Before their protest action, they verified that the Museum’s scanner allowed “a box with food and a metal bottle with water” to pass through.
“Paintings. A lot of vigilance. Velázquez and El Greco. Little Surveillance: Goya and Rubens and Murillo“. These are the notes of the two ‘Futuro Vegetal’ activists who stuck to the frames of The Naked Maja and The Clothed Majaby Goya, at the Prado Museum, on November 5.
The police intervened one of the plans of the museum, where they had noted details of the preparation of the assault and the choice of the painting to carry out their protest. against the climate summit and climate change. OPEN CASE, the investigation and events channel of Prensa Ibérica, has accessed this documentation, which can be consulted in this report.
The two activists, aged 18 and 21, had previously gone to the Prado Museum to check security measures. Thus, on the map of the museum that the police confiscated from them, they had written down how the details of their “action” should be in order to be successful.
“Watchman looking at computer”
First they made notes on the security measures to enter the Prado. One of the activists wrote about the plan: “Tape. Watcher looking at a computer with a camera”, referring to the scanner. But they don’t seem to worry about getting the glue in, which they did. In fact, they note: “I brought a bag. Tupperware with food. Metal bottle with water” to demonstrate that they were able to pass the scanner and the entrance control without difficulty.
The annotations are made on page 1 of the plan of the Prado Museum that is given to visitors. Activists look at various cadres as possible targets. Thus, about room 12, dedicated to Velázquez, they write: “Meninas. Lots of people in front. Close surveillance”.
Click on the image to see the map with the annotations in full screen:
They also thought of carrying out their action together with “The Knight with his Hand on his Chest” by El Greco, in room 98. But there they write down, in addition to the name of the painting, a V (vigilant) and “vigilance” in the corridor where there are works of art El Greco and Titian.
Other targets: Rubens and Murillo
The activists also studied other possible targets for their protest. Thus, they wrote “Little vigilance” in an area dedicated to rubenswhere they scored “The Three Graces” and in another dedicated to Murillowhere they pointed “just a watchman.”
They also took notice of the Goya self portraitin room 34, of which they wrote that it is “small, but with glass”. Most of the protests in museums had taken place by throwing liquids at works protected by glass. They also wrote on the plan where the box of “The family of Carlos IV”by the Aragonese painter.
“There is no glass”
Finally, in the corner of the map they located, in room 38, the paintings that were to be their targets. They wrote on the plan: “Maja dressed and naked” and noted that there was “only one guard” for all those rooms with works by Goya, from 32 to 38.
With all this data, the activists wrote down the advantages and possible disadvantages of sticking to the frames of Goya’s pestles. The document seized by the police reads: “Pros. Little surveillance. One person in several rooms. Cons. No glass. Separation rope. Photos?”.
On Saturday, November 5, the two young activists stuck to the frames of Goya’s paintings. Two more people recorded it and spread it on social networks. The four were arrested and released after spending the night in cells. They are being investigated for a possible crime against the historical-artistic heritage.
From what they commented, one thing is certain: “we did not want to damage any painting or art, if we wanted it would have been easy” and another is an advertisement: “we will not return to the Pradotell the director not to worry.”