ChatterBank2 mins ago
Is This Really The Way To Protest?
https:/
This is not the first time a work of art has been targeted by these idiots. Because of course taping paper over a 200 year old painting is not going to damage it. What an absolute load of idiots. I do not know whether the painting was damaged or not - but I imagine neither do they. As a matter of common sense anything of that age and value ought to be treated with some care.
I accept that some may agree with their cause. But is potentially damaging priceless art the way to do it?
This is not the first time a work of art has been targeted by these idiots. Because of course taping paper over a 200 year old painting is not going to damage it. What an absolute load of idiots. I do not know whether the painting was damaged or not - but I imagine neither do they. As a matter of common sense anything of that age and value ought to be treated with some care.
I accept that some may agree with their cause. But is potentially damaging priceless art the way to do it?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Barmaid. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
// Barmaid, a suffragette attacked a painting in the gallery. Not just covered it up and put glue on the frame, actually slashed it.
Outrageous no doubt but it helped get women the vote. Is a painting more or less important than democracy? //
interesting point, but where would you draw the line - when does protest become unacceptable? clearly wanton vandalism is fine in your book, so where's your line, jno?
Outrageous no doubt but it helped get women the vote. Is a painting more or less important than democracy? //
interesting point, but where would you draw the line - when does protest become unacceptable? clearly wanton vandalism is fine in your book, so where's your line, jno?
jno - // Outrageous no doubt but it helped get women the vote. Is a painting more or less important than democracy? //
You have to be careful not to chase your quarry over a cliff.
Clearly a painting is not more important than democracy, but with any freedom comes responsibility.
It is the sort of freedom that enshrines democracy that also allows people the right to enjoy their heritage without it being roped into a political protest.
As far as I am concerned, protest is an enshrined right of a free society, but in the same way that free speech does not allow you falsely to shout 'Fire!' in a crowded theatre, so protest is not boundless simply because the protestor believes that the rightness of their cause gives them carte blanche to protest in any way they see fit.
Alienating the very people whose support you seek in order to create the change you pursue is counter-productive, and this is a prime example of exactly that.
If you deprive people of the sight of a work of art, they are highly unlikely to see beyond your pointless posturing, and certainly not as far as the essence of the point you are trying to make.
Protest needs to be effective, and on-message - this was neither of those.
You have to be careful not to chase your quarry over a cliff.
Clearly a painting is not more important than democracy, but with any freedom comes responsibility.
It is the sort of freedom that enshrines democracy that also allows people the right to enjoy their heritage without it being roped into a political protest.
As far as I am concerned, protest is an enshrined right of a free society, but in the same way that free speech does not allow you falsely to shout 'Fire!' in a crowded theatre, so protest is not boundless simply because the protestor believes that the rightness of their cause gives them carte blanche to protest in any way they see fit.
Alienating the very people whose support you seek in order to create the change you pursue is counter-productive, and this is a prime example of exactly that.
If you deprive people of the sight of a work of art, they are highly unlikely to see beyond your pointless posturing, and certainly not as far as the essence of the point you are trying to make.
Protest needs to be effective, and on-message - this was neither of those.
hue - in . . . please
just as decidendi has its own pronunciation, so does hue-in
well... we know he varnished it
so that should be protective
(Turner in his later life, only painted during the varnishing days leading up to an exhibition to allow the younger ones, 'a chance')
Amazing um what one learns on AB
just as decidendi has its own pronunciation, so does hue-in
well... we know he varnished it
so that should be protective
(Turner in his later life, only painted during the varnishing days leading up to an exhibition to allow the younger ones, 'a chance')
Amazing um what one learns on AB
// It's idiocy when the target of their actions has no bearing on their cause.//
no nothing to do with idiocy - catching the public eye
like trying to stop the kings horse at the Derby (1913)
Fathers 4 justice chained themselves to the top fo Buckingham Palace: Nadine O’Connor, told Channel 4 News that the group is tired of the “cup of tea and jammy dodgers” approach to political negotiation.
Google Naomi - you should try it
no nothing to do with idiocy - catching the public eye
like trying to stop the kings horse at the Derby (1913)
Fathers 4 justice chained themselves to the top fo Buckingham Palace: Nadine O’Connor, told Channel 4 News that the group is tired of the “cup of tea and jammy dodgers” approach to political negotiation.
Google Naomi - you should try it
i did read it, but still didnt understand what you meant by "They sit and feed the eco lot"
it sounds like you are saying the police pander to them, in the same sentence you say the police were arresting them, so i truly don't get if you see the arrests as a bad or good thing. Or have i got it completely wrong, and you mean once they have been arrested they shouldnt get given refreshments?
it sounds like you are saying the police pander to them, in the same sentence you say the police were arresting them, so i truly don't get if you see the arrests as a bad or good thing. Or have i got it completely wrong, and you mean once they have been arrested they shouldnt get given refreshments?
