Soup coup?

The visitors to the LouvreA famous art museum in Paris, France. watched in horror as the yellow soup sailed through the air and splashed against Leonardo da VinciAn Italian artist and inventor (1452 - 1519), considered to be one of the world's greatest geniuses. He painted the Mona Lisa and designed an early flying machine.'s masterpiece. A moment later the two women climbed under the barrier in front of the painting. They then took off their jackets to reveal white T-shirts with the slogan "Riposte Alimentaire" - French for "Food Response".

"What is more important?" they shouted. "Art or the right to healthy and sustainable food?... Your agricultural system is sick. Our farmers are dying at work."

Fortunately the painting, protected by a glass screen, was undamaged. Police arrested the two protesters.

There have been widespread protests by French farmers in recent days, including blocking roads and setting fire to bales of hay. They claim that their lives are being made impossible by unfair pricing, cheap imports and new rules to protect the environment.

This is not the first time that the Mona Lisa has been targeted. The protective glass screen was installed in the 1950s after an acid attack. In 2022 a man disguised as an old woman threw a custard pie at it, shouting "Think of the Earth!"

There is obvious ironyA situation in which the result is opposite to what you might expect. in the fact that the Mona Lisa has been attacked both by a climate activist and by people opposing green legislation. But for art lovers it is not a laughing matter.

Other masterpieces have been attacked in the same way. Also in 2022, Just Stop Oil protesters threw soup at Van GoghA Dutch Post-Impressionist painter who is among the most famous and influential figures in the history of Western art.'s Sunflowers in the National Gallery in London.

Such acts have been encouraged by a New York psychologist called Margaret Klein Salomon. Her Climate Emergency Fund channels money from rich donors to similar groups around the world.

The aim of supporting them, she says, is to "shake us awake" and get people talking: "It's not about liking their style, or even agreeing with everything that they do... this is absolutely needed."¹

But critics say such tactics do important causes more harm than good, infuriating people who would otherwise be sympathetic. They believe the protesters should focus on the people they consider responsible for their problems, not on an artistic heritage which benefits us all.

The term "Philistine" is used to describe people without sufficient respect for art and beauty. It was popularised in Victorian times by the poet Matthew Arnold.

Is this morally defensible?

Yes: The protesters are right to say that healthy and sustainable food is absolutely essential. Protecting farmers' livelihoods is far more important than an old piece of wood with some paint on top.  

No:  To attack one of humanity's greatest achievements in order to criticise a government's failings is both utterly perverse and deeply disrespectful to the artist. It will only alienate potential allies.

Or... Nothing is more important than art. People, protesters and governments are only here for a short space of time; the Mona Lisa is eternally valuable and will last for ever if properly looked after.