Molotov Man

 Who is the Molotov Man?
The actual man is "Pablo Araus, who was known as 'Bareta' during the war" (Meiselas 57) but what we're actually referring to when we ask that question is this man:

"Untitled"
Susan Meiselas
(from itp.nyu.edu)

"The man is throwing his bomb at a Somoza national guard garrison, one of the last such garrisons remaining in Somoza's hands. It was an important moment in the history of Nicaragua--the Sandinistas would soon take power and hold that power for another decade--and this image ended up representing that moment for a long time to come" (Meiselas 57).

He is a symbol of struggle, pain, passion and empowerment. According to artist Joy Garnett, who he is is not as important as what he represents. She did a series of paintings depicting people in extreme emotion. One of those paintings depicted the Molotov Man.

"Molotov"
Joy Garnett
(from robertlpeters.com)

Since she felt that this painting best described her series, she chose it for the postcard to represent her exhibition. This started a legal battle between Susan Meiselas and Joy Garnett. Meiselas is a strong supporter of the importance of context, especially when relating to this piece. Garnett on the other hand, completely erases context, zeroing in on one aspect of the Molotov Man, his intense emotion. "'Who owns the right to this man's struggle?'" (Garnett 55).

How did the meaning or identity of the Molotov Man change in its different representations and contexts?

In Joy Garnett's work, he has no identity. He is just a man in a rage. The power of his expression is the focus of the piece. However, Garnett wasn't the first person to reuse Meiselas's image, and she probably won't be the last. The reason why the above painting upset Meiselas is because of the lack of context. In any other use of the image before Garnett, it was still relatable to the original context. It has been used on matchbook covers to celebrate the anniversary of the revolution. Also it was used by the Nicaraguan Catholic Church because they noticed he was wearing a crucifix. They used the image on the cover of a magazine to tribute to a priest who was killed while fighting the Somoza's. In both of these instances, the Molotov Man is representing the original meaning/context fairly closely. It gets funny when stencils of the Molotov Man are spray painted in Honduras and linked with the Spanish Civil War, however, it's still about revolution. Ironically, the Contras themselves used the image to support the US in fighting the Sandinistas, and the Molotov Man himself is a Sandinista.

The context around the Molotov Man changes on its use and placement, but the focus of the image is his intense emotion. Humans can easily identify the struggle in the Molotov Man, and that is the most powerful thing about it. Does context matter? I agree that it definitely makes the piece stronger, once you know the story behind it. But the idea of ripping it out of context and focusing on one element also creates a moving work.