Month: June 2017

I’ve been watching Master of None, and this song is not relevant to anything I’m saying, but it’s a fun song anyway and you should check it out!

Reading the article “Debates in the Digital Humanities: #transformDH, Growing Up” created some thoughts that are still… kind of critical of this field. They will look selfish, and they will look a little negative. I agree with everything this stands for, but there comes a point where you need to start prioritizing where you put your energy.

I admit when I signed up for the fellowship I was merely hoping to do some research and create a digital project. I wasn’t expecting to be part of a bigger community, or bigger movement. Research, to me, has always been relatively isolating work because that’s what professors expect from you- you sign the honor code and remind everyone that this is your work and you did it on your own, right? Or else you get kicked out of school or at least get a bad grade?

DH, since I first defined it, hasn’t changed its definition much besides the possible addition of “interdisciplinary” to the word choice. The idea of politicizing it more kind of adds a bit more pressure to someone getting into the field who wants to do research and learn about how to make a great project, and get recognition for said project in the field the project is in. It’s very easy to get caught up in the politics of DH and act like you know what you’re saying when you barely have anything to show for yourself and credibility. While I do preach you should never disregard an amateur’s fresh eyes and lack of jadedness, there should be some basis to back up their points and minimize their ability to get attacked.

I also think that the DH community is trying to tackle too many things at once- making their own house safe for the queer and feminist community while also trying to get taken seriously by the respective fields digital projects are in while also trying to be politically active. There isn’t enough time to cover all of that, and there isn’t enough people too. We’re all human and have our own issues to focus on too.

The reading mentions utopianism in DH and trying to get more feminist and queer voices in the DH discussion, but I don’t think it will ever be perfect. There will always be a group that isn’t satisfied. I think the politics of it are important and reflect major issues that society is seeing in general, and even I don’t think that we will reach the agenda that radical queer groups and feminists are hoping to get. We keep mentioning castle in the sky, and building a log cabin instead- and no one seems to accept the log cabin.

I’ve accepted the log cabin. I don’t think my project will be that transformative- because I don’t want it to be. I think quality should speak for itself, and that’s what people are looking at my project for at the moment. It’s what I’m looking for. I want my audience to learn about cool art pieces, and literally while I was writing this Julia retweeted this:

The most important academia lesson I've learned: we are all smart, distinguish yourself by being kind and good.

— Emily Farris (@emayfarris) June 28, 2017

I like that. If we all just agree to be good people, and not a jerk, and work on our projects to make things accessible but high quality, that’ll be a good transformation. I think that’s a better pathway than trying to overthrow the system.

-Britt

As I was reading, Reflections on a Movement, I realized that I really connected with it! A lot of my frustrations with DH were being addresses and talked about! I really appreciate #transformDH, for what it has done and what it can do. I think it is important for all people to be aware of hierarchies and how they affect the work that we create and the production of knowledge. The values that Moya Bailey, Anne Cong-Huyen, Alexis Lothian and Amanda Phillips are really important values:

“1. Questions of race, class, gender, sexuality, and disability should be central to digital humanities and digital media studies.

2. Feminist, queer, and antiracist activists, artists, and media-makers outside of academia are doing work that contributes to digital studies in all its forms. This work productively destabilizes the norms and standards of institutionally recognized academic work.

3. We should shift the focus of digital humanities from technical processes to political ones, and always seek to understand the social, intellectual, economic, political, and personal impact of our digital practices as we develop them.”

I believe that every movement should embrace the values like the ones above. The world would be a much better place if these issues were addressed in all walks of life.

By making DH more inclusive not only will more people be able to interact with digital projects, but more people will be able to be part of the DH community. I believe that the more diverse a community is the better it is. It can more easily meet the needs of others, help to educate those in the community and address the bias in some forms of scholarship.

I didn’t realize how powerful hashtags could be. I knew of #OccupyWallStreet and #BlackLivesMatter but I didn’t realize the extent to which that hashtags can literally support/ create movements and be used by activists. I think it is really cool that no one can own a hashtag. Although that might be a little scary, because they are not owned they are open and anyone can share their beliefs with a hashtag. All opinions might not be taken seriously, but they are all documented if the same hashtag is used. Hashtags can empower people to change the direction of a movement by having their voice heard by everyone that uses it.

Before this summer I did not have a lot of respect of Twitter and I did not like using it. Although I may not use it in my everyday life, I think it is extremely beneficial to connect communities, especially DH communities. I am very excited to start using #transformDH.

The most important values of DH are openness and accessibly and I believe #tranformDH should be given credit for helping to create that.

This weekend I went home for my sister’s graduation from high school. While I was home I went to 8 graduation parties for 12 of my sister’s classmates. Because I have not been home since January many people wanted to catch up with me. I told them about my trip to Morocco, Little Rock and this fellowship. Each time I explained my research, my elevator speech got a little better. I am going home this weekend for my sister’s graduation party and I will mingle with more people and talk to them about my research. I will also practice my elevator speech with them. I did not have a hard time explaining my research, I actually had a harder time explaining this fellowship and the digital humanities.

Reading “Reflections on a Movement” by Moya Bailey, Anne Cong-Huyen, Alexis Lothian, and Amanda Phillips brings different aspects of DH to light. DH as a field encompass much, but it cannot encompass everything, and less visible issues tend to be pushed to the side. To combat this, according to the authors, #transformDH was born. It was used to bring issues pushed aside into the light and critically look at how DH is being used. The article itself can explain all this better than I can summarize here, so I suggest you read it for yourself.

In guiding my own project, the quote that most stand out to me is as follows:

“We should shift the focus of digital humanities from technical processes to political ones, and always seek to understand the social, intellectual, economic, political, and personal impact of our digital practices as we develop them.”

I know that technology is a big feature of this fellowship. In creating any DH, it is digital literacy is a required skill. However, technology is not the only part of a digital project. This quote encompasses that idea for me. In doing DH, I want to create a project not to simply be online and “with the times”, but to reach people on their terms.

My project can be transformative by giving space for stories not otherwise heard. Gettysburg has a history beyond the Civil War, one that is told in places but overlooked in others.  I have focused my energy on interpretation to bring these histories to people while using digital platforms to do so effectively. To make my project more transformative, I can make a place in it for discussion and give ways to contact me if there are any more overlooked stories that need recognition. While my project is historical, it does not have to be backwards looking. The past can be used to shape the future.

This program is a perfect place to do so. The program is not one where authorities dictate why things like DH matter, but one where conversation and critical analysis are encouraged. When I look at digital tools and projects now, I am looking for ways they can be improved, what biases they show, and what impact they may have. That is the strength of this program. While DH can give spaces and voices to people otherwise silenced, the DSSF program allows the fellows to talk freely (and sometimes cynically) of the nature of DH itself. Since this the first program dedicated to DH I have participated in, I have nothing to compare it to. However, because of the perspective given by this program, I’m sure as I grow as a Digital Scholar I will be able to offer a more exhaustive analysis. All in all, the program has a great basis for transformative DH because it opens discussion and challenges of the norm.

As a bookend to this, I want to return to the idea of DH and what it means. What exactly are we transforming? As this program has gone on, I’ve come to the conclusion that DH cannot be defined by platforms or programs, only by projects. The content is what truly makes something DH. Narrowing the definition only serves to marginalize people in a field that prides itself on inclusivity. The definition does not have to be set in stone and exclusive, especially not when DH always has the potential to evolve.

I don’t have a good song for this, so Spoon is always a good option.

I’ve said in a previous blog post that we keep emphasizing community in DH, and that’s something I only recently began to see. I also mentioned in my last blog post that we went to Ursinus for PCLADLA17 and that kind of turned into something even I didn’t expect: friendship? I had way more engaging discussions at this workshop and conference with both students and advisers, and I definitely felt more engaged with the community for once. We were joined in that nice house by the members of Muellenberg’s DH cohort, and it honestly turned into one of the most fun and low stress nights I’ve had in a while. That’s a lot coming from me, especially given how I don’t really like people (as my mother tends to point out). One of Muellenberg’s cohort is actually a former music director, and one thing I haven’t had the complete pleasure of doing is talking about the weeds of radio music directing. It was safe, relaxed, and many laughs were had.

Community is good. Make sure to appreciate it when you can, even if it’s with a few random strangers, a giant jar of cheese balls, and a pinochle deck they thought was a regular card deck.

-Britt

Social media is controversial. Some people post all of their thoughts, beliefs and ideas, while others are more private and some edit every photo only posting the perfect ones. I think only posting perfect photos leads to several issues, but that’s not the point I am trying to make. Facebook is literally a digital scrapbook of our lives. Future researchers will look at our profiles to understand our lives and our beliefs. Books (or maybe digital websites??) will be published about some of our lives using Facebook as a primary source. Wow… that’s crazy to say. Facebook as a primary source?!?!

Although Facebook depicts my life, and others lives, how accurate is it? I was recently going through my newsfeed and one of my friends was dating someone that looked different from whom I remembered. After looking at her profile I realized that she had a new boyfriend. I tried to remember the name of her previous boyfriend, so l looked through her old photos but noticed that none were there. I completely understand why someone would delete previous photos from a relationship or friendship or even delete embarrassing photos of themselves, but what will happen in 50 years when someone is trying to understand your life and there are huge “Facebook” gaps ? I mean I guess understanding the culture of Facebook is key to understanding the bias depiction of someone’s life… but still.

There have been countless times throughout my research where I have wished there was more information about an event, another photo, or a photo at a different angle. It’s okay if those documents never existed, but if someone purposely deleted them because they were standing next to their ex-boyfriend, or they looked bad in it or whatever, I find that so frustrating.  I would consider myself a relatively sentimental person when it comes to photos, but my main hesitation towards deleting digital photos is that they never come back! Just because the photo is not there, does not mean a friendship, or a relationship or a bad hair phase did not exist it means there is poor documentation of it.  Every time permanently I delete a photo, I cringe a little bit.

Just like you need to think before you post please think before you delete.

Sincerely,
Many people that have done research on poorly documented events

A link aPEIRS!

The First World War Letters of H.J.C. Peirs is a digital project made by Dr. Ian Isherwood, Amy Lucadamo, R.C. Miessler, with the help of student assistants and letters donated by a former student named Marco Dracopoli, a descendant of Peirs. They made this project to preserve the history of Peirs and create more of a learning opportunity for the students. Each letter by Peirs is digitized, transcribed, and annotated before being published 100 years to the day of when it was written.

The project was made for WWI historians and students, but is also meant to be approachable by the public who may have an interest in a more intimate understanding of what transpired during WWI through the eyes of someone who was there during the major campaigns. The project states its main goal is to make these letters widely available, and focuses more on preserving the history with some commentary about how he writes about the war to his family back home. The authors talk about the way Peirs describes the war and also what he doesn’t describe, especially since Isherwood knows a very good history of where Peirs would be when the letters were written, and can compare his accounts with other, more graphic accounts.

The home page is inviting and interesting, and the site itself is easy to navigate. Isherwood’s writing style, while still has some formalities, is approachable and understanding to keep in line with the project’s main goal of making the letters widely available.

The project utilizes a WordPress site and puts the scans of the Peirs letters next to a transcription of them. The authors also put Peirs’ location when the letter was written on a StorymapJS map, and I’m surprised at how accurate they made it, right down to the trench location. Frankly, I find that incredible that we’re able to do that with a single man, all of my issues I discussed in my review of StorymapJS aside.

The project I would say is far more interesting and interactive than a traditional research project because you can build more and more on it as time goes by, with the touch of putting up a letter 100 years from the day it was written letting the project be a longer time commitment with an easier and steadier pace than doing it all at once. Isherwood or other members of the staff can add his own little chats on the side when he has an idea or thought about what may have been running through Peirs’ head when he was writing his letters, and connect it to other events and a bigger picture of the First World War.

War and history can be tough subjects to sink your teeth into, and for some Americans it can be even harder for some since we came into the war so late, and at least until my junior year of high school the only thing discussed about the era was the League of Nations and that’s it. The Peirs project does what it aims to do- make this available and approachable, and I really like it. Thanks, Gettysburg Staff I Totally Don’t Know.

-Britt