Comments on: Response to “On the Rights of Molotov Man” http://leesean.net/2008/11/07/response-to-on-the-rights-of-molotov-man/ The Life of an Artist-Activist-Musician-Nerd Sun, 06 May 2012 01:48:10 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 By: The Law Cares Not For Trifles…. « White Noise http://leesean.net/2008/11/07/response-to-on-the-rights-of-molotov-man/comment-page-1/#comment-80715 The Law Cares Not For Trifles…. « White Noise Wed, 03 Feb 2010 19:48:18 +0000 http://leesean.net/?p=1319#comment-80715 [...] discussed the Meiselas-Garnett controversy at length last year in Comm Lab.  My colleague Lee-Sean Huang wrote a thoughtful post arguing that it was in fact the subject of the art, Pablo Arauz that had really been ignored.  He [...] [...] discussed the Meiselas-Garnett controversy at length last year in Comm Lab.  My colleague Lee-Sean Huang wrote a thoughtful post arguing that it was in fact the subject of the art, Pablo Arauz that had really been ignored.  He [...]

]]> By: Catherine http://leesean.net/2008/11/07/response-to-on-the-rights-of-molotov-man/comment-page-1/#comment-80704 Catherine Wed, 03 Feb 2010 16:29:26 +0000 http://leesean.net/?p=1319#comment-80704 We're discussing this again in Copyright and Cyberlaw at ITP this week - am reading Joy Garnett's Steal this Look at the moment. Lots of other reading on fair use, de minimis, moral rights and copyright reform. We’re discussing this again in Copyright and Cyberlaw at ITP this week – am reading Joy Garnett’s Steal this Look at the moment. Lots of other reading on fair use, de minimis, moral rights and copyright reform.

]]> By: leesean http://leesean.net/2008/11/07/response-to-on-the-rights-of-molotov-man/comment-page-1/#comment-71623 leesean Mon, 20 Jul 2009 00:42:57 +0000 http://leesean.net/?p=1319#comment-71623 Apparently Pablo Arauz is in the news again, because I'm getting a lot of traffic to my blog post. Susan Meiselas fotógrafa, “No creí que la insurrección triunfaría”: http://www.laprensa.com.ni/archivo/2009/julio/19/suplementos/domingo/339202.shtml “Tenía mucho miedo”: http://www.laprensa.com.ni/archivo/2009/julio/19/suplementos/domingo/339197.shtml Apparently Pablo Arauz is in the news again, because I’m getting a lot of traffic to my blog post.

Susan Meiselas fotógrafa, “No creí que la insurrección triunfaría”: http://www.laprensa.com.ni/archivo/2009/julio/19/suplementos/domingo/339202.shtml

“Tenía mucho miedo”: http://www.laprensa.com.ni/archivo/2009/julio/19/suplementos/domingo/339197.shtml

]]> By: Ida http://leesean.net/2008/11/07/response-to-on-the-rights-of-molotov-man/comment-page-1/#comment-48612 Ida Thu, 13 Nov 2008 14:59:57 +0000 http://leesean.net/?p=1319#comment-48612 Lee-Sean and Joy, thanks for this conversation. I am a fan of Meiselas' work, but I see how unfortunate it is that the issue as elaborated in the Harper's piece boils down to ownership. I'm not surprised that Pablo Arauz's disinterest in the effects of a photograph of him didn't make it into Meiselas' documentary. The relationship between events and their representation is tangential. Joy's work is an opportunity to look closer on how this phenomenon plays out now. This opportunity has been muddled amid in the spasms of an outdated photography industry becoming economically enviable in the digital age. Lee-Sean and Joy, thanks for this conversation. I am a fan of Meiselas’ work, but I see how unfortunate it is that the issue as elaborated in the Harper’s piece boils down to ownership. I’m not surprised that Pablo Arauz’s disinterest in the effects of a photograph of him didn’t make it into Meiselas’ documentary. The relationship between events and their representation is tangential. Joy’s work is an opportunity to look closer on how this phenomenon plays out now. This opportunity has been muddled amid in the spasms of an outdated photography industry becoming economically enviable in the digital age.

]]> By: joy http://leesean.net/2008/11/07/response-to-on-the-rights-of-molotov-man/comment-page-1/#comment-48245 joy Sat, 08 Nov 2008 14:34:09 +0000 http://leesean.net/?p=1319#comment-48245 hi Lee-Sean, I take your point; I thought that ending my segment of the article with maszca's ironic question was a way of inserting Arauz, if briefly, into the equation. Of course, the article was drawn from twelve minute talks that Susan and I had given at an NYU conference on fair use, so there was a certain focus... As for Arauz, I guess we have to take Susan's word for it: when she interviewed him a decade later when making her documentary film, his reaction to becoming an icon, and to the explosive ubiquity of his image, was fairly "banal". Not what she hoped for; it didn't make the final cut! I suppose she wanted more; maybe we want to much from him; but that is part of our own need, our own projection of heroic values onto a guy who unknowingly lent a gesture and became an iconic figure. Which brings me to something that we didn't get a chance to explore in the article: historic events are only "historic" so far as they can be recalled and retold through narrative; and those narratives, whether they be constructed for art purposes or as journalism, are nevertheless constructed. The moment such an image is made, it heads in a direction that is tangential to its initial "reality". The image and the reality are perhaps always connected in some way, but the image will have a life of its own, for better or for worse. best, Joy hi Lee-Sean,
I take your point; I thought that ending my segment of the article with maszca’s ironic question was a way of inserting Arauz, if briefly, into the equation. Of course, the article was drawn from twelve minute talks that Susan and I had given at an NYU conference on fair use, so there was a certain focus… As for Arauz, I guess we have to take Susan’s word for it: when she interviewed him a decade later when making her documentary film, his reaction to becoming an icon, and to the explosive ubiquity of his image, was fairly “banal”. Not what she hoped for; it didn’t make the final cut! I suppose she wanted more; maybe we want to much from him; but that is part of our own need, our own projection of heroic values onto a guy who unknowingly lent a gesture and became an iconic figure.

Which brings me to something that we didn’t get a chance to explore in the article: historic events are only “historic” so far as they can be recalled and retold through narrative; and those narratives, whether they be constructed for art purposes or as journalism, are nevertheless constructed. The moment such an image is made, it heads in a direction that is tangential to its initial “reality”. The image and the reality are perhaps always connected in some way, but the image will have a life of its own, for better or for worse.

best,
Joy

]]> By: leesean http://leesean.net/2008/11/07/response-to-on-the-rights-of-molotov-man/comment-page-1/#comment-48208 leesean Sat, 08 Nov 2008 02:58:20 +0000 http://leesean.net/?p=1319#comment-48208 Hi Joy, Thanks for your comment on my blog. I had to read the Harper's article for a class I am taking in my masters program at NYU. I am sure that all of this controversy as put a toll on you personally, but I am happy to see that you are still engaging in debate about the wider implications of intellectual property and creative production. I think the fact that it (referring to the article and not to the artwork) was actually never about Pablo Arauz that I take issue. I’m fine with the photo and with the painting. I think they both have creative and ethical merit. I just thought that the absence of Arauz’s voice in the article was a loud silence. I guess all I am trying to say is that I’m curious to hear what he would have to say about the whole debate. Even if it isn’t really about him, he is still somehow involved. Lee-Sean Hi Joy,

Thanks for your comment on my blog. I had to read the Harper’s article for a class I am taking in my masters program at NYU.

I am sure that all of this controversy as put a toll on you personally, but I am happy to see that you are still engaging in debate about the wider implications of intellectual property and creative production.

I think the fact that it (referring to the article and not to the artwork) was actually never about Pablo Arauz that I take issue. I’m fine with the photo and with the painting. I think they both have creative and ethical merit. I just thought that the absence of Arauz’s voice in the article was a loud silence. I guess all I am trying to say is that I’m curious to hear what he would have to say about the whole debate. Even if it isn’t really about him, he is still somehow involved.

Lee-Sean

]]> By: joy http://leesean.net/2008/11/07/response-to-on-the-rights-of-molotov-man/comment-page-1/#comment-48204 joy Sat, 08 Nov 2008 01:42:20 +0000 http://leesean.net/?p=1319#comment-48204 PS: it was actually never about Pablo Arauz. PS: it was actually never about Pablo Arauz.

]]> By: joy http://leesean.net/2008/11/07/response-to-on-the-rights-of-molotov-man/comment-page-1/#comment-48202 joy Sat, 08 Nov 2008 01:24:16 +0000 http://leesean.net/?p=1319#comment-48202 Wow -- thank you so much for this thoughtful post. These many years later, I continue to find myself embroiled in difficult discussions about all this. It's important to try to separate the real issues from the emotional personal stuff. best regards, joy Wow — thank you so much for this thoughtful post. These many years later, I continue to find myself embroiled in difficult discussions about all this. It’s important to try to separate the real issues from the emotional personal stuff.

best regards,
joy

]]>