Disruption as a tool for change?

  The 17th century Rokeby Venus painting by Diego Velázquez has been damaged by two Just Stop Oil protesters in the National Gallery in London. Armed with hammers, the two students smashed the protective glass of the painting. The same painting suffered a slashing in 1914 by the suffragette Mary Richardson. The press in 1914 responded to Richardson by referring to her as “Slasher Mary”, or, “The Ripper”, insinuating that her actions were as serious as those of the serial killer Jack the Ripper. Interestingly, the 2023 press has previously responded to art protests, notably the splashing of soup on Van Gogh's flowers, in a manner of similarly intense scrutiny and outrage. However, Just Stop Oil's imitation of the suffragette's protest has instead garnered a more balanced commentary, as if adding a historical perspective has framed the movement's efforts as respectable rather than rash. [...] Disruptive? Absolutely. Effective? This depends on one's definition. The movement is certainly effective at making headlines and encouraging the climate crisis conversation across Europe. Although such conversations may be disapproving, talk of the impending climate crisis continues. Nonetheless, it is done so at the cost of the public's favour. 78% of Britons believe that disruptive protests hinder activists' causes, according to a YouGov poll. It is debatable that Just Stop Oil has potentially created more division than unity.