Can Throwing Soup at Art Help the Climate Crisis?
Radical activism like soup-throwing sparks debate over the role and impact of disruptive climate protests worldwide.
In October 2022, two young activists from the group Just Stop Oil made global headlines for an act as unusual as it was provocative: they threw tomato soup at Vincent van Gogh’s renowned painting, Sunflowers, in London’s National Gallery. Their goal was not to destroy priceless art, but to shock the world into questioning society’s priorities in the face of climate catastrophe. The moment—captured on video and instantly viral—reignited fierce debate: can radical acts of protest help accelerate the fight against climate change, or do they risk alienating the very public whose support is needed most?
Introduction: When Soup Becomes a Statement
Climate protests have evolved from peaceful marches and community rallies to more disruptive forms of civil disobedience. One of the most polarizing acts in recent memory—splashing soup on a masterpiece—has emerged as both a lightning rod for criticism and a rallying call for urgency amidst the climate crisis.
- Protest Details: Two Just Stop Oil activists threw tomato soup at Van Gogh’s Sunflowers.
- Message: The activists posed a central question: “What is worth more, art or life?”
- Public Response: Public opinion split between shock, outrage, and support.
- Consequences: The activists were subsequently arrested and faced criminal charges.
Background: How Did We Get Here?
Activist groups worldwide have embraced disruptive protest tactics in the face of mounting environmental crises. However, targeting works of art represents a significant departure from previous protest styles. The soup protest, performed by Phoebe Plummer and Anna Holland in October 2022, was carefully orchestrated to maximize impact while minimizing physical harm. Their shirts—emblazoned with ‘Just Stop Oil’—clarified their intent: to force a conversation about the real cost of inaction on fossil fuels .
The activists glued their hands to the wall beneath the painting and addressed onlookers: “Are you more concerned about the protection of a painting, or the protection of our planet and people?” The action—and its aftermath—exposed deep divides over what constitutes ethical protest and the fine balance between provocation and persuasion.
The Global Ripple Effect
- Inspired Actions: Similar protests quickly followed in Germany (mashed potatoes on Monet), Canada (maple syrup on Emily Carr), and Paris (soup on the Mona Lisa).
- International Solidarity: The phrase “Solidarity with Soup Throwers” became a rallying cry, marking the spread of this protest style across embassies and cultural sites worldwide .
- Government Response: In the UK, Just Stop Oil’s demands for a moratorium on new oil and gas licenses gained traction, eventually finding their way into political manifestos.
Understanding the Tactics: Why Target Art?
Disruptive protests are designed to break societal complacency, using shock as a tool to draw attention to urgent but overlooked issues. By targeting iconic art, activists tap into collective symbols of cultural heritage—forcing audiences to reckon with what is truly irreplaceable: centuries-old paintings, or the planet’s future?
What others are reading
| Protest Tactic | Intended Impact | Controversy |
|---|---|---|
| Throwing soup at art | Generate massive media attention, prompt ethical debate, dramatize the stakes of climate inaction | Perceived vandalism, risk of alienating public, overshadowing core message |
| Gluing hands to exhibits | Symbolic commitment, delay response for greater media exposure | Legal consequences, perceived disrespect for public spaces |
| Slow-marching, road blockades | Disrupt daily life to highlight climate urgency | Public frustration, risk of backlash |
Just Stop Oil and other groups insist their actions are carefully chosen to minimize permanent harm. In this instance, the Van Gogh painting was protected by glass—the worst damage was to the frame, with repair costs estimated at £10,000. The National Gallery clarified that the art itself was never at risk.
Consequences: Legal and Social Repercussions
The activists who staged the soup protest were swiftly arrested on charges of criminal damage and aggravated trespass. Their subsequent sentences—ranging from 20 to 24 months in prison—sparked outrage among supporters and reignited debate over proportionality in punishing non-violent protestors .
The judge presiding over the case added additional prison time for related acts of slow-marching, a peaceful yet highly disruptive form of protest. These sentences mark some of the most severe handed down to climate activists in the UK so far, raising questions about the shrinking tolerance for civil disobedience even in the face of existential threats.
Are These Protesters ‘Criminals’?
- No Lasting Damage: Despite sensational media coverage, the Van Gogh painting was unharmed.
- Contrast with Real Harm: Activists argued that true ‘climate criminals’ are those responsible for ecological disasters, not peaceful demonstrators.
- Public Outcry: The combination of harsh sentencing and global acts of solidarity amplified the movement’s core question—are we protecting art, or the future of life?
Public Perception: A Double-Edged Sword
Perhaps the most far-reaching effect of the protest has been the wave of public and media commentary it inspired. Reactions ranged from outrage over perceived vandalism to reluctant admiration for the activists’ passion and strategic thinking. Influential media figures and ordinary citizens alike weighed in, revealing deep ambivalence:
- Negative reactions: Many saw the act as senseless destruction, or at least a misdirected use of civil disobedience.
- Qualified Support: Others, upon learning that the painting was protected and unharmed, shifted toward begrudging respect or even support for the cause.
- Central Debate: Does such a dramatic spectacle further the movement or simply alienate potential allies?
According to Just Stop Oil, the goal was never to win popularity contests but to catalyze tangible change. “We are not trying to make friends here, we are trying to make change,” spokesperson Alex De Koning stated, underlining the tension between achieving awareness and winning hearts .
Media Coverage and Its Consequences
Media representation played a critical role. Photos and headlines showed soup splattering a beloved painting, often without context that the artwork was unharmed. As academic analyses point out, this surface-level reporting may have entrenched misconceptions, redirecting outrage away from climate inaction and toward protest tactics .
Impact on Climate Activism: Success or Setback?
Did the soup protest contribute meaningfully to the fight against climate change? The answer depends on which metrics are used:
- Media Attention: The protest generated global headlines and put climate activism at the center of cultural conversation.
- Political Pressure: Demands for fossil fuel moratoriums gained traction—and even resulted in policy proposals in the UK.
- Movement Growth: The act inspired copycat protests and a wave of international solidarity.
- Public Debate: While some were alienated, others reported reappraising their priorities and attitudes toward direct action.
- Risks: Backlash from the public and harsh sentencing could deter future activists or overshadow the movement’s core message.
Is Disruption the Only Way?
The hunger for rapid climate action has reached a fever pitch. Traditional political processes are seen by many as too slow and unresponsive. Disruptive protest, advocates argue, is critical for “shaking the system.” Critics counter that alienating the public could undermine support for urgent policy measures. The balance between disruptive action and constructive engagement continues to be fiercely debated within the environmental movement itself.
Ethical Questions: Where Do We Draw the Line?
The soup-throwing protest’s real legacy may be the difficult ethical questions it poses:
- Do ends justify the means in climate activism?
- What forms of protest are acceptable—or effective—when the stakes involve the future of humanity?
- Where do we draw the line between necessary disruption and public alienation?
Historical Context
History is full of examples where disruptive protest—suffrage, civil rights, anti-war—was initially reviled, only to be later recognized as a catalyst for essential change. Whether soup-throwing will be remembered as a similar inflection point remains to be seen. However, its ability to force moral reflection, spark conversations, and push climate policy into the mainstream cannot be denied.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)
Did the Van Gogh painting suffer any damage?
No. The painting was protected by glass and suffered no harm. Only the frame received minor damage, estimated at about £10,000 .
Why target art rather than directly challenging polluters?
Artworks are highly cherished and symbolically powerful, making their targeting more likely to secure widespread media coverage and spark urgent discussions on what society values most.
Have these protests led to any policy changes?
Yes. Just Stop Oil’s central demand—no new oil and gas licenses—was adopted into the UK Labour Party’s 2024 manifesto, indicating significant political reverberations.
What was the public reaction?
Public opinion was deeply divided, with initial outrage often giving way to grudging respect once it became clear the artwork was unharmed. Many, however, remained skeptical of such radical tactics.
Are the activists still imprisoned?
As of late 2024, the original soup-throwers were sentenced to between 20 and 24 months in jail, marking some of the harshest penalties yet for non-violent climate protest in the UK .
Conclusion: What Is Worth Protecting?
The soup-throwing protest at the National Gallery was more than an act of vandalism or spectacle—it was a calculated gamble to shift the world’s attention from priceless art toward a planet in peril. Whether seen as an act of desperation or a savvy campaign for the climate, it has opened space for a global conversation about values, justice, and the boundaries of protest. The climate crisis, with its profound threat to both natural and cultural treasures, demands responses that are as urgent as they are thoughtful.
References
- https://curious.earth/blog/solidarity-with-soup-throwers/
- https://www.ecowatch.com/van-gogh-painting-protestors.html
- https://web.sas.upenn.edu/pcssm/news/throwing-soup-at-art-shifted-peoples-views-of-climate-protests-but-maybe-not-in-the-right-way-2/
- https://www.womanaroundtown.com/sections/living-around/tree-hugger-in-manhattan/
Similar Articles
Read full bio of Sneha Tete
