McPherson Response
¶ 1 Leave a comment on paragraph 1 3 McPherson suggests a number of solutions, looking at different ways of starting to bridge the gap. She argues, “First we must better understand the machines and networks that continue to powerfully shape our lives in ways that we are often ill equipped to deal with as media and humanities scholars” (152). This seems to be an important suggestion, one that might being to tackle the existing separation. While reading her essay, to an extent I felt out of the loop in her discussion of code, but it made me realize how little I understand many various elements of the “machines and networks” and media that do shape much of what I do digitally, even as little that might exist.
¶ 2 Leave a comment on paragraph 2 3 This is an important call, for those that consider themselves Digital Humanists to start to learn and better understand what it is they’re doing and how it works beyond the surface. Part of the reason behind this segregation, if you will, between a more in depth digital understanding and the work being done by some Digital Humanists, is that again, the field needs to work to be more inclusive, something McPherson outlines a few pages later. She says, “Code and race are deeply intertwined, even as the structures of code labor to disavow these very connections. Politically committed academics with humanities skill sets must engage technology and its production and generative space that is always emergent and never fully determined” (155). Academics in the field of the Humanities and therefore Digital Humanities, must be aware of and engaged with technology and the way it continues to change and evolve, therefore shaping the work they are doing. The gap that is still existing between the coding work and humanities work, two things that may still seem separate for many, needs to be bridged. Its difficult, indeed, but McPherson suggests this is certainly one way to start to knitting these two things together. In suggesting this she seems to ultimately be calling for more inclusion, more collaboration, and a willing to engage with what might not yet be familiar, in an attempt to better understand it.
Note: my comments are late? I must have closed my laptop lid before they finished uploading on Wednesday. But I still wanted to get my comments to you, Mekayla. I’m sad I missed Friday’s discussion, so that I could have had more time to grapple with McPherson’s essay.