LEWISTON — The University of Southern Maine has removed three works by a highly regarded oil painter from a gallery on its Lewiston-Auburn campus subsequently learning that the artist is a sex offender, a decision that has prompted objections from the evidence'southward curator and the Union of Maine Visual Artists.

The paintings are by Bruce Habowski of Waterville, who was convicted of unlawful sexual contact in 1999 and served six months in jail. The show's curator, Janice L. Moore, said they were removed when a relative of a victim in the sex criminal offence called the academy to complain. Where the paintings in one case hung are at present empty hooks and open white wall space with a signed notation from Moore that says, "This painting has been removed by order of the USM president."

USM President Glenn Cummings declined an interview for this story. The academy's communications department issued a statement that said: "USM received a complaint from a member of the public. The complaint was not about the content of the fine art, but virtually the artist. After careful review, USM decided to remove his works from the exhibit."

Both the university and Moore accept not named the artist publicly, only his identity is evident by comparison the roster for the testify, called "Industrial Maine: Our Other Mural," with the artists whose works appear in the gallery. Habowski has shown his work at the Portland Museum of Art and the Center for Maine Contemporary Art, among other venues. Reached past phone, he too declined an interview, proverb but that he was disappointed the exhibition is drawing negative attention because of his paintings.

A criminal background check for Habowski, 51, shows that Oakland police force arrested him in April 1999 on a felony unlawful sexual contact accuse. He was plant guilty in Waterville District Court in June 1999, and sentenced to four years in jail with all but six months suspended. He too has two sex-related misdemeanor convictions from effectually the same time, including one involving a juvenile.

Moore, who lives in Freeport, is livid nearly the art being removed. "He was convicted for his criminal offense and he paid his debt," she said. "The act of making art, to me, it seems is a very positive thing. You are contributing to society in a positive way. I don't sympathize how that should be punished."

The art in question is function of an exhibition of nearly thirty artists and lxx works of art most Maine's industrial landscape (A review of the show appears on Page E6). It opened March 12 and the 3 paintings were removed nigh three weeks subsequently. The Atrium Gallery is part of a central entryway and commons expanse on the small campus that provides graduate and undergraduate degrees and certificates. The school is tucked away on the southwestern edge of Lewiston, near the Maine Turnpike.

This bulletin has replaced three paintings at University of Southern Maine's Lewiston-Auburn College.

The Atrium is a small gallery, with an annual upkeep of about $ten,000 and a reputation for showing smart and timely contemporary Maine fine art, in large function because of the stewardship of longtime gallery managing director Robyn Holman, now retired. The gallery is currently managed by an ad hoc committee under the supervision of an interim dean.

The removal of the fine art raises questions virtually free expression, community standards and tolerance, the public display of art and censorship, and comes during a national discussion well-nigh the value of art versus the character of its creator. That discussion has been framed by the #MeToo movement and revelations of bad behavior past prominent filmmakers, painters, maestros and musicians. This calendar week, the University of Motion Picture show Arts and Sciences expelled convicted sexual practice offenders Bill Cosby and Roman Polanski from its membership, citing a violation of upstanding standards.

'LET'S JUDGE THE ART'

Timothy Rhys, editor-in-primary of California-based MovieMaker magazine and a part-time Maine resident, said the outcome is layered and complex. Ultimately, he said, we as a guild should estimate artists based on the work they create and non how they conduct their lives.

"Past removing these works of art they are not censoring the art just they are censoring the artist because of who he offends. The definition of censorship is removing something because it'south offensive, just who'southward it offensive to? This person paid his debt. He doesn't owe annihilation to gild anymore," Rhys said.

"Art does and should transcend the private behavior of the artist. We actually need to come up to grips that nosotros are not going to all have the aforementioned opinion of the person. If there needs to be a judgment, allow'due south judge the art."

There are no easy answers, Moore said, and that's why she's upset the university passed up the risk for discussion.

FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION AT Risk

"If everybody has a background check, practice we have to edit every slice of music and gallery and stop showing movies? What happens when someone who behaves desperately likewise created something worthwhile? Do we negate all of that? Do nosotros erase it? Do nosotros lose an opportunity to acquire and evolve?"

The Portland chapter of the Union of Maine Visual Artists sent a letter to Cummings on Friday objecting to the removal of the paintings on the grounds that such action amounts to censorship while recognizing the horrific nature of sex crimes, said John Ripton, a fellow member of the artist'south matrimony.

He circulated a draft of the letter to union members before last calendar week, seeking feedback and endorsements. He declined to share a copy with the Press Herald.

"This has to do with the Kickoff Amendment, freedom of expression," Ripton said. "Glenn Cummings decides unilaterally, or without whatsoever meaningful consultation with the curator, to remove the work. The university charter clearly states that the university is the identify that encourages open and free expression."

At the same time, Ripton said, the Union of Maine Visual Artists decries the sexual victimization of anyone, female and male.

Moore, he said, is "completely sensitive to the complaint that had been made on the victim's behalf. Janice and I are both aware that the delicate complexities of this issue are interconnected and anything short of addressing those wide-ranging relationships may actually exercise more harm to victims of sex crimes than might be appreciated without deeper consideration."

OBJECTIONS BEGAN IMMEDIATELY

Moore said she heard rumblings of objections inside two weeks after the show opened. Someone from the university chosen – she can't retrieve whom she spoke with, merely she thinks it was someone from the function of the provost – to ask what she knew about the creative person and how she selected work for the show. She said she chose the work based on the quality of the art, not the groundwork of the artist.

Later, she also spoke with Cummings directly, telling the president: "I don't believe this art should be removed. I don't think information technology's the correct affair to practise."

She too told him that she understood the hard state of affairs he was in, and she recognized that he had a responsibility to protect the students and the university community "and that I understood that needed to exist a priority for him."

She learned of the fine art'southward removal after it happened and later the artist was contacted past the academy and told to pick up his paintings, she said.

When she drove to the exhibition April half-dozen, she found the voids on the wall where the paintings hung. Some people suggested she rehang the testify to cover those voids, simply she decided to get out them with a notation calling attending to their removal. Rehanging the prove, she said, would amount to a "whitewash."

"At that place is no caption for the removal of three paintings which figured prominently in the infinite," she said. "There were nails left where the work one time was. This censorship without caption does not experience correct and does a disservice to everyone involved."

The issue has caused anger and anguish, she said, and is nuanced by many shades of grayness. Moore has no sympathy for sexual activity offenders, but she thinks information technology's wrong to continually punish the creative person – and, by extension, the other artists in this testify. "Everybody is jumping on a whole lot of bandwagons and shouting loud," she said. "I wish we could have a slow consideration and actually discuss it."

Staff Writer Matt Byrne contributed to this report.

Use the class beneath to reset your countersign. When y'all've submitted your account email, nosotros will ship an e-mail with a reset lawmaking.