Recently, a notable trend has emerged where famous artworks have become unexpected tools for protest. Instances of these protests have been recorded in Italy, Germany, England, and even within our own shores of Australia. These protests include individuals gluing themselves to or even throwing food at these treasured pieces of art. What unites these acts of protest is a shared concern for climate change and the preservation of precious natural resources. However, it prompted me to ponder: is this approach an effective way to communicate their concerns?

Before I go ahead and address their actions, let’s look at the role and responsibilities of an artist.

An artist’s duty is to shed light on the importance of things in the world that may escape the notice of others. The very act of making art is about drawing attention to a theme or idea via artistic mediums, be it video, traditional arts, or digital art. This is the role of art. This is our job.

If we look at the definition of ‘activism” - Oxford Dictionary - the policy or action of using vigorous campaigning to bring about political or social change. This is the role of art and ultimately the role of artists. This is our job.

As artists, we willingly sign up to create visual narratives that breathe life into topics often conveyed through spoken or written words. When executed correctly and poignantly, the work gains power and resonance. This is what the great artists have done throughout history. This is activism at play.

From the earliest cave paintings to the masterpieces of Da Vinci, Van Gogh and modern-day artists, we can see art as activism. It serves to highlight aspects of humanity which are deemed important. In essence, art is another form of communication. It’s capacity as a mass communication is due to its ability to resonate with a diverse audience, regardless of sex, religion, culture, and social status, it can in essence, speak to everyone. The themes don’t need to be executed with aggression , they can be subtle and beautiful, as exemplified by the works of Van Gogh.

Vincent Van Gogh was a troubled soul, whose personal story is well documented. Van Gogh used his art as a beacon of light in his darkness. His ability to see the world as colourful and textual paintings invites us to view our own natural environments with awe. It encourages us to look around and appreciate the present moment and humanity with reverence.

Therefore, when we look at the choice of works being vandalized by protestors, it becomes evident that they are ultimately missing the point of art. To damage something which emphasizes the importance of our environment seems profoundly counterproductive. To throw a can of soup over a Van Gogh work and glue their hand to a wall, seems absurd to me as an artist. Artists are, by nature, activists. Once again to repeat myself, this is our job. Therefore, to damage artwork in order to draw attention to an important issue seems utterly pointless.

Sure, these protestors have gained attention and become fleeting sensations on the internet. However, in our fast-paced modern society, we swiftly move on to the next sensationalized media topic. Their online tantrum seemed futile, immature, and vacuous. Moreover, it is now the gallery who must spend money and time to restore the painting, a cost which has no bearing on the target of their anger.

Let’s just imagine for a moment that this type of performance was actual performance art, akin to artists like Serbian Marina Abramović or Australian Mike Parr, who use their bodies to create live art to illuminate various concepts and issues. Would we have perceived these acts differently? I doubt it, even artists themselves would not destroy their fellow artists works, especially those of the greats.

I, personally, hold no respect or admiration for people who choose to destroy something which is ultimately shedding light on similar issues. Their choice of vandalism and activism are misguided and counterintuitive. Moreover, the mere act of vandalizing the art overshadows the very reasons behind their activism in the first place.

Therefore, it feels as if these acts of supposed activism are, in essence, fruitless. If you want to be an environmental activist, join Greenpeace, because gluing your hand (with I assume petroleum-based glue!) certainly doesn’t earn credibility or respect.

Or become an artist because we take the act of making art seriously and ultimately we are activists.

Yours in art (and activism)

Bec xx

Art + Activism- Can we separate the two?