Debates in the Digital Humanities

by Matthew K. Gold (Editor)

Debates in the Digital Humanities brings together leading academics to explore the theories, methods, and practices of digital humanities and to clarify its multiple possibilities and tensions. From defining what a digital humanist is and determining whether the field has (or needs) theoretical grounding to discussions of trends in data-driven research and coding as scholarship, this cutting-edge volume delineates the current state of the digital humanities and envisions potential futures and challenges. At the same time, several essays aim pointed critiques at its lack of attention to race, gender, class, and sexuality; the inadequate level of diversity among its practitioners; its absence of political commitment; and its preference for research over teaching.

Contributors: Bryan Alexander, Rafael Alvarado, Jamie "Skye" Bianco, Ian Bogost, Stephen Brier, Daniel J. Cohen, Cathy N. Davidson, Rebecca Frost Davis, Johanna Drucker, Amy E. Earhart, Charlie Edwards, Kathleen Fitzpatrick, Julia Flanders, Neil Fraistat, Paul Fyfe, Michael Gavin, David Greetham, Jim Groom, Gary Hall, Mills Kelly, Matthew Kirschenbaum, Alan Liu, Elizabeth Losh, Lev Manovich, Willard McCarty, Tara McPherson, Bethany Nowviskie, Trevor Owens, William Pannapacker, Dave Parry, Stephen Ramsay, Alexander Reid, Geoffrey Rockwell, Mark L. Sample, Tom Scheinfeldt, Kathleen Marie Smith, Lisa Spiro, Patrik Svensson, Luke Waltzer, Matthew Wilkens, George H. Williams, Michael Witmore.

Genres: Nonfiction, Philosophy, Library Science, Academics, Sociology, Technology, Cultural

516 pages, Hardcover

First published January 1, 2012

Reviews

[Anderson Evans · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is a great text, published in a very bleeding edge format (The complicated process of academic compilation publication made manifest in only a years time). It is a kind of reference book, when read in its most relevant context. The text itself is primarily conversation, contributors made up primarily of authors that have written some brilliant academic material talking about, and more often than not trying to pin down, the burgeoning field that is Digital Humanities; a field the majority of these academics consider themselves to either be entrenched in, or at least connected to. Many of the volume's ruminations on the digital humanities field itself act as sort of a bridge toward contextualizing some very dense and important work in the academy of the 21st century. I've greatly enjoyed using it as a road-map to understanding the possibilities and conundrums of DH scholarship.

[Sarah Cavar]

Definitely shows its age (ten years!) but offers solid insights into the most hotly debated issues during DH's emergence, most of which continue to be debated today. Perhaps this was naïve of me, but I was surprised at the number of people who ignored the ways that a significant portion of contemporary humanities scholarship is necessarily digital –– it would not exist offline. That is, the digital is not merely an appendage of or extraneous to the "real" / 1.0 humanities, but a kind of scholarship that only new technologies allow to exist.

Trans and/or disabled digital scholarship (not to toot my own/my fields' own horn(s)) would have been a great way to address this. The fat blogosphere, or Fatosphere, could have been another. But alas, there was not nearly enough attention to specific marginalized groups and knowledges in the collection, and when there were, it was largely to lament their/our absence rather than to investigate our presence –– one that was and is everywhere, if one knows where to look.

[Austra · Rating 3 out of 5]

The book was published 10 years ago and it can be clearly noticed in almost every essay. It depicts the DH scene in times when Twitter and blogging was the big thing in digital humanities. The discussions of DH before the hit of AI are somehow skeptic, - do we need distant reading, do we need analyses of big data, do we need digital peer-reviews etc. Apart of that, essays discuss what DH is, what can we do with it, and above all will we experience novel research topics in the future. As a masters graduate in digital humanities I should say - yes.

[Som Nath]

good

[Kay Davis · Rating 3 out of 5]

English, history, and media studies scholars believe that digital humanities has the power to reshape academic practice. How this will be done is the source of academic debate. Questions posed in the book include:

Why are scholars slower to adopt multimedia projects as legitimate forms of publication?

When will multimedia projects be acceptable forms of dissertation research?

How might scholars use data collected from multimedia sources in academic research?

The main theme of this book is how to define "digital humanities" and determine acceptable methods to engage in discourse through social media, blogs, and Web sites.

[Erik · Rating 3 out of 5]

I tend to think of this as a useful snapshot of the state of debates in DH, but it's important to remember that most of these debates are continuing, and even continued in the comment sections below some of the blog posts featured in the book.

Not that it's all blog posts. There are a fair number of 5-20 page essays.

[Anastasia · Rating 3 out of 5]

Great introduction (albeit somewhat repetitive in places) to the major debates in the field. Nice to see the open peer review concept at work. I particularly enjoyed the essays in the "theorizing" part of the book, as well as Alan Liu's concluding paper on rethinking the future of DH as a culturally informed practice.

[Tim Lepczyk · Rating 3 out of 5]

Read my subpar review here: http://timlepczyk.com/2014/04/29/debates-digital-humanities.html. Subpar is describing my review, not the book.

[William Torgerson · Rating 4 out of 5]

Just starting this. Reading excerpts of the text with my First Year Composition colleagues at St. John's University.

[Rebecca Robinson · Rating 4 out of 5]

great food for thought on the future of humanities.

[Cassie Bentley-Bradshaw · Rating 1 out of 5]

Brutal.