Recent news about climate change activists throwing food, and other items, on art to highlight the climate emergency got a lot of eyeballs. So, we guess in that respect, it was a successful ploy to their cause. And it was not the first time that art was used to amplify a cause. In 1914, Mary Richardson a suffragette slashed ‘Toilet of Venus’ by Velasquez, which was hanging in the National Gallery, London. It made the headlines and attracted attention.
Climate change activists began targeting art in museums from May 2022, when a man smeared cake on Mona Lisa. It is yet not certain if this was related to the subsequent incidences of vandalism. But Monal Lisa is no stranger to being attacked, in 1956 a man threw stone at her (it caused damage to her elbow) since then she has been behind glass, but this did not deter the attacks, in 2005 a woman threw a teacup on the glass, and damaged only the glass but this still grabbed attention. It is the most visited artwork.
But the trend, since it got such widespread coverage, continued, with museums targeted in London, Potsdam, Rome, Melbourne, Canberra. As of now, we do not see any link between artworks chosen for attack, apart from the fact that these were cultural icons.
The museums administrators issued a public statement highlighting the need to keep artworks safe and available for all.
While we feel the activists urgency and support the cause (for action towards a sustainable earth), we weren’t too pleased to see food, or indeed any other items, being thrown at works of art! They have also glued themselves to artworks, albeit it didn’t damage the work.
But coming back to what prompted this article.
It sometimes gets forgotten that a lot of art is political, social and ideological response of artists of that period. And just because these are now housed in well protected enclosures in museums, they were at the time of their creation a radical statement of artists of a time, their own private protest.
Guernica by Picasso, Barbara Krueger’s impactful statements, Bansky’s almost guerrilla style operations, Ai Wei Wei’s many installations and sculptures, and several more well-documented and displayed artists have been, through their works, highlighting the injustices of the times.
We offer two more perspectives.
Museums all over the world are struggling to bring in people through the doors. With huge costs of acquisition, storage, preservation, display, programming and high-tech security, there is a constant struggle to keep the engagement updated and relevant. Do these attacks bear a negative impact? Or will they draw in more people out of curiosity. There is already an increased financial pressure for additional security measures, and the much-needed funds will no doubt get diverted towards such. How will this impact exhibitions and outreach programming?
Additionally, while almost all the artworks targeted were behind glass – only in the case of Warhol’s ‘painted car’ dry flour was used, the insurance companies are jittery. Some have made claims that they will insure only artworks behind glass! This is sure to impact the viewing experience of an artwork and add to the expense! Will people loan artworks to museums? It is also said that people who have loaned or donated works have asked for them to be removed and put in storage.
The art world functions in an opaque fashion and is bound by systems and processes that are not governed by statutory bodies. Incidences such as these puts the system on a back foot. Art is a powerful vehicle for communication and artists have been involved in spreading the message of climate change, and many artists are voices of societal injustices and inequalities.
The activists, who may have their heart in the right place, have triggered a set of actions that could be misused.
We understand that to attract media and public attention, in an age when we are inundated with a constant supply of images and words, any group wanting to make an impact would resort to extreme measures, especially when their cause requires urgent political and social action.
However, art in museums is a privilege for us all. To maintain this link with the global heritage is something we cherish as a society.
Museums work very hard to preserve, conserve, interpret and display these works. So, when some climate activists’ groups pose the question, “What is worth more, art or life?”, it offers an incomplete narrative. Why? Because the protestors are not targeting art per se, if that were the case then they would target, high profile galleries, artists, art fairs and artworks. Please note that there are paintings, unprotected by glass, that are hanging in the same room as Mona Lisa; their targets are perceived symbols of wealth and privilege, and in doing so they have found easy pickings in institutions, which conversely are working towards equitable access to art.
Kommentare