Attacking works of art in the name of the climate? It's a call for help "

• On Sunday, environmental activists from the group “Last Generation” threw mashed potatoes at a Claude Monet painting at the Barberini Museum in Potsdam, Germany.

• Last week, two activists from the Just Stop Oil movement splashed sunflowers

  , a work by Vincent Van Gogh, with tomato soup at

  the National Gallery in London.

• For Marta Torre-Schaub, research director at the CNRS, specialist in environmental law and climate change, these activists "did not just want to damage a work of art" but "to make themselves visible".

“Do you have to throw mashed potatoes at a board to make you listen?

This painting will no longer be worth anything if we have to fight to find something to eat”.

On Sunday, at the Barberini Museum in Potsdam (Germany), Claude Monet's painting

was targeted by environmental activists from the Last Generation movement.

Dressed in orange vests, the two activists threw mashed potatoes at the work, protected by glass, before being arrested.

Already on October 14, two environmental activists from the Just Stop Oil movement attacked Van Gogh's masterpiece

at the National Gallery in London.

The paint, which had been sprayed with tomato soup, suffered no damage.

But why are environmental activists stepping up actions against works of art?

To understand this,

interviewed Marta Torre-Schaub, research director at the CNRS and specialist in environmental law and climate change.

Why do environmental activists attack works of art in this way?

These activists are angry at the inaction of the public authorities and the international community, they want to send a message, to show that they are concerned.

Their actions follow a certain strategy: they did not take place in an empty street or a little-known gallery, but in large museums.

This is not insignificant, they have chosen very busy places to be visible, to attract attention and to shock.

It was also the same approach, this summer, for the actions carried out at Roland-Garros or on the Tour de France.

Personally, I'm confused.

Why are they attacking culture?

Art is one of the elements that characterizes our humanity, differentiates us.

It's a bit of a shame to attack this part of humanity, when they themselves want to fight for their generation, for the survival of humanity on this planet in peril.

Are these forms of civil disobedience increasing in number?

Environmental activism has changed in ten years.

They will no longer demonstrate in front of the headquarters of large energy groups.

It's another generation, with a different strategy.

They know they have to reach the general public to have a chance to make things happen, so they demonstrate.

They targeted the painting, it was prepared, thought out.

Art is universal, it speaks to a lot of people, it's durable over time, in history, so it's obviously much more impactful.

Ecological militancy has therefore rejuvenated, why?

These are often high school students or students who have not completed their course.

This movement has rejuvenated a lot since the launch of Friday For Future, in 2018, by Greta Thunberg.

At the time, she was only 14 years old.

Now, young people have a model to follow, which was not the case before.

Especially since young people have much more access to information and social networks have largely contributed to this “rejuvenation”.

Even though their actions are spontaneous, there is a ripple effect.

There was no such communication, such coordination ten years ago.

At least not at this level.

Are these actions, especially against works of art, not likely to serve the fight for the preservation of the environment?

There is always the risk that some will find it goes too far or feel that it is unnecessary and that they had better try to dialogue.

These questions are legitimate: Do they need to throw mashed potatoes or tomato soup on the boards?

Is it really necessary?

However, many understand that young people have absolutely nothing to make their voice heard, no lever for action, except the right to vote.

They don't know what world they're going to live in, how they're going to get it back.

The youth are anxious.

In a way, it's almost a cry for help.

These activists want people to remember the gesture and the message.

And it is by this gesture that they send their message.

Someone who sees this will wonder, which leads to questioning their motivations, their band, their message.

They get what they wanted: we wonder about them.

It should also be remembered that these are peaceful actions.

The targeted paintings are protected by glass, they knew it.

There is no degradation of public property or works of art per se.

Demonstrating in the street, blocking the entrance to a nuclear power plant or dumping manure in front of a company's headquarters… Are the old methods outdated?

No, there are marches, strikes, demonstrations, punches, blockades… No method is better or outdated than another.

There is a multiplicity, a range of protests.

For example, young people from Polytechnique demonstrated in 2020 to oppose the creation of a Total research and development center.

The students of AgroParisTech, themselves, took advantage of their graduation this year to call for “deserting” jobs that are “destructive” for ecology.

They try a lot, experiment to see how best to convey the message.

We can imagine in the future that cinema, sculpture or literature will be targeted, everything is possible.

There will be other actions in the coming months, to see if it will remain peaceful.

World

London: The activists who doused the “Sunflowers” ​​with soup face justice

Company

Environment: No, Just Stop Oil activists are not funded by "palm oil shareholders"

• Planet

• Claude Monet

• Germany

• Museum

• Ecology

• Activism

• Climate