Group items tagged

This blog article by Stanley Fish discusses how digital humanities is seen by others in positive and negative ways. Some people find that digital humanities is a "monstrous terrain" because it destroys traditional humanities and that not all authorship of online sources are accurate. On the other hand, digital humanities allows students to use a variety of resources with conducting research. Stanley explains one of the challenges in digital humanities is to spread the awareness of such a field.

This article focuses on the limitations of the traditional method of studying literature. David Smith, assistant professor of computational social science in the College of Computer and Information Science, and Ryan Cordell, assistant professor of English and digital humanities in the College of Social Sciences and Humanities at Northeastern University hope to mend the gaps and limitations to the traditional method by encouaging a digitial humanities project for their school.

This blog post created in anticipation of a panel on undergraduate work and research in the digital humanities creates many questions and ideas for discussion at the panel. The author invites others to share input in hopes of turning it into a discussion to bring forward to the panel at the 2013 Digital Humanities conference. Among these questions and ideas are questions of the best way to incorporate project-based digital humanities research approaches in the undergraduate classroom as well as designing curricula to incorporate Digital Humanities into the coursework while still including traditional humanities disciplines.

A literature teacher and researcher who is very fond of books and texts has realized the importance of a digital education. She likes the digital aspect of researching information because if information is given digitally it gives people around the world access to it. This can create a better education for people around the world and connect people who have the same interests. She focuses on discussing Digital Humanities that focus around literature and arts so that once more people become digitally connected, humanities people can demonstrate their skills and expertise that are relatable to people around the world outside of a classroom or library. She knows the importance it is for the 21st century to have easier access to more humanities knowledge that can be shown everywhere.

This article about the 2011 Digital Humanities meeting highlights three big project announcements from that meeting. The first of these was a then new grant program: Digital Humanities Implementation Grants, a follow up to the Digital Humanities Start-Up Grant program. The second of these was a collection of alternative academic careers for humanities scholars titled #alt-academy. The last of these was the introduction of Press Forward, an initiative aiming to fuse traditional scholarly review with open-web filters.

Bethany Nowviskie's article proposes an overhaul of modern graduate studies by replacing aging practices and methods of education with more modern and technology appropriate forms of education. One of Nowviskie's key points of criticism it that many of these more traditional forms of graduate education are producing humanities PhDs who do not fully understand how modern universities work and are impacted by the outside world. Nowviskie's main proposal for beginning to replace these aging methods is through the cooperation of funding agencies and respected humanities organizations, ones with a good history of inter-institutional and interdisciplinary collaboration, to utilize grants to reshape graduate studies.

Tim Hitchcock begins this article by stating that books are dead. He goes on to explain his statement, qualifying that the process of creating a 'book' is lengthy and redundant, especially in the digital age. In our current state, we still think of data in reference to standard book form (book, chapter, page, line). He also criticizes modern humanists' approach/integration of scholarship and technology. Hitchcock believes that many utilize technical shortcuts (such as Google Books), but refuse to recognize it. Or they reference an article that they found online, but cite the paper version. His greatest criticism is the path that he believes digital humanities is going. He beleves that it is following the progress of the book too closely and that in an attempt to make things accessible, they have not utilized the versatility of digital publishing. He notes that how we currently view books depends on how digital humanities progresses. At the end of the article, Hitchcock describes his original tone and intention of the article. He also describes the editing and peer-review process.

In the article Literature Is Not Data: Against Digital Humanities Marche explains how literature will at some point become data and how we will soon be able to read anything, anywhere, at anytime. Marche argues that literature is not data, and that it cannot be meaningfully treated as data. Instead, he believes that literature is the opposite of data and that data precedes written literature. Marche develops this "idea" that literature is terminally incomplete, and that you can not record even most of literature, even English literature. He assumes, that huge swath of the tradition are absent or in ruins.