Staff at the Croome Estate, a neo-Palladian mansion in central England, recently discovered a blue pencil scrawled on an 18th-century nude statue by eminent British sculptor John Bacon. The artwork of a reclining Sabrina, a water nymph from Welsh fairy tales, was found on Easter Sunday completely covered in anonymous doodles. And you thought your little one’s living room wall masterpieces were bad!
The National Trust, which oversees the historic site, removed the markings four days later on Thursday April 13. The vandal has not been identified at this stage.
“We are appalled that this has happened,” a National Trust spokesman said. Hyperallergic. “As disappointing as they are, incidents like this are very rare given the millions of visitors who appreciate and respect the places we care for.”
The attacker also drew on a nearby plaque commemorating Lancelot Ability Brown, an 18th-century British landscape architect. The Croome estate belonged to Brown first big commission and he spent years renovating the house and grounds, even creating a hand-dug river that stretched over a mile and a half in length. Sabrina’s sculpture is exhibited along this body of water; it was originally surrounded by shells and gemsbut its embellishments are no longer there.
The Croome Estate contains an original 17th century house with an extensive network of gardens and outlying buildings. It took a lot iterations including a World War II air base, a boys’ school and, from 1979 to 1984, the UK headquarters of Hare Krishna.
Acts of vandalism against public art are relatively rare. Last year, climate activists often made headlines when they organized actions targeting famous museum works. Although paints splattered with liquids, including “oil” and tomato soup, were not damagedsome museums tightened security measures in response. Last week, Italian Culture Minister Gennaro Sangiuliano propose five-figure fines for vandalizing works of art and public monuments. The country’s Council of Ministers adopted the recommendation, but the move drew criticism from climate activists who suspected the new law was a direct response to their initiatives.
