For YOUR Wall

at

CDI1T69XIAAEIXtScreen Shot 2015-04-22 at 12.35.35The mural at Dame Street and South Great George’s Street, Dublin (above) and A2 prints of ‘The Claddagh Embrace’ (top)

Joe Caslin’s controversial mural of two men on the corner of Dame Street and South Great George’s Street in Dublin.

Now available in a limited number of A2 prints (presumably signed by Joe) for €20 here.

Dublin City Council has sent a letter of warning to Mr Caslin over the mural because of planning breaches, while Dublin City Councillor Mannix Flynn has told the Irish Times it may take three months for anything to happen to the mural because of due process.

Further to this, a petition has been set up to keep the mural.

Warning issued over contentious George’s Street mural (Irish Times)

Joe Caslin

Previously: “It’s Just About Love”

Leah Farrell/Photocall Ireland

Sponsored Link

63 thoughts on “For YOUR Wall

  1. Jimmee

    This mural could well cost the yes side votes. How does this appeal to the wavering voter who might still change their mind and vote no?

      1. Jimmee

        A few polls now have shown that there is a large proportion of yes voters who aren’t fully sure they’ll will vote yes. Murals like these that openly highlight homosexuality aren’t talking to the wavering voter who might still feel uncomfortable with open acts of homosexuality. The strategy of the yes side shouldn’t be about teaching people to be fully accepting to open acts of homosexuality, but rather, to be tolerant enough to vote yes. Wide acceptance of being gay is a battle that is ongoing and will continue to remain a challenge well in to the future and long after this referendum is won (or lost).

        1. bumbasqwuat

          ‘Open acts of homosexuality’ It’s an embrace FFS. Must be awful to live such a loveless life! Ignorant pri(k.

        2. JimmytheHead

          Also Jimmee, for all you know these guys in the picture are straight. Did you not get enough affection from your family and loved ones? Hugging isnt gay mate.

        3. Jimmee

          Ok so the message from the mural isn’t a gay couple embracing or anything to do with fact that there’s a marriage equality referendum on?

          My mistake.

          I trust that you’ve all reassured the floating voters and are looking forward to a 70%+ YES vote on May 22nd.

        4. because

          Nuts to em.
          Why in any way pander to bigots who think that a democratic system should not extend all it’s rights and privileges to all it’s citizens?

          It’s a filthy dark joke that this is even up for debate or vote.
          You are either a citizen with all the rights of other citizens or you are not – it’s utterly ludicrous that there is any segregation under the law in this regard.

          Let them stew in their fear and hatred and die bitter.

        5. Jane

          I should think that a tender and loving embrace between two people who happen to be of the same sex would be more encouraging people to vote yes if they were wavering. In my opinion, this mural cuts out all the extraneous blather and comes back to the central issue – people who love each other should be able to marry if they choose to regardless of who it is that they happen to love.

        6. Annie

          Jesus – “open acts of homosexuality”. Either you are an ABM proxy or very, very dim. Since when has a hug or an embrace equated with “open acts of homosexuality”. You appear to perceive gay people as nothing more than walking sex acts. Is a mural that displays an mere embrace of an opposite sex couple ” an open act of heterosexuality”?

          In any event, leaving aside the sheer wanton idiocy of your comment, I would hazard a guess that a “wavering” voter who is repulsed by the sight of two men or two women hugging is as far from a “wavering” voter as one can get . As a straight person, I find those who have serious problems with a display of mild tenderness between any two persons of whatever gender or sexual orientation, dehumanising and bizarre in the extreme. Needless to say, the ones who usually have the strongest feelings of disgust are more often than not hiding a sad truth about themselves.

  2. mrmurphster

    It’s just a picture…Nothing on it says anything about the referendum.

    Do we now have to pull down any poster that has two people of the same sex in it.
    Does it mean we have to pull down men and women posters because of the connotations to the No vote.

    Typical Irish reaction to something different.

      1. ahjayzis

        It’s across the road from the spiritual home of Ireland’s gay bar scene. It’s timely, but Georges Street has been the gay quarter for ages, so it’s not *necessarily* related.

        You know what’s completely unrelated to the referendum? EVERY SINGLE POSTER FROM THE NO CAMPAIGN.

        1. Markus

          Bar the fact that the artists Facebook page clearly indicates that it is related.

          Lies from the no side are not the issue here. If the no side had put up a massive mural on the side of a protected structure without permission would people feel the same?

          The yes side should be holding itself in higher stead than to compare to the measures being taken by the no side.

          1. ahyeah

            Did the ‘yes side’ put this up? Is there a single, unified movement?

            Would be curious to know who paid for it.

    1. cohenhand

      If I put up a 50 foot poster of a unicorn on the side of a city centre building without getting the all-clear from the Council, I’m sure the result would be the same.

      The “typical Irish” attitude you refer to has nothing to do with people being unimaginative or conservative. What it speaks to is a basic contempt for systems and due process. And then howls of indignation when one falls foul of the law.

  3. Custo

    I believe the back pages of all newspapers are going to be REDACTED if they show Wayne Rooney indulging in an act of open homosexuality with Juan Mata after scoring a goal.

  4. Nikkeboentje

    The building is listed and therefore, various procedures have to be followed if the appearance of the building is to be altered in anyway.

    1. Drogg

      ah ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha hold on a second ah ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha, saying something written by known cow poo artist Ian O’Doherty is a great article says a lot about you.

    2. Parky Mark

      Ian O’Doherty just goes after whoever he can annoy the most. He sees the yes side as having more people so they are easier to aggravate.

    3. newsjustin

      It was good how he called out Una Mullally yesterday on The Last Word for peddling the “if we don’t vote yes, we’re making young gay people commit suicide” line. She seemed shocked, but, as he pointed out, it was she that raised the issue.

      1. Kieran NYC

        No it wasn’t. He was completely and utterly horrible.

        It’s the only interview I’ve listened to (including all the Iona ones) that made me feel physically sick.

  5. Paolo

    Finally!

    For the record, I have no problem with the image being displayed. The image itself is bland though. They should have sought planning permission and I reckon it would have been granted. It weakens your stance on planning abuse if you choose to ignore instances that you agree with on an aesthetic or moral ground.

  6. Liam from Lixnaw

    also is BS giving a lot of coverage to this referendum? like much more than most mejia outlets?

      1. newsjustin

        It’s a big deal some days. Other days it’s a tiny little formality that we shouldn’t even be bothering ourselves having a referendum on.

          1. newsjustin

            Like when people suggest “we should have had this years ago, we shouldn’t need a referendum”. Or when people propose that we don’t have a referendum, legislate instead and see if that holds up in court – the “suck it and see” approach.

            Or, more generally, when voters are told it’ll have no impact on them, so just vote Yes.

          2. Drogg

            None of what you just said has anything to do with why some days we shouldn’t be bothered with a referendum in your opinion and secondly voting yes will have no impact on you unless you are gay which means you can get married, its that simple.

          3. newsjustin

            It’s always been a big deal for me. My comments were on the flip-flop view of some on the Yes side.

      2. Liam from Lixnaw

        regardless, the question was are BS giving more column inches, space, time and whatnot to this subject compared to the papers, the state broadcasters, the national stations etc –

        1. newsjustin

          They are, because they’re campaigning for a particular outcome. Fair enough in my book.

        2. Drogg

          Its implied by my answer that they are when i said “Well they kind of should be we are changing the constitution” the implies yes and that it is appropriate because we are changing the constitution. Am i going to have to simplify everything i say so you can understand.

    1. Odis

      The guy who owns Broadsheet, John Ryan, publishes some sort of gay magazine, in Germany, so I read somewhere.

      1. Annie

        Shur he is up to his neck in gay malarky. He is probably consuming his gay supper as we speak before he heads off to his gay bed…

  7. jet

    Bland embraces bland in a carefully orchestrated stunt drenched in peroxide… The only question this “mural” asks is whether this is art or just mere garbage.

    1. Annie

      How long did it take you to come up with that one dear? While your efforts at contrarianism are obviously plain to see, what a shame your “comment” didn’t garner the traction which it was designed to elicit. Shucks.

          1. Odis

            Hey stop picking on me – I think a giant mural of two gays hugging each other with bleached hair – is like wow – Art.

          2. Annie

            Odis – stop being so polemical then. No one really thinks it is some sanctified work of art as I explain below. It is simply a nice image of two real men embracing ( I know you didn’t mean to be dismissive but I did wince at your “two gays” description) which we don’t get to see that often. In newspapers and whatnot tenderness between gay men and women is rarely represented by actual real people with faces – its all hands, smokescreen and what have you. That is why I like the mural – not because of the fact I think it has some overarching artistic merit.

      1. jet

        Calm down, dear. My “comment” merely poses the question of whether this mural constitutes art or just mere garbage. If you so wish, you may elevate it to the status of a Banksy and define it as just clever advertising. Your call, my dear.

        1. Annie

          Dearest one, I stand rebuked. The manner in which you posed your question obviously hid your noble philosophical aim of educating the masses as to what is really art. Lucien Freud had a word for folks like you…

          Oh and sweetpea, no one is claiming it is some sort of sanctified work of art.

          Grow up.

Comments are closed.

Sponsored Link
Broadsheet.ie