In defence of Ed’s mural

Year 11, Columba College

FOR something as seemingly insignificant as a mural, barely a metre across, Dunedin’s citycommissioned painting of Ed Sheeran is surprisingly divisive.

While a good number of people have the simple, happy attitude of loving both colourful street art and popular music, most of the conversation sparked by the piece has been fiercely negative.

There is hatred for the way it looks, how much it cost, and what it represents.

Complaints about a piece of street art have been a common topic of conversation in Dunedin for a long time, but many of the opinions surrounding this particular mural are not only incorrect, but could actually harm our city in the future.

The basic argument that Ed Sheeran is an eyesore is really just a matter of taste.

When asking friends and teachers about their favourite and least favourite murals in Dunedin, I found the most popular answer was to mention the gigantic, semirealistic painting of a little girl kissing a little boy.

I loathe this painting and everything it represents, and was a little affronted at hearing so much praise for it.

However, that does not mean I wish it had never been commissioned, as I have heard from many about Ed.

However much I and killjoys like me cringe and avert our eyes from the fourstory monstrosity, the fact is that many more people love the mural.

It brightens their day. It brightens the city. It makes Dunedin, with all its bad taste in street art, a more interesting place.

Besides, let’s be honest here, the Ed mural swathed in bright watercolour, looks good.

Any complaints seem to either be that its ‘‘too orange’’, or centre on the appearance of the subject himself.

The first of these is ridiculous and the second quite rude, as well as subjective.

Not to mention the mural is pretty small, and tucked away in an alley.

Unlike the girl and boy, which assault my eyes every time I walk to town, Ed Sheeran has to be sought out.

The most common complaint heard about the mural is that it was too expensive — a ‘‘waste of ratepayers’ money’’.

To understand how this is untrue, one needs some perspective.

When dealing with things like government spending, big numbers mean very little without some point of reference or comparison.

The Ed Sheeran mural cost a little over $8000.

To put that into perspective, that same amount could repave 143m of an existing onelane street, just one seventh of a kilometre.

Besides, the mural more than paid for itself in added publicity to the Ed Sheeran concerts.

The money spent by visiting fans far exceeded the expected, already huge, amount Ed’s visit to the city would inject into the Dunedin economy, rising to $38 million, so arguing about the expense of an $8000 mural makes no sense.

Dunedin city councillor Aaron Hawkins, one of the many voices opposing the mural, said: ‘‘They should have just painted a cash register on the wall’’.

I completely agree with this statement, if not its sentiment.

Yes, the mural was a shameless way to add to and commemorate the flow of money that the concerts brought to Dunedin.

But I fail to see why this is a bad thing. I’m all for the local economy getting a huge boost from Ed’s loving fans.

However, this shameless cashgrabbing is far from popular among the majority of Dunedin citizens.

When not complaining about the ‘‘ridiculous’’ cost, they switch to how worshipping a foreign pop artist and his money is embarrassing for Dunedin’s reputation.

There’s an issue here about what exactly we find too embarrassing: not Dunedin’s many problems with healthcare or discrimination, but the unironic love people here have for a musician.

Even for those of us who are not fans of the singer, issues like these could easily be treated with an eyeroll and a ‘‘Yeah, he brought us a lot of money’’.

Shame simply should not have a place in the way a city runs itself.

A city council’s priority should be the people of that city, including fans of Ed who were excited by the mural, small businesses who made so much money from the visitors, and all of the people who can be helped with the money made and spent by the Dunedin City Council.

Another reason people think we should be ashamed is that the wrong musician’s mural has been put up.

They have either asked for representation of local artists, or of other foreign musicians having a concert similar to Ed’s that they prefer, like Kendrick Lamar or Pink.

According to many in Dunedin, these two artists are not getting the recognition they deserve because they are not white men.

While this is often the case in situations like these, another reason these artists do not have murals may be that the last time the council put one up, they were met with anger and resentment.

It seems common sense not to discourage the actions we want to see, but that is exactly what we citizens have done.

Everyone agrees that street art is important, yet all we do is complain about what we have.