Soup à la Mona Lisa: A Reaction to Climate Activists’ Soup-Centered Actions
This article was written as part of the Silver Needle Fashion Show (SNR) to highlight climate change.
In recent years, climate activists have directed their protests towards the art world. One common demonstration method has been throwing food on iconic paintings, like the tomato soup thrown on the “Mona Lisa,” to draw attention to the escalating climate crisis. Their actions,
although unconventional, have sparked global conversations surrounding natural gas use, food insecurity and lack of wide-scale sustainability efforts. Yet the target of their efforts, priceless paintings, has also brought global controversy.
Many believe that the “Mona Lisa” or other paintings targeted by these activist groups are too valuable and culturally significant to risk damage. Despite protective measures like temperature-controlled glass, concerns persist about the potential harm these protests may cause.
When one imagines typical action by climate activist groups, their minds often go to organized rallies, marches or climbing into trees in efforts to stop deforestation. Yet the fact that the paintings at the center of their actions are culturally significant and priceless is why I am so intrigued by these protests. Yes, their methods may seem outlandish and senseless, but I believe these activists are calculated and highly effective in bringing attention to their cause, the climate crisis.
For decades, climate activists and ordinary, concerned citizens have attempted to get their voices heard through peaceful protest, school strikes for climate, boycotts and implementing small-scale sustainability efforts. At times, it feels like no one is listening, like we’re screaming into an endless void, hoping someone will listen before it's too late.
As a student, as a young person and as someone who loves art and this planet, the escalation of the climate crisis makes me feel helpless. Even though I know my voice and actions have power, no individual effort will ever undo decades of environmental damage caused by those who prioritized profit and personal comfort over people and the planet.
Ultimately, if effective climate action isn't taken, there won't be a planet for future
generations to inhabit. That should take precedence over any paintings or worries held by concerned individuals. We’re slowly running out of time.
Without environmental protections and regulatory laws, we will not have a planet to inhabit.
Without a planet, we will not have the opportunity to appreciate the art at the center of these
discussions. All the efforts, the protection of art and protests by activists would have been for
nothing. These ideas I have, like the protests and sentiments expressed by various climate change activists, aren't new. They aren’t revolutionary. They’re simply a collective cry for help, a collective cry magnified by soup-related protest.
Despite how unconventional and controversial their efforts may be, the climate activists in question are doing important work. And maybe I might just be naive, but if throwing soup on the “Mona Lisa’s” protective glass casing gets someone to protest ExxonMobil or forces companies with true global power to implement sustainability efforts, I think in some ways, it would have been worth it.
Yet, I know these food-related protests damage art and museum culture. I know if they continue at a growing rate, there will be a decrease in the public’s already limited access to art.
At the end of the day, when the safety and security of this planet and everything we hold dear are in jeopardy, I do not mind what happens if a painting’s glass cover gets a little splash of tomato soup on it.