Three individuals targeted National Gallery paintings an hour after Phoebe Plummer and Anna Holland were jailed for similar attack in 2022
Climate activists have thrown tomato soup over two Sunflowers paintings by Vincent van Gogh, just an hour after two others were jailed for a similar protest action in 2022.
Three supporters of Just Stop Oil walked into the National Gallery in London, where an exhibition of Van Gogh’s collected works is on display, at 2.30pm on Friday afternoon, and threw Heinz soup over Sunflowers 1889 and Sunflowers 1888.
The latter was the same work targeted by Phoebe Plummer and Anna Holland in 2022. That pair are now among 25 supporters of Just Stop Oil in jail for climate protests.
My tin hat tingles with these guys they’re either too upper middle-class to actually understand the real world or they’re making sure climate activists are a running joke.
I see your point, I do. But I also see theirs. There will be no one around in the future to enjoy or make art if we continue fucking up the world with fossil fuels the way we are.
Maybe it’d be better to walk around posting little signs on the paintings descriptions with a catch phrase like “like art? Stop fossil fuels” then a little blurb about how there’ll be no art in the future if there is no future.
That’s probably how I’d handle it, maybe even try to work with the museum so the signs wouldnt get taken down. But, that doesn’t get media attention. It’d never end up in the news. Maybe after contacting 50 museums it’d get a small mention, but ultimately no one would care.
Our current news cycles don’t encourage people to act civilly when trying to be heard. So that’s why this sort of extreme behavior keeps happening. It’s a vicious feedback loop and just like climate change we don’t seem to be making any moves to stop it.
No bad publicity.
Here are a few reasons why thats not true
-
People talking about these guys being dumbasses does not equate to people taking climate change seriously.
-
There is limited bandwidth for publicity, these morons are taking publicity away from people actively doing the research, enacting changes, building things the help mitigate climate change.
-
They give the opportunity for climate change deniers to lump all climate change activists together with these idiots, allowing them to replace the message of “Act against climate change” to look at all these dumbass climate change activists.
I’m taking it seriously. Are you not taking it seriously?
are taking publicity away
And this is being published where?
Here’s my challenge to you: every time you see Just Stop Oil pop up, post these articles. Get people excited about actually doing something.They give the opportunity for climate change deniers to lump all climate change activists together with these idiots
Deniers are too far gone. You spray paint stone henge, they complain about the lichen. You splash color on a ferrari dealership, they complain about the small business owners. You bomb an oil rig, they say that violence never solves anything. They’re already not on our side.
No, but actions like this will bring more people onto their side.
-
Just like the Civil Rights Protestors!!
/s
Actually, it’s almost exactly like the Civil Rights protesters. MLK even outright said that they didn’t do anything more than marches and sit-ins because those were already illegal and doing anything more could get them killed or prison sentences.
That said, I think this was a stupid way to risk jail time.
Well I just started peeing on people while yelling “Stop Big Oil!” and although I’m embarrassed to admit it, that does make me exactly like Dr. King. Oh, sure it may get me some jail time but that’s what fighting for freedom takes. Er, fighting big oil. Freedom from big oil.
And hey if my POV videos get me a few million clicks on the site in the meantime, I can’t blame the people. They’re hungry for justice!
You are either extremely deluded or a little deluded and almost intentionally misunderstanding their aims.
Climate activists have been chaining themselves to oil infrastructure for decades. How many times can you honestly say you’ve heard of it? I’ve heard of maybe one instance, and it got very little news coverage.
JSO has recently pivoted to this strategy of (temporarily) vandalizing monuments and works of art. EVERY. SINGLE. TIME it happens, it’s all over the news and spawns endless discussion. Almost like IT’S FUCKING WORKING.
I award to you the Useful Idiot Ribbon.
Yeah people do talk about what clueless freaking idiots they are. It sure is working! It’s jenius! Wait til Madison Avenue figures it out!
Climate activists have chained themselves to trees, to construction equipment, to the property of the companies they protest. THAT is serious action.
Throwing soup in a museum is completely tone deaf, utterly counterproductive and pathetic.
Climate activists have chained themselves to trees, to construction equipment, to the property of the companies they protest. THAT is serious action.
You know we need more people doing stuff like this, right?
Not “climate activists.”
You.Have you been inspired to chain yourself to oil infrastructure? To accomplish something real?
I have been inspired not to make a mockery of that action by doing something idiotic and posting it to Instagram pretending it’s serious.
I’m afraid “doing nothing” isn’t going to cut it here, man.
And did you make the news?
I’ll have you know I’ve been featured in several NextDoor posts!
That’s great, man. Maybe they’ll write that on your underwater tombstone.
This is what the American public thought of MLK in the 60s:
You mean the American Public that burned the Beatles records because John said they were “bigger than Jesus”? The American Public that treated German POWs better than black Army servicemen? That American Public?
What’s the source of that cartoon? I’m interested to know if it was in fact from Birmingham.
The Guardian - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)
Information for The Guardian:
MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: Medium - Factual Reporting: Mixed - United Kingdom
Wikipedia about this sourceSearch topics on Ground.News
I’m sorry, but these protests are going to far! That was a perfectly fine soup!
This is invalid civil disobedience. The point of civil disobedience is to disobey unjust laws (see: Rosa Parks disobeying bus segregation). So unless they think laws against throwing soup at paintings are unjust, their point is lost.
I keep thinking that these guys have to be right wing plants. Can these people really be this stupid? Doing this shit and blocking roads only makes people your enemy. Go throw paint on billionaire’s houses or at your nearest court house you idiots
Point of order, they didn’t block the road. They were up on the sign poles. The police stopped traffic.
Removed by mod
Good for them.
They’re getting media attention for their message. That isn’t easy to do.
I 100% agree with their message, I 20% agree with their tactics.
These people are utter cunts.
All this does is annoy people and potentially damage the actual art. If they threw soup at oil execs or something, at least it’d be somewhat related to their message. But attacking paintings does nothing.
If I saw that in a museum, I’d punch them in the mouth.
This is so poorly motivated it makes me wonder if it were in fact staged by the fossil fuel industry to make climate activists look bad.
“I chose to peacefully disrupt a business-as-usual system that is unjust, dishonest and murderous.”
Ah, yes, the murderous system of [checks notes] art made generations before you were born.
Was it actually damaged? Seems like the only damage done was to the frame.
Damage was only done to the frame on this occasion, yes. Their claim of disrupting an unjust etc etc etc system though hinges on them disrupting the system of… viewing priceless art in a public gallery.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Just_Stop_Oil
In April 2022, it was reported that Just Stop Oil’s primary source of funding was donations from the US-based Climate Emergency Fund.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aileen_Getty
Aileen Getty is an American heiress and activist. She is a member of the Getty family, the granddaughter of J. Paul Getty. She co-founded the Climate Emergency Fund in 2019.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._Paul_Getty
Jean Paul Getty Sr. (/ˈɡɛti/; December 15, 1892 – June 6, 1976) was an American-born British petroleum industrialist who founded the Getty Oil Company in 1942 and was the patriarch of the Getty family.[1] A native of Minneapolis, he was the son of pioneer oilman George Getty. In 1957, Fortune magazine named him the wealthiest living American,[2] while the 1966 Guinness Book of Records declared him the world’s wealthiest private citizen, worth an estimated $1.2 billion (approximately $8.6 billion in 2023).[3] At the time of his death, he was worth more than $6 billion (approximately $25 billion in 2023).[4] A book published in 1996 ranked him as the 67th wealthiest American who ever lived (based on his wealth as a percentage of the concurrent gross national product).[5]
So she assuages her guilt for having a huge oil inheritance by donating some of it to encourage other people overseas to go to jail protesting other people doing what her grandfather made his money doing. Great.
Honestly, got no problem with that. We aren’t responsible for the actions of our ancestors. The issue is whether what she’s funding is effective.
I dunno. if I was born into a family rich on something like oil, I hope I’d spend a bunch to end our dependence on it. chiefly because it’s better than not, and I’d also have the fortune to do so, and the irony of using oil money to get us post-oil like we’re Norway would be a bit of added cheek.
What should she do in her position: lay about like Bruce Wayne or try to do good like batman?
What do you expect her to do instead?
Invest in renewables?
I work for a green hydrogen production and supply company. Our financials are not amazing. If she cut a check for even a few $100k that would go a long way.
It’s time to stop bringing awareness to climate change, and to actually start addressing it. If you’re passionate enough to throw soup at a painting, you’re passionate enough to get job training to help operate renewable energy sites.
Maybe she should be the one throwing the soup if that’s what she thinks need to happen?
So… you’d be okay with this action if she were the one throwing the soup? I’m super lost.
No, I’m saying if that’s what she thinks should happen, she should do it herself and not hide behind her money. It’s not about whether or not I’d be okay with the action, it’s about her cowardice.
Well, she inhereted all that money, right? Maybe… Juuuust maybe she could spend it on nuclear or green energy production technologies.
The article doesn’t make clear if the painting was damaged this time or not.
I assume not, but that’s the very first thing these kind of articles should be stating up front.
Just Stop Oil has to be the most destructive and idiotic activist group I’ve ever heard of (besides Greenpeace and their anti-nuclear agenda). They make activism as a whole look bad with their pointless stunts.
What does Vincent van Gogh have to do with the current state of the petrol industry? What does any classical artist have to do with the current state of the petrol industry? Why go out of one’s way to try and ruin something that isn’t even remotely related to the subject? They’re only making themselves look like a bad joke.
Doesnt help they’re total assholes either; a few years ago they blocked a motorway in England in protest. Fair enough. But there was a family who’s baby had to be rushed to the nearest hospital, and they weren’t allowed to pass! Seriously, fuck them.
Heard an interview a while ago with a founder of Just Stop Oil who clearly said he doesn’t care whether they even stop climate change (around 40:00-43:00).
What does Vincent van Gogh have to do with the current state of the petrol industry?
It’s famous, so attacking it gets attention.
Evidence suggests that disruptive protests actually help, rather than hinder organisations like JSO:
It’s all about raising awareness and facilitating discussions.
Meanwhile petrol companies are doing everything they can to smother protests: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/sep/26/anti-protest-laws-fossil-fuel-lobby
Consider who gains the most from perpetuating the idea that JSO are the bad guys…
I don’t agree with this but I think I can see the point.
I think it shows how upset people get when they think something like the painting is being destroyed, but do not connect that to the planet being destroyed by the people they protest.
Wreck a van Gogh goto jail, wreck the planet profit.
I’m confused who this is for. Even many who agree with them don’t appreciate vandalism of art and art galleries.
It’s to get cameras thrust in their face so they ask when oil executives will face consequences.
“Is destroying art worse than destroying the whole planet???”
It’s an idiotic form of protest, it accomplishes nothing but turning the public against you, and forever associating your cause with petty vandalism.
…and yet, here we are talking about climate change. If they’d instead organized a protest of 10,000 people marching for hours it wouldn’t have been international news and we wouldn’t be talking about climate change.
10 thousand people marching would make world headlines. Though admittedly that’s more difficult than smuggling soup in to an art gallery.
You’re really close to getting it. Just a few more steps.
Confirming that “We don’t want to do things the hard way that works, we want to do easy stuff” is the motivation is a hell of a take to present as a positive.
10 thousand people marching would make world headlines.
No, it wouldn’t. Protest is totally normalized now, it’s just a pressure release valve that helps keep the status quo running.
Here is a protest that happened today - https://cloudisland.nz/@simplicitarian/113212289035494255
Apparently it involved between 20,000 to 30,000 people - https://cloudisland.nz/@simplicitarian/113212686270895144
It will not be mentioned in any big news media outside of New Zealand.
“Is destroying art worse than destroying the whole planet???”
It’s a fair question.
Everyone cares so much about protecting this painting. Why don’t they care as much about protecting the planet? (And the painting isn’t even in any real danger. It’s behind glass.)
The vandalism is practically thought-provoking performance art in itself. It’s probably one of the best pieces in the gallery.
The vandalism is practically thought-provoking performance art in itself. It’s probably one of the best pieces in the gallery.
Jesus fucking Christ.
And also everything they do is wrong because all protests are secretly worse than the things being protested.
Let the planet die like all the reasonable people.
They should throw (cold) soup on the children of oil company executives.
I don’t know how many times I need to say this. THAT IS ASSAULT. In most countries that is years of prison. Soup on a Plexiglas barrier is, at most, a few days for disturbing the peace and vandalizing protective equipment. What doesn’t make sense about this to you?
Because soup on plexiglass doesn’t save humanity?
I think some soup on a person is a small price to pay. Frankly, I feel beheading a few million rich people and their spawn is also a SMALL PRICE for eliminating the problem with humanity.
But let’s start with the soup.
What doesn’t make sense about this to you?
I mean if that’s your opinion, I’m right there with you. It’s a drastic solution, but it might work! Problem is, who are you going to get who’s okay with a serious crime and a prison sentence on their record? It doesn’t matter what action they actually do as long as people talk about it. If the news got all up in arms about them putting up posters on their local community board, then I’d suggest that they do that.
I’m going to keep saying “what doesn’t make sense about this to you?” because I feel you’re being wilfully obtuse.
Oh, you can’t get anyone to do it. Because even then change would probably never happen.
Humanity is over, I’m down for whatever ends it the fastest and lets the earth wipe us from existence.
Long live Earth.
Except when they did protests targeted at oil infrastructure, that was still apparently wrong and got far less coverage than much safer stunts like these.
Getting a couple of ounces of soup on a picture frame is hardly the “vandalism of art” people are making it out to be.
Will art matter when we’re all dead from climate change tho?? I guess everyone has their priorities
Will art matter when we’re all dead from climate change tho?? I guess everyone has their priorities
Jesus Christ.
Yes. You got it. Climate crisis averted because some twits threw soup on a priceless painting and damaged the frame. Now we are all aware, whereas we weren’t before.
respectfully disagree. its way too easy to normalize every disaster, every lie, every little “we’re all going to die anyway”.
I may be a sick minded outlier, but I am ok with this action and others. there is no damage done (soup on glass and cornflour on rock don’t count) and these people are putting their bodies and freedom on the line to keep people talking about what is likely the single biggest existential risk humanity has faced.in 50k years.
right now, any time this issue is in front of eyeballs (even if tangentially reported) its a win.
if you do this bullshit for years with zero impact how is that a win? And why even paintings? I mean, let’s be real, not a lot of people care about art. If you want to go this route, at least throw soup at things the masses care about. But really, just don’t because no amount of attention will have any significant impact. You either give people incentive to change or you force them, anything else is not effective.
all good.points. my only retort is that its ineffective until its not. this direcyaction has an effect on a small number of people and I think the blowback is likely minimal - net positive? the people involved may geninely not ever engage in any other way on this issue. and if the marketing people are right, engagement is vital.
to keep people talking about
Honest question but do they really keep people talking about climate change?
I feel like this is the tenth stunt that I’ve read about then came into the comments and it’s just the same talk about exposure vs art vandalism.
I generally just leave these posts more exhausted and don’t give a shit about exposure or vandalism in the end. With climate change being something the furthest from my exhausted mind.
good question. it seems to work on me, but I don’t think I count.
I can say that when people in my orbit start talking about the direct action they have heard about (a few do), it is a possible entry point into a personal discussion on climate change. I don’t often pursue these openings, but I have gotten into 2 or 3 good conversations - apply exponential growth and …?
“excuse me, but do you have a moment to talk about our
lord and saviourbringer of war and famine?”so, I don’t know. but it feels like its a net positive.
I guess you feel like climate change is being tackled seriously and with great haste then. You’re right, calling more extreme attention to this issue is a waste of time, we’re gonna meet the 1.5C limit ez pz lemon squeezey. Shiiiet, you really helped me stop giving a fuck about this issue, whew.
You’re right, calling more extreme attention to this issue is a waste of time, we’re gonna meet the 1.5C limit ez pz lemon squeezey
Ah, yes, by throwing soup at a Van Gogh painting, extreme attention has been raised that wasn’t already raised.
Next time they can try public masturbation. After all, apparently, the only thing needed for a successful protest is something that catches eyes and attentions.
Everyone dying from climate change is not what climate scientists are predicting. Lying about reality will not help the cause.
The fuck? Yes it is. Unable to grow food? Unable to survive extreme weather and weather events?? Where are you getting your climate change info from, faux news??
when we’re all dead from climate change
Would you mind sharing an article from a climate scientist that claims all humans will die? What I have seen is that life will get harder, certain crops will not grow in certain areas anymore, resource-related wars will increase, and weather events will get stronger and more numerous. What I have not seen is that these things result in the extinction of humans. Which is a vastly different statement.
What you’re missing is the understanding that this will keep getting worse, till we are all dead, it’s not gonna taper off and then some places will be ok. As this continues, we will keep tripping past points of no return till everything we relied on for life is gone.
What you’re missing is the understanding that this will keep getting worse, till we are all dead
Apparently the climate scientists are missing that understanding too, as I have yet to see any of them claim such.
Will art matter when we’re all dead from climate change tho?? I guess everyone has their priorities
I believe these antics hurt the advocacy for taking climate change seriously. Their vandalism protests confirm in the minds of the opposition that “climate change is fake because the ‘soup throwers’ are the ones driving it.”.
Its similar to how vegans are dismissed not for their choices in diet but because of how they advocate others to do the same. People that want to go vegan have to do so in spite of the perception the most vocal vegans have created. Instead of accelerating adoption it creates a new barrier. Note, I’m not a vegan. See, I have to say that so I’m taken seriously in this response. That is how bad public perception of veganism is because of its most vocal advocates.
So people can go randomly punch the homeless? It won’t matter in the end if we are all dead due to climate change.
You think I’m ok with harming humans because I don’t care if art got ruined?? What?? The fuck
You seem to be ok with causing harm unrelated to the action taken. This is just identifying what that line is.
Congratulations, I award to you the Useful Idiot Ribbon. Wear it proudly as your world burns.
I just don’t see how vandalizing artwork helps the cause. Please explain it to me.
Yesterday you were not talking about climate change. Today you are. Because someone threw soup at a painting and sat down, waiting to be arrested. Had they not done so, you likely would not be talking about climate change.
The painting wasn’t “harmed”,
‘In passing his sentence, Hehir said he took into account not only the damage caused to the frame but the potential for even greater damage to be caused to the painting had the soup seeped behind the glass that covered it.’
The frame is also not a human being, and no where did I imply I was ok with harming any person you jackass, false equivalence much?
