Susan Meiselas, Street Fighter, Managua, from the series Nicaragua, 1979 

 

The power of Susan Meiselas’ “Street Fighter” resides in the highly contrasted expression of the mouth through the white bandana. In combination with Meiselas’ precarious placement of symbols, limited use of color, and pronounced cropping, a unique visual story is crafted. 

Meiselas composition ingeniously captures one man in the foreground, while relegating all the others to the background, their faces purposely excised from view, thus heightening the mystique of this main character. He is the only one with an expression, and it is one that is quite ambiguous, as the bandana veils his expression. As a viewer, we wonder if the dark gape of his mouth is a sign of horror or concentration. This perilous expression evokes confusion among viewers, compelling contemplation as to the underlying narrative concealed within his visage.  

The image captures a moment suspended in tension, poised in the liminal space between confrontation. Propelled by the outstretched arm and its accompanying firearm, our visual trajectory is guided to the right. Yet, a counterpoint emerges as we are drawn into the magnetic force of the man’s intense gaze, an opposing vector that commands our attention in the opposite direction, to the left. As a viewer, we are forced off the page in two disparate directions, yet we are contained within the frame due to Meiselas’ cropping. This deliberate choice emphasizes the tension of the conflict zone, encapsulating a moment fraught with anticipation and uncertainty. Split between these points, we are drawn back to the central focal point – the stark white of the bandana. 

The photographer places herself in front of the central figure, at a similar height to him. In this vantage point, we, the viewers, are neither cast beneath nor elevated above the central figure, but rather, we inhabit a shared visual plane. We are located close enough that his knee and forearm protrude far into the foreground, seemingly tangible. Although we are a bystander, we do not identify with the other “bystanders” in the background, but rather, feel as if we are within the tension, working with the masked man. We are not passive onlookers; we are invited to occupy a unique space within the tension, actively participating with this “lone soldier.” 

A limited color palette is utilized to demarcate the figures from the background. The pavement beneath them exudes cool, desaturated tones, providing context while imbuing a sense of detachment. In contrast, the skin and clothing of the figures is much warmer, akin to the fire in the background. This collection of warm hues, encompassing both the fire and the fighters, allows the viewer to see them as one with the blaze. They do not fear the fire behind them, but rather, seem to be the ones that have caused it, bound by their union in color.  

 Amidst the collection of similar tones, the white fabric of the bandana and the glints of the gun stand out, bereft of the warm tonalities that envelope the other symbols. Despite their coolness, they stand out from the background, distinguished by their luminance. 

The sartorial choices of the figures present a departure from the conventional visual cues associated with conflict and strife. The plain clothes they wear stand in stark contrast to the regimented uniforms or wartime regalia typically expected in such settings. Ordinarily, we see images of soldiers clad in attire emblematic of their military roles and their preparedness for confrontation. Such imagery, while familiar, renders the fighters as symbols of war rather than fellow humans. In contrast, the everyday clothing worn by the figures in this image, reminiscent of what one might see in any urban setting, imbues them with a relatability that resonates deeply with the viewer. They appear not as abstract symbols of war but as individuals who could be our neighbors, friends, or even ourselves. This blurring of the lines between the commonplace and the extraordinary confronts the viewer with a disquieting reality – that conflict and its attendant consequences can intrude upon the most ordinary lives. 

Furthermore, the juxtaposition of these unassuming clothes with the provocative instruments held by the figures intensifies the visual impact. The two individuals wielding metal rods, objects ordinarily associated with construction or utility, take on a disconcerting symbolism within this context. Their presence suggests a transition from mundane activities to a sudden, and perhaps, desperate response to the chaos around them. Likewise, the main figure clutching a gun, an emblem of violence and authority, generates a dissonance with his otherwise nondescript attire. This incongruity serves as a poignant reminder of how ordinary people, in the face of conflict, must navigate the thin line between survival and devastation. 

In conclusion, the enigmatic void carved into the white bandana emerges as the power in Susan Meiselas’ “Street Fighter.” This visual element bridges the different facets of the composition and beckons viewers to delve into the captivating narrative it conceals. However, throughout this analysis, it becomes evident that there are aspects within this image, apart from the power, that hold significant value and harbor profound layers of meaning. For instance, the deliberate positioning of figures, the juxtaposition of symbols, representation of clothing, and the meticulous choice of color palette all contribute to the rich tapestry of this visual narrative.