C ASE S T UDY 9

.The artist as a post-colonial subj eet

and this individual's journey towards
~the centre'
,
- _ A'

, ,
RASHEED
•
ARAEEN
I
, ••
-
, -
Introduction •
•

What is a post-colonial subject? Is this a white/E~opean 'self' wh~ is

, somehow reluctant to come to terms with post-colonialiry and realize his or
her liberation from the.legacies of an imperial past, or is iJ a liberated colonial
'other'? My concern here is with the latter, the post-cote.n ial subject who is
now supposed to have been displaced from his or her place of origin and is
•
lost in the wilderness of global migration, Although I am dealing with the
predicament of this subject, he or she cannot be separated from the white /
European subject: both are entangled in a post-colonial struggle for ,
•
redefinition.
Liberation from colonialism presupposes liberation from a past thafwas -
defined by colonialism ,and its view of history. The dynamic of this history
denied the colonized people any creative place in it. It was therefore important
- for the liberated people to seize the dynamic ofhistoIY again, its modernity, .,-- .. •

, "~
and locate themselves within it; and redefine their post-colonial subjectivity.
I
'.
~
,
- , 1. .
"'1 However, this was not easy for the artists who wanted to enter the central
K. space of modernism and deal with its most advanced ideas, as their newly
j
..\ • independent countries were still suffering from the legacies of colonial under-
•••
development and lack of modem art institutions. The paradox is that· they
therefore had to leave their ow:n 'liberated' countries and undertake a journey
towards the very metropolis that was the centre of the West's colonial empire.
It was there that they wished to realize their full creative potential and reclaim
their place in hiStory. . •

In this case study, which has two parts, I Will attempt to deal with this paradox
or problematic situation. In the first part, I will discuss some issues regarding
the problems the post-colonial subject laces on entering' the centre', the West,
and trying to locate him- or herself within the history of mOderriism. 'The
..
, ' second part deals with an example - my own work as an artist - which shows ,

how an artist from 'the periphery can locate him- or herself within the
metropolitan centre, and thus confront the dominant theory of art, ~itK its
continuing colonial ideology, which underpins the eurocentricity of the
, mainstream' art.
history of our
.
mo~em times. ' . •
• - ' .. \
•
, •
•

_ The po~t-colonial.subject and the We~t •

Some yea~ ago, I was invited to a co~erence in Rotterdam, which discussed

the invisibility in Europe of what were referred to as 'artists from other
cultures'. The dominant view was that this was due to the inability of Europe
to come to tenus with cultural differences underlying these artists' works. I,
on the oth,er hand, argued that this view was based on ignorance of what
•

• •
.
•
,.... -_.-
-
_ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ ____ _ • •
. ·--r
_ _ _ • __ . _ • • •
.
._~..;. __ , , _ _ o• • •• _ _ '_",'

:..
. '..- '", ..----..=- .__ . "-. .
" ~ '. , - ' ,
,
• •
• •
•
. • •
'. _ _~~_-_._--"':~ ,~.- _ _ _~~_ c..,"----_ _ _ _~ .: .~.- - -'-' - ,-'~ . _-....;..
.•- - - - - , -~-....:.-
 ~ ........ _ . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,~ ... _ _ ........ _.~. . . . . . . . . . . ... -..; • • u~ .. •
•

actually was produced by these artists, which had very little to do with cultural ••
differences. On the contrary, many of artists had left their own cultural ,
•
,
•

milieus exactly in order to be in the modem metropolis and to explore, like ,

their European contemporaries, new ideas and produce work that was new •
and Significant in the context of the development of modern art in the
twentieth century. But this created a problem for the West and its art
•
institutions, which still maintained their eurocentric structures formed during
•
colonialism, differentiating between the rul~r and the ruled. The presence in
post-war Europe of post-colonial artists, who had liberated themselves from
•

colonial bondage, posed a challenge to this eurocentricity, and the only way •
~e establishm,ent in Europe could deal with this challenge was to ignore
•

j
these allists. This fact was made clear in 'The Other Story', an art exhibition !
that I curated for the Hayward Gallery in London in 1989, but agai n its impact. .
did not touch the intransigence of art institutions, which stilI saw post-colonial - -
arlists as being outside the mainsl:r€'am history of British ¥to
. . ... • I
--.'..
•

.'
,
"
••
The question now really is: why are art institutions in the West even today ; .·
closing their eyes to the fact that the post-colonial artist has intervened in the •

genealogy of post-war developments in modem art and has thus contributed

to these developments? Why is the history of modem art of the twentieth
century still the history of art produced only by white European and North
•
American artists? To be specific, why are the 'other' artists being denied their
•
rightful place in it? .
j
The dialectics of liberation from colonialism, whether political, economic, or
. ~; - "cultural, demand that both the colonizer and the·colonized liberate themselves
at the same time. But, unfortunately, the West has not yet come to tenns with
this historical process; its institutions are still resisting a change in their ,•
structures and are thus maintaining an imperialist world view as part of the
West's continuing political, economic, and cultural world domination. This
has lead to a neo-colonial situation, mistakenly called post-coloniality, which
does not recognize the liberated 'other' as a historical subjectl- as part of the
histOrically transforming processes of modernity. . ••
'.
However, the 'other' artists - who in general came from the West's ex -colonies
•
in Africa, Asian, and the Caribbean, hence I will use the term 'Afro Asian
artists' - could not be ignored forever. They had to be recognized as they had •

become part of European society, but to recognize them in the same way •
•

white/European ax lists are recognized would obviously disrupt the white

genealogy of the history of modem art. Thus, art institutions faced, and they
.still face, a serious dilemma: how to recognize AfroAsian artists but without
• locating their work in the same hisforical paradigm as that of their white
• -• •
contemporaries, and at the same time make it appear that art institutions are •
•
-
not' . 'nating between white and non-white artists. The splution was to
- •
•
adopt a cultural-theory that would (X)nnect the work-of A froAsi an 'artists to ' •
•

-
the cultures they had originated from in Africa or Asia and then evaluate
~eir significance in relation to their own traditiQ1lS, while providing both
•

t
• 'r hite and non-white artists a common spaCe for the circulation of their works. - ..
The most disturbing aspect of this is that even post-colonial cultural theories
that engage- with art do not 'somehow recognize this problematic situation, •

•
• ,
1 In ~ci:>lo~ical theory. a historical subjed. is somoon<, thought capable of laking an adi'/(! •

, U\ shapmg ,,"ellts.
IOle
 ........... ............ -... ..... ... ... .., ..... ~~ ..... ••• ,.. .ro 0" 0 0 00 •
•

- - - - - - - # •• __ • • --- •• -,
. --- ---- . .. - --
and continue to privilege cultural differences as the basis of artistic practice •

by the post-colonial artist. It is no wonder that there is now so much talk

about the 'in-between space' (see Homi Bhabha, The Location of Culture,
•
pp.l-4), legitimated by the art institutions. This is a mythU;a1 space between
the periphery and the centre through which the post-colonial artist must
pass before he or she becomes a.fully rerognb:ed historical subject. This has
let the art institutions in the West 'off the hook' and provided them with a
,. new framework - multiculturalism - by which the 'other' artist can be kept
•
outside mainstream art history and at thetame time promoted and celebrated
••
on the basis of his or her cultural difference. In other words, multiculturalism
, is now a new institution;ti strategy of containment. .. ,
•

•
• Thus, AfroAsian artists have now been pushed into a new marginality of
•
multiculturalism, in which oply the expressions of'cultural differen'ces are
•
seen to be authentic. This is justified and legitimated on the basis of a desire •

by AfroAsian communities to preserve their own cultural traditions.iii the

.. •

."
~.

West. This desire is understandable, given the diasporic situation these "•
•
communities feel themselves to be in. But why should this mean that
, .
• indiViduals from these communities are necessarily trapped within this
- •
. situation, and that they have been unable to experience the. world outside
their own cultural boundaries, particularly when these experiences are
concerned with what leads to the production of art? c.,,-, . . •

The problem with the policies of multiculturalism, or theories of cultural

diversity, is that they have failed to address the main issue of art as an
individual practice rather than an expression of community as.awhole, or of
art as an expression of a post-colonial subject who, in order to come to telms
with his or her modernity, must to some extent free him- or herself from the
'constraints of a specific culture. .
To be more specific, it is important not only to make a distinction between
•
collective cultural manifestations of a community and individual production
. of art, but also to recognize that there may exist a problematic relationship
between the collective and the individual, to the point of creating a rupture~­
between the two. This has, since the. Renaissance, been recognized in the
- case of the western individual, but this modem subjectivity has continued to
be denied to the 'other' even after the philosophical basis on which the
colonial separation between the 'self' and the 'other' was constructed has.
collapsed. In fact, there is no justification in maintaining this separation after •
the collapse of the West's colonial empire and the liberation of the colonized, •

particularly when there is now enough evidence that the post-colonial artist
has entered the space that was once meant to be exclusively occupiedJ~y the
white/ European·artist. . ,-
• In the face of multiculturalism; which has provided an opportunity fO{Tany " . • I •
,
AfroAsian artists to pursue successful careers, but who, with success'I n the ~
•
•

marketplace, show no concern with the issues I ha,;,e raised here, theproblem
•
of institutional control and containment has now become very difficult to
.. deal w'i fuJln fact, the artists who are now being promoted and celeb~ated in"
•

,
the West on the basis of their cultural differences are being used J:>,y "the •

•
establishment 'as .a shield against· any attack. on the policies:.oJ JJs.a-r,t . _', •

institutions.
•
• ••
,
•
, •

•
______ ~____
._. _ ,.rr __ ~_ '
_
__ ._,..=~_=_
=~ ........-=:..'';;;":;"",_ ...' ..;.__-" -._ -_ _~_ _ _ _ _ __ - '--
 . IU" '" V ,
I ' vU· I ' tJ( t.N Lt. : UI ..... I:.KP.NT vmws OF AI( r

H ow ev er , I st ill m ai nt ai n th at th e po st-co lo ni al ar tis t ha s a

hi st or ic al ,•
re sp on si bi lit y to pr es en t a cr iti ca l po si tio n w ith re ga rd to im
pe ria lis t
• as su m pt io ns, w hi ch sh ou ld go be yo nd co nc er n on ly for a successf
ul ca re er.
It is no t ju st ab ou t en try in to th e sp ac e th at w as pr ev io us ly fo rb id de n an
da
de m an d for reCognition, irr es pe ct iv e of the na tu re of the ar tis t's w
or k. Th is
re sp on sib ili ty en ta ils th at, w hi le w e en te r the sy ste m , w e slruuld co
nf ro nt th e
co lo ni al legacies th at co nt in ue to un de rp in its ar t in sti tu tio ns. .
•
It is th er ef or e im po rta nt, for me, to pe rs ist in an artistic po sit io n th
at ch al le ng es
.
al l th e co lo ni al st ru ct ur es or fr am ew or ks , in cl ud in g th e on es
,
le gi tim at ed by PO,st-col on ia l cu ltu ra l th eo rie s. Th ese str uc tu re s pr ed
th at ar.e
••
et er m in e,
co ns tra in , an d co nt ro l in pa rti cu la r th e artistic practice of those w ho
ar e no w
be in g de fin ed as 'ar tis ts fro m ot he r cu ltu re s'. In a gl ob al society in w
hi ch th e
in di vi du al is an au to no m ou s subject, a historically sig ni fic an t ar t
(o ne th at
in ve nt s, an d co m m en ts critically on ev en ts) ca nn ot be pr od uc ed by
a th eo ry
th at pr, ed et er m in es its sp ec ifi c cu ltu ra l fra m ew or k. Th e hist or y of th e la st
•
•
hu nd re d ye ar s of m od em ar t in pa rti cu la r sh ow s th at ar t pr od uc es
its ow n
fr am ew or k at th e po in t of its realization, de te rm in ed no t by a prior
i th eo ry
bu t by th e specificity of its de ve lo pm en t at a pa rti cu la r po in t in hi st
or y an d
th e pu rs ui t of th e in di vi du al to fu rth er th is de ve lo pm en t. The jo ur ne
y of th e
so -c al le d' ot he r' ar tis t fro m th e pe rip he ry to the metropo1.itan ce nt re
ha s be en
pa rt of a st ru gg le to pa rti ci pa te in th is de ve lo pm en t, w hi ch de m
an ds a
fra m ew or k th at is no t co ns tra in ed by specific cultural traditions or bo un
da rie s.
Bu~ i{ th is fra m ew or k is no t in sti tu tio na lly available to all
artists, be ca us e of
racial or cu ltu ra l differences, th en it i~. n9 t .ol)Jy a vi<;>lation of the basic
hu m an •

to de te rm in e on e's ow n w ay s or m et ho ds of expression bu t also a

ne ga tio n of th e fact th at th os e w ho w er e once colonize d by the Wes
t ar e no
lo ng er colonial subjects bu t free ag en ts of hi sto ry an d ha ve the rig ht
to ac t as
such.
•

From th e p er ip h er y to th e centre ,

,•
I will no w sh ow yo u, th ro ug h th e ex am pl e of m y ow n work, th at this
jo ur ne y
of the 'o th er ' ar tis t to w ar ds th e 'centre di d no t pr od uce a lo ss, ne ith
• er·di d it
st op at th e th re sh ol d of moder-nism, as is im pl ie d by so m e po st-
co lo ni al
cu ltu ra l theorists, ev en w he n su ch a st op pa ge w ou ld ha ve offered a lu
cr at iv e
career as an 'ex ot ic ' artist. O n th e contrary, this jo ur ne y le d the post- ,
colonial
ar tis t in to th e centre, w he re it be ca m e possible for hi m or he r to chal
lenge, in
th e tradition of t.he avant-gaede, an d ch an ge the prevailing course of do
m in an t
ar t history.
-
Fo r. lI!e, this jo ur ne y be gi ns at th e place of m y' birth, w hi ch is in a ,
• • •• • co un try
no w caHed PaJ.;istan. I w ou ld like to go th ro ug h pa rt of this artistic •
journey,
w hi ch has no t ye t en de d, an d sh ar e w ith yo u its m em or ie s. '
• •
•

I waf; bo rn in Karachi, Pa ki st an , In th e mi<;l-1950s, w he n I wa s 20

, I ca m e
acro~s m od em ar t an d be ca m e fascin~ed by it. But I ha d no idea
th en th at , ..- -
I
this fascination w ou ld le ad me to a life-lo ng co m m itm en t to art. My am
bi tio n
at the time w as to be co m e a m od em architect, bu t th ere w as no sc
ho:)1 of
architecture in Karachi. A nd m y pa re nt s w er e no t rich cn ou gh to
sc nd m e' .
abroiid for ed uc at io n. So I st ud ie d civil engineering, while co nt in ui ng
do in g
ar t as a hobby.
•
•

•
 But in 1959, while I was sti ll studying civil engineerin~ to produce
1 began
experimental work in architecture, paintin~ and sculpture, the modernism
of which surprised me. So I decided to be a professional artist. The ideas that
underlie my early work in Karachi were seminal and remained the basis of
my subsequent work over the last 40 or so years.
In the works I produced at this time (Plates 164 and 165), I was not only
looking for a new form, unlike my contemporaries who were experimenting
with borrowed western forms in order to produce modernist worKs, but I
was also attempting to d\!al with what'I had actually experienced in my
environment. The first work was inspired by children playing hula-hoop (a
subject that was not considered suitable for a painting), and the second was
about a phenomenon that I had witnessed in my neighbourhood: old bicycle
tyres being discarded by burning them on rubbish heaps. .
.'
•
•

•
••
•
I

~.

J
1
J
J
.
·· -- .. -
•
-I
-
J

•
• ,
• •
•
.', •
• •
.•, • •

•
•

\
• •
Plate 164
Rasheed Aracen,
Ham Raqs
(Dancillg
Parlll"r).1959,
• oil on <:anvas, •

. 4D x 60.£JH. .
•
Photo: bv
•
courtesy of
•
Rasheed Araecn.
•
, •
•
 · ~dom3. U'~ ~lI.H O~ AIWno:> AID Clll.\?Cll 01 pClppClp I 'fr961 u~ 'OS ',)j\~1eAoUU! •

a~ 0, a \Q. ~ssodU11 , SOW\'e aUl'e::>aq II ·AI:tuno::> UMO Am u! lS!1-I1? tre 51? ,)AU PUI?
\~-e \3~ s-e<>'P~ NI.<>U ~u~>.o\dx<> 3nu~~uo:> 01 3\.U ~oJ lln:>y}!p A~3A .... 0l':)Jc>lp SI?.M lJ

. ~ ..... ,.... --'" • • •• • ._., ,. .- .,---

.. J .................... , ........... "

•
. . ..... . . ..... . . . ....,.... ......................... _ ...... J • • _.
-

Both these works are about transformation, in the sense that ordinary and •

banal encounters are transformed into works of art. But the second work,
Burnillg Bicydc Tyres, is also involved in a material and conceptual process,
in which two rubber tyres are burnt and transformed into four metal loops,
which goes beyond the conventional way of making and looking at things.
"1 did-these and subsequent works (Plate 166) in a cultural milieu that was
dominated by the e~erging post-colonial middle class that took pride in •

- imitating whatever it could get from the West. This milieu !Ilso provided the
basis for the development of modemisn\ in Pakistan. The work of European "

artists working in the ~e~tieth century, such as Picasso, Georges Braque,

Henri Matisse, Marc Chagall, and Paul Klee, was the inspiration for most of
•
my contemporaries in Karachi and also provided the criteria by which m9dern
art in Pakistan was and is still being evaluated. Abstract expr~sionism, for
example, came to Karachi in 1959 and immediately had its· imitators, who
are still working as successful artists. •

_.
·
--
· •

.--·.,.
u
.;'0- -
,.'),

.~
"-
-.... f.. - ..' -.. -
••-.
~/l
• _. . •

fit
,
.~
,
'r.
P;.
< •
•
•

".'• •

.-, •

•
'!\.;
,
-,.•
,~.

,. •
, • •

,'f

'J •
",
;{f
"
"
"•
•

" ,
•
.
·.'
, • •
"

...,: .. ...
. -~
- ~'J
"

-. ~ ,
"
• •
•

•
•

- •

•
•

• Plate 166 Rasheed AraL'en, Untitlcd (Ai), 1961, ink on paper.

275 x 20 cm.
, Photo: by courtesy of Rasheed Aral'en .

. ,;iI.
 - . _ .. f ......... _ ••••• ~,.." .... ,,....... , . , . . , .,. •• u .... ., . . ,
•
, , .... "",. .. .,....",

V I S\V!> OfT D.PPURIZN C: OI"I-IJ)<e",.,.. V I QWS OP ", 1"0 '

It was therefore very difficult for me to continue exploring new ideas in art
and live as an artist in my own country. It became almost impossible to be
innovative. So, in 1964, I decided to leave my country to live in Europe.
My destination was Paris, but on arrival there I found the city very difficult
to cope with. particularly as I did not speak French, and so I decided to corne
to London. I found the art scene here so exciting that I decided to stay. It was •

- an encounter with an environment that was new and intellectually inspiring,

and I immediately felt that this ,was the place where I could realize my
ambition to do something extraordinary. . •
, •

As I have said, I Was really excited by the art scene in London,-but, when 1
saw the work of the sculptor Anthony. Carp, my ex~i.tement turned into
fascination (Plate 167). rhe way he used' industrial material ·such as. steel
girders was an approach I had not seen before (I was then totallJ ignorant of
the work of another twentieth-century sculptor, David Smith), ~d it put me ,

on a path to become a t;ruly modem·sculptor. ~.

-'i• •
, .
~

-
.
.'.... '".. ..,-'-',
- --""
.... ,
•
. •.• '.- .
i .. , "
. •
.
•
• •
•
" -..""'-
.
• ..• ' . •

.....,
••
•
•
.r
• •
, .. ~., •
.,.. -.
... ;.J;" ,. , , • . ,
..
•

- • ..

•
•

Plate 167 • •
Anthony Ca ro, •
• •
Early One •

Morning, 1962, ,.
sculpture, 289.6 x '.
•
, ..
.,
619.8.cIil. Photo: -. •
by courtesy of •
Rasheed Araeen. •

printed by •

permission of the •
Trustees of the
Ta te Gallery, •
•
London. • • •
•
•

• •
• • . . . •.
.. ...
.. .,' .'!o ~
•
•
•
.
•

However, despite my great fascination with Caro's work, I did;'~ot follow in ,

•
his footsteps in the way some of his contemporaries followed.him in the
•
early 196~s. It was partly to do wfth'my temperament, butJ al$R"~iq :n~t have • • - .. •

the matenal resources and expertise to do that kind of work " ~hl'ch" t d '
be h '. ,ume
~ut.to , a good t ing. M~reover, by 1965, the work of Ca~o" and "others was •

m~t.y:utionally well establishe~ and~ had lost its critiCal '~qge·:.S0·J began to
"
• I.

think how I co~ld do, something dIfferent, something more challenging' I •

was aWare ~at, If I wanted to do something ne~,and sigJ)lfi~JitI h .~ t ' .

•

•
•
•
·
·
••
'.
••

· . ..
....'' .
. '
•
' . '. .
• •
. .
.
.."
. • •

;:~ 0 e:rtn:e.at something that could be a new breakthrough. One must

I haa fa w!t. lienee and be able t.o seize the moment when it doe,S happen, so
1

. .

-_..
 ' - i ... _ ............... ••• u . . . . . . . . . . . . .... . . . ....... .. ____ •••• _ ... , __

M ea nw hi le , I be ga n to be critical of Ca ro 's w or k. l be ga n to feel un co

m fo rta bl e
w ith th e wa y Ca ro composed hi s w or k. But th at wa s no t en ou gh .
It di d no t
pr ov id e m e w ith an al te rn at iv e, un til on e da y al th e en d of 1965, w
he n I wa s
w or ki ng as an en gi ne er in g as sis ta nt w ith British P tro le um 's pe tro
ch em ic al
se ct io n, I fo un d m ys el f dr aw in g on pa pe r eq ua fs iz steel gi rd er s, wh
ic h we re
arrimged..5¥.mmetric(llly. And th at w as it. I im m ed ia te ly re al iz ed
th at I ha d
fo un d w ha t I w as lo ok in g for. I di d no t, of co ur se , un de rs ta nd
its full
sig ni fic an ce im m ed ia te ly , ex ce pt th at th e id ea of m ak in g sc ul pt ur e
this w ay •
w as ne w an d ch al le ng in g. Fo llo wi ng th e gi rd er pieces, I de ve lo pe d
a sy ste m
ba se d on th e lattice str uc tu re th at is co m m only us ed in en gi ne er ing,
re su lti ng •

in a se rie s of wo rk s ba se d.o n th e sy m m et ric al pe rm utatiol1 of a sin

• gle m od ul ar
un it (P la te s 168 an d 169). . . •

• •

-
,.-.
.•••-
.". ':..
•
••

•
•• •

. Pl ate 16 8· -Rash ee d
Ar ae en, Sculpture
Number Two, 1965 /
1987, pa inted ste el,
•
120 x 120 x 120 em .
•
• • Ph o to: by co ur tes y of
Ra sh eed Ar ae en .

• •

•
•
• •
• • •
•
•

•
•

• .. . • • • •
•
•

•
•
Pl ate 169 Ra sh ee d
Arae en , Fir,:' StTllcturc,
1966 - 7/19117, pa inted
steel, 137.5 x 137.5 x
137.5 em . Ph oto: by
co ur tes y of Ra sh ee d
Arncen .

:---- _. __ . __ '. _ _ . _.r- __"___ -- . -

• •
. . -
•
 l nitja lly, I was foll ~w~ng. my jn~ition w j ~hou t any the ore tical und erst a n d in g
o Ethe w ock , but I did m time begm to realIZe that what I was doing challenged
th e prevailing concept of mode rnist scu lpture, which continued to b e
compositional,. pictorial, and hierarchicaL I began to feel that it was time to
free modern sculpture from gestural 'expresst9nism' and the irrationality of
trial-and.-errOLmethods and to d evelop a new concep tual framework that •

w ould redefine it. It is now recognized that in the m id -1 960s this kind of
work represented a 'radical shift and a historical breakthrough, bu t this
achievement is,wrongly attributed only to American artists for reasons tha t I
hope will be clear as I proceed further. ,
Why was the change ' from Caro's work to my work a radical shift and a
, histo rical breakth ro u gh ? This change is a very complex phenomenon,
underlying a philosophical and ideological proposition. However, I will give
a b rief explanation. •
,

Traditionally, particularly since the Renaissance, western art was based on ,

asy mmetric arrangements, which were achieved by dividing the flat surface
of the canvas or sculptural space into unequal parts. This continued into the
twentieth century even when art abandoned iconographic representation. · '
. '

With the exception of a very few works, such as some by the sculptor
Constantine Brancusi, the painter Alexander Rodchenko, an~ perhaps the
artist Max Bill, the whole development of modem sculpture ~hom Picasso
to Smith, Caro, and Eduardo Chillida - was based on the idea of dynamic
balance created by asymmetric composition, produced by the method of trial
arid errorl by.putting4lUngs here and there, the final result of which depended
,

on the genius of the artist. This represented a particular philosophical id~a or

world view, according to which the world can only be constructed or defined
by a heroic figure and in terms of its uneq~al parts, In o!he,r , ~~r~s, the
dynamic of human society can only be reahzed by arranging Its dIfferent
parts hierarchically.
My own work, on the other hand, was conceived around an idea of symmetry, ,
which thus rejected and challenged the idea of the hierarchical view of things,
It also rejected the role of the artist as a 'shaman' whose touch was necess~ry ,
,

, in the production of art (in fact, my structures can be reorganized by the ,

spectator.; or audience themselves). Underlying this was a philosophical

, proposition according to which things can and should be arranged
, symmetrically in order to recognize their equal status, with an implication
that hllman society should be reorganized at its structural level on the basis
of the equality of its members. Of course, I w as aware that symmetry when ,

imposed on society could also act as a homogenizing force, and:thus prevent

human individuals from acting differently and freely. I tried to:deal with this ,•
problem by making the work respond to 'the movement of the audience or ,

spect~tor; thus, the kinetic movement one experiences in the w~rk becomes
,
, an expression of the human movement or adion.' , ,':;,-,' , " , .
However, th~ ,w ork is symmetrical only at a ~onceptual and structural level. (

It a~~~ contains .asym~etry, ~hich can be exper'ienced depen~ling upo~ the

,

posltion of the vlewer m relation to the work. In fac t, there is coJ)s.!ant dynamic
movement from symmetry to asyinmetty and vice 've rsa in' th~: workwhen , ,
,, ,
one moves around or in front of it. ' :~., :', ,

" , , I

',''''
, 1$. . \
.
¥
,
.' •
~
, '.
, , ,
 ---- . --- . •

Between 1965 and 1968, 1 carried on this work alone and in tota! isolation.
During this time J did not personally know any artist in London, let alone
. any artist who was doing similar wor . 1fow ver, I was then not alone in my
thinking, as I came to know later. Th r was a whole group of artists in New
York who were involved in a similar pursuit, who in time became known as •

minimalists. When a culture or body of knowledge becomes global, it is not

unusual for new ideas to emerge at th same time in different part of the
world, and it should not be a surprise if minimalist thinking emerged in •

New York and London at the same timel

•

However, my work has been compared, by many critics, with the minimalism
of the American artist Sol teWitt, as if to imply that I was influenced by him
- which is factually untrue. Anyway, the resemblance here is superficial. The
fundamental aspect of my structures is the use of the diagonal, which is absent
in American mi~alism. Moreover my work, unlike that of LeWitt, is not •
•
about the consti~ction of a form, but in volves re assemblages or
rearrangements of found material, that is, the lattice structures that constitute •

our modern industr'ial environment (Plate 170) .

..
• ,- .- _ . ' YUO

•
•
Plate 170
Rasheed Araeen,
Char Yar, 1968, •
•
painted wood,
• 90 x 180 x 180 cm .
Photo: by
courtesy of •

•
Rasheed Araeen. .
• •
•

It is also important to remember th at there was no movement called

•
minimalism in 1965, let alone anybody in the. United Kingdom who knew
what was going on·in New York in this respect. There were sOllie individual
•
artists in New York, such as Carl Andre, LeWitt, Robe rt Morris, and Donald •

Judd, who were doing work ind ividually that disph:.yed a common
... . .. philosophy and conceptualization based on the idea of symmetry and .. • • •
permutation of modular units, and their works were subsequently put
together on the basis of their commonalty and w ere historically termed
,
' rninimalism'. . • • • •

•
My own work, which by coincidence showed similar thinking and which
was the United Kingdom's own contribution to what is· now universally •

recognized as a historical development, has not been able to enter the history
of minimalism, despite its IInique origi nality .
, •

•
 ---- . - . . ' ..~.:-:-:':
. . ::."....,.".':: .~ ..:-:_--- .- - - - -

My s tructu ra l \>\rork had trernendou . . .

with it all my life but I did not want ~ potentlal, ~U~hclethnt for me to continue
th · ' 0 carey on olng e same kind of work
so at It wO~d be~me my signClture tune, as it w ere. I have a tenden
towa~ds ex~enmenhng w ith new things, pushing the language of art to Z
breakin~ pomt. A t the end of the 1970s, I thought it would be a good idea to
take my Ide.a~ .out of the endosed studio or gallgry space and subject them to
•

an ope~ e n viro nme nt, thus freeing them fr2m the constraints of the
conventional gallery. T~e open environment or space happened to be a large
•

lake of water surroundmg my studio in Saint Katherine's Docks London

and the nature of this space demanded an entirely different c~nceptuai
approach fro~..that ?f the work I had been doing in my studio; of course,
•

what was re~ulred was something that would float. One day, I stopped on
. the small b~dge that .1 had to cross to go to my studio aI\d found mystM
contemplating over.~lje. water: suddenly the idea of floating' discs was there
(plate 171). " :.'
•
"•• • • ,

t.he work.that I mad~-as a result comprised sixteen equal size, same colour,
nrcular discs, fonning a minimalist structure of 4 x 4. When this work was •

thrown onto the water, its formal structure was broken and. dispersed' over
the water, its parts combining with the flotsam and jetsantand ptoducing • •

asymmetric configurations. While it maintained its symmetrica14 x 4 structure

conceptually, one could not see or experience it as such, neither could it be
seen as a whole. One could see only a few discs at one time at one place,
while all the sixteen discs were there together within the materiality of the
work's space and conceptual frame. The word chakras means circles. In Hindu •
•
mythology, chakras are the fire circles that, by emergIng'fromthelr pnmeval
liquid state, gave birth to the universe. The connection here is incidental, or ,
perhap.s ironic.
,
Although my minimalist work was a response to what I encountered on my
arrival in the United Kingdom, on close examination we find another
connection. This has to do with the work I did between 1959 and 1962 in
Karachi. It seems that the foundation for the work I did in London was already ,
laid down. much before' it was realized: the organic fOIm of my early work
was now transformed into a geometrical system (Plates 172 and 173). •

a
My entry into and taking up radical position in the history of modernism
was due to my experience of myself as a free subject. But this a problem
for the dominant cultural theory and western art institutions. They could not
accept the idea that a person from outside western culture could be a free
•
agent of history and could, in fact, intervene by challenging prevailing ideas
•
in a pa.rtjcular time in modem history. and produce som~.thing that may
represent a historical breakthrough. This problem is due. to. the fact that art ,
institutions in the West, as I have ..explained
. before, have rtot yet abandoned .. • • •

... . '
the concept of art history and its 'Grand Narrative' that was-~stilblished as ,
,
• part of the colonial world view, particularly the prevailing liegelian model
of art history according to which only a European could be an agent of artistic
•

•
Ft0gxess, .within ·this model, I had no place as a free agent but only as the
'6ther', whose role was to provide the European 'self' with an affirmation of
his or her central role in (modern) history. .., . ... ~;: ..
. , . . .. ~ . .. .. • • • •
• •
..•
The realization that I was seen to be outside 'history was shattering' for me.
For some time, I lost all my self-confidence and the urge to cr~.;tte. I becam.e a
political activist with a belief that radical political activity was more effective

. -
•

.. - - . • -
- ---- .... -- - - .- .. . ~
. . ,~
. - • •
•
 " ""- \ • •, .
• •

I1 ·I\SHsn.II)Y~ lll 1 i All rI!' 1 1\:, A I'C..ISI'.(..'ULUNIAL ~UIIJ t:.L I •

th , l\ ar t in dc . ling wi th su h a sit ua tio n. Al th ou gh m y ai m wa

, s to br in g
lo g th er art an d politics, lo on re al iz ed th at politics ha d its ow n
• ru le s an d
lim ita tio ns , an d se ld om un de rs to od th e co m pl ex ity of an ar tis tic en
de av o\ ,lr
an d its im po rta nc e, So I re tu m ed to ar tis tic activity, re ali zin g th at
th er e w as
an im po rta nt str ug gl e to be wa ge d wi th in ar t, no t on ly in te rm s of qu
es tio ni ng
an d ch an gi ng th e pr ev ai lin g do m in an t framewar-k-of ar tis tic pr ac
•
tic e, bu t •

al so in fin di ng a la ng ua ge th at wa s no t su bs er vi en t to th e do m in an
t m od el ,
w hi ch w as al so (ree fro m th e bu rd ep of m er el y re pr es en tin g
w ha t is - -
w ,d er st oo d by politics .
• • • ,
A lth ou gh m y ea rly wo rk , th at is m in im al ist str uc tu re s, wa s m y im
po rta nt
ac hi ev em en t an d it also 'ch al le ng ed th e sta tu s qu o, I feIt un ab le at t~
e ~e to
de al w ith th e m ul tip lic ity of m y ex pe rie nc es in th e ,U ni te d Ki ng do
m wi th in
th es e str uc tu re s. So I ha d to m ov e on to so m et hi ng else. .
•
...•
. So on af te r I left the Black Pa nt he rs , a po lit ica l or ga ni za tio n Q.f Af
ro As ian
pe op le in Lo nd on whose m ai n task wa s to confront an d fight raciS.m: (o •
f British
so cie ty ), I pr od uc ed th e wo rk sh ow n in Pl at e 174. It wa s th e sw nm er
of 1973,
w he n I wa s in vi te d to tak e pa rt in an ex hi bi tio n in m y local library. I ac
ce pt ed
th e in vi ta tio n on th e un de rs ta nd in g th at I wo ul d be all ow ed to do wh
at ev er •
I w an te d to do du rin g th e ex hi bi tio n wi th ou t an y interference or ce ns
or sh ip
fro m th e organizers. Within this exhibition I pl ac ed a display, an d th e
m ate ria l
of th is di sp la y wa s ch an ge d ev er y we ek for th e four weeks of th e exhi -
bition's
du ra tio n. Th e id ea wa s no t re all y to re pr es en t politics or pr od uc e
political •
ar t, as ha s be en co m m on ly un de rs to od , bu t to de ve lo p a la ng ua •
ge th at
ch al le ng ed th e pr ev ai lin g- co nc ep t of ar t an d th e sp ac e in -which
•

ex hi bi ted , wh ic h ha d be en depoliticized an d privileged in fa vo ur of th

it w as .' _~.7' '...... or.:.'." :,,

• e statUs
qu o.
•

•
•

-
•
• •
"
•

['l~h! 17 4 Rasheed AI'dC!('n, For Ol uWIlle, 19 71 -3, .. panels wi th ne ws pa

pe r cli pp ing s on ha rd bo ard , ea .h
pa ne l 60 x.60 em, 'Artistl' (or De mo cra cy ', Lo nd on , 1975. Photo: by cou
rt~'Sy of Ra sh ee d Ar ae en .
 •
< 7
I
r

. Subsequently, my work went through many s tages: it 80metimcs moved

linearly and at other times in a to-and-fro manner. The IItruggle flu alw ays
• been to fmd a language that .would express my own expcrk-nces of life, but at
the same time to find ways to locate the work art-historicaJly, not only in •
•
tenus of an innovation but also as one that could maintain its challenge to
the mainstream. Although by 1975 T had abandoned completely making
minimalist \york, there have aJways been references to this work in my
- subsequent performances, and sqch works as my photo works and tape slide
pieces (plates 175-179). •

•
I

• - .,

- • •
•

• I

- .
•
• •
•

. .•.. ,,
• •
• ···
.• t' '..
. ,,..- .
••

-. •
•
'. •

• - "

-
 I
•

I
•

/
/

CASfiSIUD\' , nm IIRTISf liS A I'(Y.;I..(.;ULUNIAL"UDJC\..' -. •

Howeve~ in the early 1980s, I developed a language or form that recycled

•
and engaged with minimalism - not only my own work but the concept of
• • minimalism - through a methodology of deconstruction, which involved
parody, irony, and sarcasm. It expresses the mtIltiplicity of one's being in a
world that is no longer rigidly demarcated according to national or cultural
boundaries, in opposition to the dominant system which would like to c.ontain
one's experiences within a space that is defined by specific cult:ural roots or
•
origins. ! .

This work, which comprises nine panels put together in 3 x 3 arrangement, is

.•, • not a simple juxtapositi9fl of western or eastern' icons, as some critics in the
•

>
West have implied, but is t4e result of cutting, rupturing, and polluting the
•
purity of the dominant paradigm. First, I make a rectangular minimalist space
~;H.
· · . or paneL often painted green (an allusion to, for example, nature/raw /
,,.
·. --- young/immature - all these words are taken from an English dictionary), ,-
"
r,
•

"
",'
:-::;

•':":
(;;
• which is rut vertically and horizontally, and then I move the four panels .
:t
..
• apart forming an empty space or cruciform. This cruciform is filled with
material that is incongruent to the purity of minimalism. What is most -
'j
•
•

important in this work is not merely the meaning of iconic images but their
spatial location within the whole configuratiofL In other words, the sacred
is polluted and turned into something whose significance can only
be uriderstoodln terms of a penetration of one reality into another
•
(Plates 180-182). . .
•

•
• •

-,
• •

",
• •
•
.. \ ..
~

•
•

•
•
•

Plate 180.' Rasheed Araeen, Grccn Painting No: 2, 198S-92, colour photographs, ne ws paper clippings,
and acryhcon canvas, 167.5 X 226.25 UIl, Fukuoka Art Museum, Jap an. Photo: by co urtesy of Rasheed
A raeen. .
 Besides the wall pieces whid, I havc cl -;; rlb,-d b v , I have 0.150 do~e ~ome
installation works, the forms oC whl h we'd l rmin d by the specifioty of
the space in which these inslallallons - b lit phy leal and cultural - were •

located. One in particular is a billb aro w rk thai was commissioned in 1990

by the Artangel, an organization in Ih - Unit d Kingdom that sponsors
artworks. This work, called Tire Golll('11 VI'" 1.'5, was shown al about 20 different
sites in London, as well as in th Unit'd lat ,Germany, and-recenUy in
South Africa (Plate 183). It compris s 11 Urdu alligraphic text superimposed
on the image of an oriental carp l. 1'11 I ' lJreads:
,
•
WHITE PEOPLE ARE VERY G PE L. THEY HAVE VERY WHITE AND
,
- SOFT SKIN. THEIR HAIR IS GLEN AND THEIR EYES ARE BLUE. THEIR
• CIVILISATION IS THE BEST CiVILISATION. IN THEIR COUNTRIES THEY
, LIVE LIFE WITH LOVE AND AFFECTl N. AND :fHERE IS NO RACIAL
•
•
.!l
•
• DISCRIMINATION WHATSOEVER. WI ITE PEOPLE ARE VER" GOOD
,
-
•• PEOPLE.
~~

•
•

-
~PWe183
•

, •

Rasheed Araeen,
The Golden Verses,
. 1990, multicolour
commercial print,
installation, 300 x
600 em, Jamaica
Road, London,
1990. Photo: by
courtesy of
.' -Rasheed Araeen .
- , • • ,
, '.
<,
•· - Although the-work is composed of the calligraphy and the carpet, which are •
•

• stere-otypical representations of Islamic culture in western culture, it turns

the tables by incorporating the stereotypical image of western people (blonde
- with blue eyes) disguised in the calligraphy of the Urdu text Mo~t non-Urdu-
•
speaking p~ople thought this represented \}erses from the Qur'an.,The work •

confused many people, and generated a violent response in the'lPtm of

yandalism:_,i n Cleveland, the work was burned down by an Asian &,rOup; in
Germany, it was attacked by neO-Nazis'with a scrawl ()f a ·swas!ika "Qn,it; in " • ..
• ,
London, it was scribbled with graffiti by the National Front, with. the7words .. •
-.
'What's It All About, Bongo!' . ' -.:'.~ : '
, . ."'-
This workls not about white people, neither merely a sarcastic rep~~~~ation, ,
- •
..
,of them (as ~nderstood by critics) nor a praise of white people (as un~ei-sto?d
,
,

,by Some ASians). It essentially deals with stereotyp.es in wes~~f!\ ~Htjte~ bQth
,
, ,
, ••,
•
of other cultures as well as the West's own stert~otype 0'( itself. W}lile the , ,•
•
-, .'•
• '- ,

stereotypes of the others keep them in a frozen or sllspended state, the image
, - ,

-
 ~ , \\\ "..

•
,
I
I
lh h,,. al d [or itself is not only promoted as a privileged or superior I ,

n pI of b uly bUl it also serves an imperial function to differentiate

l w n lh 01 nizer and the colonized. The work destabilizes our perception I
of thin s imp d upon us by the dominant linguistic and conceptual system. I ,
I,

,
•
In lus ion, I would like to present two more areas of my work which I
011
,
hay b n pursuing since the early 1990s. I was in Karachi when the Gi.llf I

• ,
•
War slarl d . While watching th,e b9mbardmenrof war images on CNN, the I

, inl mational ision news network based in Georgia, Atlanta, J began to I· •

realize the growing power of globally expanding information technology, I,
pa rtieu larl yin the form of sateHi te television. Soon afterI returned to London, I
, •

I,
1 sel up an instaUation work at The Central Space in London, in which J u,.sed
,
four television sels. The Space was filled with six inches of sand, on which ,,
I,
were placed lwo of my 1960s sculptures;one arranged in the original manner ,
I
on which were placed four television sets facing each other, the other
fragmented <)nd scattered arou nd . The television sets showed live
,
'.,•
I
,

programmes broadcast from four different channels (Plate 184). Since the war •
,
I

was still on, the broadcast of it on one of the television sets became part of the ,
,I
,
work. The work, What's It All About, Bongo? (a reuse of the graffiti scribbled ,

on the billboard work described above), as described by critic Paul Overy:

,I,
, '
,•
I

is a much more complex work, densely layered and(fl1apped over with different •
meanings, relating not only to the recent military adventure of the West, but I
I
, directing the viewer back and forward in time through the artist's own career
and its reception, disclosing and attempting to forestall the appropriation of and ,

•,
anaesthetisation of the Other,
. .......... •. '...
~ ~""~-r _1>. , ,
, ('Rasheed Araccn', pp.22-3) • • •

I ,
•
. ,.'
p "
•
- ... -.. _ -\ ..
, •
,

..
, •
•
, . . \ :; • •
~. '
,

\, \, ,
•
•

..
•
,• •

•
• , • ;
•
•
• ,
- ,
,
••
•
•,
•

•
•
,
,•
•
•,
,
•

,
.. . • • .. •
•
• •
, • , ,

,, '
• • • •·
,, •
,,
• ,
I
,•
I
Plate 184 R.. sheed Araeen, Whafs II All A1J(lilt, 80llg07, 1991, sand, sculptun:s, • I•
. calligraphic {riezc, and 4- television sets broadcasting live programmes from 4- I•
,
( cha .... n\.ls, installation, The Central SpaC(', London. Phot~: by courtesy of Rasheed I,
Ameen. ' , " ,,,
, I I
,,
 •
•

-"' _. __ . ... _.... . _-..- ... --- --_. --- ._---.-_.

.;

--
I do not want to add anything to Overy's interpretation except to say that the
multilayering he refers to alludes to a jux taposition of my personal history
and its achievement with the destruction of Iraq. The cause of the Gulf War
was not that Iraq was being ruled by a cruel dictator (who was the West's
. own creation), or that he had a ttacked and occupied a neighbouring country,
but that Iraq had the ability and capacity - both material and cultural (its
modernity) - to defy the West.
- •

Since doing the work shown in Plate 184, ~ have done a series of works that
• •

incorporate live television broadcasts directly from available television

channels. In other words, I 'steal' television programmes and u se them' as
ready-mades, the images alluding to the tradition of western art tha t is based
on iconographic representation. Sometimes both the images and the sounds
are there, for.nmg an unnerving cacophony in the case of multiple broadcasts.
When I twn the sound off, the images are redu ced to an absurd silence.
..
~~
~,
.
No Big Tragedy (plate 185) is const r\ic~ed inside the fra mework of m.i.niIDaijsm •

(recalling the grid-like sculptures eOudd), comprising four sections of gold-

painted bricks (using modular arrangem ents such as those of Andre)
surrounding a live broadcast from a television channel in Japan and forming
the central cruciform, the corner boxes of w hich are empty and are painted
green. This work was conceived just before the end of Apartheid in South
A frica - black, gold, and green colours allude to the African Nattonal
Congress's flag, and are now part of South Africa's new flag.

<'. •

• •

-
•

•
" . •
• • • •

•
•

•
• •
••

• •
-
Plate 185 . . Araeen, No Big Tragedy, 1991-3, plywood shelf, bricks pajnted
gold, acrylic pamt, and a television set broadcasting alive programme,.196.1;1$
203.1 x 52.5 en., Fukuoka Art Museum, Japan. Photo: Fujimoto KcmpachL ,. )'':' , . .. .,' . • • ..... ./
• •
 - .
•

While try in g to cr iti qu e an d di sr up t the pu rit y of m in im al ism , an ap

pr oa ch
th at by no w m us t ha ve be en ob vi ou s to yo u, I ha ve also be en tryin
g, since
1990, to de co ns tru ct m in im al is t sc ul pt ur e w ith ou t the us e of iconic im
ag es . A
recent ex am pl e of su ch w or k, To Wlwm it M ay Concern, co m pr is in
g a cu be
m ad e of scaffo ld in g bars, w as installed a t the Se rpen tine Gallery, Lo nd on
in N ov em be r to D ec em be r 1996 (see ~e tw o view s of th e w ork sh
ow n in
Plates Hs6 an d 187).
•
I
•

• ,•
.' ...

I .
•

.. ' ............

Pl at e 186 Ra sh ee d Ar ae en , To Whom It May Concern, 1996, us ed

sea ffo ldi ng ba rs,
in sla lla tio n, 450 x 37 5 x 375 an , Se rp en tin e Gallery, Lo nd on , Oc to
be r-N ov em be r
1996. Ph ot o: by co ur tes y of Ra sh ee d Ar ae en .
. .

- I
•
,
•
, • ..
•

.I
•

•
•
Pl ate 18 7 Ra sh ee d Ar ae en , To W/ WI 1I It Mny c.,,,'-t'''', 1996, us ed
sc aff old ing ba rs, I
in sta lla tio n, 450 x 37 5 x 375 CIl1, Se rp en tin e Gallery, Lon~on, Oc to
1996. Ph ot o: by courtL>SY of Ra sh ee d An we n.
be r- No ve mb er I,
,•
 •

While 'talking to a friend I explained this work as follows:

•
My Serpentine piece was a result of very long gestation, going back 10 to 15
years, if not more. Its self-referentiality is part of a suppressed history, and that ·
is why it may be difficult to comprehend its full significance. The work refers to
a history with an aim to recover it, not .nostalgically but through a continuing
• process whose new materiality and temporality put it in a. different historical.
time. The change represents a critical shift from the utopianism of my 19605
• minimalist work, its presupposition of being in the mainstream, to an awareness
of the problematic of its location within ilie system which remains indifferent to
its legitimate historical position ... The title of the work, To Whom It May Concern, •

is therefore ironic. I'm aWare that I do not have a recognized position vis-a-vis
the history of minimalisqt, but at the same time I cannot relinquish my cl.~im to
it. . ' ,
..•• ••
•
•

· .. •
•
•

I would like to conclude by s.~ying that my text here represents only a

conunentary.1t does not deal with the complexity of the work, which
multilayered references to art history, to the works of other artis my
own personal history, to my constant travelling between Lon~on 'and .
where my mother still lives. I have spoken as an ai tist about m,y own work,
which is not really the way to understand its full i~s complexity
•
•
•

can only be disentangled through a debate and discussion of the:~o'rk within

•

the mainstrea IU critical theory and i~s historical space, which hay! so far been
•

denied to me. My work has developed and has lived in opPo.s ition to an
institutional position, but it also has a paradOxical position in the sense that . •

the work will attain ' its historical significance only when it receives .an
•
institutional legitimation. But thjs.i~.a paradox whose dialectic can bring about
•
a profound change in our perception of modernism b art and its history. We
may come to see that modernism is no longer a monopoly or creation of the
West and its white people, but is now the result of the creativity .of different . •

peoples from all over the world, irrespective of their cultural roots or origins
or where they live. .
• • •
•
•

References •

• ~
•
.
•

Bhabha, ~. (1994) The Location of Culture, London and New York,

Rou tledge. . : ". . .
•
Overy, P. (1991) 'Rasheed Araeen', AtrMonthly; April, pp.9-10. "~'
The Other Story (1989) exhibition catalogue, London South Bank Centre
Hayward ·Gallery. . ' . . ' :. , '
•
• ,
• •
•
. '"
o 0
1"
.
•
'~ .
:'\" . •
o
•
"0 ' ~~ .
• o · •
•

•
· ..
..
• . , I.~

•
•

•
• •
• •
-.,
•
• •
. ' .
•
•
• • • • •

•
•
.• •
.'
'.
'.
. ".
•• •
" . '
•
" ••
.-• •
•

_ _~ _ _ _ _ _ _- - - ,{'
.'.
': 2
.-. _ ~
•
•
•
•
' .:;,;;
~::;,.;. "-_
I
•

•
_ _ _ _ _ __
•