McGann Response
¶ 1 Leave a comment on paragraph 1 0
¶ 2 Leave a comment on paragraph 2 1 In writing “Information Technology and the Troubled Humanities”, James McGann speaks of a “train”, saying, “…whether we choose to or not, we should all be clear about the slow train that’s coming and that won’t be sidetracked” (McGann 63). The “slow train”, the one “that won’t be sidetracked”, seems to be the call for putting concepts, ideas, and programs, such as NINES (Networked Infrastructure for Nineteenth-century Electronic Scholarship), into practice instead of simply discussing them theoretically. It is a call to once again, learn and to then discuss the process.
¶ 3 Leave a comment on paragraph 3 1 Following the Swinburn quote, McGann writes, “Men (and women) are indeed called to the mastery of things. Of things precisely. Of people and of life events we are and always will be participants and students, never masters. Drawing that distinction between things and people, between mastery and learning—is what it means to be … a humanist” (McGann 62). Here, Humanists are the subjects, insofar as that what makes Humanists such are their life events, who they are as people. The objects McGann is outlining here are things like electronic scholarship, learning how to speak the technological language that is critical to understanding and therefore mastering these objects.
¶ 4 Leave a comment on paragraph 4 2 The subjects that Humanists study, those regarding people and life events, are subjects that they will never be masters of. Instead, they will forever be participants and students. However, to continue on as Humanists, to continue learning and participating, we must be willing to board the slow-moving, inevitable train that McGann speaks of. We must be willing to finally put into practice ideas and programs that will allow us, Humanists, to keep learning. The necessity for beginning to learn through practice and to discuss the process again is imperative to the life-long commitment of mastering subjects. In order to even begin mastering those subjects that McGann is outlining, we have to be willing to master things like electronic scholarship; we have to be willing to become digital humanists. Mastering such objects and continually studying these subjects are indeed key elements to a successful, thriving future for the Humanities and Humanists.
Yes. What fuels this debate about “practice” (or praxis) vs. “theorization”? What is McGann’s investment in this argument?