Inside History: Protest. Revolt & Reform
For our next issue we take a closer look at the theme of Protest from the events of Peterloo to the fall of the Berlin. Inside we cover a whole range of historical protests and the individuals who led the charge for change. This issues includes:
John Brown's raid on Harpers Ferry, The Suffragettes, Billie Holiday and the role music has played in protests, The Civil Rights Movement, Protest and Sport, We are the People: The Fall of the Berlin Wall, Bloody Sunday at Trafalgar Square, and much much more.
For our next issue we take a closer look at the theme of Protest from the events of Peterloo to the fall of the Berlin. Inside we cover a whole range of historical protests and the individuals who led the charge for change. This issues includes:
John Brown's raid on Harpers Ferry, The Suffragettes, Billie Holiday and the role music has played in protests, The Civil Rights Movement, Protest and Sport, We are the People: The Fall of the Berlin Wall, Bloody Sunday at Trafalgar Square, and much much more.
sticks and umbrellas – were bannedfrom public museums and galleries,whilst plain clothes detectives trailedafter any suspicious-looking woman whomight enter. By 1914, planned closuresat times of heightened suffrage activitytook place, causing further disturbancefor disgruntled visitors and agitatedgallery staff.Unlike the window smashing campaign,smashing paintings was not a formulatedmoment involving hundreds of women atone time. The most famous attacks onpaintings were isolated incidents,undertaken by individuals or a very smallgroup, and the choice of painting wasoften selected because of their subject;Mary Wood deliberately chose to slashthe portrait of Henry James by Sargent atthe Royal Academy in 1914, because sheknew (and given women were still notadmitted to the RA): ‘…if a woman hadpainted it, it would not have been worthso much.’But as we look to the national museumsto understand how these campaignsimpacted public space, closures, andvisitor restrictions, we must recognisewhere the first painting smashing tookplace in 1913 - in the city wherePankhurst had, ten years previously,founded the militant campaign.women holding ‘a small confectionaryhammer and another instrument’. Theother instrument proved to be a screwwrench hidden behind a statue. Thehammers bore notes featuring messagesthat read: ‘Votes for Women’ ‘stopforcible-feeding’ and ‘Parliament fordishonourable men; imprisonment forhonourable women.’Throughout the Gallery, thirteenpaintings were smashed, causing over£100 worth of damage. Lillian Forrester,Annie Briggs and Evelyn Manesta were allarrested; upon her detainment, Forresterand Manesta declared, as if rehearsed: ‘Ibroke the glass of the pictures as aprotest against the wicked sentencepassed upon Mrs Pankhurst.’ AnnieBriggs remained silent.The attack on Manchester Art Gallery hadbeen planned by Lillian Forrester, butacross the city, and indeed, across thenation, women were protesting thesentencing of Emmeline Pankhurst, whoOn the evening of Thursday 3rd April1913, at around quarter to nine, threewomen stood in room No.5 ofManchester Art Gallery. According to thestatement of the guard, he heard a loudsmashing noise, rushing in to find theMilitant Suffragettes as secretly identified by the Criminal Record Office. (Public Domain)42 INSIDE HISTORY
an outcry against my deed, let everyoneremember that such an outcry isan hypocrisy so long as they allow thedestruction of Mrs Pankhurst and otherbeautiful living women, and that until thepublic cease to countenance humandestruction the stones cast against mefor the destruction of this picture areeach an evidence against them of artisticas well as moral and political humbugand hypocrisy.’Almost fifty years later, Richardsonrecalled visiting the gallery forreconnaissance, and feeling enragedover the men who ogled and ‘gaped’ atthe painting, only grew in herdetermination to destroy it. This couldhave been the incentive for anotherattack in the same year, when GeorgeClauden’s nude Primavera was slashedby Mary Spencer at the Royal Academy,alongside four other paintings.Unlike Richardson, the Manchester ArtGallery attackers did not publicly declaretheir reasoning for choosing thepaintings that they damaged. Theselection of paintings was primarilymade up of Victorian and Pre-Raphaeliteworks, including Astarte Syriaca by DanteGabriel Rossetti and Sybilla Delphica byEdward Burne-Jones. Whilst it is morelikely that they were chosen simply fortheir accessibility, the attack on TheSyrinx by Arthur Hacker, perhaps predatesRichardson’s and Wood’s attack onthe nude as an act of challenging themale gaze. The Syrinx was the first nudepainting to be purchased by Manchester" I have tried todestroy the picture ofthe most beautifulwoman inmythological historyas a protest againstthe Government fordestroying MrsPankhurst, who is themost beautifulcharacter in modernhistory."MARY RICHARDSONArt Gallery, and shows the nymph Syrinxtransforming into a reed to escape beingraped by the god Pan. Despite theuncomfortable subject matter, there is adichotomy within the painting, of awoman both escaping male violencewhilst also being displayed fully nude forthe viewer. It is perhaps fair to assumethat Forrester and Manesta held similarmotivations Richardson and Spencer.Richardson’s passionate statement maybe more decorated than any given in theManchester Art Gallery trial, but with theexception being Annie Briggs, who wasacquitted, all the women weresentenced to gaol. Richardson wasforcibly fed, whilst surveillance images ofEvelyn Manesta shows a wardenclamping her arm around her neck,forcing her to face the camera. Manestapulls a face to the camera despite theforce, a common tactic of suffragettesto ensure that, even if their image wascirculated to police stations (and ofcourse galleries and museums) theywould not be recognised.We will never know the real reasonbehind the choice of paintings. Was it,as in Wood’s case, and to a degreeRichardson’s, about value? Or, in thecase of Manchester Art Gallery,accessibility? Whatever the motivations,the attack on The Syrinx, the RokebyVenus, and Primavera open an earlydialogue about depictions of women,how militancy gave the suffragettesagency to challenge these depictions,whilst causing wide set fear amongstnational and city museums andgalleries. Today, as museums andgalleries use their space to challengeneutrality, encourage opinion, andfoster change, it is vital to rememberthose early radical acts within thegallery space, and the part thosecourageous women played in placingpublic pressure on those with thepower to grant universal suffrage.Helen Antrobus is the coauthorof First to the Fight:20 Women Who MadeManchester which isavailable from ourbookshopINSIDE HISTORY 43
- Page 1: ISSUE 7VOLUME 1HISTORYbraveryUK £6
- Page 4 and 5: INSIDETHIS ISSUE06Peterloo: How wom
- Page 6 and 7: PETERLOOA coloured print of the Pet
- Page 8 and 9: PETERLOOAt previous meetings, the a
- Page 10 and 11: REBECCA RIOTSPROTEST &PETTICOATSTHE
- Page 12 and 13: To some, John Brown was a revolutio
- Page 14: For Brown, the continued talk of th
- Page 17 and 18: Bringing Shields Green to life is D
- Page 19 and 20: cynical about their motives. Their
- Page 21 and 22: Bloody Sunday, 1887. This engraving
- Page 23 and 24: 20th CenturyIn 1909, Clara Lemlich
- Page 25 and 26: or risk a hard cold winter without
- Page 27 and 28: “Remember thedignity of yourwoman
- Page 29 and 30: (Above) Christabel Pankhurst, Flora
- Page 31 and 32: months previously and been utterly
- Page 33 and 34: WSPU’s newspaper, Suffragette, wa
- Page 35 and 36: The drive behind Rosa’s fight was
- Page 38 and 39: FIGHTING TO VOTEPhoto: Rokeby Venus
- Page 40 and 41: "I know you will sentence me, but i
- Page 44 and 45: BILLIE HOLIDAY& THE IMPACT OFSTRANG
- Page 46 and 47: BILLIE HOLIDAYIt wouldn’t take lo
- Page 48 and 49: WORDS: Ben PurdieWHEREWORDSFAIL...4
- Page 50 and 51: When the war in Vietnam began, many
- Page 52 and 53: PROTEST &SPORT52 INSIDE HISTORY
- Page 54 and 55: PROTEST & SPORTfrom the 1972 Summer
- Page 56 and 57: Demonstrators marching in the stree
- Page 58 and 59: “Let us notseek tosatisfy ourthir
- Page 60 and 61: WIR SINDDASVOLK!WEARETHEPEOPLE!Mond
- Page 62 and 63: internment camps” including Ranis
- Page 64: sticks and umbrellas - were bannedf
an outcry against my deed, let everyone
remember that such an outcry is
an hypocrisy so long as they allow the
destruction of Mrs Pankhurst and other
beautiful living women, and that until the
public cease to countenance human
destruction the stones cast against me
for the destruction of this picture are
each an evidence against them of artistic
as well as moral and political humbug
and hypocrisy.’
Almost fifty years later, Richardson
recalled visiting the gallery for
reconnaissance, and feeling enraged
over the men who ogled and ‘gaped’ at
the painting, only grew in her
determination to destroy it. This could
have been the incentive for another
attack in the same year, when George
Clauden’s nude Primavera was slashed
by Mary Spencer at the Royal Academy,
alongside four other paintings.
Unlike Richardson, the Manchester Art
Gallery attackers did not publicly declare
their reasoning for choosing the
paintings that they damaged. The
selection of paintings was primarily
made up of Victorian and Pre-Raphaelite
works, including Astarte Syriaca by Dante
Gabriel Rossetti and Sybilla Delphica by
Edward Burne-Jones. Whilst it is more
likely that they were chosen simply for
their accessibility, the attack on The
Syrinx by Arthur Hacker, perhaps predates
Richardson’s and Wood’s attack on
the nude as an act of challenging the
male gaze. The Syrinx was the first nude
painting to be purchased by Manchester
" I have tried to
destroy the picture of
the most beautiful
woman in
mythological history
as a protest against
the Government for
destroying Mrs
Pankhurst, who is the
most beautiful
character in modern
history."
MARY RICHARDSON
Art Gallery, and shows the nymph Syrinx
transforming into a reed to escape being
raped by the god Pan. Despite the
uncomfortable subject matter, there is a
dichotomy within the painting, of a
woman both escaping male violence
whilst also being displayed fully nude for
the viewer. It is perhaps fair to assume
that Forrester and Manesta held similar
motivations Richardson and Spencer.
Richardson’s passionate statement may
be more decorated than any given in the
Manchester Art Gallery trial, but with the
exception being Annie Briggs, who was
acquitted, all the women were
sentenced to gaol. Richardson was
forcibly fed, whilst surveillance images of
Evelyn Manesta shows a warden
clamping her arm around her neck,
forcing her to face the camera. Manesta
pulls a face to the camera despite the
force, a common tactic of suffragettes
to ensure that, even if their image was
circulated to police stations (and of
course galleries and museums) they
would not be recognised.
We will never know the real reason
behind the choice of paintings. Was it,
as in Wood’s case, and to a degree
Richardson’s, about value? Or, in the
case of Manchester Art Gallery,
accessibility? Whatever the motivations,
the attack on The Syrinx, the Rokeby
Venus, and Primavera open an early
dialogue about depictions of women,
how militancy gave the suffragettes
agency to challenge these depictions,
whilst causing wide set fear amongst
national and city museums and
galleries. Today, as museums and
galleries use their space to challenge
neutrality, encourage opinion, and
foster change, it is vital to remember
those early radical acts within the
gallery space, and the part those
courageous women played in placing
public pressure on those with the
power to grant universal suffrage.
Helen Antrobus is the coauthor
of First to the Fight:
20 Women Who Made
Manchester which is
available from our
bookshop
INSIDE HISTORY 43
Change language