Internationally recognised art and literary critic, writer and cultural producer. Published in ELLE, Glamour, Esquire and Cosmopolitan; member of the Union of Writers.
On Sunday, January 28, 2024, two protesters stormed into the Louvre Museum in Paris and hurled soup at the Mona Lisa painting by Leonardo da Vinci. The painting, which is arguably the most famous and valuable artwork in the world, was not harmed by the soup, as it is protected by a clear casing. The protesters were quickly apprehended by the security guards and taken into custody.
The protest was claimed by an environmental group called Riposte Alimentaire, which means “Food Response” in French. The group said that the action was part of a new campaign to raise awareness about food waste and hunger in the world. The group said that the soup was made from discarded vegetables and fruits that were collected from supermarkets and restaurants, and that it symbolized “the nourishment that could be provided to those who need it the most, if only we stopped wasting so much food.”
The group also said that the Mona Lisa was chosen as a target because it represents “the epitome of the Western civilization’s obsession with art and culture, while ignoring the basic needs of millions of people who are starving and dying every day.”
The protest sparked outrage and condemnation from the public, the media, and the authorities, who denounced it as a senseless and disrespectful act of vandalism. The Louvre Museum said that it was “shocked and saddened” by the incident, and that it would take legal action against the perpetrators. The French Ministry of Culture said that it was “an attack on the heritage of humanity and the universal values of art.” The Italian Embassy in France said that it was “an insult to the genius of Leonardo da Vinci and the friendship between our two countries.”
The protest also sparked debate and controversy among the art world, the environmental movement, and the general public, who had different opinions and reactions to the incident. Some people applauded the protest as a bold and creative way of drawing attention to a serious and urgent issue. Some people criticized the protest as a violent and ineffective way of alienating and offending potential allies. Some people ignored the protest as a trivial and irrelevant way of distracting and diverting from the real problems.
As an art journalist and an environmental activist, I have mixed feelings about the protest. I respect the protesters’ bravery and passion, as they risked their freedom and safety to challenge the status quo. But I also condemn their damage and disrespect, as they squandered their resources and opportunity to inspire change.
I believe that art and activism can enrich each other. Art can be a powerful tool for activism, and activism can be a powerful source for art. Art and activism can work together to raise awareness, provoke dialogue, stimulate action, and transform society.
But I also believe that art and activism have to be respectful, responsible, and relevant. They have to respect the rights, dignity, and diversity of others. They have to be responsible for the consequences, impacts, and outcomes of their actions. They have to be relevant to the context, audience, and goal of their messages.
In this case, I think that the protesters failed to meet these standards. They disrespected the Mona Lisa, which is not only a masterpiece of art, but also a symbol of history, culture, and humanity. They were irresponsible with the soup, which could have fed the hungry, instead of staining the painting. They were irrelevant to the issue, which is not about art and culture, but about food and hunger.
I think that the protesters could have done better. They could have used their soup to make a soup kitchen, instead of a spectacle. They could have used their soup to feed the people, instead of attacking the painting. They could have used their soup to show the solution, instead of highlighting the problem.
I think that the protesters missed an opportunity. They could have used their art to make a positive and constructive impact, instead of a negative and destructive one. They could have used their art to educate and empower, instead of shock and offend. They could have used their art to unite and mobilize, instead of divide and antagonize.
I think that the protesters wasted their soup. I think that the Mona Lisa deserved better. I think that we all deserve better.
