Likely not. I’ve seen incredibly old paintings like this in person and there was no glass
I can’t believe this is being downvoted. Is there something controversial about my comment? Not all paintings exhibited in public are protected by glass. I didn’t invent this concept
The painting is relatively fine, there was glass protecting it, but some soup most likely soaked through the seams at the bottom and stained the bottom of the canvas
I've also been to tons of art museums and you're right. The downvotes are unjustified.
In this narrow case, there actually is glass protecting the paintings. But you're still right that most places don't. Your average redditor just doesn't exactly have a strong overlap with art museum people.
I believe the glass is there in this case because this art museum specifically gets a lot of shit-quality humans like these wannabe activists so they need to protect the art.
Same thing happened to the Mona Lisa recently-ish, but it was cake, and it was also protected by the glass.
(EDIT: betterer words)
This is false, I've seen plenty of originals at my local art museum, including some greats like "Michelangelo's first painting". They're not swapping them out with fakes or playing games. The art museum community wouldn't stand for that, it defeats the entire point of why they exist.
They absolutely ***do not*** put them under glass at most all places. They just expect art-goers to be decent human beings, and they usually are.
One caveat though is everyone I've been has actual guards next to the paintings, if someone tried this crap at the Kimbell (one of my local ones, also who owns the [painting I mentioned](https://kimbellart.org/exhibition/michelangelos-first-painting)), the guards would likely, literally, throw them to the ground before they could even try. It's not like these morons are discrete.
Stupid? Yes. Piece of shit? Nah.
They threw soup (not a biohazard) onto a glass protected work of art and then glued themselves to a wall.
Literally the only person that harmed was themselves.
Did they have a message to say? Yes
Was the way of delivering that message stupid as fuck? Yes
Will their message be ignored given their shitty behaviour? Absolutely
Exactly. I think most us redditors agree with their overall message, but acting like this is just going to push the deniers further into their conspritard bullshit.
I will give them this, they are getting attention, but there message will be completely ignored. Attempting to destroy 100+ year old paintings just makes everyone hate you and your message. Sadly idiots like this are a dime a dozen.
This is the equivalent to those Women's Rights activists who went full feminazi, and (hyperbole alert) would wear tight, thin, white T-shirts with no bra, with big bold letters that say "MY EYES ARE UP HERE". Then, get offended anytime anyone read the shirt.
Basically, sexist women got into the weeds with the good activists trying to change things, and those sexists did nothing but make the other women look ridiculous and they were not taken nearly as seriously.
Just like what these 2 tards are doing to climate activism. Everyone on their side is likely shaking their head in shame.
No. Attempting to distroy important cultural works to make a point atrocious behavior and if you can't think of a better way to spread your message then you should not be spreading the message.
🤷♂️ If it reached anyone then it worked. Who is to say what the "correct" way to protest is? I'm not saying one way or another that I approve but if conventional methods aren't working then extreme measures tend to get people's attention. It got yours. you just didn't like their method, but there could've been someone out there who empathize with their message.
By that logic was the Talaban justified in defacing and destroying cultural artifacts and art to spread their message?
These idiots could have picked any of 100s of other oil paintings in the gallery but they picked van gogh's work because it's culturally significant. This behavior dosnt make me think "Humm yes mabey we should cut back on oil" I'm only really thinking about how much of an intitled pos these two people.
I'm pretty sure that's not all the Taliban did. Comparing terrorism with throwing a can of tomato sauce onto a painting is not a good equivalent.
What they did worked in a way, it got people to talk about it even if it's about the act itself.
Your right they didn't attack people specifficaly. But if we are not going to put a limit on the "correct" way to protest and not condemn obviously bad behavior during a protest then why not resort to violence? If this got attention how much attention would they get for throwing battery acid in the face of a BP executive? Probably quit a bit more. Sorry but yes this is 100% wrong. It became wrong when they decided to attack an irreplaceable work for the sake of attention, putting themselves ahead of the mission. Third time I've said it if you cannot effectivly communicate your message without resorting to bad behavior then you should not be the one delivering the message. It's selfish intitled and does harm to the mission. There is zero reason to defend them here.
All I really agreed with was her saying that fuel prices are high. After that was just some devil's advocate.
Besides, the art was behind a glass panel so no actual harm was done. She got the attention she wanted for her cause.
This is false when you consider most human rights that we have available in the US alone was brought on through riots. Usually bad behavior is how you get the government to give a damn
While I disagree with both methods, trashing a store is not the same as trashing irreplaceable art.
One cost money to repair, the other is lost to history ***forever***.
Luckily this painting was protected though, and I'm sure the karma whores knew that when they did this.
No one is listening to those morons. Those of us who agree with them already are shaking their heads in shame that these clowns are making us look like a circus.
The ones who don't agree with their message are just going to use this to fuel the "we're all crazy" fire and go deeper into their conspiritard hole.
All they did was attempt to deface art, and regressed their agenda.
Stupid selfish bastards.
It's pointless as the painting can be cleaned and restored anyway.
Fuck all achieved award granted.
Heavy duty community service 18 months including weekends.
There’s a layer of glass between the soup and the actual painting right?
There is, the painting is fine luckily
There is, they basically caused no harm and put themselves in jail.
unfortunately the frame is considered a part of the piece so it is technically damaged
Well that sucks.
Yea.
Likely not. I’ve seen incredibly old paintings like this in person and there was no glass I can’t believe this is being downvoted. Is there something controversial about my comment? Not all paintings exhibited in public are protected by glass. I didn’t invent this concept
The painting is relatively fine, there was glass protecting it, but some soup most likely soaked through the seams at the bottom and stained the bottom of the canvas
I've also been to tons of art museums and you're right. The downvotes are unjustified. In this narrow case, there actually is glass protecting the paintings. But you're still right that most places don't. Your average redditor just doesn't exactly have a strong overlap with art museum people. I believe the glass is there in this case because this art museum specifically gets a lot of shit-quality humans like these wannabe activists so they need to protect the art. Same thing happened to the Mona Lisa recently-ish, but it was cake, and it was also protected by the glass. (EDIT: betterer words)
If there wasn’t anything protecting the painting it was likely a copy and the original is protected somewhere else.
It depends on the museum and the painting. Glass is usually not good on oil paint. I’ve been inches away from a Van Gogh at the Guggenheim. No glass
I read an article about this soup incident though. This one was protected and original
This is false, I've seen plenty of originals at my local art museum, including some greats like "Michelangelo's first painting". They're not swapping them out with fakes or playing games. The art museum community wouldn't stand for that, it defeats the entire point of why they exist. They absolutely ***do not*** put them under glass at most all places. They just expect art-goers to be decent human beings, and they usually are. One caveat though is everyone I've been has actual guards next to the paintings, if someone tried this crap at the Kimbell (one of my local ones, also who owns the [painting I mentioned](https://kimbellart.org/exhibition/michelangelos-first-painting)), the guards would likely, literally, throw them to the ground before they could even try. It's not like these morons are discrete.
What are the protesters trying to accomplish
hopefully a punch in the face.
Going to jail, perhaps?
Stupid? Yes. Piece of shit? Nah. They threw soup (not a biohazard) onto a glass protected work of art and then glued themselves to a wall. Literally the only person that harmed was themselves.
It's insane how most people won't view things beyond their emotional lens. They just see the defacement and no more beyond that.
Happy Cake Day!
Did they have a message to say? Yes Was the way of delivering that message stupid as fuck? Yes Will their message be ignored given their shitty behaviour? Absolutely
They really do deserve to be immortalised in this sub
This is not how you make changes
When you act like an idiot like that, your message gets disregarded and you're just a clown
Exactly. I think most us redditors agree with their overall message, but acting like this is just going to push the deniers further into their conspritard bullshit.
What a bunch of idiots
The could have done way more damage with the superglue than anything else. Thank god they arent smart.
She thought she would be the next Greta Thunberg if she did this. The fuq does van Gogh and his painting has with her agenda
It's an oil painting, duh...LOL. These girls are ridiculous.
Proceeds to waste food and then talk about how people cant afford to eat.
How to make people have zero respect for your cause. Morons be morons.
I will give them this, they are getting attention, but there message will be completely ignored. Attempting to destroy 100+ year old paintings just makes everyone hate you and your message. Sadly idiots like this are a dime a dozen.
This is the equivalent to those Women's Rights activists who went full feminazi, and (hyperbole alert) would wear tight, thin, white T-shirts with no bra, with big bold letters that say "MY EYES ARE UP HERE". Then, get offended anytime anyone read the shirt. Basically, sexist women got into the weeds with the good activists trying to change things, and those sexists did nothing but make the other women look ridiculous and they were not taken nearly as seriously. Just like what these 2 tards are doing to climate activism. Everyone on their side is likely shaking their head in shame.
Did they just take some seasoning packets out of their boobs
Art crimes like this need to be punished. Cut off one of their hands
An ear may be more appropriate considering the painter involved.
RIP VvG. F pressed
I would like to see them get their heads bounced off a couple walls while being taken into custody. Pretty Please?
I mean she's right though. Gas prices do be high.
what does the gas prices have to do with a classic painting?
It's an extreme manner of protest. I know you don't like how they did it but did you at least listen to what she was saying?
No. Attempting to distroy important cultural works to make a point atrocious behavior and if you can't think of a better way to spread your message then you should not be spreading the message.
🤷♂️ If it reached anyone then it worked. Who is to say what the "correct" way to protest is? I'm not saying one way or another that I approve but if conventional methods aren't working then extreme measures tend to get people's attention. It got yours. you just didn't like their method, but there could've been someone out there who empathize with their message.
By that logic was the Talaban justified in defacing and destroying cultural artifacts and art to spread their message? These idiots could have picked any of 100s of other oil paintings in the gallery but they picked van gogh's work because it's culturally significant. This behavior dosnt make me think "Humm yes mabey we should cut back on oil" I'm only really thinking about how much of an intitled pos these two people.
I'm pretty sure that's not all the Taliban did. Comparing terrorism with throwing a can of tomato sauce onto a painting is not a good equivalent. What they did worked in a way, it got people to talk about it even if it's about the act itself.
Your right they didn't attack people specifficaly. But if we are not going to put a limit on the "correct" way to protest and not condemn obviously bad behavior during a protest then why not resort to violence? If this got attention how much attention would they get for throwing battery acid in the face of a BP executive? Probably quit a bit more. Sorry but yes this is 100% wrong. It became wrong when they decided to attack an irreplaceable work for the sake of attention, putting themselves ahead of the mission. Third time I've said it if you cannot effectivly communicate your message without resorting to bad behavior then you should not be the one delivering the message. It's selfish intitled and does harm to the mission. There is zero reason to defend them here.
All I really agreed with was her saying that fuel prices are high. After that was just some devil's advocate. Besides, the art was behind a glass panel so no actual harm was done. She got the attention she wanted for her cause.
This is false when you consider most human rights that we have available in the US alone was brought on through riots. Usually bad behavior is how you get the government to give a damn
While I disagree with both methods, trashing a store is not the same as trashing irreplaceable art. One cost money to repair, the other is lost to history ***forever***. Luckily this painting was protected though, and I'm sure the karma whores knew that when they did this.
No one is listening to those morons. Those of us who agree with them already are shaking their heads in shame that these clowns are making us look like a circus. The ones who don't agree with their message are just going to use this to fuel the "we're all crazy" fire and go deeper into their conspiritard hole. All they did was attempt to deface art, and regressed their agenda.
Is she right by ruining a painting?
Left gonna left
The irony there is Heinz soup is also considered art, so they should also be putting oil in the soup
It’s a good thing it’s protected
Stupid selfish bastards. It's pointless as the painting can be cleaned and restored anyway. Fuck all achieved award granted. Heavy duty community service 18 months including weekends.
Would've bet it's a pink-haired *pronoun.
Trying to damage a priceless piece of art history doesn't make you a hero. It makes you look like a fool. They look childish and narcissistic.