“Gallerie d’Apollon (Louvre)” by Wilfredo Rafael Rodriguez Hernandez/CC BY

Unless you have been living under a rock–or rocks, worth roughly a hundred million euros– the story of the recent Louvre heist is in no way news. That being said, many may be shocked to find out that the incident occurred in under ten minutes, and that the thieves actually escaped by scoot-ing through the streets of Paris. Occurring on the 19th of October 2025, the robbery of the crown jewels from Paris’ Louvre has quickly reached global notoriety, and not for the reasons you might think. 

Whilst the initial media responses to the high-profile robbery reflect shock and indignation, as one might expect, the general reaction of the public to the crime has overwhelmingly been positive. The robbery has gained traction on multiple social media platforms, notably Tiktok, with over 200,000 posts under the hashtag “#louvre”. Parody videos, memes, and even Halloween costumes have been birthed from the heist, and the adjective frequently awarded to the crime is overwhelmingly ‘whimsical’. 

But why such a positive response to stolen diamonds? Well, they were already stolen. It is no secret that France’s crown jewels, like almost all other precious stones residing in the jewelry of European royalty, were gained through the blood and theft of many nations under colonial rule. The only difference now is that there was no blood. Can it really be considered wrong, morally, for diamonds that many already consider to be a symbol of theft, to be robbed once again? For the overwhelming majority of the population, the answer appears to be no. Another thing to consider, when discussing morality, is the current political climate of contemporary society. The ability to become informed at just the click of a button has left many to believe that there is little excuse to not have a general idea of what is going on in the world, and more importantly, to use digital platforms for social change. The growth of social media has birthed a generation that is not only globally and socially aware, but that also feels comfortable questioning the social order in a way that may have previously been viewed as taboo. When so acutely aware of the failing economy, the current job crisis, the inability of young adults to move out of their parent’s homes, it is difficult to feel any sympathy for the robbery of some pretty jewelry that costs the price of people’s houses two hundred times over. Similarly, when the average netizen is being greeted by images of death, poverty, and genocide every time they unlock their phone, the severity of this crime seems somewhat nonexistent. 

That being said, stretching beyond morality, beyond class division, the reason for the crime’s fame is that it is just pure fun. Whether you are pro or anti Louvre-robbery, no one can deny the sheer cinema of a Parisian diamond heist. As if that alone was not entertaining enough, the robbers escaped on scooters at 9.38 am, after being inside the Louvre for only eight minutes total. On top of all of that, a recent photograph of the crime scene has gone viral, with many believing that a dapper gentleman pictured is the detective assigned to the case, though no official sources have confirmed this. The man in question is the personification of a film noir, with a trench coat and jaunty fedora to boot. The case is overwhelmingly cartoonish, with every detail straying further and further into television territory. It is no surprise that people are treating the incident as a Netflix drama. 

Overall, in a world that appears to be becoming increasingly more dismal, with every global news story depicting war or natural disaster, the Louvre heist is in many ways a breath of fresh air. A victimless crime, a story-book detective (allegedly), a carbon-neutral getaway ‘car’. It is truly fair to say that these robbers brought whimsy back to crime.