One of the essays in the first section was titled "Why We Fight," which led to the Decemberists song of the same name being stuck in my head all the rest of that day that I read it. But I think it's an apt description of the "debate" going on in digital humanities about just what DH is.
All through the first section, we get an overview of the evolution of digital humanities, from its emergence as a topic for consideration in the Nineties (with the rise of the internet and more access to information than ever before) all through the various labor pains of its gestation and eventual naming. DH is a young 'un in the world of scholarly disciplines, coming of age just as I was, to an extent. It would be fair to say that I'd never even heard of the concept until I signed up for this class.
The definition of DH is fluid right now, because in a lot of ways we're still trying to figure out just what "digital humanities" are and what they should (or shouldn't) include. It's easy (if a little arrogant) to assume that History is "the story of the past and how it relates to us today," if you will, but History covers quite a bit of territory, and can be divided into various strains (European history alone would require quite a bit of leeway in terms of what can be covered within the parameters of a lecture course and what has to be left by the wayside for lack of time or relevance to the overall idea of the course). English is similarly both easy to define and slippery from such formal definition: we can all agree it's the study of writing and how writers write, but what can you cover (and what can't you cover in the time allotted)? It can encompass the study of literature (and that in and of itself is another huge chunk of territory, because every country and even regions of countries has their own brand; you could take enough courses on "Southern literature of the United States" to cover any pre-requirement for a major, though you run the risk of Faulkner overload). DH is facing much of the same concerns that disciplines far, far older than it have faced and (arguably) overcome, or shrunk in the face of.
The idea of the digital humanities eventually "becoming" the humanities (as one of the respondents to a questionnaire about DH predicted) is interesting, because the humanities could be said to cover not just the obvious (literature, grammar, etc.) but also defining characteristics of shared culture. I thought it was interesting how one article cited the seemingly random inclusion of film and music as falling under the future banner of DH at some point in time, though such citations weren't as well defined as the ones listed under perhaps more "typical" humanities concerns. Film, like DH, is relatively new to the scene in terms of other artistic mediums; literature's been around at least as long as Chaucer, if not even earlier, and music (in the sense of being performed, not recorded) is probably one of mankind's oldest means of expression. Film came along through photography, and the desire to tell stories through images (film, as magnetic as it is, is basically still photographs taken one upon another and run through a projector to create the illusion of movement, or at least it is when it's literally "on film." Digital filmmaking doesn't use film, of course). I know when I originally signed up for a film class during my undergrad term at Clemson, I didn't consider it an "art" at least because I'd taken it for granted that movies were there. But an intro to film class caused me to reconsider, to see the inherent beauty and flaws of the medium, and to embrace the notion that, while not all films are art, there is art in film.
Like DH, film studies can encompass a wide berth: for example, I took an entire course devoted to Jean-Luc Godard, with pit stops into the territory of Francois Truffaut, Agnes Varda, and other French filmmakers. Like DH, it's a new discipline, but one that has long since established criteria (it's hard for me to imagine that anyone would take a course in "the films of Michael Bay" except as a joke, or a tongue-in-cheek "celebration" of camp cinema, but it could easily happen within time). Film would be an ideal medium through which to examine the digital humanities, because it leads inevitably to the plethora of images we can see on the internet, which is where the concept of DH laid its roots.
I think that the debate over just what is or isn't DH is healthy and necessary, a discipline in search of itself and experiencing growing pains but finding the strength to assert itself. I have no doubt that one day the digital humanities will be defined conclusively. It may even encompass the whole of humanities, like the Blob eating up entire towns. But right now it's trying to find itself, and there may be some stumbles along the way or missteps. DH is at an interesting stage of its development, and I wonder how it will proceed from here.
No comments:
Post a Comment