On Creative Conscription
Serubiri Moses
(1) Method
A monument to whom or to what? —is a question that challenges the specific tendency for art to function as if it had no context; or rather as if there were no subjective ties to its production or display. The question might even seem antithetical to the views of a modernist art history that has continued to call for the recognition of art’s autonomy. This question was asked by American critic Holland Cotter in a review of a public monument by conceptual artist David Hammons.1 I view it more as a provocation that challenges the complacency around what Cotter describes as “specific social and personal histories.”2 Arguing against the erasure of various histories of cruising in the West Side piers in Chelsea, Cotter enables me to theorize on what I call creative conscription, which is vaguely about the ways that spaces and sites are made to adapt to an alternative mandate.
The term creative conscription is one that becomes useful when thinking about the artwork of BritishIranian artist Reza Aramesh. Creative conscription is a form of signposting strategies in the artist’s practice such as performance, appropriation and site responsiveness. These strategies serve as protocols in the rewriting and transfer of spaces into artworks. Beyond this act of transforming spaces, it matters, too, that many of Aramesh’s artworks (photographs or sculptures or ceramics) are themselves
monumental. As monuments they refer to a person. They aim at commemorating those whose lives have been marked by torture and captivity. Rather than extend Holland Cotter’s condemnation of Hammons’ minimalist sculpture for what it fails to acknowledge, I am interested in appropriating his formulation to theorize differently about what it means for spaces to be rewritten into artworks, and/or adapted to an alternative mandate.
My concept of creative conscription may portray art as militaristic. Yet I am interested in sharing a view that has the potential of exposing the mechanisms of power within art. Very often art’s relationship to power is unspoken. Yet many artists are revered for artworks which center power and/or political events. The proximity of such artworks to authority will be neither debated nor interrogated. Historians and critics will describe this sense of authority as symbolic rather than actual within the artwork itself. Creative conscription offers a way to expose the reproduction of authority and power in art itself. My concept of this term bears similarity to theorist Irit Rogoff’s use of the term smuggling 3 Her concept of smuggling aims at transcending the binary of theory and practice: she defines it as “a form of surreptitious transfer, of clandestine transfer from one realm into another. The passage of contraband from here to there is not sanctioned
1. Cotter, Holland, “From David Hammons, a Tribute to Pier 52 and Lastingness,” The New York Times (May 13, 2021) https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/13/arts/ design/david-hammons-pier-whitney.html
2. Cotter, Holland, Ibid
3. Rogoff, Irit, “Smuggling: An Embodied Criticality,” European Institute for Progressive Cultural Policies 2 (2006): 1-7.
and does not have visible or available protocols to follow.”4 Rogoff’s concept of smuggling follows two crucial sources: a London University doctoral dissertation on the topic by Simon Harvey and an artwork by video artist Ergin Çavuşoğlu. Her use of the term is within the sphere of curating, wherein she defines it as a “critical” methodology of exhibition making. Rogoff’s concept of smuggling can be helpful when attempting to understand the occupation of spaces that may be unexpected. In the case of Aramesh, at least one space where the artist took over the site by staging models and making photographs issued a statement forbidding the artist from using their space in the future. 5 Aramesh, thus, can be said to be smuggling his ideas and actions into spaces. Further, the word conscription is defined as compulsory enrolment and, literally, adding someone to a list. Creative conscription functions in creative ways, such as in art making and exhibition making.
Following Rogoff, creative conscription can be considered unexpected. It takes place within the context of transfer . This word has a meaning in psychotherapy, where transference takes place between the patient and the analyst. APA defines the term as “a patient’s displacement or projection onto the analyst of those unconscious feelings and wishes originally directed toward important individuals, such as parents, in the patient’s childhood. It is posited that this process brings repressed material to the surface where it can be reexperienced, studied, and worked through to discover the sources of a patient’s current neurotic difficulties and to alleviate their harmful effects.”6 The term has far-reaching meaning for the making and re-making of subjectivities when it is deployed in the forming of new subjects in art. When spaces are revised in creative conscription, they become reexperienced under an alternative mandate.
Philosopher Julia Kristeva writes about the term in relation to fantasy and cinema. She argues that transference is the moment when the patient brings their fantasy into words.7 For Kristeva, this process provides for an analytic clarity that cures pathology. “Analysis consists of making the fantasy conscious–formulating the phantasmic narrative and interpreting it—in order to dissolve the symptom.”8 That kind of clarity is essential for this ‘transfer’ to
4. Rogoff, Irit, Ibid
5. I have intentionally kept the name of the institution anonymous.
occur in the turning of spaces into artworks.
The Latin script connotes writing. It can point towards the law. Perhaps my view of conscription here follows too closely the philosopher Jacques Derrida, who makes the argument that writing and power are closely linked. Writing “can ally itself to power, can prolong it by complementing it, or can serve it.” 9 Writing, when viewed through the law and specifically its use by law clerks, produces mandates. Conscription therefore has a relationship to mandate and to the law. Derrida’s own biography was wrapped up in the trials of being excluded from French citizenship. First, on account of being an Algerian-born Jew. Second, on the dissolution of his French citizenship during World War II. Derrida’s biography shows how the law is allied to power in its most violent and tyrannical. Where then might we cite creativity or the creative act within law? What might aesthetic judgment mean in the context of creativity? The creative in creative action, and its universal claims to validity.
(2) A Marylebone Church and Kenwood House
Having asked what it is that we mean by creative conscription, I turn to Aramesh’s takeover of a Marylebone church (formerly Holy Trinity Church) in London in 2011 as an example. A review noted of the Marylebone church solo exhibition that: “It is rare that an exhibition will have no false notes, that the totality of works across different media, the subjects covered and the location will combine without there being a single thing that jars.” 10 This review helped me appreciate the success and the overall effect of this installation, and what I conceive of as creative conscription. The installation further brought “seven sculptures and six photographs” into the space.11 Despite its mention of Christian art and Islamic art, alongside the work’s “stylisms of Catholic icons,” the review does not mention that the sculptures were polychrome limewood, nor that this is the same material (and similar techniques) with which post-medieval Christian sculpture was historically made. 12 The review does not acknowledge that Aramesh was aware of the connection here between Christian and Islamic art and his own work, which is informed by the history of post-medieval Spanish sculpture and painting as well as a history of 20th-century
6. American Psychological Association, “Transference,” APA Dictionary of Psychology (n.d.) https://dictionary.apa.org/transference
7. Kristeva, Julia, and Jeanine Herman (transl.), “Fantasy and Cinema” in Intimate Revolt: Power and the Limits of Psychoanalysis (New York: Columbia University Press, 2002): 63-81
8. Kristeva, Julia, and Jeanine Herman, Ibid
9. Derrida, Jacques, “Scribble (Writing-Power),” Yale French Studies 58 (1979): 117-147
10. Smalldon, Jon, “At One Marylebone: Reza Aramesh,” Jon’s Place (Oct. 14, 2011) https://jonsmalldon.wordpress.com/2011/10/14/at-one-marylebone-reza-aramesh/
11. Smalldon, Jon, Ibid
12. Smalldon, Jon, Ibid
photojournalism of male captives. The installation was created with a more serious understanding of the Christian mandates that shaped the space, and this is in fact evidenced by the title of the exhibition ‘Those Who Dwell on Earth,’ itself a citation of the Bible. Aramesh’s 2011 installation at the former Holy Trinity Church, whose sculptures and photographs depicted human suffering, throwing off unsuspecting visitors, is the inspiration behind NUMBER 207 at Chiesa di San Fantin.
The human suffering depicted in Aramesh’s artworks was noted in the review: “The sculptures follow the stylisms of Catholic icons but are presented here with human suffering and pleading rather than divine forbearance. These are then given further context by the photographs: monumental black and white images in which the subjects gaze out in variations of judgment or misunderstanding. The whole feeling is one of profound ambiguity.”13 This latter ambiguity appears inconsistent with the review’s initial appraisal that the exhibition was of “no false notes.”14 If the sculptures and photographs provided evidence of human suffering in an exhibition with no false notes, then where did or would the ambiguity lie?
One of the ways that Aramesh’s 2011 exhibition performed smuggling and conscripting was through the juxtaposition of what looked to the average viewer like Christian art with the bodies of non-white captives across the globe, the images of which the artist had adapted from various reportage archival sources. Often the image sources reference locations in the developing world, such that the exhibition places bodies that were supposedly absent in 18th and 19th-century Marylebone within a Western and classed society. Aramesh’s exhibition further clarifies what some historians have told us over the decades: that the Western world gained capital by creating conflicts across the globe.
A history of Marylebone (then a village on the outskirts of London) notes that it was associated with wealth, an idea that was implanted in its very name: “The close of the year 1832, has become memorable to all who feel an interest in the welfare of this division of the metropolis, from the extension of the elective franchise by an Act of the Legislature, and
9. Derrida, Jacques, “Scribble (Writing-Power),” Yale French Studies 58 (1979): 117-147
the creation of the Borough of Mary-le-bone:– (sic) by which means ‘a population equal to that of most Capitals, and in intelligence and wealth not inferior to any on the globe,’ became for the first time represented in the Great Council of the Nation.”15 The emphasis on superior intelligence and wealth should signify the Enlightenment and the onset of the Industrial Revolution.
The former Holy Trinity Church today is deconsecrated, and used primarily as a venue for weddings and other events. Though the history of the Marylebone’s churches (St. Marylebone Parish Church and Holy Trinity Church, among others) reveals details of consecration. The first account details the St. Marylebone Parish Church’s consecration and subsequent evolution in the 18th century: “Upon the erection of the New Church (...) it was dedicated to the Virgin Mary, and stood till May 1740, when, being in a very ruinous condition, it was taken down.”16 After this historical moment we learn that: “The Church was replaced by another, erected on the same site, which was opened for Divine Service in April 1742.”17 It has been noted that the church was designated a parish chapel under English law and that its curacy was under the diocese of London, while its patronage was under the rector of the parish. These details leave no doubt as to the Christian, class-oriented nature of this church, even as it lay on the outskirts of 18th century London.
By bringing this Christian milieu to the surface, almost like the recollection of a fantasy, Aramesh’s exhibition created a revision of the mandate of the space. This could be particularly incredible to see knowing that the former Holy Trinity Church had fallen out of use as a space of worship, and the dead exhumed and the sepulchral monuments relocated. The ambiguity that the review of Aramesh’s 2011 exhibition mentions may have to do with the transfer of that historical memory of the Marylebone church into the present, through the formal qualities of the artwork, as well as the expression of suffering in the nearly-nude male figures in the sculpture and photography.
Placing familiar human suffering experienced by non-white bodies at the center of the church, the six photographs that Aramesh installed in the space similarly revised the mandate of the space. I am interested in the artist’s creative
10. Smalldon, Jon, “At One Marylebone: Reza Aramesh,” Jon’s Place (Oct. 14, 2011) https://jonsmalldon.wordpress.com/2011/10/14/at-one-marylebone-reza-aramesh/
Ibid
17. Smith, Thomas, Ibid
Smalldon,
Smalldon,
11. Smalldon, Jon,
12. Smalldon, Jon, Ibid 13.
Jon, Ibid 14.
Jon, Ibid 15. Smith, Thomas, “Preface,” A Topographical and Historical Account of the Parish of St. Marylebone (London: John Smith, 1833)
16. Smith, Thomas, “The Old Church,” A Topographical and Historical Account of the Parish of St. Marylebone (London: John Smith, 1833): 59-64
conscription of Kenwood House which acts as the setting of the photographs exhibited at the former Holy Trinity Church. In the photographs an ensemble of nonwhite nearly nude men wearing only sweatpants and t-shirts re-enact the poses of contemporary captives depicted in reportage images. This performance takes place inside the elaborate rooms (dining room, great library, and galleries) of Kenwood House, both animating its history as the home of the elite of English society, while simultaneously mirroring the bodies on display in the Kenwood House art collection, including paintings by Rembrandt among others.
Kenwood House was first built in the 1600s and its renovation in the 1700s under architect Robert Adam was commissioned by its then owner, the Earl of Mansfield and Scottish lawyer William Murray. We learn that Murray was an exceptional individual. Named Attorney General and then Chief Justice of England, he was also a close friend of the English poet Alexander Pope.18 After his London residence had been attacked by rioters, he established the country house as his permanent home. Adam’s architecture of the Georgian era commands space and recalls the drive to British imperial power. The Georgian-era plantations in Jamaica contributed to the traumatic history of the Transatlantic Slave Trade.
Art historian Geraldine A. Johnson has further elaborated on how Aramesh’s performative photographs mirrored the bodies on display in the galleries at Kenwood. She pointed out that his Action 67 and Action 87 were reenactments of mass-media images of a wounded Somali man carried by his comrades in 2009, and a casualty of the FrancoAlgerian war in 1958. She said that the photographs simultaneously evoked art historical sources such as the Spanish Baroque sculptor Gregorio Fernández, whose work Aramesh had seen at the National Gallery in 2010, in addition to Raphael and Caravaggio’s Deposition 19 Johnson does not in this quote list the works in Kenwood House that would appear in the background of the photographs. The collection, we are told, was acquired in the 19th century and installed in the house in c. 1925, after the property had been sold by the Earls of Mansfield to Edward Cecil Guinness, the 1st Earl of Iveagh, a rich businessman and a member of the prominent Guinness family.20 The pictures included
one Rembrandt and several paintings by Thomas Gainsborough, among other English paintings of the Georgian and Victorian periods. 21 All of these historical details show the class distinctions that are animated in the revising of space, as Aramesh orchestrates the visual reenactment of post-medieval Spanish painting with the bodies of Black and Arab men, while echoing torture in contemporary conflicts across the globe.
(3) Artistic Strategies
Having elaborated on the spaces that Aramesh has adapted into artworks, I now highlight strategies of performance, site responsiveness, and appropriation that simultaneously enact creative conscription. The first strategy that I will describe is appropriation Aramesh’s process includes research into image archives, specifically photojournalist archives. The process by which these images in Aramesh’s art are adapted into the mediums of sculpture, performance, photography, video, textile, and ceramics has been described by the curator Mitra Abbaspour as an “alchemical” process.22 The tendency here is for alchemy —a scientific process that converts base metal into gold—to transform images sources into actions in a space of chance, probability, and experiment. Abbaspour’s alchemy description opens avenues to interpret the intentionality behind the artist’s work, and in fact highlights the delicacy and meticulous process that leads to polished marble or ceramic. This alchemy might not be seen immediately as a kind of appropriation. Yet philosopher and artist Adrian Piper’s view of appropriation was to associate it with the logic of modernism. This implies that any artist working within the framework of modernist logic performs appropriation, something that she calls natural and expected in Euroethnic art. “It is natural that a society dependent on colonized nonEuroethnic cultures for its land, labor, and natural resources should be so for its aesthetic and cultural resources as well. But the impetus in the latter case is not necessarily imperialistic or exploitative. It may instead be a drive to self-transcendence of the limits of the socially prescribed Euroethnic self, by striving to incorporate the idiolects of the enigmatic Other within them.”23 For example, Piper reminds us that the early Italian Renaissance drew on the ancient culture of Hellenic Greece for its revitalization. She
18. Summerson, John, “Kenwood and Its Owners,” The Iveagh Bequest, Kenwood: A Short Account of Its History and Architecture (London: English Heritage, 1988): 5-14
19. Johnson, Geraldine A, “Reza Aramesh: Them Who Dwell on the Earth,” in Them Who Dwell on the Earth (Dubai: Mottahedan Projects, 2011) ex cat
20. Summerson, John, “Kenwood and Its Owners,” The Iveagh Bequest, Kenwood: A Short Account of Its History and Architecture (London: English Heritage, 1988): 5-14
21. Summerson, John, Ibid
22. Abbaspour, Mitra, “Reza Aramesh: Material Actions” in Action: By Number Edited by Serubiri Moses (Milan: SKIRA Publishing, 2024
23. Piper, Adrian, “The Logic of Modernism,” Callaloo 16, No. 3 (1993): 574-578
also says that the real lesson of the Renaissance was “the discovery of difference as a source of inspiration.”24
In psychoanalysis, one of the outcomes of transference is the production of new subjectivities. It is crucial to address how smuggling and creative conscription operate in this sphere of culture. That alchemical process, often viewed as chiefly scientific, then enters a cultural sphere. One medium and its history become united with another medium. One form of representing nonwhite people is transferred from the newspaper media to the art gallery. Though I must highlight that photography is not alien to Aramesh in the way that Piper deduced African art was alien to Pablo Picasso. And further, Aramesh is British but not ‘Euroethnic,’ having been born in Iran. The artist’s biography shows, too, that he started his career working in the medium of photography. Whether rightly or wrongly writing from the United States, Piper surmises that it is natural for the Euroethnic society to depend on non-European cultures, labor, land, and natural resources in addition to those cultures’ aesthetic and cultural resources. While her position aims at revealing the logics that underlie modernism, they help us reveal the continuous frictions and fissures that activate the landscape of contemporary art and its history.
The second strategy in Aramesh’s creative conscription is performance. Performance has taken precedence in the artist’s work in ways that are not very often acknowledged. For example, when Geraldine A. Johnson wrote about the six photographs that Aramesh made in Kenwood House, she pointed out that they were staged. She addressed the artist’s direction of nonwhite models to recreate the posture of captives.25 But this did not fully explain why the artist used performance in the production of his art. We know that he has worked in the medium of performance and around performance at least since the mid 2000s. He used dance clubs in Brooklyn and Manhattan as the sites for his polychrome sculpture. And one of his notable artworks was his recreation of Félix GonzálezTorres’s Untitled (Go Go Dancing Platform) in Havana, as commissioned by the 14th edition of the Havana Biennial in 2022.26 Despite a backlash to the performance when it debuted in Havana, the work
fascinates me even from the distance of the archive. I find it revealing on several counts. To me, it takes the site itself as a medium to work with. As Aramesh told me recently, he wanted to take this performance to Cuba . 27 Go Go Dancing Platform is regularly reenacted in Western museums for audiences that might not have intimate knowledge of Cuba, where González-Torres was born.
By doing this, Aramesh carries out a re-migration of the artwork of González-Torres back to the country of his birth, which banished homosexuals by putting them on a boat. It is transferred from its Euro-American art world setting in the confines of blue-chip galleries and museums in New York, London, and Paris to the street in Havana during the biennial. It draws out the anxieties of a practice that could only have taken place in exile, within the diaspora. And it shows the unequal balance between those permitted by the Félix González-Torres Foundation to perform Go Go Dancing Platform , and those who cannot. Aramesh’s Action 216, (Fig.1) which is subtitled “everybody owns me,” removes the platform and lights and places the dancer on the street surrounded only by velvet barrier ropes, confronting the divide between those who have access and those who do not have access either to González-Torres’ art or to the athletic male body on display. Creative conscription occurs when the performance re-enacts the events/sites it claims to represent—or confronts the limits of representation by revealing those who are erased or made absent.
The third strategy in Aramesh’s creative conscription has to do with site responsiveness. It is clear that the artist has been working with sites of many different kinds including heritage sites, recreational sites, and sacred sites. Whether it is gay and lesbian bars in Williamsburg or the former Holy Trinity Church in London, each site has its own story, and its own histories. To borrow from art and architecture historian Ivan Lopez Munuera, each site has actors that generate social, cultural, and political activity, and when describing spaces and sites it is important to acknowledge that they are not neutral.28 Spaces bear genealogies that concern the various actors and the activity that has shaped them over time. For example, Munuera labors to explain that the West Side piers in Chelsea were historically influenced by the urban planning policies of Robert Moses, which
24. Piper, Adrian, Ibid
25. Johnson, Geraldine A, “Reza Aramesh: Them Who Dwell on the Earth,” in Them Who Dwell on the Earth (Dubai: Mottahedan Projects, 2011) ex cat
26. Action 216: #everybodyownsme, a conversation with Felix Gonzalez-Torres’s Untitled (go-go dancing platform)
27. Reza Aramesh cited in conversation with the author, March 2024
28. Munuera, Ivan Lopez “Lands of Contagion,” e-flux Architecture: Sick Architecture (Nov. 2020) https://www.e-flux.com/architecture/sick-architecture/363717/landsof-contagion/
promoted single-family units and single-family cars, alongside highways and luxury apartment complexes. In Munuera’s radical history of the West Side piers in Chelsea, Robert Moses’s city planning policy runs parallel to the lives of sex workers, prostitutes, gay activists, and night life that shaped the meatpacking district and Christopher Street, in addition to the abandoned piers.29 Sites like Kenwood House, as enumerated earlier in this essay, have long histories in English aristocracy and land tenure. They embodied power. This power came not only from their association with aristocratic or wealthy landlords but from the building design by architects like Robert Adams. Georgian architecture was meant to portray an enormous sense of grandeur with the large windows, wide thresholds, and doorways, and expansive interiors, letting in a flood of natural light as evidenced by Adam’s large and wondrous library and galleries at Kenwood. The artist’s project at Kenwood was informed by the space itself. Aramesh was aware that it was not a neutral space. Thus, reenacting an event of torture and captivity acted out by racialized nonwhite models set into motion a friction or fissure between the space/site and Aramesh’s Action 67 (Fig. 2)and Action 87. (Fig. 3)
In conclusion, the question that I started with – A monument to whom or to what? – is a provocative one. It casts a shadow on the practice of making monuments, and why public monuments, produced by artists, continue to cause public scandal. Stirring the action of activist groups that seek permanent removal of public-facing monuments. The question – A monument to whom or what? – also concerns public space. Contemporary urbanism shows competing views from activists and politicians. Yet creative conscription can reveal to us how art’s monumentality also produces its own mandates, which, as I explained earlier, can be overlooked.
29. Munuera, Ivan Lopez, Ibid
Fig.1
Action 216: Untitled (Everybody owns me) in conversation with Felix Gonzalez-Torres’s Untitled (Go-Go dancing Platform),1991 2022
Fig.2
Action 67: A Somalian man wounded in a mortar attack February 24 2009, Mogadishu 2010
Fig. 3
Action 87: Villagers attend to the dead after a French bombing raid on a town near the Tunisian-Algerian border, 1958 2010
Works Exhibited Site of the Fall - Study for the Renaissance Garden Site of the Fall – Study of the Renaissance Garden Action 218: At 8:26 pm, Thursday 16 November 2017 Hand carved and polished Carrara marble 100.5 cm, x 72.5 x 250 cm 2024 Site of the Fall – Study of the Renaissance Garden Action 245: At 4:00 pm, Friday 08 September 1950 Hand carved and polished Carrara marble 109.5 x 75 x 240 cm 2024 Site of the Fall – Study of the Renaissance Garden Action 498: 9:30 am, Wednesday 09 December 1953 Hand carved and polished Carrara marble 95.5 x 74.5 x 260 cm 2024 Study of Sweathcloth as an Object of Desire "NUMBER 207" Study of Sweathcloth as an Object of Desire Action 248-454 Hand carved and polished Bianco Michelangelo marble Installation size variable 2023/2024
Credits
NUMBER 207
Reza Aramesh
Curated by Serubiri Moses
Presented by MUNTREF, Buenos Aires with support from Institute of Contemporary Art, ICA, Miami
Chiesa di San Fantin, San Marco 3090, Calle dei Orbi, 30124, Venice, Italy
16 April, 2024 - 2 October, 2024
Open: Wednesday to Monday (Tuesday closed) 10am -6pm
Additional Publications: Monograph “ACTION: BY NUMBER” published by SKIRA Editore edited by Serubiri Moses with texts contributed by Mitra Abbaspour, Julia Friedman, Geraldine A Johnson and Storm Janse van Rensburg
ISBN: 978-88-572-5285-8
Media contacts:
Italy: Casadoro Fungher info@casadorofungher.com
USA: A&O PR info@aopublic.com
Project Website: www.number207venice.com
Published by Stjarna.art, this publication was made possible with generous support from Stjarna.art, Dastan Art Gallery, c1760, Lito.io, Venice Patriarchate together with contributions from individuals who wish to remain anonymous.
Printed by pixartprinting. Catalogue design Ruohong Chen. Copyright foreword Arch. don Gianmatteo Caputo, copyright essay Serubiri Moses.
Photography: Reza Aramesh Studio, Luca Asta
ACTION
REZA ARAMESH 2023
ACTION
NIGRITA PRISON
PROGRESSION #108
REZA ARAMESH 2023
ACTION 356
AL-HASAKAH PRISON
26 OCTOBER 2019
PROGRESSION #109
REZA ARAMESH 2023
ACTION 357
AL RAY PRISON
21 AUGUST 2013
PROGRESSION #110
REZA ARAMESH 2023
ACTION 358
SEDNAYA PRISON 27 AUGUST 2012
PROGRESSION #111
REZA ARAMESH 2023
ACTION 359
HAJIN PRISON
15 DECEMBER 2018
PROGRESSION #112
REZA ARAMESH 2023
ACTION 363
QOBBEH PRISON
20 SEPTEMBER 2010
PROGRESSION #116
REZA ARAMESH 2023
ACTION 364
YARZE PRISON
27 MARCH 2005
PROGRESSION #117
REZA ARAMESH 2023
ACTION 365
JBEIL PRISON
30 MAY 2010
PROGRESSION #118
REZA ARAMESH 2023
ACTION 366
JEB JENNINE PRISON
14 MARCH 2010
PROGRESSION #119
REZA ARAMESH 2023
ACTION 367
RIHANIEH PRISON
2 AUGUST 2015
ACTION
ACTION
ACTION 360
MARCO AURELIO
SOTO PRISON
20 NOVEMBER 2015
PROGRESSION #113
REZA ARAMESH 2023
ACTION 361
ROUMIEH PRISON
26 APRIL 2005
PROGRESSION #114
REZA ARAMESH 2023
ACTION 362
ROUMIEH PRISON 16 NOVEMBER 1993
PROGRESSION #115
REZA ARAMESH 2023
ACTION
#120
ARAMESH 2023
PROGRESSION
REZA
368 EVIN PRISON
JULY 1989 PROGRESSION #121
ARAMESH 2023
31
REZA
369 EVIN PRISON 10 AUGUST 2000
#122
ARAMESH 2023
PROGRESSION
REZA
370 VAKILABAD PRISON 2 JANUARY 2013
#123
ARAMESH 2023
371 KAHRIZAK DETENTION CENTER 4 JUNE 2009 PROGRESSION #124 REZA ARAMESH 2023
372 GORGAN PRISON 5 JANUARY 2008 PROGRESSION #125 REZA ARAMESH 2023 ACTION 373 RAJAEI-SHAHR PRISON 18 SEPTEMBER 2013 PROGRESSION #126 REZA ARAMESH 2023 ACTION 374 BADUSH PRISON 10 JUNE 2014 PROGRESSION #127 REZA ARAMESH 2023 ACTION 375 JAU PRISON 2 FEBRUARY 2014 PROGRESSION #128 REZA ARAMESH 2024 ACTION 376 HODEIDAH CENTRAL PRISON 12 AUGUST 2010 PROGRESSION #129 REZA ARAMESH 2024 ACTION 377 MANHATTAN DETENTION COMPLEX 3 JUNE 2020 PROGRESSION #130 REZA ARAMESH 2024 ACTION 378 NIGRAT SALMAN 14 APRIL 2022 PROGRESSION #131 REZA ARAMESH 2024 ACTION 379 CENTRAL PRISON PESHAWAR 21 OCTOBER 2006 PROGRESSION #132 REZA ARAMESH 2024 ACTION 380 MANHATTAN DETENTION COMPLEX 10 AUGUST 1970 PROGRESSION #133
ARAMESH 2024
PROGRESSION
REZA
ACTION
ACTION
REZA
354
DETENTION CENTRE 18 FEBRUARY
MAKHACHKALA
2015
PROGRESSION #107
355
24 JULY 2013
ACTION 390
FLEURY-MÉROGIS
PRISON
7 AUGUST 2018
PROGRESSION #143
REZA ARAMESH 2024
ACTION 391
BROOK HOUSE
28 MARCH 2017
PROGRESSION #144
REZA ARAMESH 2024
ACTION 392
SANA’A PRISON
6 JULY 2009
PROGRESSION #145
PROGRESSION #136
REZA ARAMESH 2024
17 APRIL 2018
PROGRESSION #138
REZA ARAMESH 2024
ACTION 386
ZAHEDAN PRISON
16 MAY 2016
PROGRESSION #139
REZA ARAMESH 2024
ACTION 387
ABU GHRAIB PRISON
30 DECEMBER 2003
PROGRESSION #140
REZA ARAMESH 2024
ACTION 388
JALALABAD PRISON
3 AUGUST 2020
PROGRESSION #141
REZA ARAMESH 2024
ACTION 389
BELET HUEN BASE
16 MARCH 1993
PROGRESSION #142
REZA ARAMESH 2024
REZA ARAMESH 2024
ACTION 393
FALLUJAH
TEMPORARY PRISON
23 NOVEMBER 2004
PROGRESSION #146
REZA ARAMESH 2024
ACTION 394
KLONG PREM
1 JANUARY 2005
PROGRESSION #147
REZA ARAMESH 2024
ACTION 395
SHIMO LA TEWA PRISON
4 APRIL 2012
PROGRESSION #148
REZA ARAMESH 2024
ACTION 396
BERBERA PRISON
30 MARCH 2011
PROGRESSION #149
REZA ARAMESH 2024
ACTION 397
LA SANTÉ PRISON
9 JANUARY 2021
PROGRESSION #150
REZA ARAMESH 2024
ACTION 398
KEROBOKAN PRISON
13 OCTOBER 2005
PROGRESSION #151
REZA ARAMESH 2024
ACTION 399
MELBOURNE
REMAND CENTRE
7 MARCH 1993
PROGRESSION #152
REZA ARAMESH 2024
ACTION 400
HAREN PRISON
16 MAY 2000
PROGRESSION #153
REZA ARAMESH 2024
ACTION 401
POGGIOREALE PRISON
19 MAY 2009
PROGRESSION #154
REZA ARAMESH 2024
ACTION 402
MALAGA PRISON
21 JULY 2005
PROGRESSION #155
REZA ARAMESH 2024
ACTION 403
AL-KHARJ
DETENTION CENTRE
27 MAY 2022
PROGRESSION #156
REZA ARAMESH 2024
ACTION 404
GUANTANAMO BAY
14 JANUARY 2009
PROGRESSION #157
REZA ARAMESH 2024
ACTION 405
MULTAN JAIL
7 JANUARY 2015
PROGRESSION #158
REZA ARAMESH 2024
ACTION 406
BAGHDAD CENTRAL
CRIMINAL COURT
5 JULY 2003
PROGRESSION #159
REZA ARAMESH 2024
ACTION 408
8 OCTOBER 2014 PROGRESSION #161 REZA ARAMESH
ACTION 407
PROGRESSION #160 REZA ARAMESH 2024
#164
REZA ARAMESH 2024
ACTION 412
KOH SAMUI PRISON
8 JULY 2015
PROGRESSION #165
REZA ARAMESH 2024
ACTION 413
NAIVASHA PRISON 28 JANUARY 2008
PROGRESSION #166
REZA ARAMESH 2024
ACTION 414
SAINT-DENIS
ASRI
PRISON 20 FEBRUARY 2014
PUL-E-CHARKHI PRISON
2024
CENTRAL PRISON
MAY
#162
410 BROOK HOUSE
APRIL
#163
ARAMESH
411 SANA’A PRISON 6 SEPTEMBER 2021
ACTION 409 MOGADISHU
4
1993 PROGRESSION
REZA ARAMESH 2024 ACTION
11
2017 PROGRESSION
REZA
2024 ACTION
PROGRESSION
PRISON
MAY 2009
#167
ARAMESH 2024
415
PRISON
AUGUST 2018
#168
ARAMESH 2024
416
PRISON 19 DECEMBER 2005
#169
ARAMESH 2024
417
HOTEL TEMPORARY CAMP 16 JUNE 2017
#170
ARAMESH 2024 ACTION 418 AL-SHUMAISI DETENTION CENTRE 26
2022
#171
2024
381 CAMP CROPPER 20 SEPTEMBER 2007
#134
ARAMESH 2024
7
PROGRESSION
REZA
ACTION
KEROBOKAN
9
PROGRESSION
REZA
ACTION
MALAGA
PROGRESSION
REZA
ACTION
NINEVEH
PROGRESSION
REZA
MAY
PROGRESSION
REZA ARAMESH
ACTION
PROGRESSION
REZA
ACTION 382 DHAHBAN PRISON 27 AUGUST 2020
PROGRESSION #135
REZA ARAMESH 2024 ACTION 383 GUANTANAMO BAY 10 JUNE 2006
DETENTION
ACTION 384 ABU GHRAIB PRISON 19 OCTOBER 2003 PROGRESSION #137 REZA ARAMESH 2024 ACTION 385 DRY DOCK
CENTRE
ACTION 428
NUSAKAMBANGAN
PRISON
22 JANUARY 2004
PROGRESSION #181
REZA ARAMESH 2024
ACTION 429
MANHATTAN
DETENTION COMPLEX
1 OCTOBER 1970
PROGRESSION #182
REZA ARAMESH 2024
ACTION 430
QAYYARAH PRISON
24 MAY 2017
PROGRESSION #183
REZA ARAMESH 2024
ACTION 431
BAGRAM PRISON
20 NOVEMBER 2015
PROGRESSION #184
REZA ARAMESH 2024
ACTION 432
HARMONDSWORTH
4 NOVEMBER 2022
PROGRESSION #185
REZA ARAMESH 2024
ACTION 433
DENPASAR PRISON
23 APRIL 2005
PROGRESSION #186
REZA ARAMESH 2024
ACTION 434
SAFARIAD PRISON
30 AUGUST 2017
PROGRESSION #187
REZA ARAMESH 2024
ACTION 437
DHAHBAN PRISON
9 JULY 2023
PROGRESSION #190
REZA ARAMESH 2024
ACTION 438
KARACHI POLICE STATION
4 MAY 2017
PROGRESSION #191
REZA ARAMESH 2024
ACTION 439
LOMBOK PRISON
20 MAY 2019
PROGRESSION #192
REZA ARAMESH 2024
ACTION 440
SARPOZA PRISON
5 NOVEMBER 2007
PROGRESSION #193
REZA ARAMESH 2024
ACTION 441
MORTON HALL
12 MARCH 2020
PROGRESSION #194
REZA ARAMESH 2024
ACTION 442
MOGADISHU
TEMPORARY JAIL
21 FEBRUARY 2012
PROGRESSION #195
REZA ARAMESH 2024
ACTION 443
BANDA ACEH JAIL
29 NOVEMBER 2018
PROGRESSION #196
REZA ARAMESH 2024
ACTION 446
NAIROBI DETENTION CAMP
23 NOVEMBER 1952
PROGRESSION #199
REZA ARAMESH 2024
ACTION 447
BAN METTA
ACTION 435
ADALA PRISON
13 MARCH 2016
PROGRESSION #188
REZA ARAMESH 2024
ACTION 436
GUANTANAMO BAY
2 DECEMBER 2002
PROGRESSION #189
REZA ARAMESH 2024
ACTION 444
BAMIYAN JAIL
5 FEBRUARY 2002
PROGRESSION #197
REZA ARAMESH 2024
ACTION 445
GRADIGNAN PRISON
3 OCTOBER 2022
PROGRESSION #198
REZA ARAMESH 2024
CENTER
MARCH 2000
#200
ARAMESH 2024
448 SANA’A PRISON 17 OCTOBER 2009 PROGRESSION #201
ARAMESH 2024
449 SHEBARGAN JAIL 8 DECEMBER 2001
#202
ARAMESH 2024 ACTION 450 ADALA PRISON 28 DECEMBER 2005 PROGRESSION #203 REZA ARAMESH 2024 ACTION 451 SIALANG BUNGKUK PRISON 5 MAY 2017 PROGRESSION #204 REZA ARAMESH 2024 ACTION 452 BARAK PRISON 17 OCTOBER 2001 PROGRESSION #205 REZA ARAMESH 2024 ACTION 453 TINSLEY HOUSE 24 JULY 2022 PROGRESSION #206 REZA ARAMESH 2024 ACTION 454 CAMP GIBBONS 25 NOVEMBER 2006 PROGRESSION #207 REZA ARAMESH 2024 ACTION 426 JALALABAD PRISON 2 JUNE 2003 PROGRESSION #179 REZA ARAMESH 2024 ACTION 427 COLNBROOK 26 MARCH 2023 PROGRESSION #180 REZA ARAMESH 2024 ACTION 419 MULTAN JAIL 17 APRIL 2007 PROGRESSION #172 REZA ARAMESH 2024 ACTION 420 BAGRAM PRISON 24 JULY 2021 PROGRESSION #173 REZA ARAMESH 2024 ACTION 421 BROOK HOUSE 6 JULY 2017 PROGRESSION #174 REZA ARAMESH 2024 ACTION 422 MONTLUC PRISON 21 JUNE 2013 PROGRESSION #175 REZA ARAMESH 2024 ACTION 423 NUSAKAMBANGAN PRISON 11 MARCH 2015 PROGRESSION #176 REZA ARAMESH 2024
424 FAISALIYA DETENTION FACILITY 12 AUGUST 2018 PROGRESSION #177 REZA ARAMESH 2024
425 CENTRAL JAIL KARACHI 3 NOVEMBER 2002 PROGRESSION #178 REZA ARAMESH 2024
21
PROGRESSION
REZA
ACTION
REZA
ACTION
PROGRESSION
REZA
ACTION
ACTION
Leonardo Corona Crucifixion of Christ Oil on canvas ca. 1590/92