“The Rights of the Molotov” made me feel very conflicted about my stance on copyright laws and how the ownership of one’s work should be handled, and if anyone really can like the blogger nmazca says, “own the rights of this man’s struggle”.
Initially, when I read Joy Garnett’s point of view, I fully agreed with his choice to reproduce the photograph, and the public’s choice to further reproduce it. Today, originality and authenticity isn’t as something that is as confined as it used to be in terms of art. Artists can appropriate and copy and still produce original work.
However, when I read Susan Meiselas’s portion of the article, I realized her stance in addressing copyright and originality issues were entirely justified, and something I didn’t even consider. When an image becomes iconic, its story almost becomes lost in its over-reproduction. Like the Scarface example that Kelsey used in her webpage: most of us in class have never seen the movie, and we only recognize the one iconic line, we don’t know the meaning or context of it, but we all know this empty phrase. This is what Meisela is trying to prevent from happening; for the subject of her photograph to lose meaning.