Tomato Soup on $84 million Van Gogh painting
-
They could easily have brought more cans of soup and vandalized more paintings in that room. My question is, why didn't they?
if their actions saved a single human life, could they have saved more human lives by vandalizing more paintings? Was it laziness, corporate greed, white privilege, that prevented them from going that extra kilometer and destroying more cherished works of art?
what kind of sociopath only destroys a single painting, when it is possible to do more good by destroying more paintings?
Were these two women unwitting participants in the white male patriarchy?
When will the truly decent people step up and start destroying everything for real?
Education is extremely important.
-
@89th said in Tomato Soup on $84 million Van Gogh painting:
Link to video
These two look like ditzy teenage girls. Day off from school or are they just truant?
-
"Never knew Van Gogh was a big supporter of fossil fuels. This is why we can't have nice things anymore"
There’s a statical and dose dependent correlation:
The greater one’s hair dye color(s) deviates from natural hair colors,
the greater one’s perception deviates from reality in all aspects.Trust the science.
"Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... " - Mik, 6/14/08
The saying, "Lite is just one damn thing after another," is a gross understatement. The damn things overlap.
-
They could easily have brought more cans of soup and vandalized more paintings in that room. My question is, why didn't they?
if their actions saved a single human life, could they have saved more human lives by vandalizing more paintings? Was it laziness, corporate greed, white privilege, that prevented them from going that extra kilometer and destroying more cherished works of art?
what kind of sociopath only destroys a single painting, when it is possible to do more good by destroying more paintings?
Were these two women unwitting participants in the white male patriarchy?
When will the truly decent people step up and start destroying everything for real?
-
"Never knew Van Gogh was a big supporter of fossil fuels. This is why we can't have nice things anymore"
There’s a statical and dose dependent correlation:
The greater one’s hair dye color(s) deviates from natural hair colors,
the greater one’s perception deviates from reality in all aspects.Trust the science.
@George-K said in Tomato Soup on $84 million Van Gogh painting:
There’s a statical and dose dependent correlation:
The greater one’s hair dye color(s) deviates from natural hair colors,
the greater one’s perception deviates from reality in all aspects.
Trust the science.That's . . . actually sort of compelling.
-
Van Gogh's Sunflowers back on display
The gallery said earlier the painting was covered by glass and therefore not damaged.
A statement from the Trafalgar Square venue said: "At just after 11am this morning two people entered Room 43 of the National Gallery.
"The pair appeared to glue themselves to the wall adjacent to Van Gogh's Sunflowers (1888). They also threw a red substance - what appears to be tomato soup - over the painting.
"The room was cleared of visitors and police were called. Officers are now on the scene.
"There is some minor damage to the frame but the painting is unharmed."
-
Let’s pay off $10K of their student loans…
-
Let’s pay off $10K of their student loans…
@LuFins-Dad said in Tomato Soup on $84 million Van Gogh painting:
Let’s pay off $10K of their student loans…
They’re Brits.
Only non-witches get due process.
- Cotton Mather, Salem Massachusetts, 1692
-
@LuFins-Dad said in Tomato Soup on $84 million Van Gogh painting:
Let’s pay off $10K of their student loans…
They’re Brits.
@jon-nyc said in Tomato Soup on $84 million Van Gogh painting:
@LuFins-Dad said in Tomato Soup on $84 million Van Gogh painting:
Let’s pay off $10K of their student loans…
They’re Brits.
Maybe that explains why there were no crackers. I like Saltines or Ritz with my soup.
-
The stunt was the latest in a series, and apparently “climate protesters across Europe have for months been gluing themselves to the frames of famous paintings.” The Just Stop Oil activists asked onlookers which was more valuable, “art” or “life,” and gave a speech about the cost of living crisis and the destructive effects of fossil fuel use. For context, the U.K. government has recently lifted its ban on fracking and the Conservative climate minister has justified awarding more than 100 licenses for North Sea drilling, saying that fracking and oil drilling are “good for the environment.” (This madness didn’t, of course, get nearly as much attention as the action of the activists.)
Making fun of the activists is the easiest response in the world. I think their choice of tactics didn’t really make much sense. It brings media coverage, sure, but mostly of the “look how silly these activists are” variety, which is not what you’re aiming for. Does it build public support for the movement to end fossil fuel use? Doubtful.
And yet, it’s also important to understand where these young people are coming from. I’d note in their defense that people in their generation are desperate and anxious, because they see their future being stolen from them. They see the climate crisis getting worse, and they are ruled over by an unelected Prime Minister who believes in unfettered free market capitalism. In recent years, the efforts of young left activists in the Labour Party to introduce transformative progressive leadership were undemocratically thwarted by centrists within the party. These climate activists are coming from a place of extreme frustration with the burdens that they know they are going to face in the coming decades. Futile acts like this are the result of a sense of powerlessness.
Some activism is conducted by savvy strategic thinkers who have carefully weighed up the anticipated effect of their actions on public opinion in pursuit of a clear policy goal. But sometimes activism is a cry of anger by those who do not know what else to do except to somehow “throw their body on the gears.” The London activists weren’t the first to deface paintings in the service of a noble cause. The Suffragettes did the same thing. In 1914, Mary Richardson of the Women’s Social and Political Union (WSPU) hacked up a Velázquez painting in the National Gallery using a meat cleaver. She was protesting against the jailing of WSPU founder Emmeline Pankhurst.
