Ruining precious art that belongs to all of us has no link to climate change. I am very concerned about climate change and I am doing all I can to prevent the further perpetuation of climate change. Destroy art isn’t going to reduce sea levels one inch, it’s just going to piss people off and the only way we can solve this problem is working together.
As I suspected, a few galleries have already curtailed their hours and the "viewability" of their paintings. I get wanting to draw attention to the urgent issue of climate, but maybe these kids aren't thinking big enough. Defacing paintings lacks cool. But occupying a national landmark is a bold move. Food for thought anyway.
The thing about art is that it belongs to all of us, no matter who owns it. When the Taliban blew up those Buddhas in Afghanistan, that erased any and all sympathy I might ever have had or will have for them. It mattered to me that Notre Dame burned down. There are things on this planet that are just beautiful - precious few. They belong to all 8 billion of us. 2 or 3 people shouldn't be using them for their own ends no matter what they are advocating for. Yes, it gets them attention but it makes me, gay liberal tree hugging, whale loving anti-nuke me, want them gone - no matter what they are fighting for. Find another way. You're smarter than that. And if you aren't then please just go away.
Art Vandalism? Never met him, but he certainly did have a way of generating outrage, especially amongst latte Liberals who love art museums.
Seriously, though, we are in a climate emergency. We must begin to take it seriously and take action to minimize the damage we're doing. You and I will be dead by the time the worst of the consequences are felt, but don't we have a responsibility to hand over a world that's in better shape than we found it? We have the ability and the available technology to make that happen, but the Almighty Profit Motive always seems to get in the way.
I wonder when people in positions of power will finally realize you can spend your billions on an uninhabitable planet?
***frantically waves hand*** Can I sign up for this latte liberal thing? I need a shirt. Hey, does anyone have a shirt?
Re: THOSE PEOPLE in positions of power have nothing to worry about. They have Musk! They're going to live on Mars! It's going to be Adam McKay's Don't Look Up without the pesky dinosaur.
Per #2 above: *Sea* ice melt does NOT raise sea levels. You can test this yourself. Put ice in a glass, then fill the glass with water and allow the ice to melt. The glass will not overflow (the level has not changed.) Two bad things that do occur with sea ice melt are, (a) the albedo of the the water is drastically changed, so that rather than reflecting sunlight back out into space the way shiny white ice will do, the water absorbs it and turns it into heat. (b) If that sea ice is clustered around a land mass with large glaciers (like Greenland) then melting sea ice will open a path for the *LAND* ice to flow into the sea, and that by doG WILL raise sea levels. (Actually, so will the change in albedo due to heat expansion.)
I'm inclined to disagree about Confederate statues as well. They don't belong in museums, because they are not art, any more than we should raise a statue of Hitler in the Berlin art museum. These are not works of art studying the human form, nor are they pieces of educational matter. They are monuments raised to *valorize* certain people and their actions. The animals claiming them as "part of their heritage," often enough don't even have roots in the Confederate south. They're just neo-fascist racists who want to be validated.
However, I heartily agree with you about the "protests." The chosen targets bear absolutely no relation (beyond existing in the same world) to the issues being raised. As you say, people will remember the vandalism, not the protest. Glue your hand to the cheek (any one) of the CEO of Exxon, and *THAT* will be a memorable protest. But Van Gogh? Not only will that not raise awareness, it will increase hostility and disdain toward the movement.
I like the point you make about Confederate statues not being valorized in museums. If I have to come down on one side of the fence or the other, I'll still go with "things of historical significance that are museum worthy" but your point is very well taken, as always.
Ruining precious art that belongs to all of us has no link to climate change. I am very concerned about climate change and I am doing all I can to prevent the further perpetuation of climate change. Destroy art isn’t going to reduce sea levels one inch, it’s just going to piss people off and the only way we can solve this problem is working together.
As I suspected, a few galleries have already curtailed their hours and the "viewability" of their paintings. I get wanting to draw attention to the urgent issue of climate, but maybe these kids aren't thinking big enough. Defacing paintings lacks cool. But occupying a national landmark is a bold move. Food for thought anyway.
Defacing art of this level is arrogant. Those people are trying to draw attention to themselves.
The thing about art is that it belongs to all of us, no matter who owns it. When the Taliban blew up those Buddhas in Afghanistan, that erased any and all sympathy I might ever have had or will have for them. It mattered to me that Notre Dame burned down. There are things on this planet that are just beautiful - precious few. They belong to all 8 billion of us. 2 or 3 people shouldn't be using them for their own ends no matter what they are advocating for. Yes, it gets them attention but it makes me, gay liberal tree hugging, whale loving anti-nuke me, want them gone - no matter what they are fighting for. Find another way. You're smarter than that. And if you aren't then please just go away.
Agree, agree, agree. With all of it, actually. And I'd gay-hug any tree that you were hugging, just out of solidarity.
Art Vandalism? Never met him, but he certainly did have a way of generating outrage, especially amongst latte Liberals who love art museums.
Seriously, though, we are in a climate emergency. We must begin to take it seriously and take action to minimize the damage we're doing. You and I will be dead by the time the worst of the consequences are felt, but don't we have a responsibility to hand over a world that's in better shape than we found it? We have the ability and the available technology to make that happen, but the Almighty Profit Motive always seems to get in the way.
I wonder when people in positions of power will finally realize you can spend your billions on an uninhabitable planet?
***frantically waves hand*** Can I sign up for this latte liberal thing? I need a shirt. Hey, does anyone have a shirt?
Re: THOSE PEOPLE in positions of power have nothing to worry about. They have Musk! They're going to live on Mars! It's going to be Adam McKay's Don't Look Up without the pesky dinosaur.
Finally some gets it!!! 😝
Per #2 above: *Sea* ice melt does NOT raise sea levels. You can test this yourself. Put ice in a glass, then fill the glass with water and allow the ice to melt. The glass will not overflow (the level has not changed.) Two bad things that do occur with sea ice melt are, (a) the albedo of the the water is drastically changed, so that rather than reflecting sunlight back out into space the way shiny white ice will do, the water absorbs it and turns it into heat. (b) If that sea ice is clustered around a land mass with large glaciers (like Greenland) then melting sea ice will open a path for the *LAND* ice to flow into the sea, and that by doG WILL raise sea levels. (Actually, so will the change in albedo due to heat expansion.)
I'm inclined to disagree about Confederate statues as well. They don't belong in museums, because they are not art, any more than we should raise a statue of Hitler in the Berlin art museum. These are not works of art studying the human form, nor are they pieces of educational matter. They are monuments raised to *valorize* certain people and their actions. The animals claiming them as "part of their heritage," often enough don't even have roots in the Confederate south. They're just neo-fascist racists who want to be validated.
However, I heartily agree with you about the "protests." The chosen targets bear absolutely no relation (beyond existing in the same world) to the issues being raised. As you say, people will remember the vandalism, not the protest. Glue your hand to the cheek (any one) of the CEO of Exxon, and *THAT* will be a memorable protest. But Van Gogh? Not only will that not raise awareness, it will increase hostility and disdain toward the movement.
Yes, you are correct. It's fresh water, not sea water. But it does raise the global sea level, which is a huge concern. https://sealevel.nasa.gov/understanding-sea-level/global-sea-level/ice-melt
I like the point you make about Confederate statues not being valorized in museums. If I have to come down on one side of the fence or the other, I'll still go with "things of historical significance that are museum worthy" but your point is very well taken, as always.