The Limited Times

Now you can see non-English news...

How to avoid the next cake against the Gioconda?

2022-06-17T17:57:53.600Z


Museum security protocols are often unable to prevent attacks whose motivations range from the desire for notoriety or protest, to pure vandalism


An ordinary day at the Reina Sofía Museum.

Visitors tour the rooms and examine famous works such as

El Guernica

.

An Italian woman is interested in the set

La pilgrimage of the cornudos

, by the painter and sculptor Alberto Sánchez, and she climbs on the stage of the piece to try to take a selfie.

It is then when she verifies first hand that it was not a good idea, because she slips and tears the work.

This accident, which occurred on June 3, happened a few days after a man in a wig and in a wheelchair threw a cake at

La Gioconda

in the Louvre Museum.

In both cases the damage was minimal and the two works are still on display.

But, what guarantee is there that major damage cannot occur?

More information

What to save in case of fire?

The emergency plans of the most important museums in Spain

The secrecy of the different museums in terms of security issues prevents knowing the details of the protocols established to intercept vandalism or accidents.

The press officer of the Reina Sofía, Concha Iglesias, assures that they have “all the necessary control, security and protection measures, as well as specific plans for the evacuation of the works”, but considers that it is not convenient “to enter to do another type of precisions”.

The Thyssen Museum and the Prado Museum move along the same lines, making it clear from the communication department of the latter that they do not talk about "these issues" to avoid "providing ideas".

In the series of video stories entitled

The voices of the Prado

, Antonio Macías, head of night watch between 1974 and 2009, points out the importance of the introduction of the most modern systems.

“There wasn't even a camera.

It did not exist neither at the entrance nor at the exit.

When they arrived we were very happy because the museum was already more guarded.

When the alarms entered was when we already knew the security at full capacity.

The alarms sounded in the meeting room, the roof... And there we had to go”, explains Macías.

On the other hand, the one who was head of works and maintenance of the Prado between 1994 and 2009, Pedro Álvarez, remembers an occasion in which it was the building itself (and not his works) that was attacked.

“Someone burned down Murillo's door for us.

They said that he wanted revenge for something, but we don't know who it was, ”he recounts.

For Alvarez,

'The Pilgrimage of the Cuckolds', by Alberto Sánchez, restored and exhibited at the Reina Sofía Museum.

REINA SOFÍA MUSEUM (Europa Press)

One of the greatest connoisseurs of security protocols in the field of culture is the American novelist Noah Charney.

In his book

From him The art thief

(Seix Barral), the writer points out that figures and objects with some religious component have been the main victims of vandalism due to iconoclastic thought, one that rejects the representation of the elements of the scriptures.

Along these lines, Charney also highlights that sometimes churches, more than museums, are the most vulnerable places to this type of attack.

The novelist assures that to protect a space dedicated to art against theft and vandalism, it is necessary to implement "a system similar to that of airports".

It is common to have to leave bags and coats before entering an art room to be scanned.

There is also a document from the Ministry of Culture and Sports, entitled

Guide for a plan to protect collections in emergencies

, which deals with the issue of damage to works.

The text considers terrorism, theft, vandalism and the consequences of a war in the category of intentional damage of an anthropic nature.

About acts of vandalism, as in the case of the cake at

La Gioconda

, the document specifies that "sometimes they are inflicted on a significant object in the collection for the aggressor's desire for notoriety", although it also ensures that they are generally reduced "to damages that, due to their small size (chewing gum, etc. ), they do not reach emergency consideration”.

Accidents are assumed as one of the possible risks due to human causes, although without going into detail about the importance of this type of damage.

The document establishes that "it is not about the museum drawing up an exhaustive list of each and every one of the risks to which it may be subjected, but about considering which have existed in the past and which may arise in the future."

In this sense, there is a history of works that, either by accident or on purpose, have been damaged.

The reason for intentional attacks has historically been attributed to causes such as the search for recognition, the intention of launching political-social criticism and the mental instability or personal problems of the aggressor.

Visitors gaze at Michelangelo's 'David' in the Accademia Gallery in Florence.

Robert Alexander (Getty Images)

The Italian psychiatrist Graziella Margherini, the same one who introduced the famous concept of "Stendhal syndrome", which refers to alterations caused by a kind of overdose of beauty, added that works of art could also arouse violence within people.

According to the veteran researcher, when faced with a piece like

El David

of Michelangelo an individual can feel "jealous and envious of that perfect body", which would lead him to cause damage to "reaffirm his own self".

This "David syndrome" (as Margherini dubbed it) shares with Stendhal's the basis of the powerful effect of art on people.

“It is a very powerful stimulus.

So much so that it can cause a crisis.”

One of the best-known episodes of this kind took place in 1972, when an Australian geologist named Laszlo Toth hammered Michelangelo's

Pietà

to the ground, shouting "I am Jesus Christ risen from the dead!"

The sculpture suffered significant damage and the person responsible was admitted to a psychiatric hospital.

Currently, the work is protected behind glass capable of withstanding bullet impacts.

Spray on 'Guernica'

Guernica

was also the

victim of an attack in 1974, when it was still in the Museum of Modern Art (MoMA) in New York.

Tony Shafrazi, a renowned gallery owner, wrote on Picasso's canvas "kill all lies" with red spray paint.

On that occasion, the damage was easily repaired and MoMA did not file a lawsuit against Shafrazi.

As in the case of

La Piedad

,

Guernica

is currently protected by bulletproof glass.

As for the accidents that have caused serious damage to works, the event that took place in 2016 in Lisbon with a sculpture of the Archangel Saint Michael from the 18th century stands out.

A tourist who, similarly to the case of

La pilgrimage of the horned

, was trying to take a photo, knocked the work off its pedestal.

The carving of the archangel lost its wings and the feathers that adorned its helmet.

"La Mona Lisa" by Leonardo da Vinci.

But of all the works that have been damaged and vandalized, few have an incident history comparable to that of

La Gioconda

.

The first damage it suffered at the hands of a person dates from 1956, when an individual threw acid at the work of Leonardo da Vinci.

After another attack with a stone in the same year, bulletproof glass was placed to protect the canvas, which has not prevented it from suffering other attacks, such as that of a woman with a spray in 1978 while the work was exhibited in Tokyo or that of the launch of a hot cup of tea in 2009.

Beyond the damage,

La Gioconda

was also stolen in 1911 by the Italian artist Vincenzo Peruggia, who was arrested while trying to sell the work to the Uffizi Gallery.

All this until reaching the purest news, in which a cake left a curious image for visitors who were there at the right time.

Source: elparis

All life articles on 2022-06-17

You may like

Trends 24h

Life/Entertain 2024-03-28T17:17:20.523Z

Latest

© Communities 2019 - Privacy

The information on this site is from external sources that are not under our control.
The inclusion of any links does not necessarily imply a recommendation or endorse the views expressed within them.