This question is definitely one that is generating a lot of buzz online. So, let’s take a look at it from a bit of an analytical standpoint – what is the opinion on this particular act of vandalism?
From a purely utilitarian standpoint, I can see why people might think that this act was worth it. After all, if the painting is ruined then it can’t be sold and the vandal(s) are getting something valuable in return for their destructive behavior. That being said, I don’t think that this act was necessarily well thought out or strategic – after all, why not just vandalize something valuable that’s easier to get to (like a museum)?
From a more symbolic standpoint, I think that this act was misguided and ultimately pointless. After all, the Monet painting is only worth 96 million British pounds (US$130 million), which isn’t really anything when you compare it to the millions of dollars that museums typically rake in from ticket sales. In other words, I think that this act was more about vengeful than strategic thinking.