molitov Man

Its hard to know how to feel about this situation because I sympathize with both artists. The photographer is an intimate part of the context in which the photo was taken, and Joy is attached to his emotions. It was unfortunate that she didn't look into the context more deeply to understand that this was not a riot. But at the same time, to views of her paintings, it might as well have been and who really cares what was really going on in the picture, he is still displaying riot like emotions. It sucks that this wasn't a better know image. That way everyone one know the original context and perhaps Joy wouldn't have used it because of its historical significance. I do feel that it is important to research images you get off the internet a little more closely, but at the same time, it was amazing how fast the image was appropriated by different artists.
After reading the second article, my thoughts have changed a little bit. The photographer of Molitov Man really owns nothing she just happened to be there to capture a moment in time. That moment was not created by her, she was just presented it and snapped the shutter. This is the same for Joy, who was presented the online image and painted that moment. The same is true for all subsequent artists. It is very interesting to think about how much of what we create can actually be claimed as "our own". As humans we have been exposed to so many past artists and other artforms that it inevitably becomes part of our subconscious and is reinterpreted through our work in one form or another.