In Jesus’ Name (resurrected) is essentially the story of a book that has been restored to life. It deals with the exercise of power and control within a free church organization, with censorship and artistic freedom, but also, and perhaps most importantly, with the conflicting interpretation of photographic images.
The story begins in 2011, when Christian Lutz is granted permission by the leaders of an evangelical free church, the International Christian Fellowship (ICF), to carry out a photo project among the religious group. Before taking any photographs, Lutz immerses himself in the ICF community, becoming like “a sponge that soaks up everything” (C. L.), observing, and engaging in conversations with its members. This includes discussions about the resulting images, images that reveal certain things and hint at many others.
In late 2012, the book In Jesus’ Name is presented for the first time at the Paris Photo fair. A few days later – in an action coordinated by the ICF’s leaders – 21 people featured in the photographs file a lawsuit for invasion of privacy, and the book is banned by emergency injunction. Even before the start of the trial, Christian Lutz’s Zurich-based publisher at the time accepts the preliminary injunctions and, in March 2013, voluntarily withdraws the book from sale.
Together with the author, we decided in 2016 to republish all the images from In Jesus’ Name in a new version that documents and reflects upon the events surrounding the banning of the original book, while ensuring the anonymity of everyone depicted.
A key part of this editorial reflection focuses on the conflicting interpretations of the 19 images in question. By presenting the incriminating photographs alongside the differing interpretations contained in the two opposing legal arguments, one offered by the plaintiffs and the other by the defense, an insightful discussion has been opened up.
In Jesus’ Name (resurrected) is a fascinating iconographic study written in dry legalese – a case study in the conflicting interpretation of photographic images. It addresses the openness and deliberate ambiguity of artistic photography, but also the dwindling creative freedom of politically engaged photographers like Christian Lutz.
