Screenshot of ICA Boston’s original web page for “Nicholas Nixon: Persistence of Vision.” Courtesy of ICA Boston.
In a now-deleted post on the forum page, Medvedow wrote: “I struggle with competing truths: the truth told by the individuals cited in the Globe, the divergent opinions of our staff, and the ICA’s commitment to share all that contemporary art offers to our many audiences and publics, including its controversies, complexities and conflicts.”
Similarly, Respini wrote of her longstanding admiration of Nixon’s work and her own reaction to the allegations.
It seems the maker of these pictures is a yet another man who has abused his position of power. I condemn this kind of behavior and am angered by it. Can I still love the pictures? With these allegations, I am faced with some difficult questions. Does the work of an artist accused of questionable behavior need to be revisited or re-contextualized? Can we separate creative output from personal conduct? How do artists’ actions and views inform their work and shape our cultural narrative?
Ultimately, Respini concluded that museums “should be safe spaces for open dialogue and debate,” and added that she looked forward to hearing from people both online and in the galleries.
Critics, however, were not easily assuaged. Before the page was removed, roughly two dozen respondents listed as anonymous ICA staffers blasted the leadership’s decision and called for the immediate removal of the show. One staffer wrote:
Once again, when presented with an opportunity to make a controversial but morally guided decision, the ICA chose to protect the problematic artist and its own pockets. By keeping this exhibition on view and by twisting this decision to be about public discourse, the ICA as an institution is silencing the voices of those who have come forward to name Nicholas Nixon as an abuser.
Before the page was removed, only one commenter—a former student of Nixon’s who believed his controversial and inappropriate comments were part of his unorthodox teaching approach—advocated for a more tempered response.
It’s something of an ironic twist that the final decision to remove the exhibition seems to have been prompted by Nixon himself. Over the past year, many institutions have struggled to find appropriate ways to address harassment allegations leveled at art-world figures. In January, the National Gallery of Art in Washington, DC, announced it was postponing exhibitions of work by artists Chuck Close and Thomas Roma in the wake of misconduct allegations.
Meanwhile, the Pennsylvania Academy of Fine Arts—which was presenting a show of Chuck Close photographs when news of his alleged mistreatment of models broke—chose to keep its exhibition open but added a companion exhibition of works from its collection that deal with issues of gender and power.
