The image above, a photo by Susan Meiselas, is the focus image in the article “On the Rights of Molotov Man: Appropriation and the Art of Context.” Meiselas photographed the image and discovered that it has been replicated by a variety of groups, but ultimately she was offended when artist Joy Garnett appropriated the photograph in a painting. As a response to the offense, Garnett disputes that she owes the photographer nothing more than a simple citation, while Meiselas argues that Garnett has “converted the work into the emblem of an abstract riot”.
This argument shared between Meiselas and Garnett got me thinking about context and copyright previously brought up in Lethem’s amazing article called “The Ecstasy of Influence: A Plagiarism,” in which Lethem disputes that works are more easily appropriated, lacking worry of copyright law. His argument weighs on the dissimilarity flanked by a gift exchange and commodity exchange: in a gift exchange there is “a bond between two people” established by the gift, however this connection does not exist in a commodity exchange. However, I believe it should be perceived as a honor to be appropriated, and that copyright should be used to ensure rights to the original expression.
No comments:
Post a Comment