The Grade II*-listed sculpture by Eric Gill, depicting Prospero and Ariel from William Shakespeare’s The Tempest, has been a prominent feature at the BBC’s Broadcasting House in Portland Place for decades. Created in the 1930s, the sculpture is widely admired for its craftsmanship and its reflection of Gill’s position as one of the most influential sculptors of the 20th century. Yet, in recent years, this work of art has become the focal point of a complex and controversial debate.
The statue was severely damaged in both 2022 and 2023 when it was attacked by a member of the public using a hammer. The attack left the artwork in need of extensive restoration, which has now been completed. The statue, however, is no longer simply a relic of artistic history. It has come to symbolize a much larger moral conversation about the intersection of art, the artist’s personal life, and the responsibility of institutions that display such works.
In May 2023, the BBC confirmed that the statue had been damaged by an individual who attacked it with a hammer. The assailant, David Chick from Northamptonshire, was later charged with causing more than £150,000 worth of damage to the sculpture. The incident followed an earlier attack in 2022, when the statue was also damaged by a similar act of vandalism. The damage inflicted on the statue in both incidents sparked widespread public attention, especially as the artwork had already become a source of significant controversy in recent years.
Eric Gill’s Controversial Statue Is Unveiled By The BBC.
Following the attacks, the BBC undertook a major restoration project, which involved extensive repairs to the damaged sculpture and the installation of protective measures to safeguard it from further harm. The restoration and associated protective work cost a staggering £529,715, a figure that was reportedly covered by the BBC, rather than through insurance claims.
As part of the restoration, the sculpture will be displayed with a QR code that links to information about its history, Eric Gill’s personal life, and the controversial nature of the work. The decision to include such contextual information aims to address the complex and often troubling relationship between Gill’s artistic legacy and the revelations about his abusive behavior. It is clear that the BBC, while committed to preserving the physical integrity of the statue, also recognizes the need to engage with the moral questions surrounding its display.
Eric Gill, who was born in 1882 and became one of the most celebrated British sculptors and printmakers of the 20th century, has left a dual legacy. His artistic works are considered monumental and groundbreaking, but his personal life has cast a long shadow over his legacy. After Gill’s death in 1940, his diaries were published, revealing a series of disturbing revelations about his private life, particularly regarding his sexual abuse of his daughters.
In his diaries, Gill openly documented his sexual relationships with his daughters, as well as other inappropriate behavior. These revelations have led to intense debates about how society should handle the work of artists whose personal actions are morally reprehensible. For many, the knowledge of Gill’s abuses raises difficult questions about whether his art can—and should—be separated from his personal life.
Despite the revelations about his behavior, Gill’s artwork continues to be celebrated for its artistic merits. His sculptures, carvings, and drawings are admired for their precision, their emotional depth, and their innovative techniques. His works, like Prospero and Ariel, are seen as crucial contributions to British art and design in the early 20th century, and his influence continues to be felt in the world of sculpture and typography.
However, the more we learn about his personal life, the more complicated his legacy becomes. The question of whether it is possible—or even responsible—to appreciate his art while condemning his actions is a question that has divided the public, critics, and institutions alike.
In response to the growing controversy surrounding the Prospero and Ariel sculpture, a BBC spokeswoman issued a statement in which the corporation reiterated its position on the issue. The BBC emphasized that it “in no way condones Gill’s abusive behaviour,” but that it “draws a line between the actions of Gill, and the status of these artworks.”
The BBC’s position reflects a larger debate that is ongoing across the art world, as institutions grapple with the question of whether and how to deal with the legacies of artists who have committed egregious acts of harm. Should art be judged in isolation, independent of its creator’s actions, or should an artist’s personal life be inseparable from their work?
By drawing a line between the artist and the artwork, the BBC appears to adopt the stance that the value of the sculpture itself should be preserved and recognized, even if the artist’s personal life is tarnished by morally reprehensible behavior. However, this stance has been met with criticism from some quarters. Activists and social commentators have called for Gill’s works, including the Prospero and Ariel sculpture, to be removed from public display, especially in prominent locations like the BBC’s Broadcasting House.
Some argue that by continuing to display Gill’s work without proper acknowledgment of the harm he caused, institutions are sending a troubling message. This perspective holds that art, particularly when created by someone who committed abuse, cannot be seen in isolation from the context of the creator’s actions. Others, however, argue that removing the artwork would be an act of censorship, and that the best course of action is to educate the public about the complex nature of Gill’s legacy, as the BBC is now doing with the addition of the QR code.
The controversy surrounding Gill’s Prospero and Ariel sculpture is not new. In recent years, there have been calls from various groups to have his work removed from Broadcasting House entirely. The argument for removal is based on the premise that no institution, especially one as high-profile as the BBC, should publicly display the work of someone who committed such heinous acts, especially when those acts involved the abuse of vulnerable children.
On the other hand, opponents of removal argue that the act of removing or destroying Gill’s work would be an overreaction, one that ignores the broader cultural value of the art itself. They contend that while Gill’s actions were reprehensible, the art created by him has value in its own right, and that removing it from public view would be an attempt to erase history rather than address it.
The case of Eric Gill and his Prospero and Ariel sculpture reflects a larger cultural conversation about how society grapples with the legacies of artists whose personal lives are fraught with moral failings. As the BBC restores and protects the sculpture, it seems to be taking a measured approach, recognizing both the importance of preserving the artwork and the need to engage with the history of the artist who created it.
This ongoing conversation about the separation of art from the artist is likely to continue, as more institutions, museums, and galleries are faced with similar questions about how to deal with problematic legacies. The challenge will always be balancing the preservation of cultural heritage with the recognition of moral wrongdoing. For now, the Prospero and Ariel sculpture remains on display, a symbol of both the artistic achievements of Eric Gill and the complex, troubling history that comes with them.
In the end, the decision to restore and continue displaying the sculpture at the BBC’s Broadcasting House speaks to the difficult but necessary conversations that need to be had about art, ethics, and the legacies of the creators behind them. The museum-quality restoration and the inclusion of educational resources aim to foster a broader understanding of this complexity, acknowledging the harm while still appreciating the cultural significance of the work.