I expect most of you will have heard of this sculpture inserted into the roof of an Oxford suburb house nearly 40 years ago. The official title is ‘Untitled, 1986’ and the artist is John Buckley. (I made a short video on another of his sculptures, The Nuba Survival, see https://greyarro.ws/t/the-nuba-survival-john-buckley-near-checkendon-oxfordshire/69262.)
You can read the story of the sculpture at The Headington Shark, Oxford. And here a couple more still photos from the drone:
That’s a trip down memory lane: I remember the absolte stink the locals and council put when it was installed. Now? Now they all treasure it!
Thank you for posting that.
Yes, a very good point. The council tried to enforce removal, but the appeal went all the way to the then Secretary of State, Michael Heseltine, who ruled,
It is not in dispute that this is a large and prominent feature. That was the intention, but the intention of the appellant and the artist is not an issue as far as planning permission is concerned. The case should be decided on its planning merits, not by resorting to “utilitarianism”, in the sense of the greatest good to the greatest number. And it is necessary to consider the relationship between the shark and its setting…. In this case it is not in dispute that the shark is not in harmony with its surroundings, but then it is not intended to be in harmony with them. The basic facts are there for almost all to see. Into this archetypal urban setting crashes (almost literally) the shark. The contrast is deliberate … and, in this sense, the work is quite specific to its setting. As a “work of art” the sculpture (“Untitled 1986”) would be “read” quite differently in, say, an art gallery or on another site. An incongruous object can become accepted as a landmark after a time, becoming well known, even well loved in the process. Something of this sort seems to have happened, for many people, to the so-called “Oxford shark”. The Council is understandably concerned about precedent here. The first concern is simple: proliferation with sharks (and Heaven knows what else) crashing through roofs all over the City. This fear is exaggerated. In the five years since the shark was erected, no other examples have occurred. Only very recently has there been a proposal for twin baby sharks in the Iffley Road. But any system of control must make some small place for the dynamic, the unexpected, the downright quirky. I therefore recommend that the Headington shark be allowed to remain.
I’m amazed - well done you for finding THAT! I admit I didn’t know it was Hese who gave the final ruling.
Do you remember the cinema opposite? The Moulin Rouge which had an enormous pair of stockinged legs bolted to the facade? I think the shark was in good company.The artist certainly thought so!
Apparently the legs are now attached to a cinema in Brighton. Nice to know they have a good home!
More memories! It is good to see at least the shark remains. I was underage and saw some horror film there - something about quicksand or a beach!
I hadn’t heard of The Nuba Survival till you mentioned it. I cannot find who commissioned it or why it is where it is, but a worthy and depressing reminder of an easily forgotten part of the world.
Thank you for sharing.
