McGann Response
¶ 1 Leave a comment on paragraph 1 2 “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 humanities conference, he noticed the attendees’ gloomy outlook on the field, but he adds “Something else was troubling, however: the degree of ignorance about information technology and its critical relevance to humanities and scholarship” (52). The people who are in the best place to make an impact on the field are walking around feeling discouraged and hopeless, while they are unaware of a solution available to them. McGann believes this ignorance hurts the field more and more as funding is cut and the outside world fails to see the importance of the humanities. McGann urgently cries out to anyone and everyone who cares about the humanities, begging them to take action and incorporate information technology into the field. He acknowledges that this is a significant undertaking, both financially and academically, but that it is the only chance at redeeming the field.
¶ 2 Leave a comment on paragraph 2 2 McGann suggests that one way to improve and execute this process is to first improve the relationship between man (subject) and tools or things (objects), the foundation of humanist scholarship. Part of the problem may be that we, the humans, are intimidated by new or unfamiliar tools in the technological world, but McGann insists that there is no time for fear anymore. “Today we have to try to master some new things. We have to learn how to use them and master them” (62). The tools are the key to transforming the field of humanities, and we must embrace them and utilize them as soon as possible. “We will do this by becoming students again – a role that, as educators and humanists, I think we’re especially good at” (63). If humanities professors want to keep teaching, they must teach themselves how to learn again.
I like your idea about the people at the humanities conference. They seemingly should be the ones who can come up with an idea on how to expand the humanities properly, and McGann seems to believe they are just looking at it in the wrong way. A perspective or viewpoint shift is often the best way to problem-solve, which is basically what McGann is advocating for here. McGann is aware this problem can’t be solved by a few members of the humanities community, it needs to be solved collaboratively by the whole community, which is exactly what a perspective shift should hopefully accomplish.
You do a nice job of summarizing McGann’s frustrations in this first paragraph. And I (like Lloyd) would be curious to hear more about how those “people who are int he best place to make an impact” might go about doing so, given your understanding of McGann’s arguments. Are they “in the best place” to make that impact simply given their expertise in literature studies? Or are we talking about a specific demographic of literary scholars (with regards to age, ability, institutional affiliations, training, specific expertise, etc.)?