Our group had the most fantastic debate on our group WhatsApp about protest groups and the use of art as part of the protest. It started, in part, because I mentioned that the girl who recently threw tomato soup on the Van Gogh painting in London apparently went to my school. I was quite shocked the learn this because I went to a private, catholic girls boarding school. The values instilled into the girls are those of compassion, community and a general awareness of being in a position to help those less fortunate (at least that's my impression). Alumni have done wonderful things for charities, one girl in my year set up a charity that provides education to women in India and hands out laying chickens, this being a resource that the women can earn a living from as well as use at their own table so helping them escape poverty. As far as I was aware pupils are usually educated in constructive ways that they may make a difference in society, therefore I was really shocked to discover it was an ex- st. Marys girl that performed this act of vandalism, although also rather proud of her for - I certainly wouldn't be brave enough to stand out like she did.
The conversation that followed was brillian, the topics covered and points of view were fascinating. I realised that certain assumptions were made about the people doing the vandalising with notions of them 'not contributing to society' and having not worked hard at school being mentioned. This doesn't fit with the educational attainment of the girl who threw the tomato soup at all! Several of us likened this type of behaviour as akin to children trying to get parental attention. Points were made about whether there was actually a valid link between the art and the cause, whether average people would even be aware of the works in question, and whether they cared or instead felt alienated from the cause due to the inconvenience they personally may suffer. Comparisons were drawn to the suffragettes, ISIS and the Nazi's and questions asked about whether you're 'good' if you try to save art (Hitler) or bad if you don't (US troops). Someone raised the point that there's not really a link between the oil companies and the art that was vandalised so maybe the targets need changing. We started imagining what other sorts of protests we could make and whether drenching David in oil might make more of a statement. Someone raised the very interesting point that the protesters had managed to get plenty of attention for 'responsible' damage (in that the painting wasn't harmed) and most of the people around the globe most affected by climate change will never get to see the painting anyway.
Wastage was discussed (pouring away milk) and the how important the consequences of the action are. Is it wrong to waste the milk, or does the theatricality of the protest and subsequent publicity matter more? In trying to link action with the poil companies someone suggested protesting outside the London Aquarium which lead to barracading the fish markets with barrels of oil. We were wondering how much the general public cares about the cause and how much they just find the protest an inconvenience and carry on regardless.
This all lead to the suggestion that Jonathan set us a "social disruption and protest" assignment over the holidays which started us thinking what we would do... throw oil on the David, slice through a painting at the National Gallery and return pillaged good to Egypt were the suggestions! One member of the group who is a teacher decided to explore the idea of gueriila art with his students in school.
I said that the 6th form leavers at my school used to sneak out in the night before open day when the whole school was on parade for the parents and one year group painted huge dino footprints all over school, another filled a corridor with water filled paper cups, placed so closely together that you couldn't walk through. I was musing that this is almost a type of protest art, others had similar examples of 'pranks' by school leavers (one involving geese in the headmasters office!).
The conversation then moved onto how much the general public actually care and ideas about education and civilisation levels and the differences between the average person on the street. We discussed how well known artists are outside of the art world and therefore how much using art as a means of protest or communication actually matters to people outside of the art world. Another person then raised the idea that these protests were timed perfectly to coincide with new legislation being introduced to give more powers to police during protests, cynical but possibly true?
The conversation gradually moved onto other topics as it naturally does but we recommended books and films to each other to broaden our perspective as it was highlighted that there is a fairly narrow version of western art history which is gradually being broadened to include women and artists from further afield.
All in all a wonderful exchange of views and ideas. It left me thinking that I have been missing a link between my interest in the environment in my everyday life (avid recycler, grower of food and forbidder of excess plastic) and my work looking at the forest. Maybe I should be challenging the viewer more to appreciate the wonder of nature on their doorstep (a lot of my work sells locally to people who love the Swinley Forest), and ask them whether they are fully appreciating the multi-stakeholder nature of the forest. Maybe I should be appreciating this more! I have been planning on doing further research into the forest but now it seems that a fuller understanding of it really is necessary!