Could Genetically modified food fight hunger?

Today, a total of about 842 million people in the world suffer from hunger worldwide. This means that one in every eight people on Earth goes to bed hungry each night. Now, genetically modified food seems to be a promising way for solving this huge problem. Sadly, this is not the case.

This becomes clear when looking at the world's top genetic engineering companies, such as Monsanto, which do not appear to be developing genetically modified crops that are aiming at feeding the hungry and solving the world hunger problem. If they would,those companies would be developing seeds with certain predictable characteristics, such as, for instance, seeds that were used for crops that feed people and not animals. 

Another example, which can be mentioned here, is the fact that if such companies wanted to fight or at least reverse world hunger, they would bring higher yields. However, study results of some companies producing modified soybeans show that the yields have increased instead of rising. For Monsanto, for example, the yields of genetically modified soybeans were 10 percent lower in comparison with those of conventional varieties grown under the same condition. 

According to Dr. Vandana, one of the world's foremost experts on world hunger and transgenic crops, the argument that biotechnology could help to solve the world hunger problem is great deception. The genetic modification of plants have only one major aim, namely the rising of chemical sales and of the monopoly control. All this is being done in the private domain, by corporations which are not at all in the business of charity but in the business of selling, often at extremely high prices.

Even though genetic modification is one of tomorrow's tools we dispose of today, it is a luxury that the hungry world and poor, starving people can't afford.  This is what I find the most shocking part of the complete genetic modification industry and technology!

It's not nice to fool with mother nature- ethical issues concerning GM foods

As we should also include some ethical issues in our blog posts concerning our CAJ, I decided to consider some aspects a bit more closely. After having done some research on the Internet and read several useful links, I, first of all, learned that humans have actually modified crops long before newer techniques of genetic modification were introduced. Farmers have always selected which plant they wanted to plant or grow. In short, they ever since chose plants that grew well or at least better than others. The age-old techniques were simply extended through the introduction of genetic modification. Both the traditional as well as the modern way of changing the characteristics of a plant or any organism would not have existed without human intervention. As already mentioned in previous blog posts, this intervention causes lots of controversies resulting in people opposing to or being in favor of genetic modification of plants.

What I came across during the research and found very interesting are the following two paragraphs which demonstrate that language plays an extremely important role in this ongoing debate.

"Allowed to ripe on the vine naturally, this ruby tomato comes to your table with more homegrown taste. By drwaing on the best tradtitions of crossbreeding, biotechnology has created a better-tasting tomato, available year-round."

"Although it may be as pretty as a plastic fruit, this tomato has been produced by introducing modified organisms into the plant's natural genetic material. It is the product of laboratory manipulations whose consequences for consumer health and for the environment are unknown."

Both paragraphs, one for and one against GM food, describe the same tomato and show how language is part of the problem. In general, it can be seen that opponents are good at creating bad images of GM food and at  spreading doubt about it.

Apart from language used in different ways to achieve different aims concerning genetically modified food, the opinion of people, especially of the religious ones, differs very much from people being in favor of it.

The first named group believes that this modern technology changing the genes, the basic building blocks of lives, of any organism interfere in God's creation. 

"Many opponents believe that the genetic code of every organism has evolved over millions of years and that tampering with it is an act of hubris."

Due to my traditions and Indian roots I can understand people who think in that way. What I ask myself is that if it's okay to genetically modify a plant by, for instance, inserting genes of meat to it and then not mentioning this modification on the packaging of a product because it doesn't exceed the 0.9 treshold. In my opinion, this is simply not okay as it leads to the cheating of people and their strong religious beliefs.

Monsanto Company- World's Largest Genetically Modified Food Producer

Monsanto Company is an American mutlinational agrochemical and agricultural biotechnology corporation which was founded in 1901 by John Francis Queeny. It is headquartered in St. Louis in Missouri and the leading producer of genetically engineered seed. Monsanto was among the first companies to genetically modify a plant cell and also the first to conduct field trials of genetically modified crops.

Despite the company's success, its history is full of the following controversies, which are only a few of the many related issues:

• One of the probably most shocking facts about Monsanto Company is its production of herbicides, especially of Agent Orange, which was used during the Vietnam War (1961-1971). It contained the highest levels of dioxin and contaminated more than three million civilians and servicemen. As a consequence, nearly 500,000 children were born deformed and never compensated. 
• Monsanto Company was also ordered to pay 41.1 million $ due to hazardous waste dumping.
• It operated a nuclear facility for the U.S. government until the late 1980s.
• The company is among the top ten U.S. chemical companies. 

As Monsanto regularly deals with the U.S. government, it has to comply with FDA (the U.S. Food and Drug Administration) food and drug safety regulations and it also receives federal funding for research. This leads to the the company's high levels of  involvement with federal agencies. Several people working for Monsanto have attached themselves to state-level politicians and have successfully taken up high-level posts in the government. The following examples illustrate this fact:

• In 2009, the Obama administration appointed Michael Taylor, a precious vice president of Monsanto and current Monsanto lobbyist, as senior advisor to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Commissioner. After serving a year as an advisor, he was named the Deputy Commissioner of Foods for the FDA- a boom for Monsanto.
• Roger Beachy, the Director of the Danforth Plant Science Center (a Monsanto affiliate), was appointed by the Obama administration  as the Director of the USDA's National Institute of Food and Agriculture (NIFA). NIFA focuses on funding research and innovation in agriculture  and also has the abilty to grant or reject agricultural research grants. This presents another advantage for Monsanto which will most likely result in favorable consideration for themselves during their pursuit of government research grants.
• Margaret Miller, who worked as a Monsanto researcher, contributed to a scientific report for the FDA on Monsanto's genetically engineered bovine growth hormone during the time she worked for the company. Shortly before the report was submitted, she left Monsanto to work at the FDA, where she had to review the same report. The FDA accepted Monsanto's findings, which then became the basis for its approval of Monsanto's genetically engineered bovine growth harmone. 

Again, these examples are unfortunately only a few of the appointment of people to high-federal posts. As this is development is unlikely to stop any time soon, it seems as if Monsanto will have great power influence on the American Agriculture and food policies. 

The Labelling of Genetically Modified Food

In April 2004, new regulations for the labelling of genetically modified foods came into effect. When compared to the old regulations, which were introduced in 1997 through the EU novel food regulation, these newer ones focus themselves on a different field.

According to the old regulations, genetically modified food required labelling only if GM content could be detected in the final product. In contrast to this, the new regulations are based on a different principle. According to these, all food products that make direct use of GMOs, no matter at which point in the production, have to be labelled. Also, it does not make any difference in this principle whether the genetically modified content is detectable in the end product or not. 

Despite these newly introduced regulations and the obligation of labelling products, consumers nonetheless rarely find labels indicating the use of genetic engineering. The reason for this is that labels, in general, are interpreted as something negative or as warning. What many consumer do not understand is the fact that labels aren't used to frighten them but to simply present information about the application of genetic engineering. 

Due to this wrong assumption, producers don't want to risk losses in sales and damage to their reason. In order to avoid this, they choose to produce products without GMO labels and often simply replace genetically modified substances with conventional ones. Some of them even make sure that the GM content does not exceed the 0.9 % treshold by which they forgo the GM label. Particularly shocking is the fact that even produtcs such as milk, egg, meat and other animal products (logically from animals fed GM plants) can contain those substances without informing consumers about it. 

The Debate on Genetically Modified Food

There are definitely countless people out there, such as scientists, researchers, and people just like you and me, you have tried to find verifiable, solid facts on the debate of genetically modified food which prove those who are in the right and those who are not. Is it they who are against the "Frankenstein" food and warning of its dangers or those who are in favor of it and support this type of food production?

However, the facts, which do exist in the present period and  have done in the past as well, show that millions of people have been eating genetically modified food over the past twenty years without suffering from any obvious illness or other critical symptoms. At the same it could be possible that the effects or symptoms may have been that subtle and occurred in small parts of the population so that they were simply not noticed.

This shows that the question about the safety of genetically modified food or genetic engineering in general is hard to answer. In other words, it's not a yes- or- no question. 

Margaret Mellon, a science policy consultant (Washington D.C. Metro Area), says the following concerning the GM debate:

"It doesn't appear that there's any risk that applies across the board to all genetically engineered food and to all people. Each plant is different, each gene insertion is different, each person's respond is different."

What she is trying to say is that GM food could be healthy and of no risk for a person but at the same incompatible with the immune system of another one. Despite uncertainty about the outcomes, which sometimes, occur, people should not be paralyzed by unknown risks as this will lead humanity ending up "huddles in their basements wearing tinfoil hats". 

How instant photographs work

While regular cameras need their film to be processed separately, Polaroid Instant Cameras already contain a film which is equipped with chemicals necessary for photo development. This special type of film has three colour layers which are respectively sensitive to blue, green and red light. Underneath each of them, a developer layer containing dye couplers can be found. All of these layers are stacked on a black base layer and are, at the same time, positioned underneath the image, timing and acid layer. This certain arrangement is of great importance as it is a chemical chain reaction waiting to be set in motion. The component that starts the whole process is called reagent. It is a mix of opacifiers, alkali and white pigments. Before the button on the Polaroid camera is pressed, all of these substances are gathered in the white frame of the later developed photograph. In this way, the film is prevented from exposing prematurely as all of the developing chemicals are kept away until the proper time. After you have taken the picture, the film sheet passes out of the camera through a pair of rollers. These spread the substances of the reagent out into the middle of the film sheet which then react with the other chemical layers in the film. The opacifiers are particularly important for this step as they stops light from filtering onto the layers below so that the film is not fully exposed before it is developed. When the substances are moved downward by the rollers through the many layers of the photo, the exposed particles in each of the layer are changed into metallic silver. Also, the chemicals dissolve the developer dye which begins to diffuse up toward the image layer. These move up from the unexposed layers to the image layer. Simultaneously, other substances of the reagent are working their way down through the film layers. The acid layer in the film reacts with the alkali and opacifiers in the reagent so that the opacifiers become clear. This leads to a visible image in the end. The timing layer slows the reagent down on its way to the acid layer so that the film is given time before being exposed to light. It must be remembered that the first image coming out of the Polaroid camera is initially still grey. It slowly appears because of the refined chemical developing process inside the camera. 

                      

[403 words]

Abstract of CAJ - Genetically Modified Food

The basis of the CAJ project was to demonstrate the benefits of genetically modified food and to show why regarding this type of food as completely harmful or dangerous is incorrect. 

To do this, the advantages of GM food in the fields of society and world population, development and modification of plants, pharmaceutics and the improvement of harvest were considered. An internet-based research was carried out during a five-week period. Numerous websites presenting the advantages and disadvantages of genetically modified food as well as blog posts, encyclopedias and the homepage of the Monsanto agriculture company were read carefully.  The most important and relevant information was evaluated, extracted and finally texts were composed. Those were then posted as a blog post on blogger.com. 

Upon examination of the relevant information found and the texts posted, it becomes clear that genetically modified food has several advantages in various fields and that its disadvantages cannot be taken seriously as there is no concrete evidence.  Despite the fact that the CAJ project was successful, it is recommended that enough time should be scheduled for planning and for working on it as carrying out research is very laborious and time consuming. 

[195 words]

Abstract of “When zombies attack!: Mathematical modelling of an outbreak of zombie infection”

The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate the flexibility of mathematical modelling and to show how it can respond to a wide variety of challenges, such as infectious diseases.

To do this, the scenario of a zombie outbreak infecting humans was considered and the slow moving, cannibalistic and undead classical pop-culture zombie chosen as model. Mathematical analyses of a zombie outbreak infection were conducted and altogether four models presented. The first one, called the basic model, considers three basic classes, the Susceptible (S), the Zombie (Z) and the Removed (R). It suggests that an outbreak of zombies will lead to the collapse of civilisation and in a short outbreak, everybody will be infected. The second one, referred to as the model with latent infection, indicates that susceptibles remain infected for some period of time before either dying a natural death or becoming a zombie. In this case, the collapse of civilisation still takes place but takes approximately twice as long. The third model includes quarantine of the infected but there is still no chance for them to escape. Even though the eradication of humans is slightly delayed in this model, zombies are either completely eradicated or they take over completely in the end. The final model, called the model with treatment, allows to cure ‘zombie-ism’ and to return to human form again. Upon examination of these facts, it becomes clear that the only, effective way to survive an outbreak of zombies is to deal with it quickly and attack more than once.

In order to obtain all of those above-mentioned models, mathematical analyses and Euler’s method were applied.  Results suggest that the only, significant difference between the models concerning a non-realistic zombie outbreak and other models of real infectious diseases is the fact that the dead can come back to live again. However, the fact that mathematical modelling can even be applied to non-realistic challenges proves beyond a doubt its flexibility.

[324 words]

Golden Rice (CAJ Geneteically Modified Food)

It is no longer a secret that crops can be genetically modified in order to contain additional nutrient which are lacking from the diets of many people in developing countries. One example is Golden Rice which contains beta-carotene. This organic compound is converted into vitamin A when ingested.  Golden Rice could improve the lives of thousands of children living in poor countries who suffer from blindness due to the lack of vitamin A.

The first type of Golden Rice was introduced about 25 years ago by Ingo Potrykus at the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology and by Peter Beyer at the University of Freiburg. The process of developing this new type of rice consisted of transferring genes of maize into rice to obtain the Golden Rice.  It was given this name as it produces the same pigments that yellow vegetables do.

In 2005, a second type of Golden Rice was developed which produces up to 23 times more beta-carotene than the original Golden Rice.

It was trialled in the Philippines in August 2013 but despite the fact that Golden Rice was developed as a humanitarian tool, it has been met with strong opposition from environmental and anti-globalization activists. Greenpeace, for example, believes that Golden Rice is not the answer to vitamin A deficiency (VAD) and malnutrition. According to this NGO, money should not be spent on this project but rather used for programs that they are already working on, such as the promotion of home-gardening and pills.

However, field studies in the Philippines have been conducted despite the vandalism and all the protests. In this country, vitamin A deficiency affects 1.7 million children between 6 months and 5 years. In order to improve the situation, Golden Rice will be tested also in future according to the best and most rigorous standards.

Disadvantages of genetically modified food (CAJ)

When doing research on the disadvantages of genetically modified food, you stumble over numerous websites opposing to it and warning that it is harmful. However, this cannot be said for sure as there exists no evidence proving this statement.

The debate on the disadvantages of genetically modified food started in 1994 when a tomato with longer shelf life, called Flavr Savr, was developed by the Californian Company Calgene. But then, it was found that this modified vegetable caused stomach lesions in rats and lead to an on-going debate about GM food.

Even though, this negative effect can or could not be denied and the safety of such products is not verified yet, one must not forget that those were lab rats which were tested on the safety of such technology. It is still not clear if genetically modified food has the same negative impacts on human health.  

The following examples are just a few of the other innumerable examples on the internet opposing to GM food and describing it as dangerous. Again, it is important to note that the majority of them do not state those examples with 100 % certainty.

• Genetically modified food can cause cancer
•  It could raise new allergy outbreaks in humans
• The effects of genetic food engineering could be irreversible
•  GM food can disturb the natural flow of environments
• Strong likelihood of widespread infestation of diseases across species barriers

In conclusion, the disadvantages of genetically modified food could not be proven yet but many believe that this is still the case. Although perhaps this debate might take a long time to be solved, one should hope that there are not any unforeseen consequences that arise from using GM foods in the future because if they were, most of us would be affected by it.

Advantages of Genetically Modified food (CAJ)

After having done some research on the internet, I came across many various websites being in favour of genetically modified food.  I found hardly any that could provide real evidence why GM food is dangerous. However, there are lots of websites opposing to it.

Instead of saying that GM food is harmful and being against it, it would be better to consider the fact that sufficient evidence classifying and proving GM food as dangerous does not exist. This is an important fact which can and should not be ignored.  Also, the so called “Frankenstein Food” brings many undeniable advantages not only for farmers but also for societies worldwide.

First of all, it is not a secret that global population and 3^rd world hunger are increasing massively. Genetically modified food seems to be a great promise to solve this on-going crisis.  

Secondly, plants can be genetically modified in order to become more disease resistant. Thanks to this, they would become more robust and bacterial, fungal and/or viral infestations could harm them less as they can now without the modification. Especially farmers are in favour of this development as they would have to less fear crop failures. Another important modification concerning plants could be performed by changing their genes in order to protect them against dehydration, frost, salty soil etc.  A gene from a plant which can survive prolonged water stress in desert conditions has already been introduced into rice and it turned out to be a successful experiment. The rice was then able to produce a certain kind of sugar which protects the plant against dehydration.

Finally, genetically modified food could also be used to produce edible vaccinations in order to replace medicines and vaccines which often are costly to produce and require special storage conditions.  Researchers are, for example, working on developing edible vaccines in tomatoes and potatoes. If they succeed in doing so, these vaccines will be much easier to transport, store and administer in comparison to the traditional injectable vaccines.

As can be seen from all the mentioned-above examples, the benefits of genetically modified cannot be neglected. What is remarkable is the fact that GM food has several advantages in various areas, such as society and world population, the development of plants leading to improvements of harvest, and also in the area of pharmaceutics. Even though some still oppose to this kind of modified food, there is no certain evidence proving its harmfulness.

General description of CAJ

Argumentative text for CAJ (GM food)

Beth Hoffman, the author of the text “Just Because Science Can Genetically Engineer Foods, Doesn’t Mean We Should” expresses her negative view on genetically modified food. The text does not seem to address a specific target audience. Hoffman rather states her personal opinion and tries to mobilize the readers’ emotions by using pronouns, such as “we” or “us” so that they have a sense of belonging. As there are lots of parts in the text that use this method of addressing the feelings of the target audience, it is easily identifiable that Pathos is dominant in this text.  The author supports all of this by using Logos as she logically lists arguments, examples and also explanations. These two methods are dominant in the complete text because Hoffman does not apply the third one, namely Ethos, at all. Still, she perfectly succeeds in persuading the readers. 

How to go back in time and kill Adolf Hitler

Time estimation: approximately one hour

Materials

    ●        a time machine

    ●        a loaded gun

    ●        uniform of a SS Nazi soldier

Before travelling back in time, make sure that you:
●      have strong nerves
●      are daring and courageous
●      are able to kill another person

●      are good at handling a gun 

Instructions

1.    Take the uniform of an SS Nazi soldier and get dressed.

2.    Hide the loaded gun in one of the socks you are wearing.

Option 1: Hide it in the sock of your right foot if are a right-handed person. 

Option 2: Hide it in the sock of your left foot if you are a left-handed person.

Hint: This will allow you to take out the gun later on in an inconspicuous way.

3.    Get into the time machine.
4.    Set the appropriate time (30.1.1939) and location (Berlin Brandenburg gate) by pressing the buttons of the computer keyboard inside the time machine.

5.    Pull the lever down.

Hint: Pull the lever strongly because it might get stuck!

6.    Get out of the time machine.
7.    Now you have two options:

 

Option 1: Join the crowd in front of the podium and remain there.

Option 2: Approach the podium as closely as possible.

Warning: The following steps must be carried out quickly! 

8.    Bend down and take the gun inconspicuously out of your sock. 

Option 1: If you are a right-handed person, use your right hand to get the gun out.

Option 2: If you are a left-handed person, use your left hand to get the gun out. 

9.    Place the gun at Adolf Hitler.
10. Take a deep breath and pull the trigger.

Hint: If you missed the target, keep the pistol aimed at Adolf Hitler and fire further shots. 

11.  Escape the place as fast as possible!
12.  Get into the time machine.
13.  Repeat step 3 but set the current time and your home address as location.

Well done! You have successfully completed the mission.

Rate the instructions: How to make a Camera Lucida

http://liviaandtheworld.blogspot.co.at/2014/05/group-project-post-compare-two-polaroids.html

Project Blog Post: compare two polaroids

http://liviaandtheworld.blogspot.co.at/2014/05/group-project-post-compare-two-polaroids.html

Average Joe Narrative

A ray of hope

It was a hot, sunny summer afternoon in August, 2039. The shimmering swimming pool looked marvellous with all the glittering reflections of the sunrays on its surface.  But just when Joe was about to jump in, he suddenly heard his wife’s voice. “Why now?”, he asked himself and turned his head. “Why are you still here? I told you to do the shopping hours ago!” Alma came outside the house and approached her husband who was standing in their large, well-tended garden. Anger was written all over her face. Joe knew that he couldn’t longer avoid it. “Calm down”, he said, “I’m being as quick as I can! Alma… You know exactly why I resist myself to do it.” “I do, but surviving without food will be a bit difficult, won’t it?”, she replied irritated.

While Joe was driving, he switched the car radio on to distract himself from the small quarrel with his wife.  When he entered the city centre of Los Angeles, a radio speaker was presenting the latest news. “Scientists involved in the research on genetically modified food have reached the height of their success. At this point in time, they were able to lift 400 million people all over the world out of the poverty and deprivation. All this is possible thanks to the outstanding development of GM food and all its benefits in the last few years. And that is not all: further progress is being predicted!”  Joe couldn’t believe it. The whole world seemed to be in favour of this rapid development. Why did nobody understand what it was leading to? When Joe entered the grocery store, he lost his temper even more. The prices for food seemed to be arising day by day. For this reason, he hated to do the shopping. It was not that Joe was completely against the whole development of genetically modified food. On the contrary, he was glad that thanks to it, food had a much longer shelf life and a superior quality and taste.  Also, this “frankenfood” was specifically developed so far that it could combat dietary deficiencies, like the 'golden rice' that added the vitamin A lacking in ordinary rice, or that it could generally greatly improve health. Joe didn’t deny that the future was most likely bright for genetically modified food, but the fact that soon nobody could any longer afford it, really made him angry and concerned him greatly.  The situation seemed to be promising, especially for those who could pass the poverty line but what’s the purpose of such an evolution when soon everything will go downhill again? Joe was not the only one who knew exactly who was really behind the whole thing. It was obvious but still, no one dared to oppose to it, or should he say “them”?

While he was lost in thought and purchasing food, his mobile phone rang. It was Andrew, Joe’s colleague and best friend. “Joe, the time has finally come! A surprising strike is planned against Tyson Foods Inc. ! For the first time, it will be possible to put an end to that unfair business and all the injustices! We won’t let them longer control and raise the prices of food products! You’re joining the strike, aren’t you?” At first, Joe couldn’t believe it, but then he agreed immediately. He was prepared to give everything in this fight for justice. When he left the grocery store, he was sure that he would definitely not see the unreasonably high price tags ever again.

[589 words]

Project Blog Post 2 - Napalm Girl

http://sharemarysword.blogspot.co.at/2014/04/project-blog-post-2-napalm-girl.html

History of photography- narrative text

My little history of photography- original version While I am hanging on the wall, the museum guide enters the hall with the fifth visitors’ group this day and begins to tell the history of photography. I always find it funny to listen to him because it should actually be me, the Daguerreotype of Louis Daguerre himself, telling it as I am a witness of the complete development. If I had to narrate the history, I would begin with my creation in 1844 when Louis Daguerre developed an effective method of photography. What the museum guide never often forgets to mention, but I consider as important,is the fact that creating pictures like me used to be an extremely difficult process.  When my fellow images and I were brought into being, we had to go through an extremely long exposure of iodized silver plates to light. The end products were unique and very expensive. However, our invention paved the way for a rapid development. While I am thinking back of the good old days of my creation and the following success of the tiny little pictures called miniatures in the 1840s, the museum guide carries on telling the visitors’ group about early photography. In those days, people did not dare to look back at the camera because they were afraid that the images of themselves could look back at them. The tourist group and the guide then move on to a wall where there are numerous pictures hanging on it. He points at the first one and explains that these kind of pictures, namely retouched negatives, were seen as the “revenge for art” because the aim had been to create more beautiful pictures. “In the following years”, narrates the tourist guide, ”early photography went through several developments, such as the period of studio photography, were pictures with absurd props in their background were taken or the introduction of the mezzoprint process, where pictures were reproduced.” He forgets to add that through this new technique the prestige or the “halo”, a circle of light on the picture created through the long exposure time, disappeared. After 1880, photographers tried to recreate this unique effect through faster lenses by suppressing darkness but they were not successful. The museum guide then says that several years later the photographer Eugène Atget started focusing on inconsiderable objects and set the basis for Surrealism. Thereafter, he and the visitors leave the hall and I wonder, as always, why he never mentions the most important fact that photography has been and will always remain a close connection of science and art.

[424 words]

Brief summary of peer feedback

According to my fellow students the content of my text was good because I included many historical facts of the history of photography but the text itself was too long. They advised me to shorten it down. Apart from that, I had made several expression and grammatical mistakes and some sentences were too long. My fellow students recommended rewriting all of this. In general, they liked my text and could also identify most of the elements of story grammar in it.

My little history of photography- final version

While I am hanging on the wall, the museum guide enters the hall with the fifth visitors’ group today and begins to tell the history of photography. I always find it funny to listen to him because it should actually be me, the Daguerreotype of Louis Daguerre himself, telling it as I am a witness of the early days of photography. If I had to narrate the history, I would start with my creation in 1844 when Louis Daguerre developed an effective method of photography. What the museum guide never mentions is the fact that creating pictures like me used to be an extremely difficult process.  When I was brought into being, I had to go through an extremely long exposure of iodized silver plates to light. As end product, I was very expensive. Also, my invention paved the way for a rapid development. While I am thinking back to the time after my creation and the success of the tiny little pictures called miniatures, the museum guide carries on telling about early photography. People did not dare to look at the camera at that time, fearing that the images of themselves could stare back at them. The tourist group and the guide then move on to a wall were numerous pictures are exhibited. He points at the first one, which is a retouched negative, and explains that these kind of pictures were seen as the “revenge for art” because the aim had been to create more beautiful pictures. “In the following years”, narrates the tourist guide, ”early photography developed to studio photography, were pictures with absurd props in the background were taken. Then the introduction of the mezzotint process, which enabled the reproduction of pictures, followed.” He forgets to add that through this new technique the prestige or the “halo”, a circle of light on the picture created through the long exposure time, disappeared. After 1880, photographers tried to recreate this unique effect through faster lenses by suppressing darkness but they were not successful. The museum guide then says that several years later the photographer Eugène Atget started focusing on inconsiderable objects and set the basis for Surrealism. Thereafter, he and the visitors leave the hall and I wonder, as always, why he never mentions the most important fact that photography has been and will always remain a close connection between science and art.

[395 words]