Protesting Something Bad by Ruining Something Good

On Oct. 14 2022,  two environmental activists with Just Stop Oil threw two cans of tomato soup on Vincent van Gogh’s “Sunflowers” painting. They proceeded to glue themselves to the wall under the painting on display in the Vincent van Gogh Museum in Amsterdam. However, they didn’t damage the painting because it is protected behind a glass case. This begs the question—was it worth potentially ruining a timeless piece of art? Where is the connection between destroying art and protesting new oil projects?

Protesting and civil resistance has been around since the beginning of time. There have always been disagreements—and when we disagree, we protest. It’s in our nature. We’ve realized that there are effective and ineffective ways of protesting. Potentially one of the most ineffective ways of protesting is by ruining something that has value and is respected by many people to gain publicity for your cause. For example, throwing tomato soup on Vincent van Gogh’s painting. Think about what every Van Gogh fan and every person in that museum must think about the Just Stop Oil activists after they threw soup on the beloved “Sunflowers” painting.

That being said, did throwing tomato soup on Vincent van Gogh’s painting attract a ton of media attention and help the Just Stop Oil activists explain their protest and gather support for their side? Yes. In a video posted on Twitter, Phoebe, one of the Just Stop Oil activists, explains why they did what they did. She says that they knew the painting was protected and that it wouldn’t be harmed by throwing the tomato soup. No harm, no foul. Would things be different if the painting had been damaged? This raises the question of whether or not it’s okay to destroy something good and positive, such as a timeless piece of art, to gather attention for an unrelated protest. What does targeting beautiful art have to do with trying to stop new fossil fuel production? It is completely unrelated. Surely there are other ways we can raise awareness for the causes we believe in, right?

There is a very important line drawn that separates civil resistance from civil disobedience. Civil resistance is the act of protesting peacefully—not bringing any harm to anyone or anything. On the other hand, civil disobedience is an act of deliberately breaking the law to protest an injustice. Now some things warrant civil disobedience, but that doesn’t mean it should be a part of every protest. A perfect example of effective civil disobedience would be the sit-ins that happened throughout the United States during the Civil Rights Movement. Sit-ins were protests that combated the unjust segregation laws that were present in the country. While the people participating in the sit-ins were breaking the law, it was an unjust law that they were breaking. The reason these protests gained so much traction is that not only were they peaceful, but they directly addressed the laws that needed to be changed.

The difference between the sit-ins and protests, like throwing tomato soup at a Van Gogh painting, is that one is related to the cause, while the other is not. If the Just Stop Oil activists were simply trying to tell the world that they hated beautiful and timeless art, throwing tomato soup at Van Gogh’s painting would have made a little more sense. But the fact of the matter is that they were tainting something great to protest something completely unrelated. 

Strike Out,

Ryan Manney

Boca Raton

Ryan Manney is a Content Writer for Strike Magazine Boca. His hobbies amount to surfing, skating, writing, reading, and everything music. When he isn’t surfing, he loves watching and/or playing live music. He also likes to wear cool clothes! You can reach him on instagram @ryanmanney or email @ r.manney3@gmail.com