In less than two weeks, a Van Gogh, a Monet and a Picasso have been attacked | Museum directors fear that it will become a trend and damage the works
Does the end justify the means? The question still stands after environmental activists attempted in 15 days against works of art from Van Gogh, picassoMonet and Vermeer to those who threw from soup to puree, or whose frames or walls ended up sticking their hands with glue.
The first victim was Picasso’s ‘Massacre in Korea’ in Melbourne to the frame of which two people stuck their hands on October 9.
The next was ‘The Sunflowers’, by Van Gogh at the National Gallery in London, which suffered slight damage to the frame without damaging the painting thanks to the protective glass after ending up smeared with tomato soup. A work in Monet’s ‘Haystacks’ series also suffered a mashed potato attack last weekend. and andThursday it was the turn of ‘Girl with a Pearl Earring’, by Johannes Vermeerin a museum in The Hague. An activist glued his head to the painting. There are three detainees for an attack that is attributed to people linked to the environmental organization Just Stop Oil.
Those who carried out the ‘attacks’ justified themselves by pointing out that they were protesting in this way to draw attention to climate change.
“It’s all a bit strange”, says art historian and professor Miguel Ángel Cajigal, known as El Barroquista en Redes. “Let’s hope the trend subsides before someone gets hurt because some of these actions endanger the people who do them. Gluing your hands against the frame of a work of art is dangerous: the piece can fall on top of someone & rdquor ;, adds El Barroquista, who demands that this wave stop “before one day they have a miscalculation and end up causing destruction that whether serious or irreversible in a work of art”.
“I hope that the fashion subsides before one day they have a miscalculation & rdquor;
From the Laxeiro Foundation, its director, Javier Buján, points out that “the most worrying thing is that it becomes a trend. It seems that it is a strategy of a vindictive act on any subject. I find it worrying as an art professional but also as a citizen. The artistic heritage it is a good to preserve and spread, it does not have a negative connotation. Going against that good seems worrying to me & rdquor ;.
Manuel Vilar, director of the Museum of the Galician People, considers that “there are other ways to attract attention. Personally, I am not afraid that they will do something like this in our museum. These people look for places with greater demand. However, it worries me & rdquor ;, to add that “you have to know the history of art and if you know this, you have to respect it & rdquor ;.
The head of the Galician Center for Contemporary Art (CGAC), Santiago Olmo, believes that “there is a certain fanaticism in these actions and little coherence. Culture is everyone’s heritage. It is as if to protest against deforestation we burned down libraries. I think it is determined by a degradation of teaching and culture in general & rdquor ;.
He reflects on the fact that “these attacks are aimed at works with a high media impact” For this reason, he considers that the works currently exhibited in his center “are not susceptible to attacks & rdquor ;. Now, he acknowledges thatthere are always risks, there is no 100% security in these cases & rdquor ;.
BREEK – Meisje met de parel van Johannes Vermeer besmeurd in #Mauritshuis. pic.twitter.com/XzAZTOoBv9
— Steven Bakker (@Kolpen) October 27, 2022
“Surveillance and security measures in museums –continues El Barroquista– are fundamentally dissuasive. It is true that if you seek to do something like that, in the end you find a way to do it. Museums are not spaces with extraordinarily high security measures. They try to hinder but preventing is very difficult & rdquor ;.
According to his point of view, we must also pay attention to the loudspeaker effect that the media may be carrying out. It’s about the eternal doubt about whether it is better to inform or silence to stop the echo. “What is happening is that each of these actions is becoming news and it gives me the feeling that we are experiencing an escalation. Every week something more notorious than the previous one is done and the ban has been opened to attack known works of art. There is a certain tolerance on the part of some media outlets that excuse the reasons & rdquor ;, criticizes the disseminator.
The director of the CGAC also thinks about the role of the media: “Every time there is a case like this, there is media repercussion & rdquor ;.
“There is a general frivolization in part due to the lack of reflection caused by the networks”
Miguel Ángel Cajigal points out that “museums have a very small role in climate change for them to become a target in this type of action. Most of these actions they are vindicated by groups that have just arrived in the struggle environmental and they want to distinguish doing this kind of thing to get publicity & rdquor ;.
In addition, he asks himself: “Where are the limits before a heritage of all, that is protected by law and that costs us an economic, scientific and intellectual effort to maintain it? They always justify that they do not want to harm works of art but one day something big will end up happening & rdquor ;.
counterproductive
For him, these actions can be counterproductive since they run the risk of ending up being “negative publicity” since today “there are as many people criticizing them as being on their side. I don’t think it’s a good way to draw attention to a problem that we all have.”
It was Vermeer’s turn, this time clearly putting The Girl with a Pearl Earring at risk.
I suspect there will still be people who justify this. My doubt is until when they will do it: until something more serious happens or until it is (more) evident that this is not for the environment.
– The Barroquist (@elbarroquista) October 27, 2022
El Barroquista, who is already working on a second book, believes that he does not see “the true motivation behind it clearly. I do not understand that for a protest movement it is desirable appear in the media as vandals”.
Buján concludes that “works of art are always innocent. There are several ways to use works of art as protest. There are those who do something in front of it without damaging it & rdquor ;.
For him, it would be necessary to carry out “a deep reflection” about whether art matters less and less to society. “For some time now, everything has been so trivialized that it seems that everything has the same importance, from the most frivolous things to the most important. There is a general frivolization in part due to the lack of reflection caused by the networks & rdquor ;.