Making History Podcast: The Blog

April 1, 2010

Thoughts on HUMlab and “A Room of Our Own”

Filed under: deep thoughts,digital humanities — Jana @ 5:34 pm

Today I attended a presentation about HUMlab from Patrik Svensson of Umea University.  He offered some thoughts on trends in the field of Digital Humanities, basing his ideas on his recent series of articles for DHQ.  What kept running through my mind after his presentation were the images he showed of the HUMlab facility.  It reminded me of the spaces created by many dot-com startups back in the mid-90s.  Places to play hard and work hard.  Places without typical boundaries or typical furniture.  Places with a mixture of high-tech and hands-on.  Places to eat and talk.   Places to meet in ‘real-life’ and places to meet virtually.  Patrik said that much of the success of HUMlab stemmed from its central campus location,  from its open-ness to any discipline and to the community.

His talk came just a few days after an oft-tweeted post at SampleReality about (the demise of) DH Centers, and a call to continue collaboration even when institutional funding is dry.  On Mark’s post I dropped a comment about the loss of UCI’s Humanitech (which, I should note, is not completely gone, but has been ‘archived’ into a new institutional entity called The Humanities Collective).

But back to Patrik’s talk.  Much of the discussion centered around how to garner funding for DH–either that the digital seemed to draw more funds for the traditional Humanities or that it was a liability to the Humanities because it replicated existing hierarchical structures rather than decentralizing knowledge-production.   My contribution to the discussion was to explain how most of us DH graduate students are doing our work entirely sans institutional funding.  I offered the example of my podcast, which I pay for out of my own pocket.  I do it because I love the work, not because I’m being supported by anyone to do so.  My blogging and twittering are more of the same–done for the pleasure of writing and of creativity.  Over the years I’ve found a wide variety of free or low-cost spaces to experiment with Digital Humanities, such as my most recent joint effort to create a SoCal DH hub.  Occasionally I’ve considered applying for a grant for my work–thinking how nice it would be to have the resources for a professionally-designed website, a dedicated server, or added collaborative functionality.  But in most instances I’ve been unable to apply for such funds because they are limited to non-profit organizations or faculty.  Apparently a lone grad student’s efforts are not DH-grant fodder.

I can only fantasize about how satisfying it might be to have an institutional space like HUMlab to support my DH efforts and to collaborate with other scholars–a “room of our own” for the Digital Humanities at UCI.  However, History grad students don’t have office space of any kind unless they are TAs, much less the kind of tech-rich environment of the HUMlab (as an example: when we wanted a printer in our shared grad student office space, we each contributed $5 to pay for it).   Because I’ve had outside funding for the past few years I don’t have a workspace on campus–my “office” is my sofa.  While it’s awfully cozy, it doesn’t put academic resources close-at-hand.

Perhaps I should count myself lucky to not have  access to a space like HUMlab–in its place I’ve created a vibrant online community.  At any moment I can crowdsource the expertise of a wide variety of digital humanists, or I can seek out a sympathetic audience on my blog.  But I still can’t help but consider how having a dedicated space for work and creativity might augment my scholarly endeavors.  Maybe that’s why I spend so much time anticipating academic conferences–they offer the stimulation and collegiality that I just don’t find in my living room.

March 10, 2010

PDP Podcast: Keynote Address with Peter Stallybrass

The Keynote address at The Past’s Digital Presence conference, given by Peter Stallybrass on Feb. 20, 2010 at Yale University.  Stallybrass is Walter H. and Leonore C. Annenberg Professor in the Humanities and Professor of English and of Comparative Literature and Literary Theory at University of Pennsylvania.

Listen to this Podcast

Subscribe to the Making History Podcast

Note: If you initially encountered problems downloading this podcast, please try again.  I had a minor issue with my hosting service that is now resolved.

March 4, 2010

PDP Podcast: Jacqueline Goldsby

This podcast is an audio recording of the February 19, 2010 Colloquium with Jacqueline Goldsby (University of Chicago), at the opening session of The Past’s Digital Presence conference.  Goldsby discusses her work with Mapping the Stacks: A Guide to Black Chicago’s Hidden Archives.

Listen to this podcast

Subscribe to The Making History Podcast

March 2, 2010

“Letters to a Tenured Historian” now available

My Writing of History class is now reading exemplary histories. In historiography-driven courses, so often the new trumps all. But when a course focuses on history writing, there is a fruitful dialogue between new books and old, often with a different ordering of who is at the top of their craft. I’ll be back in a few weeks with reflections on the experience of pairing these books, and on what tools of the telling can do to shape the content of history.

In the meantime, I am thrilled to announce the publication of the latest issue of Rethinking History, with a forum built around Aaron Sachs‘s essay “Letters to a tenured historian: imagining history as creative nonfiction – or maybe even poetry.”

My Writing of History course had the privilege of reading Sachs’s letters in an advance copy–quite advanced, given that the cover note suggests that the letters are recovered in 2049, “after the most recent round of earthquakes, mudslides, and fires, when Southern California was finally abandoned.” The curators of the future wonder, “Who would write such fake epistles, and footnote them, to boot?” Readers of the present will be richly rewarded if they find out.

Rethinking History has gathered more letters in response: a note of introduction from James Goodman, and reactions and reflections from Jenny Price, Scott Reynolds Nelson, Martha Hodes, Robert Rosenstone, Jeffrey Wasserstrom, Kate Brown, and Gregory Downs. My print copy is in the mail (one might find a great deal right now for AHA members, if you would like one) and I don’t have complete access online, but the abstracts suggest this is a roundtable on the state of writing history creatively (and writing about history creatively) not to be missed.

February 26, 2010

Are you a Digital Humanist?

While at The Past’s Digital Presence conference, eating Thai food with a group of new friends, our conversation turned to defining Digital Humanities.  We were mostly historians, but there was also an English student and one in Media Studies.  All of us had vastly different research projects, backgrounds, and experiences.  Only two of us (that I know of) would consider themselves programmers.  Some of us had taken a nontraditional route to our PhD studies.  Only one of us had done her doctoral work at an Ivy.

The more we talked the more I realized that we really didn’t have a whole lot in common except, perhaps, an enthusiasm for this thing called “Digital Humanities.”  But as we attempted to define Digital Humanities we saw that it was a big tent and none of us really fit into it the same way.  For example, I call myself a “digital humanist” because I’m a tool user and because I enjoy the kinds of projects and conversations that hover around the field.  But others in the group seemed to define themselves as digital humanists because of the nature of their research sources, or because of their IT background, or because of a particular pedagogical approach.

So my question is: do you consider yourself a digital humanist?  If so, why?  And, do you think there are benefits to keeping the DH tent wide open to anyone who chooses to define themselves this way, or is their value to assigning a specific definition to who is and who isn’t a digital humanist?

February 23, 2010

PDP Podcast: Roundtable with Willard McCarty, Rolena Adorno, Edward Ayers & George Miles

This podcast is a recording from the closing session of The Past’s Digital Presence conference.  The speakers were:

Willard McCarty, King’s College London (12.15)
Rolena Adorno, Yale University (21.30)
Edward Ayers, University of Richmond (37.45)
George Miles, Yale University (47.15)

The numbers in parentheses mark the time in the podcast recording where each speaker’s remarks begin.

A slide from McCarty’s talk:

One of the slides that Adorno showed during her presentation:

Listen to the PDP Roundtable

Subscribe to the Making History Podcast

February 19, 2010

Stephen Pyne’s How-To of History: Thinking, Choosing, Writing

(Apologies to those of you who dutifully waited up Wednesday for this post; it’s that time of semester. But my book manuscript did get finalized as you waited, so it’s a step closer to store shelves!)

I was quite impressed by Stephen Pyne’s Voice & Vision: A Guide to Writing History and Serious Nonfiction. I, like Pyne, had been disappointed too often when reading other writing guides. There were how-to-research books. Then the how-to-get-motivated-to-write books that plague the life of graduate students. And the books by writers of fiction or journalism had piqued my interest – how to read like a writer! – but then they did not meet my needs, as one tied to the rules of nonfiction. I had been burned before — but Pyne did not disappoint.

Pyne is writing a how-to guide, with all the pitfalls of the genre — it can’t be too specific to your project; it can mostly inspire broadly rather than create a true step-by-step approach; and it may end up feeling like the same platitudes and hollow encouragements. At worst, as one of my students suggested, it can come across as a diet book for the mind.

Yet Pyne does more than remind you to eat a healthy supply of fibrous history and do your literary exercises. Most of what he urges is simple (and perhaps obvious) advice — his insistence that a historian must write and rewrite and experiment and fail and write again to find a range of adequate voices; that historians can take risks with style but never with facts; that when historians have finished the research, they must think carefully about the shape and tone (in his words, vision and voice) of the argument, as well as its content and credibility. But one can never hear these solid pieces of advice too often.

Pyne suggests that a book is a bridge, and that each element, from foundation to framing to span, better be working correctly or there will be a lot of cars in the water. He also helpfully suggests that some books are pontoon bridges, with mostly rearrangeable parts, while others are suspension bridges, the relation between each piece crucial to the overall success.

In my conversations with the best writers of history, these concerns of structure are paramount — what holds the book together, what drives the reader from start to finish, where the tale opens and how and why it closes as it does. Reading Pyne’s book made me aware, again, of how different these conversations are those who merely seek the book’s intervention or its findings. To make your argument with the elegance of the Golden Gate will always attract more sightseers than crossing the drab San Mateo bridge.

The journal Historically Thinking and the Historical Society blog provided a précis of Pyne’s book, and invited Michael Kammen, Jill Lepore, and John Demos to reflect upon Pyne’s call to make history a literary art again. Lepore provided a delightful look at her suggestions to students, on how writing for her class was much like preparing a fresh-caught fish for dinner; Demos and Kammen reflect on earlier efforts to advise historical writers, and what courses they offer look like.

These are quite eye-opening when placed alongside Pyne’s Literary Nonfiction syllabus. In his own classroom, Pyne nicely balances the reading of inspirational histories with the hard work of crafting a historical style, using anonymity to shield fledgling student writers.

Here, the how-to gives way to the creation of a community of writers. Getting together with a group of like-minded nonfiction writers, asking about their choice of structure, thinking through the voice on the page, and getting together again, with more new writing — nothing else can guarantee success.

February 18, 2010

Event: Writing History with Edward Ball, Feb 22 at Yale

Filed under: events — Jana @ 2:23 pm
Tags: , ,
The Writing History Colloquium invites you to a discussion with
Edward Ball on Eadweard Muybridge
Monday 22 February 2010
noon, William L. Harkness Hall (WLH), room 211
100 Wall Street, New Haven CT
brown-bag lunch; we’ll bring dessert
all are welcome
Edward Ball is writing a biography of the photographer and “inventor of the movies” Eadweard Muybridge, to be published by Random House. He will talk about this work in progress and about the creation of characters in the writing of history.
Ball is the author of four books of nonfiction, including Slaves in the Family, about his family’s 200-year history as slave-owners in South Carolina, which won the National Book Award in 1998. His most recent book, The Genetic Strand (2005) is about the use of DNA in family history.  Ball’s “willingness to challenge the generations of silence in his white family” in Slaves in the Family, and to connect the American past with its enduring legacies into the present, earned critical praise.  See this review by historian Drew Gilpin Faust.
Hope you’ll join us,
Christine DeLucia & Paul Shin
Writing History coordinators

February 17, 2010

PDP Podcast: Rachael Sullivan

This is another short podcast episode featuring a presenter from The Past’s Digital Presence Conference.  Rachael Sullivan’s presentation at the conference is titled ““Dickinson Meets DoubleClick: Remediating Poetry”.

Rachael holds an M.F.A. in Poetry from the University of Nevada, Las Vegas. She is currently an M.A. student in Literary and Media Studies at the University of Texas at Dallas. Her scholarly interests include contemporary poetry, media history and theory, and electronic literature. Her current project examines the implications of hybrid literary texts, particularly lyric and confessional poetries, that have both a print and digital identity or version. Next fall, she will begin a Ph.D. in English with a concentration in Media Studies.

Listen to this Podcast

Subscribe to the Making History Podcast

PDP Podcast: Laila Shereen Sakr

Filed under: events,podcast — Jana @ 9:54 am
Tags: , ,

Laila Shereen Sakr‘s presentation at The Past’s Digital Presence conference is titled “On Implementing the Digital Form: an Arabic-English Web-based Archive.” She is a poet, activist, scholar, and digital artist. Her work critically examines the nature of digital information and cyber existence in a post-9/11 world. She is primarily concerned with digital compositions, particularly in Arabic. In her art practice, she aims to bypass the notion of critic as authority who controls narrative. Instead, she aims to create a new authoritative but participatory role that resonates with web culture: that of co-editor, co-curator, and co-producer all at the same time. This is done by building and performing her work in digital and new media: her current projects include R-Shief, an Arabic-English web-based archive for exchange among activists, scholars, and new media artists; and VJ Um Amel, an interactive, live cinema narrative about an animated cyborg who is also an Arabic-speaking mother. Previously, she co-founded media and art collectives in Washington, DC, including the Guerrilla Poetry Insurgency and Word of Mouth. Presently, she is lecturer and research associate in the Digital Arts and New Media program at UC Santa Cruz.

Listen to this Podcast

Subscribe to the Making History Podcast

« Previous PageNext Page »

Blog at WordPress.com.