After reading both articles ("The Ecstacy of Influence and "The Molotov Man"), I have decided to focus on Pablo Aravz and the "Molotov Man" for my blog. Although I thought both articles were interesting, the "Molotov Man" made me think more and I think I took more out of it. The original picture, taken in 1979 by Susan Meiselas, was a depiction of a Sandinista throwing a molotov cocktail at a Somoza as they were leaving. The Somoza's were in control up until this point and on the day the photo was taken they were leaving power and the town in Nicaragua. Susan's original picture features Pablo holding the molotov in one hand and a assult riffle around his other arm. There are other people in the background. Pablo, then known as "Bareta," was doing what he was supposed to do for the Sandinistas. It wasn't a picture about a riot, but one of difiance. The Somoza's were already leaving so there was no fight or need to rebel.
When Joy Garnett got ahold of this picture she focused only on Pablo and only used part of his body for her painting. She focused on Pablo with just the molotov in hand. She used a picture that was for documentary purposes and decontextualized it for her own use. She did this because she was working on a Riot series that included many other pictures of people doing crazy things. She even said at one point one of the pictures she used was of a bunch of fraternity men jumping over fires. That picture didn't represent a "riot," probably just kids who drank too much and trying to have a good time. Susan's picture, once again, was not about a riot, but Joy took what she needed from the photo to make it "work" for her project she was working on. She used a variety of pictures, all of which I am sure she didn't get permission to use, but when she took them in her own way and modified them, decontextualized them, it became something completely different. Something new, and it was her creation. Just because she got the idea from Susan's photo doesn't mean she copied it or stole it.
Taking photos to use that were created for documenting and making them your own work shouldn't be an issue. It makes me laugh, actually, about this whole thing. I just watched a 15 documentary short called, "Heavy Metal Parking Lot" (made in 1986) and I bet that neither guys filming had to get permits to do this. They just brought their camera to the parking lot (and even inside to film the concert) and got away with it. Nowadays with all of the technology and scandals it seems like you have to go through a huge process for something that really shouldn't be that big of a deal. We are all people on this earth and we live in the land of the free so why is this an issue? It wasn't 20 years ago. With permission, copyrights, etc... its all blown out of proportion. I understand if someone makes a film that they want the rights to it or even write their own script it is theirs. Or if someone creates something and copyrights the idea, that is theres. But when it is something that is out in the open and free to one's own eyes, it shouldn't be an issue. Regulations are still unclear for most of this stuff and that is why Susan didn't sue Joy and probably would have lost the case even if she did. My favorite part of this article was when the author talked about "Well who owns the right to Pablo" and that is what it boils down to. If anyone should have claim over the picture, it should be him since he is the subject. Not the person taking it or modifying it.
Anyways, I liked how Joy's friends on the forum took the picture and spread it all over the internet and other ads, like promoting pepsi, because it helped show Susan, and I am sure other people as well, that it really isn't that big of a deal. No one should spend the money in court fees or anything else. If anything, Joy should credit Susan for the original photo, which she did, and call it a day. That's my opinion and I am stickin' to it.
LWR
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment