The Headington Shark is a fiberglass sculpture of a shark that sticks out of the roof of a house in Oxford, England. The shark, which is 25 feet long, was commissioned in 1986 by the house’s owner at the time, Bill Heine (Mohdin). It was designed by John Buckley, a sculptor mainly known for this work, and constructed by a group of students and volunteers. The sculpture, its artists, and its supporters defeated the local bureaucracy of the neighborhood; when it was first installed, the Oxford City Council was immediately opposed to it. However, after it was proven safe by a team of engineers and championed by people from around the country at public hearings, the city council decided to approve the statue. 

The statue also stands out because of its message related to the anti-nuclear movement. According to Heine, “The shark was to express someone feeling totally impotent and ripping a hole in their roof out of a sense of impotence and anger and desperation…. [sic] It is saying something about CND, nuclear power, Chernobyl and Nagasaki” (Headington Website). The shark, with part of its body seemingly enveloped by the roof, is reminiscent of a bomb striking a house. Additionally, the connections to the anti-nuclear movement are shown by the date on which it was constructed; it was installed on the anniversary of the dropping of the atomic bomb on Nagasaki, Japan (Hickman). Heine was inspired to commission the sculpture due to the American bombing of Libya; he bought the house on the day that the bombs were dropped. 

At first glance, the Headington Shark may seem simply like a sculpture of a shark. However, the meaning goes beyond the simple image; the sculpture is a powerful anti-nuclear monument that physicalizes the emotions related to nuclear weapons and the power of a nuclear bomb. One way the sculpture does this is through its physical similarities to a bomb. With its cylindrical form and tapering end, the sculpture bears a strong resemblance to a missile. The sculpture is an image of a missile frozen in time — before complete destruction. It demonstrates the magnitude and intensity of nuclear weapons. Furthermore, the comparison creates a contrast between the natural world and the man-made world. While sharks and nuclear missiles are both dangerous, albeit at different scales, sharks are animals with a right to exist in the world. Nuclear missiles, however, are fabricated by humans, and many have argued that they defy the laws of nature. Thus, the sculpture's resemblance to a shark leads viewers to wonder about extraordinary nature of nuclear weapons, and if they should even be created at all. 


Additionally, the illusion of destruction created by this statue contributes to the anti-nuclear sentiment. The sculpture appears to be crashing through the roof of the house, causing damage inside. While this is just an illusion, it does still make a point about the total annihilation caused by nuclear weapons. The sculpture argues that nuclear attacks are as devastating — and arguably, as absurd — as a shark crashing through the roof of a civilian’s house. This is not a military base or group of soldiers that has been bombed; nuclear weapons affect everyone, including the person who lives down the street from you. Heine and Buckley emphasize this point by positioning this sculpture as if it is destroying a house.

In conclusion, Heine and Buckley’s Headington Shark statue is a brilliant piece of protest art that makes a strong anti-nuclear statement. The sculpture is about protest, and it is a protest; the legal challenges that the artist and commissioner faced, and overcame, drive this point home. The absurdity of the placement and style of the sculpture has drawn people from around the country, and perhaps the world. However, several questions remain about the future of the sculpture: Will viewers of this sculpture understand the anti-nuclear sentiment without its context? Will the sculpture be able to maintain its legality? Finally, and possibly most importantly, does the sculpture have the power to shift the mindsets surrounding nuclear power?

By Lindsay Damon