Sheeeeeeer Art Attack

Attacking art seems to be a thing these days.  Actually, it has a long history, but there seems to be an uptick this year.

In February we reported on a Russian security guard who drew googly eyes on a painting, after what was described as a psychological breakdown.

In May a climate protestor smeared cake on the Mona Lisa.  No worries, the painting is protected behind bullet-proof glass.

Now Gustave Klimt bears the brunt of climate activists' wrath. Not sure how this will help their cause.  I almost suspect a false flag to discredit climate change activists....almost.

Hearts and minds!  But as with the Mona Lisa, the Klimt is protected by glass, so the painting and its frame weren't damaged.

I agree that ecological devastation and climate change are of critical importance to all of us.  Not 1st World problems at all.  Quite the contrary.  Developing nations will bear the heaviest load sooner than Europe and North America.

Even though these works of art weren't damaged, I'm still not sure this tactic is the best.  People love art, which is one reason why it's targeted: it gets big publicity. And maybe someone out there will ask themselves if one damaged painting is a bigger outrage than a depleted planet.

I understand the geste of protest, I just think another target might be more effective.  It seems the activist vandals are choosing paintings that won't actually be damaged, so in the end, no harm done.  But the principle of attacking art is well-problematic.  

A lot of modern art was labeled "degenerate" by the Nazis and burned.   The Taliban blew up offending Buddhas.  Art is often one of the first targets of totalitarian regimes.  Even though these works weren't actually damaged, it has bad juju attached to it.  Many won't read beyond the headlines. They see "climate fanatics destroy our cultural heritage."  Our planet it worth fighting for, but we all know it.  Maybe the best tack is monkey-wrenching....

Personally, I look at some Suprematism, or works by Piet Mondrian, and think, yeah, why NOT burn it?   "Broadway Boogie Woogie."  My God, people, what rubbish!

But one must abandon youthful  exuberance at some point.  I used to agree with Breton when he said that the most Surrealist act he could imagine was firing a revolver randomly into a crowd.  Several dozen mass-shootings post-Columbine later, and that ceases to be valid or vaguely witty, even for an embittered, nihilistic crank such as myself.

We need to address climate change. Like, yesterday.  Zoiks.  One damaged painting ain't squat compared to a dead planet.  But attacking art just don't seem like the tactic that'll produce the results we so desperately need.

Mother Nature is ill.  She has a fever.  Either the host (Earth) or the virus (Humans) will die off unless the illness is cured.  

We all know this.  There's no need "to draw attention to the problem."  We need people to act and vote in ways that will resolve it.  Throwing goop on Klimt or cake on Leonardo is so self-evidently pointless and counterproductive one really does have to wonder if the plot was hatched by Total or BP or Exxon....