You may have seen the story a few weeks back about the eco-fanatics over in France who entered the Louvre, approached the Mona Lisa and sprayed soup all over its protective glass barrier as part of what they called a “food counterattack”. The West’s “agricultural system is sick”, they proclaimed, something which meant that “Our farmers are dying at work”.
Cynics might say the true reason so many European farmers are actually dying at work at the moment is because they keep on committing suicide in their barns on account of wrong-headed and ruinous EU-led attempts to force the “sick” agricultural patient in question into ruder green eco-health via mountains of unsustainable bureaucracy and other such quasi-Marxist faff, but the protesters did not agree. “What is more important?” they asked. “Art or the right to healthy and sustainable food?”
“Art!” say I, standing in front of the Mona Lisa myself and happily chomping on chocolate (milk chocolate, just to be clear, produced direct from the lovely white fluids of methane-belching cows).
New Age Thinking
Distasteful though these adolescent antics are, it might actually be better if such temper-tantrum toddlers doused all great paintings in soup rather than painted them all systematically green with their increasingly extreme ideologies instead, as has recently occurred with a new exhibition of the works of the esteemed German Romantic painter Caspar David Friedrich (1774-1840). In some ways, the physical vandalism would actually be less damaging than its ideological variant. At least the soup-sprayers are outright criminal outsiders; the history-rewriting men with green paintbrushes are the galleries’ actual curators.
Friedrich is best known for his uncanny landscape paintings, in which the German and Baltic landscapes he depicted become imbued with a real sense of pantheism, whereby the human onlookers portrayed become measly incidental Rückenfiguren (backwards-facing figures) by comparison with the mighty peaks, twisted trees and sheer-faced cliffs of ice. Although compositionally in the foreground, the puny humanoids are really the mere background to the far vaster canvas of water, rocks, clouds, fields and skies. Thus, if you squint a bit, they almost represent the sort of post-human world many a contemporary eco-cultist of the Patricia MacCormack or Voluntary Human Extinction Movement-type might like to see come true for real, a planet from which mankind’s detrimental influence has been removed forever, and where Nature has reclaimed her rightful rule: the pre-industrial and the post-industrial come together happily as one.
The most celebrated canvas of Friedrich is undoubtedly his Wanderer Above the Sea of Fog (c.1818), owned by the Hamburg Kunsthalle (i.e., Hamburg Art Gallery), which is currently celebrating the 250th anniversary of the painter’s birth with a new show, ‘Caspar David Friedrich: Art for a New Age’. As the exhibition’s title suggests, the whole thing is intended as one big exercise in shoehorning the work of a man who has been dead for nigh on two centuries into the chief political obsession of those within the New Age New World Order who now rule over us: climate change.
Fog Off!
Wanderer Above the Sea of Fog is, appropriately enough for our sad era of art activism, already covered over in something of a pea-souper: if you don’t know it, it’s the one where a lone climber, dressed in period Young Werther-style blue frock-coat and clutching a walking-stick, stands atop some jagged mountain crown, with his back positioned enigmatically to the viewer, staring out over the peaks of other rocky outcrops, which pierce the all-consuming fog like tiny islands in a lake. The overwhelming impression is of minuscule mankind left helpless and adrift in an all-consuming sea of white, grey and blue. And yet, if you head to the Hamburg Kunsthalle’s official exhibition website, Friedrich’s Wanderer now stands overlooking not some strange aerial Heaven, but some fearsome earthly Hell. The blues and whites have all become reds and oranges, like so:


What’s happened? Well, haven’t you heard? Our planet is on fire! At least, so say the serried ranks of pea-soup-throwers and their allied pea-brains in the contemporary art world. The Kunsthalle’s show lasts, strangely, until April 1st: surely it should have started then? Perhaps not, as these people are actually in deadly earnest. The oft-promised ‘climate apocalypse’ is dubiously forecast to cause all kinds of looming problems for helpless mankind, but impossibly incinerating the past is surely not one of them.
No longer can a museum or art exhibition just be allowed to be about an artist or historical figure. Instead, no opportunity to forcibly re-educate the populace or dumb down outrageously can ever possibly be wasted, so it now always has to be about ‘X person and subject Y’: ‘Admiral Nelson and Homosexuality‘, for instance, or (I’m not making this up) ‘Vincent van Gogh and Pokémon’. Here, the Kunsthalle has decided to go with not only ‘Caspar David Friedrich’, but ‘Caspar David Friedrich and the Climate Emergency’. How about just putting on a show called ‘Caspar David Friedrich and His Bloody Brilliant Paintings’ for once?
Just Stop Ruining Oil Paintings
The interesting thing is, back in early 2023, a band of climate change protesters, led by activist artist Lula Merlo (pictured here wearing a ‘Just Stop Oil’ t-shirt) had invaded the Hamburg Kunsthalle armed with a version of this very same doctored image, re-entitled Wanderer Above a Sea of Fire, and attempted to glue it over the top of Friedrich’s real original artwork. The protesters were stopped by what was termed “a quick-thinking member of staff”, who I am guessing might have been a humble, non-indoctrinated security guard. Had it been one of the building’s chief curators, presumably he would have just handed the green fanatics over a spare tube of Pritt Stick and told them to go for it. After all, a large photograph of Merlo’s parody is now an actual part of the Kunsthalle’s real Friedrich exhibition. We once spoke of lunatics taking over the asylum. Now we have philistines taking over the art gallery.
To be fair, whilst the exhibition is explicitly pegged towards climate change, the show as a whole does feature around 70 genuine paintings and 100 sketches actually produced by Caspar David Friedrich during his lifetime, and apparently restricts the green propaganda stuff to a separate but linked exhibition area at the end – so, if you’re sensible, you can just go and see the real art, then run straight out past the final few rooms, vomiting broth on the agitprop as you go.
But, if you do flee the building in soup-spewing horror, what treats will you be missing out on? How about Julian Charriere’s 2013 The Blue Fossil Entropic Stories III, a long-distance photograph of an iceberg, doctored so that a tiny, Friedrich-style figure stands atop it brandishing a small flamethrower? Or David Claerbout’s 2019-20 Wildfire (meditation on fire), which is described as “a vast lightbox” showing film of a slowly-burning forest fire caused by you, eating meat, driving a car and farting? Or Swaantje Güntzel’s Arctic Jogurt, Dezember 2nd 2021, a photograph in which Swaantje stands, like Friedrich’s wanderer, with her back to the viewer, photographed in the act of throwing a plastic yoghurt pot into a Norwegian fjord? (This one really is worth looking at, it’s beyond all parody: “On December 2nd 2021 at 12.04 a.m. I ate a yoghurt and threw the plastic pot into the Ofotfjord (Norway)”, the artist informs us, in an extract from her apparently extremely empty diary.)
Alternatively, if you prefer feminism to environmentalism, you could enjoy Finnish photographer Elina Brotherus’s 2004 The Wanderer 2, in which a female figure (or possibly a transsexual, it’s hard to tell) recreates the pose of Friedrich’s original male fog-wanderer, in order to conclusively prove, once and for all, that women are also capable of using their eyes to look at things within an outdoor environment, just like men are. For the many compulsive race-Marxists amongst the Kunsthalle’s visitors, meanwhile, the gallery has also begun inserting images of random black men into copies of Friedrich’s canvases now, too. Either that, or climate change in Europe’s artistic past has now got so bad, it’s even started sunburning all the Rückenfiguren.
False Framings
The Kunsthalle’s exhibition caused quite some controversy in Germany, with one prominent columnist, Alan Posener, accurately calling it mere “indoctrination” steeped in “infantile didacticism” in Die Welt. And yet, it seemed to come with official Government approval. German President Frank-Walter Steinmeyer attended the show’s opening, dubiously identifying an “existential uncertainty” as being present within the dead artist’s paintings. Just as, during Friedrich’s own day, Europe’s future was at risk from the militarism of Napoleon, Steinmeyer implied, so today the continent was equally under threat from a new form of global warming so severe it could even somehow retrospectively burn the fictional mountainsides of pre-Victorian landscape paintings.
Curiously, the Kunsthalle’s online press kit reveals that the entire exhibition “has been fully funded by the Federal Government Commissioner for Culture and the Media”, which is presumably why the whole thing comes laden with standard governing-class Leftist propaganda. The press kit directly quotes Claudia Roth, Germany’s Culture Minister, as lauding how Friedrich’s works “show how directly humans are interwoven with their environment. With a view to the current challenges posed by climate change, the works of Caspar David Friedrich come across as a painterly plea to protect Nature in all its beauty and vulnerability”.
No, they only “come across” like that if you deliberately mis-frame them to imply that they do so, as an integral part of the whole exhibition – even including its title – so as to transform what is supposed to be an exercise in public education into a pathetic exercise in public re-education instead. Where will this process of blatantly anachronistic misrepresentation end? Perhaps rising global temperatures were why Salvador Dalí’s famous watches were really melting all those years ago when he painted them?
We used to speak of ‘art for art’s sake’. Now, we have art for politics’ sake. Ironically enough, isn’t this whole costly state-subsidised eco-fest just one giant exercise in polluting the past?
Steven Tucker is a journalist and the author of over 10 books, the latest being Hitler’s & Stalin’s Misuse of Science: When Science Fiction Was Turned Into Science Fact by the Nazis and the Soviets (Pen & Sword/Frontline), which is out now.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
It’s a cult.
Yeah anyone who thinks the earth is on fire/boiling etc is a fruit cake, ppl cannot afford to heat their homes in this country!
A doomsday cult, no less.
I know pillar boxes exist. I have seen them and actually put envelopes into them. I don’t therefore have to claim, “Pillar boxes are real”. —-The same is true of elephants. I have been to the zoo. I don’t need to claim “Elephants are real”——–But when I hear people say “Climate Change is real and happening now” I ask where have you seen this climate change? I get answers like “All scientists agree”, or “There are mountains of evidence”. ————-But hold on, if there are mountains of evidence why not just give me one bit of it? ——-One piece of evidence isn’t too much to ask is it?——–What we now have all across the western world are brainwashed dreamers with no evidence of anything prepared to terrorise society because they have decided to “believe” something. But believing things is religion. ——These people who lay down in the street or throw soup at paintings or superglue themselves to things are members of a secular religious cult that base their world view, as all religions do, on faith and emotion, and facts and reason do not come into the equation. ——-We will eventually pay for our reluctance to clamp down on these imbeciles as they become more emboldened, and it is only a matter of time before people get hurt or worse (killed) as they morph into dangerous eco terrorists that will attack anything and anybody that they see as planet destroying heretics. ——-All based on zero evidence of anything at all.
Climate change is of course real. Even I, relatively young as I am (51), can identify three distinctive clima periods from personal experience alone. One which ran from sometime in the 1970s to some time in the early 1990s were winters were very cold and there was lots of snowfall, ie, something like 2m (2.2yds) of snow next to road was a common occurence, one from the early 1990s to about 2000 were snow in winter had vanished completely and once since then where it has been making a steady comeback. The unreal bit is equating It’s changing with It’ll bring our doom! and claiming that it must be changing because of something humans are doing, specifically, the original really dangerous something which already scared the shit out of some people during the stone age, namely, controlled burning of stuff to achieve some positive end.
The problem is not with the premise (“climate is changing”) but with the conclusion (“We’re doomed!”) and with usual Correlation must equal causation! argumentation: We’re doing something while climate is changing and hence, whatever we’re doing must have caused it to change, continued with another variation of Christian theme, As mankind is inherently sinful, all its works tainted and hence, that we’re causing climate change must mean it’ll turn out to be a change for the worse.
The main problem is not the mechanics of the cult and its true believers but the people who expect to profit from it.
It’s a very pernicious idea. It lures you in with facts and numbers, and then it introduces a tiny little leap of faith that you barely notice to tie the whole lie together. Climate is indeed changing. CO2 is indeed a greenhouse gas. And we are indeed putting out CO2 into the atmosphere. And here comes the leap of faith that people miss, because it sounds like a conclusion, not an assumption: “so therefore climate change is man made”. This is like someone throwing a chewing gum wrapper on the street and then being accused of all the litter in the entire city.
In the 70s there was a confected panic being whipped up about a possible ice age. Until that period ended, then it morphed into Global Warming.
While I support many aspects of environmental protection and don’t mind certain efforts to clean up our act, unfortunately many of the people who support the more sensible activities don’t know where to draw the line. Many are easily gulled by climate prophecy and will parrot the mantras without question.
In the book There is No Climate Crisis by David Craig, he shows similar newspaper doom articles from the mid 19th century. These apocalyptic loons have always been here but now they’re massively better organised by access to the Internet.
You start of by saying “Climate Chage is ofcourse real”———But remember that language is very important and “climate change” is a term that has come to mean changes to the climate allegedly caused by human activity. It does not mean changes that naturally occur. ——-The rest of your comment I agree with and regularly comment on here on the DS.
The one thing that’s certain about the weather is that it’s always changing and that there are both short-term and long-term fluctuations. Eg, in books written towards the end of the 19th century whose setting is the early 19th century, specifically, Fontane Vor dem Sturm (1878), one will find reference to months of temperatures below -20⁰C and rivers being frozen solid to the point where people used to drive on them until mid/ end of May. Books mentioning weather conditions from 1914 – 1918 talk about routine occurrence of snow storms in late March in northern France. There’s little point in denying that this doesn’t happen anymore at the moment.
I think one of the key points here is to the unhitch obviously occurring natural phenomenon from entirely unproven (and unprovable) mathematical theories about the long-term effect of marginal changes of the composition of the atmosphere of the earth. Climate change has been occurring since the dawn of human history. But so-called industrialization is not yet 400 years old. If the latter causes the former, how can this be?
Caspar David Friedrich is my favourite painter. Saw a big exhibition of his works in the Hermitage Rooms at Somerset House many years ago, before Somerset House went unbearably woke.
I like to think Herr Friedrich will be spinning in his grave, or looking down from above with disdain.
I liked it better when it was global warming. It has a nice, comfortable feel to it.
And yes, I know that is why they are ramping up the names for it, because the climate isn’t playing ball with them.
I always wonder how many years this can go on for. Every year more cockamamy ideas come up, presumably to try and keep the alleged threat front and centre in everyone’s mind. The oceans are boiling, hottest year ever etc etc. So in twenty years time, say, when things have gone along much as they always have, what will they be using then as a lever? Or in fifty years time even? Or will more and more people wake up to the con?
Climageddon next. Or have they already used that one?
My favourite question to AGW believers is, how much CO2 is there in the atmosphere, and what proportion of it is man made? The crazy answers you get always indicates to me that many people who think mankind is changing the climate do very little research, and are really just regurgitating ‘facts’ from msm, principally the BBC. However, I do try not to get embroiled in these discussions. I find that adherents of AGW, like adherents of the ‘wonderful efficacy of covid vaccinations’, tend to get angry when their beliefs are put to the test, so it’s not really worth the hassle.
Another good one is “what is Planet Earth’s temperature right now, and how is it measured?”
I find discussing this subject with climate zealots a complete waste of energy and time just as it is with my green zealot MP. I am though prepared to spend some energy and time actively engaging in helping my Reform UK candidate in this years GE because one of the key manifesto policies is scrapping the Net Zero agenda.
“…painterly plea to protect Nature in all its beauty and vulnerability”.
Vulnerability? Lets see.
The Boxing Day Tsunami, the Great Japanese Earthquake and Tsunami of 2011, Santorini, Krakatoa, Yosemite, Mt St Helens, any earthquake above 5, then are species of deadly venomous spiders, snakes, lizards, snails, octopus, jellyfish – then the long list of animals that will eat you from big cats, big bears, Crocodiles, Alligators, Monitor Lizards, Anacondas, Sharks – the hundred or so species of Flora that can tolerate fire or not germinate unless burnt – the Flora and Fauna that can withstand -40C, +50C, Ice, Desert, Mountain, raging rivers…Nature is far from vulnerable. Of course I do not mean that it’s not possible to damage eco-systems, but a grown up understanding of nature is vital rather than this infantile sentimentality called environmentalism.
If ‘our planet is on fire’ as the ecoloons claim, why don’t they get on their bicycles and go and help douse them rather than splashing soup over great works of art from a period when, in their crazed minds, this wouldn’t have been a problem?!