It was interesting how photographs could convey so much. Each photo’s story could be interpreted or altered in different ways depending on the style. It was really intriguing to me how something as simple as the photo subject’s posture or the pose they assumed and their eye gaze could determine status as well. The latter being based on whether they looked right into the camera or off in another direction. I enjoyed learning about the ways that technology like photography came into play within the society of that time. It helped to give more dimension to the time in an alternative way.

Reading about Porfirio Diaz, the article seemed very biased and one-sided. Clearly, the author was a fan of the Mexican president and it showed in the way he was portrayed throughout the document. The dialogue mentioned a few times how “the American soul shudders at the mere thought of a third term for any President” (130) and how this contrasted with the supposed nonchalance of the Mexican people when it came to such matters. While I do think that a two term limit can be rather restricting if the majority of a nation favours that leader over any proposed candidate, having the same president for over thirty years seems equally restricting. I have a hard time believing that for thirty consecutive years an entire country stayed united with one leader. Even though the improvements made within Mexico under Diaz, such as the railroad systems, were significant there is probably a lot more to the story than I am aware.