By throwing tomato soup on the glass that protects one of the paintings in the series The sunflowers, by Vincent Van Gogh, British ecologists have aroused strong reactions. But beyond the indignation of some, the gesture testifies to a very real fed up with the climate inaction which threatens nothing less than the survival of humanity.
The video quickly went viral after it was released last week by Just Stop Oil activists. We saw two women each throwing the contents of a can of tomato soup on the canvas The sunflowers exhibited at the National Gallery in London. “What is most valuable? Art or life? launched one of them immediately after the gesture.
The famous work, protected by glass, was not touched. But, immediately, the angry reactions multiplied on social networks, before spreading to several media around the world in the following days. “I recognize that it seems like a ridiculous action,” said one of the activists, once released after pleading not guilty to criminal damages. “Yes, it’s ridiculous. We don’t ask the question whether everyone should throw soup at webs. […] But we have no time to waste. What we do in the next three or more years will determine the future of humanity. So we use these actions to get media attention, because we need people talking about it now. »
With this new stunt, Just Stop Oil, which has already made other similar gestures in museums in the British capital, wanted to denounce the government’s bias towards the expansion of oil and gas exploitation in a climate emergency context. According to the International Energy Agency (IEA), no new project is compatible with the objective of limiting global climate change. But several countries, including Canada, continue to allow it.
Beyond the message put forward, the director of national policies of the Climate Action Network Canada, Caroline Brouillette, is not surprised by the outcry caused by the activists. “It’s normal for people to feel jostled and shocked. That’s the point. I don’t think their goal was to elicit sympathy from the general public. They wanted to get people talking about them and their demands, which they succeeded in doing. »
“You also have to consider the artistic and metaphorical aspect of the action,” she adds. By throwing soup on a painting, which was protected it must be remembered, we are trying to demonstrate the nonsense of our society, where people are more offended by the destruction of an important artistic work than by the collapse of life and the climatic disturbances that we are experiencing. »
“In their action, they pose the question very well: what is more valuable, art or life? It is a powerful question which is legitimate and which forces a certain awareness”, underlines for her part the ecosociologist Laure Waridel, who has been pleading for several years for the implementation of strong climate policies.
Without supporting this kind of gesture, she believes that it reflects not only “a fed up”, but also a certain despair on the part of young people “who will suffer from environmental inaction”. “There is a form of discouragement among young people, who have tried all sorts of strategies that have not worked. So they try to innovate and do something else to be heard. »
It must be said that, despite years of mobilization by the environmental movement, and seven years after the signing of the Paris Climate Agreement, the ruling classes are still not doing enough to avoid the worst. Result: the planet is heading towards a warming that could approach 3°C, while climate science considers it necessary to limit it to 1.5°C. The IEA has also warned this week that global greenhouse gas emissions attributable to the combustion of fossil fuels will increase by 300 million tonnes, to reach 33.8 billion tonnes.
“If we had elected officials who take more responsibility, listen more and who walk the talk, young people wouldn’t put themselves at so much risk to be heard,” Ms.me Waridel. She deplores in the same breath a certain propensity for collective indignation with variable geometry. “When Notre-Dame de Paris burned, I remember that people were very affected and that there was a strong mobilization, which was necessary. But at the same time the Amazon was burning and continues to burn in indifference. There is no action or mobilization. »
In this context, the ecosociologist considers it imperative to “go beyond” the framework of the simple demonstration to encourage elected officials, but also the whole of society, “to get out of their comfort and their indifference”.
Disobey
This crescendo, which is likely to materialize in a context of increasingly tangible climate disruptions, should probably lead to actions of civil disobedience, according to Laure Waridel and Caroline Brouillette. “It’s normal for social movements to question the effectiveness of their tactics and to try to be creative and innovative. There is a whole literature on the effectiveness of civil disobedience. Several movements, such as Extinction Rebellion, base their actions on this literature,” explains Ms.me scramble.
Scientists gathered within the organization Scientist Rebellion have chosen to leave their traditional duty of reserve to carry out actions of non-violent disobedience. This week, in Montreal, environmentalists also blocked the Valero oil loading site in order to demand the closure of the 9B pipeline. This pipeline carries oil from Western Canada to this point, crossing several rivers and residential areas.
“Disrupting reality in this way forces reflection. We are going to see more and more gestures of this kind, because there is a need to be heard in a context where there is a form of climate fatigue and where society no longer reacts, ”said Ms.me Waridel. “It is clear that civil disobedience contributes to awareness and to shedding light on subjects that are not discussed enough. It is even necessary. After that, you have to see the type of gesture you make. But I don’t rule out the idea of having one day to do it. »
Professor in the Department of Political Science at UQAM and specialist in social movements, Francis Dupuis-Déri also invites us to give historical perspective to gestures like that of Just Stop Oil.
“The English suffragists, exhausted by more than ten years of futile mobilization, began in 1914 to vandalize several paintings at the National Gallery in London and at the Royal Academy. Their leader, Emmeline Pankhurst, said: “If the general public were happy with what we are doing, that would prove that our warfare is ineffective. We don’t expect you to be happy.” They wanted to disrupt the normal order of things and disturb. »