Detailed account of exhibit cancellation from Penn State Hillel

By Tuvia Abramson, Penn State Hillel Executive Director, May 1, 2006

Following the articles in various newspapers and the onslaught of emails from across the country and around the world and following conflicting information, misinformation and smoke-screens, I have decided today to document the facts in regard to Joshua Stulman’s exhibit cancellation.

Should you need to verify the facts mentioned below, a copy of the specific emails supporting the facts and the dates can be sent to you upon request.

In February 06, the Hillel Foundation sponsored a reception and some PR costs (approximately $100) for the exhibit called “Hodgepodge” by Joshua Stulman. Hillel’s name appeared as a sponsor of this exhibit. This exhibit was presented without incident or conflict due to the sponsorship.

It is Hillel’s mission to support Jewish activity on campus, whether it is educational, religious, cultural, etc. Hillel does not pass judgment on content or on religious preference or on political preference, but embraces diversity of expression which also reflects the diversity of the Jewish student body on the Penn State campus, (this consists of approximately 4,000 students).

Hillel understands that Jewish students come from different backgrounds, traditions, political views, and they may have different opinions on the struggle of Israel’s existence. Open dialogue and expression is not only encouraged but also embraced.

After the opening of Joshua’s first exhibit, he approached me with a request for Hillel to sponsor a second exhibit at the same gallery in April 06. I was very happy to see that Joshua was moving ahead in a new artistic field, because I have known him for five years as a Jewish student leader and a cantor for Hillel. I immediately agreed on behalf of Hillel to sponsor the opening of the second exhibit. On March 1, 2006, Charles Garoian, Director and Professor at the School of Visual Arts, sent an email to Joshua questioning the nature of his exhibit and emphasized that he be prepared. This email had political bias in it and emphasized the possible controversy rather than speaking of the quality of work itself. Joshua immediately responded to this email and welcomed the professor’s interest. He understood the concern and informed the professor about the process and the classes that he took in preparation for this exhibit during both previous year and this year. In the same email Joshua informed Professor Garoian that Penn State Hillel would be sponsoring the opening and that Tuvia Abramson the Executive Director of Hillel would be more than willing to speak with him about some of the pieces that he had seen in regard to Professor Garoian’s concerns.

Hillel’s phone number was given to the professor at this point. The third email of March 1, 2006 was sent from Charles Garoian to Joshua, thanking him for his quick response and telling him that Charles’ assistant Glenda would be contacting Joshua soon to schedule a meeting.

On April 11, 2006 Tuvia Abramson and Joshua Stulman received a combined email from the professor requesting a meeting to discuss the “provocative images that could become controversial”. Charles Garoian requested a meeting to discuss the content so he can speak about it intelligently. Even this email was tainted with political overtones. In the same email, Charles Garoian suggested that Joshua, “with possible assistance from his professors, you, Tuvia, and me, prepare a press release, which would at least get well conceived information out about the exhibition to prevent it from being distorted by reporters who are not familiar with socio/political art nor Joshua’s intention to create educational dialogue.”

Charles emphasized that he looked forward to meeting with Tuvia and Joshua to discuss the exhibition before the opening on April 23, 2006.

A few emails followed on April 11, 2006, some between Charles and Tuvia in connection with the content of the exhibit and the timeframe for the meeting to take place. In one of the emails, Tuvia tried to make Charles understand that as far as he knows the pictures were not provocative, but were based on images found in pictures that were published in different public media venues.

Purposely, to avoid any misunderstanding or controversy, Tuvia gave Charles his cell phone number and his home phone number, due to the fact the Hillel office would be closed for Passover the following day and a few days the following week.

On Tuesday April 11, 2006, Joshua also responded to the email with a willingness to meet with Charles. On Wednesday April 12th, Tuvia Abramson sent an email to Professor Garoian, explaining that it was Passover eve, and in spite of the holiday, the three of them (or maybe four with addition of Professor Yarber, Joshua’s Art teacher and advisor) will meet anytime during the last two days of Passover. Tuvia emphasized that because of the holiday the Hillel office would be closed, but he would be willing to meet any time on April 19 or 20 to create a dialogue.

Again, Tuvia resubmitted to Charles his cell phone number and home phone number. Joshua also indicated that he would be available during the afternoon of those two days.

On Passover, April 13th, 2006, Joshua received an email indicating that the meeting would take place on Thursday April 20th at 4:00 to discuss the exhibition. Charles indicated in the email that he would copy Tuvia so that he, too, could join them as well if he was so inclined.

On Monday April 17, 2006 Charles sent an email to Joshua, again labeling the subject line “potential controversy” and confirming that a meeting would take place at 4:00pm with the idea of reviewing the paintings and the artist’s statement.

On Tuesday April 18 at 6:25pm, Charles sent a combined email to Tuvia and Joshua with a carbon copy to Dean Durst, the Dean of the College of Arts and Architecture, indicating that he was looking forward to meeting with them on Thursday April 20th at 4:00pm in his office. To the surprise of Joshua and Tuvia, it was no longer a meeting of 3 or 4 people as planned before, but Charles Garoian took it upon himself to invite the following people: Steve MacCarthy, the Vice President of Public Information, Tom Poole, Vice President of Educational Equity in Old Main, members of the painting faculty, plus Mohammed Atiyat, the President of Islamic Student Association and his friend Mansoor Aliedi.

The next day, Wednesday April 19th, Tuvia was driving back from Toronto to attend the meeting when he received a phone call from Joshua informing him about the increased number of participants. No change in agenda or explanation was given to explain the drastic increase and the number of participants. It was very surprising to Joshua and Tuvia that instead of 4 people meeting to discuss the art and the artist’s statement, all of a sudden the meeting took on political overtones as indicated by the additional participants who were now added to the meeting.

Tuvia was traveling and had no access to his email, therefore he asked Joshua to respond to Charles with a combined email from both of them, indicating the surprise and the dismay that was felt about the imposed change of venue without discussing it prior to the email. Because of the Passover holiday, Tuvia and Joshua asked that the meeting be changed to Friday so that they too could invite other Jewish representatives, i.e.: Jewish faculty, students and board members. This email was sent in the evening; but before the email was even received, Charles Garoian sent an email to all the participants of the meeting with the subject: CANCELLATION. As quoted from Charles’ email “After reviewing the policy and guidelines of the Patterson Gallery in the School of Visual Arts, Penn State’s policy AD42: Statement on Nondiscrimination and Harassment and Penn State’s Zero tolerance policy for hate, I have decided to cancel Joshua Stulman’s exhibition scheduled for April 23rd through 29th 2006 in the Patterson Gallery”.

Again, I reiterate that this cancellation was done before any meeting was held with Joshua, Tuvia, and Professor Garoian. The email also indicated that Joshua’s artwork does not promote the School of Visual Arts’ cultural diversity or assurance of opportunities for democratic dialogues within the context of its classrooms and its exhibition spaces.

To our surprise in spite of knowing since March 1, 2006 that Hillel was sponsoring the reception, and in spite of numerous emails, many of them to Tuvia and Joshua together, inviting Hillel to participate in preparing background information and press releases with the School of Visual Arts, Charles found some guidelines, somewhere, which we have NEVER seen, and indicated that Hillel’s sponsorship was the second reason for the cancellation, (notwithstanding that Joshua’s first exhibit was Hillel-sponsored without ANY question).

On the morning of Thursday April 20th, Charles arbitrarily sent an email to all the participants canceling the meeting.

That same day the media was notified of the cancellation. What followed was a circus of smokescreens, fake explanations, and half-truths on the part of the School of Visual Arts, which eventually culminated in a statement sent from Garoian to Joshua that his exhibit was ONLY cancelled because of Hillel’s sponsorship, but Joshua COULD have his exhibit if he dropped Hillel’s sponsorship

Tuvia was on his way to Friday night services at Hillel. Upon Tuvia’s request the CDT sent a copy of the email to Tuvia. As of today, Tuvia never received that email from Professor Garoian. The audacity of this email is beyond words. Hillel was a participant in Joshua’s first exhibit and was specifically asked by Joshua to participate in the preparation for the second exhibit.

One might wonder why there was a need for a meeting of such size and why the issue of content was mentioned in the cancellation notice. It is also important to notice that Joshua never received an individual cancellation notice from Charles with a clear explanation to the nature of the “hate crime policy” or the guidelines of the Hillel participation issue.

Upon reading the email, Tuvia offered to Joshua to remove Hillel’s sponsorship, which Joshua immediately rejected and called the email and insult pathetic. Tuvia called the email morally repugnant.

During this week misleading information kept coming from the university’s spokesman. Charles Garoian disappeared and refused to answer any questions or phone calls from the media or from anyone else.

This campaign of distorted truth was the reason why the Hillel Foundation and Joshua Stulman both requested an apology from the university administration and demanded that Joshua’s exhibit be allowed to take place in the fall with the full sponsorship of Hillel.

A promise was issued that the exhibit will be shown in the fall with Hillel sponsorship. The apology from Charles Goroian was received only by Joshua and forwarded to Tuvia Abramson. This apology did not speak about using zero tolerance for hate as its reason for cancellation. It did not apologize for using Hillel as a scapegoat to cover the wrongs that were done to Joshua Stulman.

Another apology was issued by the Dean of the College of Art and Architecture with an offer for Joshua to exhibit his work was reiterated. This email did not include a mention of the hate policy or the sponsorship of Hillel Foundation as well.

As of April 28, as seen on Fox news, the university spokesman still insisted that it was only one professor’s decision