Digital Humanities

You caught me–I dropped this quotation in without too much care.  Let’s see what I can do:

We can attribute a lot of exclusive practices to ignorance. As white people we might not notice the room only has white people in it until someone asks, “Why is ____ so white?” like in McPherson’s case.  Interdisciplinary initiatives definitely should help us address issues of scholarly intersections [which makes me point out I use this language in the same way a feminist would use “intersectionality”].  I found this quotation from McPherson particularly useful to point out that what we need is to become aware of those ignorances.  Once that first step is complete, interdisciplinary work can do more to address theory as well as their own objectives.

My last intention is to sound snarky, but I have totally been operating as if “inclusivity” is a word!

“inclusivity, n.” OED Online. Oxford University Press, September 2016. Web. 1 November 2016. [Will this link work for others?: http://www.oed.com.ezproxy.library.und.edu/view/Entry/93584?redirectedFrom=inclusivity& ]

And then, the questions you raise are really like, the important questions, right?  It’s kind of a simplistic answer but I really believe that with more opportunity [read: funding] the channels of higher education can open up and allow anyone with the right stuff to participate.

This discussion of “inclusiveness” (we are aware that “inclusivity” is not a word, right?) in administrative policies / practice is an interesting one. Except it seems that it predominantly works out in the reverse, and that student populations — those at the bottom of the academic “totem pole” — are actually very diverse and so geared towards inclusiveness whereas the administrative hierarchy itself is not (or is less so). Mekayla seems to be pondering some of these same questions / conundrums in her comment, above. So how do we go about putting pressure on administrative networks to function and act with inclusiveness in mind, given that their structure does not demand that they do that?

Interesting material here: I’d like to see you work with it more. McPherson, after all, is saying that the university operates via the same logic of separation / segregation as conceptions of race (and gender, too). So how do we go about undermining those ideologies of separation and alienation? Do interdisciplinary initiatives like DH help us to do that?

The suggestions that you describe here are interesting, and certainly worthwhile. But I’m wondering about how these suggestions even relate to the argument that McPherson is making. Her essay, after all, largely shirks any discussion of racial disparities and actual segregation (so far as real, live human beings are concerned). So what does “get[ing] minorities involved with [DH]” have to do with McPherson’s claim that UNIX (and other, similarly derived operating systems) are in fact designed with “lenticular logics” of separation and alienation in mind?

I’d like to see you sketch that link a bit more fully.

Yes, I definitely approached this argument from a social activist’s stance, not so much a theorist of the field.  So I was concerned about access to education and resources more so than I was concerned about defining disciplines.  Which of course shows that this was a more difficult article with lots of facets, right?

Could the minorities here then be those with different backgrounds, specifically digital/computer based backgrounds within the field of DH?I think maybe yes, after Sheila helped us frame her argument differently, not focusing so much on race, but I’m not entirely sure that I’m understanding her argument as intended.

I also feel as though I was taking her arguments and ideas in different ways than intended, but I suppose thats the nature of this kind of thing.

However, even in light of our class discussion on Monday, I think much of what you’re saying, although you frame it around race as her title suggests, still applies the issue she’s trying to get at.  Digital Humanities is white as you note, but “white” in that too many people don’t know or understand other elements of DH beyond the humanities aspect, there isn’t enough knowledge as McPherson seemingly argues, within the field relating to subjects such as coding, or other digitally centered practices. So yes, I think to some extent, DH needs to begin involving diversity, taking those steps to become less “white”, if you will, and start to incorporate other practices such as coding.

I think this is a really intriguing idea, especially in light of our discussion in class on Monday.  If we don’t think about her arguments in terms necessarily relating to race, but instead of disciplines, I think it changes the way this works, at least for me anyway.

If in your example the administration of DH would be people like Stephen Ramsey or Jerome McGann, in that they are the Digital Humanists incorporating different kinds of practices, those not necessarily segregating between the humanities work and digital work like coding, they seem to be modeling inclusivity to some extent, I think.  So if this is the case, I wonder then why other’s aren’t following suit.

I agree that inclusivity starts from the top down.  So then are others not following suit, not being as inclusive as those at the top, within the administration if you will, because they don’t have access to the same resources? Although you’re talking about access a bit differently here in terms of race, but I think it still applies.  They can’t be inclusive because they can’t help from separating their work simply because they don’t have the ability, the access, to learn how to start to incorporate these other ways of working with DH?