Althouse: "A small-town couple left behind a stolen painting worth over $100 million

August 5, 2018

"A small-town couple left behind a stolen painting worth over $100 million — and a big mystery."

42 comments:

Birkel said...: Who among us hasn’t done this a time or two?; 8/5/18, 6:48 AM
Tank said...: I'll take Renoir.; 8/5/18, 6:52 AM
Ralph L said...: Big-city couples wouldn't have the nerve to steal it.

"Worth" $100 million. Have they given the insurance money back, with interest?; 8/5/18, 7:01 AM
Wince said...: They base their extreme valuation of the painting on the belief that men will pay anything to look at two even barely discernable breasts.; 8/5/18, 7:03 AM
AllenS said...: Looks like it's worth, oh, about $1.60.; 8/5/18, 7:07 AM
Tank said...: Forget the money aspect, someone explain why this is good art (nevermind great art).; 8/5/18, 7:09 AM
DrSquid said...: I would never have guessed, if I were looking at a painting like that in a museum, that it represents the "quintessential American art form." Prolly why I don't visit terribly many art museums.; 8/5/18, 7:17 AM
Saint Croix said...: Forget the money aspect, someone explain why this is good art (nevermind great art).

Art is not limited to a representation of reality. If we were to limit art in such a way, painting would have died out with the photograph.

Representation of reality is kind of boring, in my opinion. And certainly sculpture (three dimensional art) is closer to reality than painting (two dimensional art). The idea that painting should only aspire to re-create what life already gives us has always been a weak argument.

I like beautiful art. Art that looks amazing, and doesn't look like anything else. That is super-cool.

de Kooning's masterpiece qualifies, at least for me.

And you can keep your Renoir. And his crappy filmmaking son, too!; 8/5/18, 7:18 AM
Saint Croix said...: What's fascinating to me is that the couple stole the painting, but not for money. They stole it to hang on their wall, apparently.

Also I was impressed by the super-honesty of the guy who bought it at the estate sale. I think the first impulse of a lot of people would have been to try to sell it. Or at least keep it!

This innocent guy found $100 million dollars, and he gave it back. I am very impressed!; 8/5/18, 7:22 AM
Ralph L said...: Art that looks amazing, and doesn't look like anything else.

Probably the original definition of "amazing," and a few other adjectives. Does it look like other de Koonings?; 8/5/18, 7:24 AM
gilbar said...: "quintessential American art form."
Okay, i'm from iowa, and i'm a prejudiced iowa bigot; *BUT!*

I'm pretty sure the "quintessential American art form." involves Stone City, and Trees
(or, if you prefer; the Hudson River school/ or Remmington)

I REALLY Doubt, that if you ask anyone in the world what is "quintessential American art form." that they'd say abstract impressionism, or whatever this crap is

Outdoor scenes with mountains or farms DUH!; 8/5/18, 7:37 AM
Tank said...: @ St. Croix

I'm fine with art that is amazing. What is amazing about this art?

I see this as some nondescript thing you find in a hotel lobby. And it would look fine there.; 8/5/18, 7:43 AM
gilbar said...: Stone City; 8/5/18, 7:50 AM
Birkel said...: Art is subjectively appreciated. I side with Tank but that opinion matters little, if at all.

The same is true for all opinions of art.; 8/5/18, 7:54 AM
Sebastian said...: Just the sort of thing you'd pick up at a yard sale.; 8/5/18, 8:28 AM
Big Mike said...: Why is it great art? Because someone is willing to pay $ 100 million for it. Why is it worth $ 100 million? Because it is great art!

Hmmm. I think I see the problem.; 8/5/18, 8:29 AM
Fernandinande said...: Appreciating an ugly painting with no redeeming qualities is what separates us from the animals, especially the deplorable animals.; 8/5/18, 8:49 AM
Fernandinande said...: Here is an "art":

(.Y.); 8/5/18, 8:50 AM
Phil 314 said...: I wonder if they hung it on their refrigerator with magnets. (because they were childless); 8/5/18, 9:05 AM
chuck said...: > "quintessential American art form."

Willem de Kooning was Dutch :) I think the painting is quite good for what it is, but I wouldn't spend a lot of time looking at it and thinking.; 8/5/18, 9:06 AM
Phil 314 said...: Which of the two was the art lover and who would have gotten the painting in the divorce settlement?; 8/5/18, 9:07 AM
Two-eyed Jack said...: A friend who studied earth sculpture in college once said that the essence of success in contemporary art is the ability to lay down a good line of bullshit. Abstract expressionism is the quintessential American art form in just this way. It is built on Jungian and Freudian ideas of automatic expression allowing unfiltered revelation. The worse it looks, the more honest it is. De Kooning gave great id. Honestly.; 8/5/18, 9:12 AM
Etienne said...: They thought they were doing the community a service. Remove that ugly painting, and hide it behind the bedroom door.

"Let the world have it back when our eyes no longer see."

Hallelujah Hallelujah; 8/5/18, 9:18 AM
Mark said...: Worth over $100 million to whom?

At $100 million, that equals the labor output at today's average wage of one person working for nearly 1,700 years (or ten for 170 years, a hundred for 17 years). Even folks who net a million-dollar income would need to work for 100 years.

Is it really, truly, objectively worth that much effort? For something some talentless hack could have thrown together in an hour in a drunken state?; 8/5/18, 9:19 AM
Michael K said...: Blogger Two-eyed Jack said...
A friend who studied earth sculpture in college once said that the essence of success in contemporary art is the ability to lay down a good line of bullshit.

My daughter is involved in that art world. She worked at a gallery in Santa Monica and would see women come in and write a check for an $850,000 painting that I would not use to patch a chicken coop (Which Van Gogh's mother did with a few of his.)

She now works for a world famous artist that I had never heard of. He is old and ill and a gallery owner sent a GV to fly him and her to a NY City opening of an exhibit of his paintings.; 8/5/18, 9:47 AM
David Begley said...: Modern abstract is the ultimate scam and Tom Wolfe described it most recently in Back to Blood,

A thief cannot pass good title.

What this case shows is how difficult it is to sell well-known stolen art. That’s the reason, in part, why the kept it at home.; 8/5/18, 10:52 AM
dustbunny said...: Art is a world unto itself. I think it is boring to hear all the ‘why is this art or my kid could do this’ comments. It’s art because people who spend their lives looking at, evaluating and studying art declare it to be so. It’s a consensus. Sometimes they’re wrong-it can take centuries to get it right especially as contemporary art often suffers from fashionability and political maneuvering. If you don’t look at or spend much time with all periods of art then your opinion is worth very little; 8/5/18, 11:41 AM
Openidname said...: "Saint Croix said...

"This innocent guy found $100 million dollars, and he gave it back. I am very impressed!"

Not really. He couldn't sell it. Certainly not to anyone with $100 million.; 8/5/18, 11:47 AM
tim in vermont said...: At $100 million, that equals the labor output at today’s average wage of one person working for nearly 1,700 years (or ten for 170 years, a hundred for 17 years).

Supposedly Rodin paid a plumber for a week's work with a sketch he did in about 30 seconds at his kitchen table. The plumber was quite happy with the exchange.; 8/5/18, 11:53 AM
Michael K said...: I think it is boring to hear all the ‘why is this art or my kid could do this’ comments. It’s art because people who spend their lives looking at, evaluating and studying art declare it to be so.

Maybe but much of "Contemporary Art" seems to me to be an example of the "Greater Fool Theory."

The people buying it are hedging inflation.; 8/5/18, 11:57 AM
Yancey Ward said...: The guy returning the painting basically had no choice- you can't sell it safely at auction, nor can you safely do so privately. You only take that risk if you are already a criminal, which he apparently wasn't.; 8/5/18, 12:03 PM
Yancey Ward said...: The best value an honest man in that situation could derive from the accidental discovery was the good name he gets by returning it, and perhaps a small reward.; 8/5/18, 12:05 PM
Big Mike said...: The imputed value of this painting is $100 million, which is not far fetched considering that other de Kooning paintings in his “Woman” series have sold for much more than that. But the highest price ever paid for a Renoir is $78 million. Yes, I know I am very fond of the classical Impressionists, but, still, there’s something wrong.; 8/5/18, 12:07 PM
Howard said...: "quintessential American Art Form" DeKooning was from Rotterdam
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Willem_de_Kooning_Academy; 8/5/18, 1:22 PM
Two-eyed Jack said...: Some answer:
Q: Is it art?
A: Of course it is. What are you, some kind of Platonist? It's a painting. Paintings, good or bad, are works of art.
Q: How can it be worth so much?
It is worth what somebody, greater or lesser fool, will pay. Nobody has paid $100 million, but someone might.
Q: Is that fair?
A: All exchange is based upon differences in perceived value. Is it fair that a Mickey Mantle rookie card goes for 55 times what a Phil Rizzuto rookie card goes for? They are both just pieces of cardboard.
Q: What if I don't like the painting?
A: You have probably saved yourself a lot of money. Find something else for the blank spot on your wall.; 8/5/18, 1:39 PM
Henry said...: Saint Croix said...

What's fascinating to me is that the couple stole the painting, but not for money. They stole it to hang on their wall, apparently.

That's really all they could do. A stolen painting of that fame is unsaleable.; 8/5/18, 1:57 PM
Darrell said...: The only way they had to authenticate it was to check the frame/stretcher? It must be a great painting, then.; 8/5/18, 2:43 PM
Darrell said...: Reward?
The people should have dealt with Banacek and the insurance company.; 8/5/18, 2:45 PM
Francisco D said...: I am a fan of modern art, owning several originals by contemporary artists, quite a few limited edition reproductions (mostly Kandinsky and Picasso) and a lot of "poster art" that my fiancé prefers to keep out of the public spaces.

Something about the abstractions calms my mind. I do not look for a deeper meaning, although many artists convey a (somewhat jumbled) point of view. Some make their view strictly artistic. Others have something to say about history or society. The latter can be annoying, but I still appreciate the work.

For me, it is as if some modern art (e.g., Kandinsky, Picasso, Dali, Miro) speaks directly to certain processing centers of the brain without conscious cognitive mediation. Doesn't that sound relaxing?; 8/5/18, 3:02 PM
Anonymous said...: No match for "The Kramer".; 8/5/18, 3:27 PM
Sam L. said...: I see it as ugly.; 8/5/18, 4:03 PM
Saint Croix said...: What is amazing about this art?

Some cool things cannot be put into words.

To give another example, that cool ass sound effect that the doors make on the Star Trek TV show. I could try to write it out for you. But it would be a subpar experience.

The guy who invented that cool ass sound effect just died, by the way. What a great artist!

How much money came from that cool ass sound effect? Don't know if we could put a price on it. It's like trying to figure out how much Star Wars owes to John Williams, or whatever guy it was who created Darth Vader's sound.

You listen to that Star Trek door sound and you might say to yourself, huh. That's not worth anything. I think that subtle little sound was one of the coolest things about the show. Not that I was a fan of the show. Mission Impossible was more my speed, with its amazing music and crazy camera work. But there's no question in my mind that when I hear that whooshing door, I am hearing the future. That is a future sound! Really cool, in my opinion.; 8/6/18, 4:41 AM