This reading brought new perspectives that I don’t think we’ve encountered so far in previous ones. In particular, Edwards’s emphasis on excavating the histories that surround photographs beyond the actual content of the works was very interesting. The point that “Things have cumulative histories that draw on their significances from intersecting elements in their histories” made me consider how photographs are unique compared to paintings or other forms of art that are more difficult to reproduce and take longer time to create. Photography is more easily replicable, like creating copies of the same photo from its negative, and especially nowadays, the word ‘photo’ may take on more of a digital connotation than a physical connotation. This speaks to how quickly a photo can spread and how tangled its intersections with different people’s histories can be. These factors also shape how different the distribution of photography is from a painting, for example, including aspects like ownership and the production, exchange, and consumption of photos.