The Role Of Censorship

at

The Best Banned in the Land – A Forum on Artistic Freedom of Expression.

On Tuesday, April 30, from 11am until 4pm.

At the Projects Arts Centre in Temple Bar, East Sussex Street, Dublin 2.

Irish Council for Civil Liberties writes:

The ordered removal of Maser’s Repeal the 8th mural has brought censorship to the fore once again. Is freedom of artistic expression being limited in Ireland? Are issues such as funding, promotion, social media restrictions and discrimination creating conditions for self-censorship?

Join a host of artists and activists as we remember and examine the role of censorship. Guests include Be Aware Theatre Company, Lian Bell, Donal Fallon, Declan Long, Una Mullally, and more to be announced.

A light lunch will be provided.

More here

51 thoughts on “The Role Of Censorship

  1. Joan

    The Maser Mural was gesture politics for the Irish Times brigade. Rather than doing the hardwork for the Repeal Campaign they expressed their outrage about a mural that every one knew was going to be painted over, due to the fact that the Project got state funding. An anti-repeal mural would’ve been painted over too.

    1. Rob_G

      + 1

      If a government-funded Catholic school had have lashed up a ‘Save the 8th’ mural, there would have been an outcry (and rightfully so).

      1. George

        There have been many government funded schools spreading anti-abortion messages to kids for years including to children too young to be discussing the issue.

        1. Rob_G

          And was that right, or was that wrong?

          If one is wrong, it means that the other was wrong, also.

          1. Rob_G

            If, instead of a ‘Repeal’ mural, they had decided to put up a mural saying ‘Save the 8th’, or ‘Save Ireland from Sodomy – the wages of sin is death’, would that still have been ok?

    2. George

      The reason it was painted over had nothing to do with receipt of state funding.
      Who are the Irish Times brigade? It is easy to throw accusations around when it is completely unclear who you are talking about.

      What is the real work? If you are talking about Una Mullally she canvassed for Repeal beginning in March 2018. She wrote many articles and edited a book on the subject which was published before the referendum. She spoke in debates in the media. What do you want?

      1. Joan

        Una Mullally, Donal Fallon, Fintan O’Toole, Roisin Ingle, etc. are the Irish Times brigade, it’s the politics of a soft and safe liberalism. Only Mullally would edit a book for the referendum, it was preaching to the converted. It raised her profile and added to her self-satisfied smugness, but nothing more. The reason the mural was painted over was the issue of state funding, nobody’s denied that. I was a repealer and, with many other repealers, was sick of Mullally’s showboating.

        1. George

          You are wrong. The reason was due to a complaint to the Charities Regulator that the mural was outside of the remit of the Project and in violation of it’s obligations as charitable organization. Here is the statement and it has nothing to do with public money:
          https://www.charitiesregulator.ie/en/information-for-the-public/our-news/2018/april/statement-regarding-project-arts-centre

          Una Mullaly was involved in canvassing for many months as I said above and which you have chosen to ignore. You also ignored my question. What is the hard work you want if this isn’t it?

          1. Joan

            She was. But, and this was the difference, while everyone else was doing it with the purpose of repealing, Mullally was doing it to raise her profile and brand, anything else was superfluous. She’s remarkably silent on the question of Paddy Agnew, not an article has she written on that. It wouldn’t get her brownie points from her bosses or from the Irish Time lovies.

          2. George

            Joan, your claims about her motives in canvassing are purely speculative and not based in fact. You said she didn’t do the hard work when confronted with the fact that you did you switched to questioning motives.

            Now whataboutery bringing in an ongoing dispute with her employer.

          3. Joan

            I look forward to Mullally’s next article on Paddy Agnew and labor rights. Oh wait, that ain’t going happen.

        2. Nigel

          ‘Preaching to the converted’ was a mantra chirped snidely at almost everything the Repeal campaign did. Up until they won massively.

          1. class wario

            Definitely. Remember the media contriving to tell everybody how disorganised the repeal side were and how the anti-choice postering campaign was already in full swing? Real head in the sand stuff and continues to be the case for many in the media and the anti-choice side.

      2. Rob_G

        “The reason it was painted over had nothing to do with receipt of state funding.”

        – this is exactly the reason it was painted over; the centre was in receipt of government funds, and as such it was considered inappropriate to have it be seen that it was supporting one side over the other in the recent referendum. The artist was still free to disseminate his design through other channels, so difficult to argue that it was a case of censorship.

  2. Clampers Outside !

    How is it censorship? It was a campaign mural… poster if you will and It did its’ job. Were people expecting it to stay up? Really?
    Also, how is the removal of it censorship? As I see it, it is not censorship, it is simply the removal of a campaign image that was for a campaign that finished. Again how is that censorship? In what frame of reference is it censorship?
    ….I’m truly bemused at this point.

    (I voted repeal)

    I bought a copy of Irish Arts Review for the cover when they ran the Maser image. Why? Looked good, and I thought it a good keep sake. Because I took it as understood that this image would come down, as it is a campaign image.
    That cover – https://images.app.goo.gl/4SidTVvA8CWv1Rym9

    1. George

      It was removed both during the campaign and before the referendum campaign. Once on planning grounds following complaints and once on back of a complaint to the Charities Regulator.

      Do you know any of the facts?

        1. George

          There were pro-life people on social media discussing ways to get the mural taken down because of it’s contents and looking for rules they could exploit to achieve that aim. Planning and an interpretation of the rules apply to charitable organisations are two such means that could have been used.

          I’m sure it is coincidental but the then head of the charities regulator has written books published by the catholic publisher Veritas and contributed to the Irish Catholic

          1. Joan

            But he didn’t write the legislation on what charities can or can’t do. We’re all pro-choice, but this Una Mullally hero-worshiping is a sad thing. If we need idols, let’s choose people who actually sweated for the cause. Mullally’s got enough of a big head as it is.

          2. George

            The charities regulator interpreted the regulation and other interpretations are possible.

            What is actually going on is nitpicking of Una Mullally. There is no hero worship.

          3. ouch

            Mullally gave out in the Irish Times when Dublin City Council pulled an event re the book she edited, she stated it wasn’t a political book, but the front cover was of a voting ballot! The book was crowd funded with a percentage of profits going to the Repeal campaign. So where did the rest of the money go?

  3. Royal Huff

    Maser’s Repeal the 8th mural was not Art.

    It was hack propaganda.

    By a hack.

    For the hack media to salivate over.

    Removing the mural was the controversy it required.

  4. bisted

    …Broadsheet could do a live blog from the event…plenty of prima donna commenters and a few censors should match the audience demographic…plus a few liggers if there is a free lunch…

  5. newsjustin

    Perhaps the organisers should invite John Boyne along. See how he feels about censorship.

          1. newsjustin

            I wouldn’t like to say. Too sensitive an issue. Something he thought and then put in a newspaper and his upcoming book.

          2. Andyourpointiswhatexactly?

            You mean Nutella spread on slices of apple? Interesting.
            I had a massive glass of pinot grigio at lunch.

          3. Andyourpointiswhatexactly?

            There’s something very pleasing about the shape of a Muscadet bottle. Same with a Picpoul.
            Jayz, I’d love another now.

  6. won't you join too

    The connected Irish arts and Twitter insiders trying so hard to look like outspoken outsiders.

  7. Frank Lee O’Bese

    Ask John Boyle. But bring it on – as Nick Cave says, the new puritanism can only result in a renaissance of expression. Bring on Punk 2.0.

Comments are closed.

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!