In videos posted to social media, one activist can be seen gluing their head to the painting while a second glues his hand to the wall before pouring tomato soup over the first. They can then be heard in the video asking: “How do you feel when you see something beautiful and priceless being apparently destroyed before your very eyes?”
“That is that same feeling when you see the planet being destroyed,” he added.
Three people were arrested for damages to public property in connection with the Vermeer protest. Two have since been sentenced by Dutch courts to a two-month imprisonment – one of which was suspended – as a third awaits trial.
“The condition of the painting was inspected by our conservators,” the museum said in a statement, “fortunately, the glass-covered masterwork was not damaged.”
The stunt comes just weeks after British Just Stop Oil activists similarly targeted Van Gogh’s iconic “Sunflowers” at the National Gallery in London, throwing a tin of tomato soup over the artwork.
While the Mauritshuis stated “art is defenceless” and rejected “attempts to damage it for any purpose whatsoever”, the string of attacks on arts and culture poses the question of whether this kind of protest is acceptable, or even viable, in the fight against the ongoing climate crisis.
Spokespeople for Just Stop Oil have repeatedly cited historical examples of civil resistance, including suffrage and pride movements, as inspiration for their methods. It is these movements that have, time and again, influenced the most radical changes in society. And, in citing these, the organisation highlights that they are by no means the first to launch attacks on art to be heard – Mary Richardson famously slashed Velázquez’s “Rokeby Venus” at the National Gallery over 100 years previously in the name of women’s suffrage.
When questioned via their online blog in relation to the earlier incident at the National Gallery, Just Stop Oil defended their choice to target “human creativity” as a “change of pace” to shock a wider audience, pushing them to ask hard questions which allow the re-evaluation of priorities.
“What we want to do is salvage a future where human creativity is still possible” the organisation continued. “What should we protect, the conditions that allow humanity to make art, or the masterpieces that will have no one to gaze on them.”
"What we want to do is salvage a future where human creativity is still possible"
JUST STOP OIL (16 OCT 2022) via https://juststopoil.org/2022/10/16/why-art-why-now/
Yet, Just Stop Oil continue to stipulate the peaceful nature of their protests. They state their aim is to cause “disruption”, not damage, and knowingly target paintings protected by glass coverings.
“Of course [things are off-limits]. We are a non-violent movement”, spokesperson Alex De Koning told Euronews Culture.
The “cultural transgression” of attacking art was, however, met with inevitable widespread criticism and mockery.
“The correct solution [to activism in galleries] is mandatory jail terms and a $100,000 fine for every person that attacks an artwork “, said one Twitter user.
“Get a life”, added another, “decimating centuries of history and art to make a point isn’t winning anyone over to your cause.”
There may be two sides to this debate, but one thing remains clear as far as these protesters are concerned: to speak at all, even if that voice is perceived as being too loud, can only be better than the apparent apathy of silence.