Opinion: The activists who threw soup on Van Gogh’s art have gone too far |

Whether you are an artist or not, almost everyone has seen splatter art. But I bet you’ve never seen environmental activists splash soup on a Vincent Van Gogh painting until recently.

Two environmental activists, Anna Holland and Phoebe Plummer of Just Stop Oil, threw soup at Van Gogh’s ‘sunflowers’ and stuck their hands on the wall where the painting hangs on October 14.

According to the Shore News Network, the protest was a response to Britain’s current fossil fuel dilemma involving the shutdown of fuel production in the North Sea, forcing Britain to rely on imported fuel.

The average UK household uses 12,000 kilowatts of gas each year, according to Energy Guide. At the beginning of October, the average energy bill was expected to increase by 80% due to gasoline prices. The staggering rise takes families’ energy bills to over £3,000 per year.

Meanwhile, in the United States, the average gas bill per month is just over $100 and sometimes less depending on the state, according to Inspire Clean Energy. Most Americans pay $1,200 a year on their energy bills.

So, one can sympathize with activists’ statements that families cannot put food on the table. Cost increases caused by the pandemic have left many households around the world struggling to pay for gasoline and electricity.

Nevertheless, it is utterly ridiculous that activists took a can of soup and threw it at a masterpiece such as “Sunflowers” to make their point. If they wanted attention, they certainly got it. But I don’t think a protester needs to go so far as to potentially destroy a priceless painting to make their point.

I don’t know why protesters think that destroying or threatening property results in support for a cause. It’s honestly silly that I have to write the statements above to show how stupid it is to tear something down to build up your activist portfolio of what you think is an innocent protest.

Fortunately, the painting has been perfectly restored. CTV News mentioned that Holland and Plummer chose the painting because of Van Gogh’s own economic struggles and how climate change could strongly affect poor citizens.

But for people who care so much about the beauty of the environment, you think they would care about beauty and restoring artwork that can capture naturalistic elements of the world. But I guess I was wrong to make that assumption. My mistake.

If activists really wanted people to support their protests, then maybe it shouldn’t be tampering with property or burning and looting businesses. In the summer of 2020 in Minneapolis, businesses such as Target and AutoZone were looted and fires were set amid protests, according to NBC News reports.

It’s one thing to hold up signs and peacefully advocate for a cause, because everyone should be able to stand up for what they believe in. However, I have a problem with the demolition of businesses, large and small, and the destruction of public and private property just to put your case. The results of these illegal activities can lead to higher crime rates, more divisions on all sides of the political spectrum, and more needless destruction.

Essentially, let’s reserve paint splatter for true artists, not activists trying to “make their point” by potentially demolishing magnificent works of art.

Taylor Hamilton is an 18-year-old freshman mass communication student from Tallahassee, Florida.