M60 The Azad Group

Manifesto (1976)

Goruh-e Azad-e Naqqashan va Mojassameh-Sazan-e Iran, better known as the Azad (Free) Group, were an anti-commercial collective established in the mid-1970s by a group of influential Iranian artists based in Tehran. In October 1976 the Azad member Morteza Momayez (1935–2005) – regarded as the founder of modern Iranian graphic design – drafted a manifesto for the catalogue of their exhibition of political conceptual artworks, Volume and Environment II (Gonj va Gostareh II), held at Tehran’s Saman Gallery.

The intention of the show was to question the direction in which modern Iranian art was heading, particularly with the emergence of a market-driven style of art, which they saw as insufficiently challenging or progressive. However, as the Azad Group sought to experiment with different mediums and concepts, they in turn were criticized for merely imitating Western artists. Azad’s riposte was that the whole history of art cannot be understood without embracing the vital role of imitation, citing Picasso among others in the West, and the highly respected nineteenth-century Persian artist Kamal al-Molk, who had first introduced a European painterly sensibility to Iran.

The Azad Group’s activities were brought to an abrupt end in 1979, when the Shah of Iran was overthrown by leftist and Islamic rebels and the radical Muslim cleric Ayatollah Khomeini became supreme leader of the new Islamic Republic of Iran, bringing about a cultural revolution in which Western and non-Islamic influences were banned.

* * *

They accuse us of the following:

We reply:

How can an artwork be original or imitative?

Who can make such a distinction? According to what criterion and knowledge?

Can everybody claim to have the knowledge needed for making [aesthetic] judgments or is it the professional critic familiar [with the] technical aspects of contemporary art production who should do it?

The judgment of any viewer is interesting to us, for such public judgments would reveal different aspects of artworks in relation to the viewer.

Yet, all artists have been waiting for years for the illuminating words of professional critics, since all that is said in the name of criticism is not critics’ words, but rather the superficial understanding of enunciators who accuse us of imitation, and their work appears substantial simply because it is published in journals …

If we look at much of our cultural activities, or those of other nations, from such a superficial perspective, we will come up with disastrous results:

For instance, according to such a superficial outlook, all art, from the miniatures of the past to Kamal al Molk’s paintings to the work of modern artists today, are imitations of either Chinese art, the classical art of Europe, or the new art movements of the recent decades in Europe.

Or for instance, many of the American contemporary art movements are imitations of Dadaists’ experiences or those of some other European artists.

Or the works of Picasso, the great artist, are imitations of African art.

Or the artworks of Modigliani or Matisse, two of the most distinguished artists of the current century, are copies of our miniatures.

As such, there remains no master at all, since one can trace in the work of any master his master, and according to such a viewpoint, the world of art is imitating itself in a chain [of imitations].

Relying on a superficial understanding, such judgments would inevitably end up in such conclusions because all sorts of ‘influences’ mean [nothing but] ‘imitation’ to the one who judges.

Imitation is an interpretation with no intellectual subtlety, and in every movement numerous imitators step forward. But history does not recall imitators who lasted long. The influenced remains at the bottom of the gutter.

We must not dismiss a new movement and ridicule its simplicity as a result of fearing the appearance of imitators. Yet being influenced is not a voluntary action that can be avoided. Those who are sensitive are influenced by their living environment, and the living environment in its turn is under the influence of communication and economic systems.

Which of us has a nonenvironmental behavior and is therefore able to condemn influence? What deceives an ignorant observer is that he chooses criteria for his empty hands, criteria that lie in the hands of others, the same way that he recognizes his worth only when it comes out of the mouth of the other.

A need has brought together the members of Azad Group despite all the differences of their artistic methods. The environmental influence has created this need in us.

The need for an intellectual play, for an investigation and for experiencing a route different from their main path, for opening a window into a different air, for smelling, tasting, digesting, and being born anew in the same main path.

The need for self-destruction to test our criteria anew.

The need for avoiding repetition.

The need for simplicity and for approaching and approximating whatever is in our lives – things we do not see in our intellectual solitude and the value of which we ignore.

The need for hailing other horizons.