420

Historic Portrait of Lord Balfour Slashed by Pro-Palestine Protestors (news.artnet.com)

submitted 8 months ago by gedaliyah@lemmy.world to c/world@lemmy.world

171 comments fedilink hide all child comments

A painting of Lord Balfour housed at the University of Cambridge’s Trinity College was slashed by protest group Palestine Action.

The painting of Lord Balfour was made in 1914 by Philip Alexius de László inside Trinity College. The Palestine Action group specifically targeted the Lord Balfour painting, describing his declaration as the beginning of “ethnic cleansing of Palestine by promising the land away—which the British never had the right to do.”

top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] ninjan@lemmy.mildgrim.com 206 points 8 months ago

Probably the only type of destruction of art as protest I condone. The piece:

Is not very old or culturally/historically important
Directly depicts someone at the root of this conflict
Was deliberately targeted and the reasons layed out

Trying to destroy unrelated art work is just wasteful of our shared human heritage. Attacking symbols of oppression however is perfectly valid in my opinion and is to me perfectly reasonable escalation when peaceful protests obviously do not bring the changes needed.

I put this on the same level as African Americans attacking statues of confederate generals and other proponents of slavery to hammer home their point.

[-] PugJesus@kbin.social 35 points 8 months ago

Probably the only type of destruction of art as protest I condone. The piece:

Is not very old or culturally/historically important
Directly depicts someone at the root of this conflict
Was deliberately targeted and the reasons layed out

About where I'm at. Normally I get immensely irritated by 'protesters' who go and vandalize unrelated and historically important artwork, but this isn't particularly objectionable.

[-] TheFriar@lemm.ee 18 points 8 months ago

I mean, correct me if I’m wrong, but this is the first story I’ve seen of protestors actually destroying the painting itself, they’re usually splashing paint on the protective cover, not on the painting itself. I’ve never seen one where the actual art was destroyed before now. Is that what you’re talking about? Or am I missing a bunch of stories where unrelated artwork was destroyed by protestors (usually climate protesters)?

load more comments (3 replies)

load more comments (2 replies)

[-] Excrubulent@slrpnk.net 28 points 8 months ago

Agreed, except that I would call this peaceful protest. Vandalism isn't violence. Violence is against a person. As long as no person was relying on this painting for their meals or shelter or whatever - and they definitely weren't - then no person was harmed.

[-] agressivelyPassive@feddit.de 25 points 8 months ago

No no no, you don't understand. Violence is everything that disturbs those in power!

Mediocre art being damaged in one of the centers of power is violence.

Tens of thousands of people somewhere else dying is just a minor inconvenience.

load more comments (2 replies)

[-] auraness@lemmy.world 26 points 8 months ago

Another important detail to consider is that these pieces are really only worthwhile for their historical value. I would argue that this response is more significant than the original production of the painting.

If anything, the value of this painting will increase due to the added historical value of this event.

[-] dept@lemmy.sdf.org 25 points 8 months ago

actually later on this will add more historical value to it.

[-] GiddyGap@lemm.ee 19 points 8 months ago

Definitely. Historic or not, don't put bad people on pedestals. E.g. there's a reason why you don't see statues of Hitler in Germany.

load more comments (2 replies)

load more comments (3 replies)

[-] Deceptichum@sh.itjust.works 206 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

It’s from the 20th century, and of the guy directly responsible for the mess in Palestine today as well as his shit in Ireland.

I’m about as outraged about this as I would be a Jew slashing a “historical” painting of Hitler.

I wonder if in a hundred years people will be upset over Trumps portrait getting ruined?

[-] alvvayson@lemmy.world 103 points 8 months ago

If we are going to shed tears for the loss of culture, then the loss of Roman era bath houses and early Christian churches in Gaza is quite a bit more concerning to me than this painting.

load more comments (2 replies)

[-] Linkerbaan@lemmy.world 76 points 8 months ago

Based. Take those genocidal maniacs off the wall.

[-] iain@feddit.nl 38 points 8 months ago

Or leave it: I think it's improved this way: a terrible man, a mediocre painting, in context with the ongoing genocide he put into motion. It invites the viewer to wonder what kind of legacy the rich folk who paid for these paintings have.

[-] Linkerbaan@lemmy.world 24 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Hope they put it in the Genocide museum, not on the wall of a university as some hero

[-] bbuez@lemmy.world 13 points 8 months ago

I would say its new torn status would make it a perfect fit for said museum

[-] assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world 15 points 8 months ago

They can go into the same pile as all those Confederate statues and flags.

load more comments (8 replies)

[-] reverendsteveii@lemm.ee 62 points 8 months ago

Take a look at everyone clutching their pearls over this painting and think about what doesn't upset them

load more comments (15 replies)

[-] NoneOfUrBusiness@kbin.social 58 points 8 months ago

This has the same energy as destroying confederate general statues. Good on them.

[-] leraje@lemmy.blahaj.zone 41 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

There was a news article a day or two ago about a pensioner vandalising a statue of Thatcher. I feel the same way about this act as I did that - good on the perpetrator.

Unless a work of art is housed somewhere meant to cause reflection on all the actions a person took in their full context which includes making clear the problematic acts of the subject, they shouldn't be somewhere clearly meant to commemorate them. And if they are, then they're fair game.

[-] Evil_Shrubbery@lemm.ee 40 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

... the artist ...

[-] Chip_Rat@lemmy.world 34 points 8 months ago

Hang on a tick. Is that my old cheese? My good-time boy?! Or is he but a simple human man?

load more comments (3 replies)

[-] iain@feddit.nl 13 points 8 months ago

The comments are full of people who value one shitty painting more than they value human life.

load more comments (5 replies)

load more comments

this post was submitted on 10 Mar 2024

420 points (93.9% liked)

World News

39004 readers

2573 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.