Digital Humanities on a Spectrum
¶ 1 Leave a comment on paragraph 1 0 Although I believe that Mullen’s argument in “We’re All Digital Humanists Now” is a little weak and needs more support and refinement, I get her point of view, and I can imagine the digital humanities being on a “spectrum”, where the most professional humanists are on one side, while the least professional humanists are on the other side,
¶ 2 Leave a comment on paragraph 2 1 To make my point clearer, I think on the spectrum of digital humanities scholars need to be categorized according to how much knowledge they have about technology, and how comfortable they are using it. So in this way, I am suggesting that all contributors need to have the least knowledge about technology, such as how to operate a laptop or a desktop. Otherwise they can’t have a place on the spectrum. Being an ignorant of technology is still a problem among humanists from developing countries.
¶ 3 Leave a comment on paragraph 3 1 On one side of the spectrum, I can see those who have exceeded the average knowledge about technology, and have reached an advanced level in dealing with and in using digital tools and software. I will call this group “the professionals”. The most important skill these professionals have is the ability to build and analyze software and websites where humanists can gather and exchange knowledge and points of view, The type of training that help humanists acquiring such a skill, would typically be done by taking face to face or online courses in website and software designing. These type of courses are usually given by a computer science department, or by a computer science institute. Jerome McGann is included in the professionals’ category because I think his NINES project represents the level of proficiency that is associated with this category. All of the activities linked to this category are complex and need particular attention from those who are involved in them, so not anybody can do them, only those who had proper training in them.
¶ 4 Leave a comment on paragraph 4 2 On the opposite side of the spectrum, lies those who have the least knowledge about technology. “The amateur”, or those who are interested and engaged in DH, but don’t have sufficient digital knowledge to help them excel in the field. The activities these individuals are involved in include, the ability to post and comment on simple online websites (like Word Press), searching different websites or databases for certain topics, and finding online resources to support a paper they write or an argument they make. Therefore, most of the tasks included in this category are simple in nature, and more accessible by the majority of humanists. Also, there is no actual training in demand here because it’s something people obtain after becoming familiar with computers. Having said that, I find it difficult to put any of the authors we’ve read for in this category because I feel all of them have this initial knowledge already.
¶ 5 Leave a comment on paragraph 5 1 Finally, on the middle of the spectrum, I imagine those who have moderate knowledge of everything digital, but are not afraid to try anything new. “The experimentalists”. They can post a full blog at Word Press (by full I mean a blog with some pictures or videos, and a hyperlink to an external source), and at the same time they can use a software designed to search different collocations of a word. Some of the activities scholars in this category experience are commenting on a text in Microsoft word, besides inserting tables and charts to a certain paper, experimenting a new scholarly search engine specialized in a certain filed, etc. Now when it comes to which author I think fits in this category, I immediately thought of Terras because I believe she is in this middle point. As it’s very obvious that she used a software/program to calculate the number of presenters according to their country of origin, and to calculate the most commonly used words in the ACH/ALLC 2005 conference, all to show her knowledge about the subject she’s discussing.
I agree with you that the spectrum needs to range quite a bit, but I can’t agree with the fact that if you can somehow operate a laptop or computer, you can be a digital humanist.
I like the fact that you bring up the issue that technology in developing countries is still a problem. I guess I kept forgetting that digital humanities isn’t just something that is happening in North America and some parts of Europe. Digital humanities on a global scale should be taken into account.