Response to McPherson
¶ 1 Leave a comment on paragraph 1 0 First off, I found this article extremely hard to follow and understand so bare with me as I answer this question.
¶ 2 Leave a comment on paragraph 2 2 I had to read this text several times to understand how coding and race were related and after reading it more than once, I still can’t quite figure it out to be honest. But maybe that’s the issue – I can’t see them being brought together.
¶ 3 Leave a comment on paragraph 3 0 McPherson talks about how we need to look beyond our screens and look at the complex and difficult studies of computing systems as whole, without noticing what happens on our screen. This, intermixed with racial culture, is a way to bring these two modes together, without just adding race analysis into the mix, according to McPherson. My problem is, what is this analysis? Yes, I am trying to look beyond what my screen is saying, but what else am I looking for then? To “hold race and computation together in a systemic manner” is a way of bringing these two together, but she doesn’t actually develop into how were actually going to hold these two in a systemic manner.
¶ 4 Leave a comment on paragraph 4 2 For my own opinion of how to bring these two methods of inquiry together, I can’t really think of anything. The idea of coding and segregation seem so separate, even after reading the essay. But that’s the problem isn’t it? That traditional humanities scholars feel segregated, disconnected and out-of-touch when they read technological literature, and the same goes for computer scientists when they read traditional literature. The only way I can think about bringing these two together is more education from outside your own field. Computer scientists take more English classes, and English majors take more computer science classes.
¶ 5 Leave a comment on paragraph 5 2 If these were to come together, I think the humanities in general would become the digital humanities, because of everyone’s intellect on the digital world and coding. Though the segregation would not completely disappear, for not every humanist can be a computer engineer, it would blur the lines.
I agree, I am still confused by this argument.
I wonder if our class discussions have since helped to shed light on the ways that McPherson is constructing a set of links between these issues?
What, in particular, prevented you from seeing her argument more clearly? Was it her writing style, her dependence on certain kinds of terminology, etc? I’d be interested to see you get more specific here.