Skip to main content

Advertisement

Advertisement

Smoking samsui woman mural to be retained in full, building owner fined for not seeking approval

SINGAPORE — The Chinatown mural featuring a samsui woman holding a cigarette — a subject of public debate in recent weeks — will be kept as it is without any changes to the artwork.

A mural by artist Sean Dunston in Chinatown, featuring the image of a smoking samsui woman.

A mural by artist Sean Dunston in Chinatown, featuring the image of a smoking samsui woman.

New: You can now listen to articles.
Sorry, the audio is unavailable right now. Please try again later.

This audio is AI-generated.

SINGAPORE — The Chinatown mural featuring a samsui woman holding a cigarette — a subject of public debate in recent weeks — will be kept as it is without any changes to the artwork.

“This is in view of the fact that the mural is not an advertisement for tobacco, which is against the law, and is largely perceived as an art piece,” said the Urban Redevelopment Authority (URA) and Ministry of Health (MOH) in a joint statement on Wednesday (July 10). 

The building owner was fined S$2,000 on Wednesday for carrying out unauthorised works on a conserved building, and for continuing with the works despite reminders to obtain approval.

In an Instagram post on June 19, the mural's artist Sean Dunston said that he had been notified by URA to "get rid of the cigarette" by July 3. 

URA later informed the landlord on the night of June 21 that it would re-evaluate its stance following public feedback.

In their joint statement on Wednesday, the authorities said that although the mural is seen as an art piece, it does "normalise smoking", which is against MOH's policy.

"Had prior approval been sought, MOH would have raised concerns about the depiction of smoking to be featured in a prominent mural like this, and requested modification. 

"We will therefore work with the building owner to find appropriate ways to mitigate any impact that the mural may have in promoting smoking, without modifying the mural itself," read the joint statement. 

In laying out their review and decision on the matter, URA and MOH said they took into consideration "diverse views from many members of the public".

The authorities said the mural had generated much public discussion, with several expressing concern that it normalises smoking. Others commented that this was an art piece and should be left as it is. 

"Most members of the public do not see this as an advertisement for cigarettes," they said.

"In general, it has been a constructive discussion, conducted in a tone that was calm and respectful. We thank members of the public for sharing their views."

DID NOT COMPLY WITH URA REQUIREMENTS

However, the authorities said the building owner did not comply with URA’s requirements on the conservation and protection of Singapore’s built heritage. 

"As murals on conserved buildings are prominent visual markers that enhance the character of our conservation districts, URA requires all owners of conserved buildings to submit their mural proposals for approval."

The proposal may be reviewed in consultation with community stakeholders and other government agencies to ensure that it relates well to the area, considers cultural sensitivities and values, enhances public space and is welcomed by the local community. 

"If necessary, we will work closely with the building owner on any required modifications. All proposals must be approved by URA before works commence," said the authorities.

In this case, the building owner began work on the mural on the conserved building at 297 South Bridge Road without approval from URA. 

On March 22, URA told the building owner’s representatives that approval had not yet been obtained for the mural and requested that a submission be made immediately. 

URA then reminded the building owner’s representatives on March 25 of the need to obtain approval before continuing with the mural works. 

"Despite this, mural works continued. An application for conservation permission was only submitted on April 11 after the mural was completed," noted the joint statement. 

The building owner was fined for failing to obtain conservation permission prior to the start of the works.

The statement said that URA will continue to work closely with relevant agencies and stakeholders to ensure that its guidelines and processes for murals on conserved buildings not only provide space for creative expression, but also “safeguard the character of our conserved buildings and address the larger public interest”.  

"Owners of conserved buildings are reminded to obtain the relevant approvals before commencing any works. Failure to do so will result in enforcement against offenders, including prosecution for egregious cases." CNA

For more reports like this, visit cna.asia.

Related topics

mural Urban Redevelopment Authority

Read more of the latest in

Advertisement

Advertisement

Stay in the know. Anytime. Anywhere.

Subscribe to our newsletter for the top features, insights and must reads delivered straight to your inbox.

By clicking subscribe, I agree for my personal data to be used to send me TODAY newsletters, promotional offers and for research and analysis.