Anti-smoking message added to samsui woman mural after public controversy

The controversial mural of a young samsui woman with a cigarette in hand on 297 South Bridge Road now comes with an anti-smoking message, more than a year after the authorities raised concerns that it could normalise smoking.

A newly installed plaque at the bottom left-hand corner of Singapore-based American artist Sean Dunston's mural states: "The artist stresses that the cigarette depiction is not intended to glamorise or promote tobacco use. Smoking has been shown to be extremely harmful to one's health."

The lengthy statement includes interpretive text that states the mural's artistic intent: "Samsui women are usually depicted on task, or in less than comfortable contexts, and much older, though they were often young as any other workers."

On July 11, the Urban Redevelopment Authority (URA) and Ministry of Health (MOH) said in a joint response to The Straits Times (ST) that the mural is "retained without any modifications to it" and that they have "worked with the building owner on the proposed message to ensure that the cultural and artistic context for the mural and anti-smoking stance are conveyed appropriately".

A spokesperson for Shepherd Asset Management, which represents the landlord, called this a "happy resolution". "We hope it helps to contextualise the mural and give viewers more insight on the artistic intention."

Dunston, who had been at work on the plaque for months, said: "It was a weird sequence of events. I'm happy that there was so much discussion and I'm enjoying the attention she gets."

The controversy around the mural was one of several kerfuffles over public art in 2024.

In June 2024, ST reported that an order by the URA to erase a cigarette from the Chinatown mural sparked online controversy about public complaints and censorship. In e-mails seen by ST, the URA cited anonymous feedback that the depicted woman looked like a "prostitute".

After the report, artists, tour guides, history buffs, advocacy organisations and the online commentariat spilt much ink over whether the unauthorised mural should be removed or remain unchanged.

Following weeks of public debate about historical accuracy and artistic representation, the URA and MOH said in a joint statement on July 10, 2024, that the mural can remain, although the building owner would be fined $2,000 for starting work on the mural without approval.

On Aug 7, 2024, then arts Nominated Member of Parliament Usha Chandradas also addressed the controversy in Parliament and called for better policies on the labelling of public artworks.