How Love Turns People into Art Thieves: The Psychology Behind Infamous Heists Part III: Prestige—The Glorified Shoplifter
- sasharpe
- 6 hours ago
- 4 min read
Art is a lie that makes us realize the truth – Pablo Picasso
Photo courtesy of Picryl.com
As you may have read in Part I and Part II of this four-part blog post, I challenged myself with the task of uncovering the underlying psychological reasons people become art thieves. I found those who steal for love of the art to be the rarest and most intriguing.
The Psychology of Art Heist Motives
In the four cases I studied, I also found that the “pure love motive” is colored by one or more additional motives. The first is an obsessive need to possess certain works of art, as I illustrated with infamous art thieves Stéphane and Anne-Catherine. The second is a need to protect works of art from damage or obscurity, as I illustrated with Professor Feller, known as “The Robin Hood of the arts.” If you missed these first two parts, they’re worth checking out.
Now, let’s look at the third motive for stealing certain desired art: the need for prestige.
Compared to the warm-hearted Professor Feller, the thieving art collector, Dr. Frank Waxman, left me totally cold. In part due to the lack of inside information and personal statements, I found it difficult to understand or empathize with Waxman’s motivations. A Doctor of Osteopathic Medicine, married with two children, Waxman stole dozens of items from art dealers in Philadelphia in the 1970s and early 80s. Like Breitwieser, Waxman was a well-dressed, well-behaved, cultured-looking man who stole only during the day from small galleries and art dealers.
When Prestige Overshadows Passion
One of his more effective but repellent strategies was to bring one of his young sons to the gallery and then ask an employee to keep watch over the boy. Then he would browse unobserved and hide one or more artworks under his jacket. I found this criminal use of his son grossly irresponsible and narcissistic. I would also conclude, from this high-risk kind of theft, that he was a cool, super-confident con artist.
How he did not get seen in action or remembered when an artwork was found missing seems inexplicable. I could find nothing in any report that explained this.
Waxman did not steal for money. He stole small works of famous, high-priced artists, including Pablo Picasso, Jasper Johns, and Andy Warhol. To friends, business associates, and other members of the art world, he appeared fond and proud of the works in his collection, and was thought to be an art collector of considerable taste and knowledge. He would entertain guests from the art world in his 13th-floor luxury apartment adorned with 170 mostly stolen paintings and sculptures, all as skillfully lighted as if they were in a museum.
The large collection, featuring high-profile artists, elaborately displayed for high-profile guests, made me question his “love” motive for the thefts. Did he steal the art he truly loved, or for another more important reason? I suspected that he loved the prestige his high-profile collection brought him more than any strong affection for each work he snatched. He appeared to bask in being an admired, big-shot art collector.
When the brazen flaunting of his ill-gotten art finally got him caught in 1982, his wife seemed to have no idea that their grand collection was stolen. She thought an inheritance from his grandfather had been paying for the art. Most of the dealers in town knew Waxman and had no suspicion of him. He was described as “a very personable young man.” In other words, my words, he was a gifted con artist.
Photo courtesy of Picryl.com
The Narcissistic Drive Behind High-Profile Art Crimes
This big-time collector might have been less mortified by the discovery of his thievery and stolen collection than by being called “a first-rate shoplifter” by one of his victim gallery owners. Lumping him in with such common criminals must have really stuck in his craw.
Unlike Stéphane Breitwieser and Professor John Feller, Dr. Waxman does not appear to have any redeeming features, aside from having good taste in art. Though I don’t think we can be sure of that, since Waxman’s choices may have been primarily determined by the artist’s status in the art world and beyond, or maybe it was as simple as a particular important work of art was more easily accessible. We may never know.
No one seemed to know who this man really was, but it’s hard to imagine him staring lovingly at an artwork he’d chosen to steal. The work was simply a prize to win him recognition. Waxman was not a love-struck thief compelled to steal art like Breitweiser or Feller, but more of a narcissistic con artist addicted to the risk and high stakes of stealing art to inflate his grandiose self-importance.
Caught in 1982, Waxman initially pleaded not guilty to transporting or receiving 34 stolen works of art; he later cut a deal in which he admitted to stealing 8 works of art, and he served 8 months in prison and paid a $60,000 fine. The statute of limitations saved him from being charged with the other 160+ art heists. I’m not sure where he is, or if he’s even alive, today, but if he is, I hope he regrets his narcissism and shallow motivations.
That’s our third look into the heart and soul of art thieves. Again, I hope you found their stories and psychology as interesting as I did.
Check back very soon when I post the fourth part of How Love Turns People into Art Thieves: The Psychology Behind Infamous Heists, where I’ll tell you all about a pair of popular high school teachers who not only stole works of art, but possibly added murder into their thrill-seeking, duplicitous lives.
Don’t forget to check out Artist, Lover, Forger, Thief, the first book in my Kate O’Dade Art Crime Series. You can find it here, and it's in the running as a semi-finalist for the Clue Award from Chanticleer (Mystery, Suspense)!
I’d really like to hear from you! Let me know what you think about the prestige-seeking doctor. Did he get off too easily? Did his punishment fit his crimes?
***
