A Post about McGann
¶ 1 Leave a comment on paragraph 1 2 I think McGann is highlighting the importance of learning all about the digital tools and methods that are to be used in acquiring the digital humanities language. How valuable it is to the filed and to its future. He illustrates the value of information technology by using the verb “master” which indicates that humanists need to have more than sufficient knowledge of the digital tools they use or will use; they need to upgrade from being students to becoming professors; in other words, they need to be professionals in using it.
¶ 2 Leave a comment on paragraph 2 0 Therefore, I believe McGenn is attaching the future of the humanities with how professional we are going to be in using the technology available for us. More precisely, if humanists dealt with digitals as as necessities for the thrive of the field, they will take it more seriously and will give it space and attention, and vice versa.
¶ 3 Leave a comment on paragraph 3 1 Also, I feel that McGenn is encouraging scholars to thoroughly search and experience this relatively new approach of humanities, by briefly mentioning his NINES project and its “three-year initial plan”. More specifically, he defines specific tools used by scholars in the project such as, JUXTA and IVANHOE. I think this type of encouragement might work well, especially that he initially discussed the benefits that would be brought to the humanities by becoming digital.
¶ 4 Leave a comment on paragraph 4 2 Moreover, I feel that one of his arguments in supporting the urgent need to use digital tools has been shaped by the fact that people who are not humanists starting to be involved in many ways with the literary work done by those who are humanists, this involvement has several downfalls or negative effect on the literary work, he is almost suggesting that literature is starting to loose some of it’s initial beauty because of the need to outsource those who knows the digital.
Focusing on your use of students and professors, do you think a move towards using digital tools in the Humanities affects both roles equally? Is it up to professors to teach new technologies to drive the move to a more digital classroom?
Nick brings up a good question in his comment, and urges us to consider whether the implementation of digital tools / skills affects all ranking members of the institutional hierarchy in the same way. My short answer, based on experience, is that it does not, and that certain people occupying certain positions within that hierarchy will have more of an impetus to explore digital tools and methods than others because their jobs and careers require it.
This brings up the — much larger, but always important — question of how do we go about teaching the digital humanities. Ryan Cordell (a committed and well-known DHer) takes a rather snarky approach to this issue in this blog post, called “How Not to Teach Digital Humanities.”