ENGL 481: Digital Humanities

Marche's article criticizes digital humanists for a perceived failure to adequately address the human and interpretive nature of literature by treating it as data. Two core issues identified by Marche is that literature, unlike statistics, is terminally incomplete - that parts frequently are missing or shifting - and that data mining efforts fail to account for context in literature. Marche argues that current data mining efforts are flawed because "algorithms are inherently fascistic" and that "meaning is mushy." Marche does not oppose digitization efforts and in fact welcomes the translation of texts into digital formats, rather Marche argues that literary meaning cannot be as readily quantified as numbers - that "insight remains handmade."

Dan Cohen's transcript of his anonymous speech at Harvard on March 1, 2011 provides insight into the demands scholars have digitization efforts and digital archives. Cohen identifies five major demands on the part of scholars: reliable metadata, the ability to experience serendipity, an interface to handle differing modes of research, a representation of the physical book, and open APIs to accommodate the demands digital libraries cannot anticipate. Dan Cohen's goal is to borrow the best aspects of a physical library - the ability to stumble upon new material readily as well as some measure of its tactile feel - with the ease of use of a well designed digital archive.

The purpose of this power point presentation is to provide information on an alternative to XML called "Linked Data." The purpose of linked data is, according to the powerpoint, not to create "data silos" but to connect all these pieces of data together akin to hyperlinking. By digitizing materials in this manner, data can be more readily connected through the use of various identifiers such as Uniform Resource Identifiers (URI).

This link, rather than an actual article, is an entry for the grant application process for the Digital Humanities, closing on Jan. 23, 2013. Although it lacks any actual discussion of its own on the Digital Humanities, it provides a link to its own entry on the NEH website which has a collection of projects which have applied for grants, such as WordSeer. The grant requires its applicants to be nonprofits or education institutions, meaning its list of applicants may provide insight into modern innovations in the Digital Humanities with regards to education.

The article explains the potential application of the SMI RED-m, an eye tracking device, in digital classrooms by explaining its use by the Humanities Lab of Lund University in Sweden. According to the article Lund University, in cooperation with other international researchers, installed 25 SMI RED-m devices to build a prototype digital classroom. By utilizing this eye tracking software, researcher sin the visual perception lab hope to analyze how children learn things in a classroom situation, particularly with regards to introducing new technology to the class room. The intent of the researchers is to use data collected from the project to better tailor educational materials to the abilities and interests of children.

The UA article introduces a collection of humanities professors, with a focus on Africana studies assistant professor Bryan Carter, who have worked to integrate modern technology such as smart phones with their course. The article provides multiple examples of how these technologies have been specifically integrated into the classrooms, such as iPhones reading out lectures from the syllabus, as well as how online courses have attracted a new group of students who might have otherwise been uninterested in the course. The professors interviewed in the article all agree that integrating new forms of technology with the classroom is important to opening access to education to new students.

This article covers the upcoming launch of a Digital Humanities website/collective, Ars Liberalis. According to the article, Ars Liberalis intends to be a tool for facilitating communication between students within the digital humanities, as well as between the digital humanities community and the outside world. Students will be able to begin discussions about lectures, submit materials to Ars Liberalis, etc., all with the goal of fostering interest in the digital humanities and communication within the community. Ars Liberalis will host both news articles or related essays as well as creative submissions from students.

"In Defense of Data" presents two articles, "The Digital Inhumanities?" by Scott Selisker and "Imaginary Targets" by Holger Schott Syme, in response to an article by Stephen Marche, "Literature is Not Data: Against Digital Humanities." Selisker's essay focuses primarily on dismantling the idea that digitization removes the human element from interpretation and enforces a quasi-authoritarian view of literature. Syme's essay addresses both Marche's misunderstanding of the motivations of the movement against Google Book's digitization efforts as well as Marche's inaccurate depiction of modern literary research in the wake of digital humanities.

This article introduces the DIGHUMLAB in Denmark. This laboratory is a collaboration between for major Danish universities and will make it much easier for researchers and students to search for and analyze material across research fields, national boundaries, and media. It will increase international collaboration of Danish scholars with the rest of the world for the sake of the humanities. The grant-funded project will help raise public awareness and interest in humanities research.

This article discusses Microsoft's departure, for lack of potential business, from the digitization of books. He argues that Google's vast lead in this area will allow them to continue to dominate it with its competitors failing to find sufficient outside funding. The article concludes hoping for a joint funding by leading institutions like Harvard, Yale, and Princeton.

Cohen cites PressForward as a model for the "catching the good" 'style' publication. He believes that scholarly journals should "catch" works that they think should see a wider audience, as opposed to reject and criticize those that are deemed "bad." He emphasizes that there is no submission process. He argues that this form encourages publication and creativity.

This article expands on the subjects discussed in Dan Cohen's earlier article on The Social Contract of Scholarly Publishing. He breaks the supply and demand model, introduced in the previous article, into four influential categories that need focus to better both sides. He argues for impartiality when approaching a text, passion for the subject, shame for the lack of sharing compared to other fields, and the shift from narcissistic desires for compensation to a desire for communal knowledge.

This article discusses the extensive nature of scholarly publishing. He explains the industry in terms of a social contract between the supply side, publication, and the demand side, the consumers. The supply side of this contract has enjoyed large growth recently, with the continued growth of digital outlets, while the demand side has remained stationary, maintaining its view of the book as the definitive form of publication. In conclusion, the author argues that curation will solve this problem, and become more important that publication once publication ceases to be limited.