Archive for the ‘Uncategorized’ Category
Future Plan
First off, the digital humanities should definitely be concerned with the transfer of neoliberal policies to the university. This is an issue that affects everyone in the university in the long-term and brings the idea of education itself into question. Neoliberalism in universities is something every academic should be aware of and actively analyzing, if […]
11/28 Response
When thinking about how to prevent increased corporatization in the university system, the first thing that came to my mind was to have all departments come up with a minimum operating budget, an ideal operating budget, and an extravagant operating budget. Based on those budgets, an accounting firm or some other separate board can give […]
Education Shmeducation
Chun et al., “Darkside of the digital humanities” brings up a lot of valid points regarding the sanctity of digital humanities. Within all this, the question with Universities are brought up and how we can save corporatization with universities. I personally believe that Wendy Chun makes a valid point when she states, “I also want […]
Prompt 11/28: Chun et al., “Darkside of the Digital Humanities”
Last week, we read an essay by Daniel Allington, Sarah Brouillette, and David Golumbia arguing that the digital humanities are, as a field, contributing to the “neoliberal” / corporate takeover of the modern university — not just in the U.S., but in countries like the U.K. and Canada as well. Then, for class today, we […]
Response to Golumbia
Though the article gave a factual history of DH, it did so with the bias in mind that DH is doomed and that it won’t become an actual academic work. It seems that it doesn’t fully commit to their statement that DH “as proved itself so useful to university administrators and to funding bodies”. The […]
Golumbia Response – 11/14
I think the essay describes DH effectively in that it addresses some of the previous concerns of Digital Humanists but also raises new questions and perspectives. The argument, as in previous essays, that DH is changing the field of the humanities is again present in this text: “Digital Humanities has often tended to be anti-interpretive, […]
Clarity at Last?!?!?!?
Given everything that we have read thus far, I think it is safe to say that this latest piece by Golumbia et. Al takes the cake in terms of a viable, relatively complete -as far as I know!- history and definition attempt. The only author whose historical narrative of DH I vividly recall would […]
Neoliberal Tools
In “Neoliberal Tools (and Archives): A Political History of Digital humanities” Daniel Allington, Sarah Brouillette, and David Golumbia begin their essay by summerizing a complete description of how DH is promoted as “a corrective to the “traditional” and outmoded approaches to literary study that supposedly plague English departments” and the role it plays in facilitating “the neoliberal takeover of the […]
Neoliberal Tools Response
“Advocates position Digital Humanities as a corrective to the “traditional” and outmoded approaches to literary study that supposedly plague English departments,” (page 1). This opening quote not only headlines a well-argued point on DH’s role in the world of English study, but it also facilitates a jumping off point into one of the main conflicts […]
Who’s the real tool?
Golumbia’s essay almost feels like a conspiracy theory. This becomes apparent when he starts talking about Hirsch’s writing and the influence it has had, “conservative commentators nonetheless have converged on the view that readers shouldn’t interpret and evaluate texts for themselves, especially with regard to politics” (Golumbia 6). Golumbia uses Hirsch’s constraining of the focus […]
