Before the term "digital humanities" was coined, the practice of applying computational methods to examining the humanities was known as "humanities computing." The discipline, loosely defined as such, launched in the 1940s with the work of Roberto Busa. From there, it progressed, and began to encompass three different applications: algorithmic, metalinguistic, and representational, each of which are researched and fleshed out from perspective of computing in the humanities. Representational applications include data visualization (e.g. The Pudding), but in a broader sense include the manipulation and transforming of data and its appearance. Metalinguistic applications include using language to access artifacts and information computers cannot normally reach. Algorithmic applications utilize algorithms and models to test and codify the humanities, through sets of rules to create poems, for example, but their real value lies in the questions they raise when the slipperiness of data becomes evident: for one, what does it mean to create artwork? What form renders a piece of art valuable, and is it still art if it is made by a computer? Mccarty asserts that humanities computing searches to answer these questions, and constantly work toward refining said answers.
In the pursuit of formalizing humanities computing (also known as digital humanities), it is worthwhile to ask what attributes it displays that qualify it for academic instruction. Rockwell, a professor from the University of Alberta, explores these questions in "Is Humanities Computing an Academic Discipline?", and decides "multimedia" is a better name to propose, especially as he believes humanities computing should not only straddle linguistic and textual data, but include the performative and visual arts, incorporating computers into their creation. Additionally, he raises the issue of how effective computing is when combined with the humanities and whether or not it enhances the experience of the discipline. However, John Grisham, whose paper "What is Humanities Computing & What is Not?" is also included in the DDH reader, believes that a computer is primarily used as a tool for access to, modeling of, and understanding humanities data. Grisham views the transformation catalyzed by computing's inclusion in the humanities with more idealism than does Rockwell, who makes a point to recognize his skepticism toward the idea.
From "Humanities Computing" (McCarthy, 2005).
In the second article of a four-article series, Svensson delves into the current state of the digital humanities, addressing the common belief shared among those at the forefront of DH, including Tara McPherson & Cathy N. Davidson, that there have been two subsequent waves of digital humanities development. Specifically, the first surge of activity occurred during the "humanities computing" phase; the second phase of activity has been ushered in with the rapid growth of the World Wide Web. McPherson stressed the difference between peer-to-peer, network media -- such as Twitter -- and the development of tools and models applied to humanities data. Davidson made a distinction between the Web 1.0 and the Web 2.0, applying this division to the history of digital humanities. In recognizing specific lab spaces, like HASTAC at Stanford (see Universities page) and libraries as repositories for digital humanities development, Svensson furthers the legitimization of the digital humanities and gives credit to the field as one worth dedicating time to studying and developing. However, one question he draws attention to is whether the digital humanities will diverge from or converge with "traditional", e.g. non-digitized humanities: as computer use grows more ubiquitous and digitization is a phenomenon common in most first-world countries, the likelihood of convergence is increasing.
Rydberg-Cox discusses four specific instances of digital libraries, foremost among them the Valley of the Shadow Project and the Perseus Library, to provide examples of harnessing technology to digitize relevant data. For example, the Valley of the Shadow Project is an archive of ephemera related to the Civil War, while the Perseus Library captures images and information related to the breadth of Greek mythology; both of these niche libraries offer a unique viewing experience that, more importantly, makes the humanities more accessible. With an astounding amount of information to sift through, having "digital libraries" more intensely focused on certain niche topics -- like Wikipedia, but more extensive and more trustworthy -- facilitates the information-finding process. Automating data this way can be a boon to not only librarians, but also to patrons and to the humanities in general, by way of ensuring a permanent record of a book and by encouraging the centralization of data.
The word computer first referred to someone who computed answers to complex mathematical equations. Most of the early computers were female, because the work was viewed as "lesser" for men and seen as relatively unimportant; thus, it was easier for women to break into the computing industry. However, as the Internet developed and the power of computers was increasingly recognized, computer science grew into one of the most male-dominated industries existing today. McPherson's statement that "computers are encoders of culture" pays homage to the history of computing: the first computers created a culture vastly different to the Silicon Valley of today. She argues that, because digital humanities began its ascent during the civil rights era, when politics and race became even more deeply intertwined in everyday life, it is imperative to consider race's implications even when dealing with seemingly innocuous structures, like UNIX, that seem to be impervious to race's influence. Furthermore, she asserts that having greater diversity of coders results in intellectual generosity, a spreading of information that serves to benefit all. She also implies that in not considering race while examining and expanding digital humanities, the field is put at risk for unidimensionality.
|
"The greatest service that the digital humanities can contribute to the humanities is to practice instrumentalism in a way that demonstrates the necessity of breaking down the artificial divide of the “two cultures” to show that the humanities are needed alongside the sciences to solve the intricately interwoven natural, technological, economic, social, political, and cultural problems of the global age."
// Alan Liu |
Liu expresses concern that digital humanists are overly concerned with technical details of their discipline, focusing on the need to have programming experience or be firmly grounded in STEM (science, technology, engineering, math), rather than on the gaps they can fill through straddling both STEM & the humanities. He believes the digital humanities are uniquely positioned, by virtue of their utilization of digital methods, to communicate with the general public about humanities findings and their implications. That being said, Liu seems to advocate for a more humanities-based implementation of the digital humanities, focusing more on the nebulous, nuanced details of the field rather than on concrete algorithms stressed by proponents of a more technological approach to the field.
