amy’s affair with a guy she knew from synagogue. This happened back when their daughter, Miriam, was six, and her older brother, Michael, was 12.

Their marriage has not improved in the intervening years. The early pages of this novel, a countdown of the Laywards’ last few days as a family unit before Miri matriculates, recalls an old magazine feature: “Can this marriage be saved?” One would think not. Amy, forever trying to provoke a reaction from her impassive husband, jabs repeatedly, “You really don’t care about anything, do you?”

Tom observes that staying in a long marriage requires acceptance of reduced expectations. He notes wryly: “It’s like being a Knicks fan.” (Like Markovits and Updike’s Rabbit Angstrom, Tom is a former basketball player. Amusingly, his description of each character includes a height estimate.)

Driving west, Tom has plenty of time to ponder his disappointments, and Amy’s. He notes that she had hoped he’d be more ambitious; she wanted him to accept a lucrative offer from a top litigation firm that would have paid for private school for their kids. Instead, Amy says, he chose to stay in his “dead end” job at Fordham Law, where he teaches a controversial class on hate crime. He is currently in hot water for his legal input for the defense in a case against an NBA owner for racial allegations. Amy’s take: “Tom loves to stand up for racists.”

Tom’s road trip takes him on a desultory odyssey visiting old friends and family. He finds their lives disheartening. In Pittsburgh, a grad school friend who became an English professor teaches “dead white men” and is having an affair with a graduate student. In South Bend, his younger brother is distressed over limited access to his kids after a divorce. In Denver, a college teammate urges him to see a guy at UCLA who wants to bring a case about systemic discrimination against white American basketball players.

Advertisement

His old high school girlfriend, who leads a busy life in Las Vegas as a single, late-life parent, urges him to steer clear of the case. When she also tries to talk about his alarming health symptoms (puffiness, breathlessness), he stonewalls her. “I forgot what you’re like,” she tells him, eerily echoing Amy. “You don’t really care about anything.”

At each stop, Tom tries to put a good face on his trip by telling his hosts that he’s thinking of writing a book about pickup basketball across the country. He also confesses, “I may have left Amy.” “You may?” his brother says.

Tom exacerbates Amy’s longtime presentiment of abandonment by ignoring most of her calls. Periodically, he checks in late at night, and they circle around what’s going on. “God, you’re cold,” she says when his explanations leave her wanting. His response? “Okay.” When he confides that he’s feeling “a little adrift…I can’t seem to get a grip on anything,” she surprises him by responding, “Me neither.” It’s a start.

In a 2006 interview with Yale Daily News, Markovits’ alma mater, he said, “I like to write about what it is like to become happier, although no one has ever been able to spot happiness in my books.”

You don’t have to look too hard to spot glimmers of happiness behind the missteps and misconnects in this ultimately moving probe of life, love, family and marriage across years and miles.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Lifestyle

Guess Who This Racing Enthusiast Is!

Published

on

Guess Who This Racing Enthusiast Is!

Guess Who
This Racing Enthusiast Is!

Published

Advertisement

Continue Reading

Lifestyle

Springsteen’s label was about to drop him. Then came ‘Born to Run’

Published

on

Springsteen’s label was about to drop him. Then came ‘Born to Run’

Biographer Peter Ames Carlin describes the making of Born to Run as an “existential moment” for Springsteen. Carlin’s book is Tonight in Jungleland. Originally broadcast Aug. 7, 2025.

Hear the Original Interview

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending