In Aristotelian scholarship, there's a so-called 'dirty hands' debate. It's about acts that are voluntary and seemingly necessary, but also wrong or shameful.
For example, we today might find invasion justifiable, but still ethically abhorrent.
Whether or not Aristotle agreed with invasion is beside the point. Some scholars believe Aristotle's theory didn't allow for these kinds of acts, and was therefore unrealistic.
Others argue that his 'mixed acts' did recognise them, and that his outlook was more worldly than he's given credit for.
I'm no expert in this field, but it's a fascinating debate - if only for the possible conclusion that politics and ethics have a long history of ambiguity. And incommensurability and ambivalence are part and parcel of moral life.
But this isn't about Aristotelian scholarship, or my (hurried) take on it. This is about a bust of Aristotle.
So we helped Aristotle get dirty. And we got dirty as we did.
Not quite as sophisticated as the 'dirty hands' literature, but good fun with the kids, on a slow Monday afternoon.