Archive for September, 2016
Trask-McGann Response
For McGann, the relationship/bond between humanists and the objects they choose to study-texts, artifacts, etc. is a practically unbreakable one given that one cannot properly exist without the other. What would humanists as subjects/inventors & main attractions have to pass their days with if it wasn’t for their close study of the things/software prototypes (objects) […]
McGann Response
The relationship between humanist as people and humanities as a collection of methods is static and because of this, is dissipating. Humanities as a scholarship has been around for centuries and since it had become so successful for such a long period of time, people do not want to change. What McGann is arguing is […]
McGann Response
From McGann’s perspective, human beings are not simply the masters of things, but rather we are more suited to be viewed as “participants and students,” who are constantly learning. Humans collectively can only become greater, and reach the potential status of mastery through educating ourselves with new objects of study and learning how these […]
McGann Response
McGann certainly has a more enthusiastic approach to the tools of digital humanities than other self-described “traditional” scholars. That stance coming from that of mastery rather than participation. McGann is sure to say, “Of people and of life events we are and always will be participants and students, never masters” (62). But of things, like […]
McGann Response
“We have to get going now, we can’t wait to see if there’s more to learn” (63). In his essay on the Digital Humanities, Jerome McGann writes about major issues he sees in the field. He argues that while the world is being transformed by new technology, the humanities are struggling to catch up. At a recent […]
McGann Response
McGann’s argument offers a multidimensional approach to the relationship between humanists as people and the humanities. He argues “integrating digital technology into our scholarship will have to be pursued on as broad a scale as possible” (51). At the same time, he also states, “we have to restore textual and bibliographical work to the center […]
McGann Response
McGann uses a line from Swinburne about humans being the masters of all things to argue that despite its digital form, digital humanities is just another thing for humans to master. He suggests that digital humanities should be seen as another tool, like paper or pen, to better conduct research and/or convey literature to the […]
McGann and the inevitable evolution of the humanities
McGann views the movement into the digital humanities as an inevitability—a part of our social evolution predicted by the human drive to learn and master new things. He argues that “Men (and women) are indeed called to the mastery of things” (62), meaning that part of what makes us human is our desire for learning […]
Response to McGann
McGann’s essay on the digital humanities consists on the evolution of what the digital humanities will consist of. Mcgann’s idea of digital humanities is represented in different ways. On page 56, McGann goes on to explain how the digital humanities is hard because it is always changing and with it always changing, it is hard […]
Responding to McGann
McGann’s image of the humanist—and a kind of humanism—seems to be at the heart of his approach to this shift in our field. As the line McGann lifts from Swineburn reveals, McGann believes it is fundamentally human to work with things, to build things, to see ourselves in ripples of the pond after tossing in […]
