Trevor Pettit
“Art Forges Beware: DNA Could Thwart Fakes”
In Tom Mashberg’s article “Art Forges Beware: DNA Could Thwart Fakes,” Mashberg claims that “experts say fakes have become one of the most vexing problems in the art market.” Luckily, students at the State University of New York at Albany are developing an extremely intricate marking system: the students have begun creating synthetic DNA “markers” giving artists unique signatures. Robert J. Jones, President of SUNY Albany highlighted that they designed this marker with the artists in mind. So, some of the key features of this marker are that it will not alter the appearance of the painting in any way but rather leave a unique print on the molecular level, it will be cost efficient, at an opening price of an estimated $150, and it will be reliable, as simply removing the marker will not remove the molecular imprint. The idea of this sort of marker is so appealing that the developers already have three dozen internationally renowned artists, archives, foundations, and museums set to test the technology as early as next year.
This technology advance could prove to be exactly what the art market was looking for. In fear of being sued, very few curators, experts, and artists’ foundations are willing to authenticate pieces for being sued, resulting in a sharp decline of consumer confidence in the art industry. This technology would remove the need for individuals to put their careers on the line, as the synthetic DNA codes would be catalogued as unique for individual artists, thus giving back consumers confidence in that what they are buying is, in fact, an authentic piece of art. Therefore, this development is especially significant because it would help both sides of the art community: artists could be confident that art being sold under their name truly is authentic and buyers could be confident that the art they are investing in is original.
I felt this was a very well written article. The author is concise and explains what the issue is and how this synthetic DNA marker could solve it at a basic level that is easy to understand. The article also clearly appeals to authority, sometimes even flaunting its legitimacy, which further strengthens the authors point. I also felt that the author did a good job capturing the development from all points of view: the developers, the artists, and the art buyers. This really helped me see how extensive the benefits of this development are. The only discipline in which I feel the author could have improved the article is in how the technology works: I understand that the synthetic DNA would be unique for each artist and could be catalogued, but how would the tag be put on a piece? However, this may be too complex for the reader and it is understandable that he neglected to expand on it. Overall, I thought this piece was well written, interesting, and definitely worth a read.
Work Cited
Mashberg, Tom. "Art Forgers Beware: DNA Could Thwart Fakes." The New York Times. The New York Times, 12 Oct. 2015. Web. 13 Oct. 2015. <http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/13/arts/design/developing-dna-as-a-standard-for-authenticating-art.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Fscience&action=click&contentCollection=science®ion=stream&module=stream_unit&version=latest&contentPlacement=2&pgtype=sectionfront&_r=0>.
Jeanne Chrisanthopoulos
ReplyDeleteCurrent Event 4 AP Biology
Due Wednesday, October 14th, 2015
Scientists Recover First Genome of Ancient Human From Africa
Within the past couple of days, a group of scientists salvaged the genome from a 45,000-year-old-human skeleton, Mota, found in the highlands of Ethiopia. This is the first time DNA was completely assembled from an ancient being in Africa; a huge step in technology. It had been previously believed that DNA would not be salvageable because of the extreme weather conditions in the tropics that damage human remains. The genome was reconstructed from the extraction of DNA of the inner ear bone. Scientists were able to interpret the appearance of the man from these genes: brown skin and brown eyes. The DNA from the Ethiopian fossil is very different from native Africans today; this may be because he lived at high altitudes and adapted genetically to his conditions. Ethiopia holds the record for oldest human fossils from 200,000 years ago; scientists can tell that later on humans began to migrate to Asia and Europe. Scientists believe that Eurasian genes were brought to Africa from ancient farmers in the Near East. This is possible because there are major similarities in DNA sequences between the Africans and Europeans and Asians. However this male fossil had no segments of Eurasian DNA in his genome. In African populations we see backflow in genes.
Trevor incorporated the importance of reconstructing the human genome and finding more fossils into his summary, and the article explained it well. Because of this new discovery in the reconstruction of genomes, scientists hope to recover human genomes from an even longer time ago. With these new connections of the genome made between people from different areas created new insight into the migration and adaptation of species.
I enjoyed the summary by Trevor because it flowed nicely and gave enough detail to understand the concept; but Zimmer was hard to follow because he changed topics often. The author, Zimmer, explained the theories of migration and adaptation in depth; not only did he state the theories, but he used them with examples from other real-life discoveries. This made the theories seem plausible and less like theories and more like facts. Also Zimmer used other scientists’ research to back up his or show other contradicting viewpoints which made him seem more credible.
I thought we were going to see cool photos of the man being discovered and learn more about how they found him, so it was disappointing when it was only touched upon briefly. Overall I enjoyed reading this article.
Zimmer, Carl. "Scientists Recover First Genome of Ancient Human From Africa." The New York Times. The New York Times, 08 Oct. 2015. Web. 09 Oct. 2015. .
Trevor, I thought this article was really interesting, so first off, nice choice! I liked how the article wasn’t purely scientific, but it also very much relates to the real world, it was not just an experiment. I think your summary was very clear and brief, but I still understood what you were saying. Lastly, I think you did a great job at explaining the possible implications of this new technology on the art world.
ReplyDeleteI think that you could have maybe explained the science behind what they were doing, so I could’ve understood this new technology even more. I also am confused on if they are doing this just for new paintings, or if they are going back to old paintings, like DaVinci's or Monet’s, and mark their signatures.
I am not an expert on art collecting, but I know that anyone who is a major art collector always has to worry about not having authentic artwork because forgery is an issue. This synthetic DNA could solve this issue and bring comfort to art collectors and art buyers.
.
After reading the actual article myself, Trevor did a great job concisely summarizing the key points necessary for a reader to grasp a good understanding of the article. He not only included his viewpoint on how well the content of the article was communicated but also considered the writing mechanisms that the author used. Trevor’s report was also cohesive because it was very well written. As far as improving goes, there is not much to say; I can only imagine more examples listed in his second paragraph enhancing the report and mentioning the positions of the people involved in the “forging process” that were significant to the article. It is always inspiring to hear of creative ways in which needs are met; in this case, the arts gained a huge advantage due to out-of-the-box thinking from SUNY Albany students. Overall, Trevor chose an article that evokes a connection between biology and a completely different field. The article not only sheds light on the benefitting art community but also highlights the versatility of Biology and therefore its significance to different parts of society.
ReplyDeleteMashberg, Tom. "Art Forgers Beware: DNA Could Thwart Fakes." The New York Times. The New York Times, 12 Oct. 2015. Web. 13 Oct. 2015. .