Chris Forster's Big Tent of Digital Humanities
  • Direct, Practical, Uses of Computational Methods for Research: Here are your dyed-in-the-wool "humanities computing" projects. Things like (one of my favoritie subjects) statistically grounded, computer-enabled authorship study, text mining, etc. Another vein here, no doubt would be folks associated with TEI markup, and the question of how to best represent texts digitally, or (another of my favorites) text visualization.
  • Media Studies folks studying "New" Media: I think this is the position which Tanner Higgin is coming from. I take his points there to be reasonable and his method to be recognizable to any academic in the humanities: political critique. But it is his object of study (in that post at least) that is "digital" rather than, say, his method.
  • Using Technology in the Classroom: The concern for how various technologies change pedagogy has been written about by Brian Croxall here (among other places). And it isn't coincidental that Brian's very next post is about the state of adjunct teachers. Concern with pedagogy brings with it the political situation of teachers. And anyone interested in pedagogy comes up against the complicated politics of the relationship between teaching & research within university culture.
  • The way new technology is reshaping research and the profession: Here I am thinking of Kathleen Fitzpatrick's work on academic publishing as well as Bethany Nowviskie's posts on alternative academic career paths. Here the "digital" in the digital humanities is not a method, so much as an event happening to the humanities, something humanistic scholarship is undergoing, and which opens up new avenues even as it presents certain challenges.

From Chris Forster's "Hi, I'm Chris, Where Am I Wrong?" blog, Sept. 8, 2010.

Unless otherwise stated, the content of this page is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 License