Category: Blog #1

Categories
Blog #1

Blog #1 – Caleb Broughton

Often times when historians are analyzing an archive, specifically one that is large in size and may take a long time to analyze fully, they run into some trouble with a term that Micki Kaufman uses in her project Quantifying Kissinger; “information overload.” This over abundance of information usually requires multiple different tools and methods for analysis, and when historians are working on this for hours at a time, the work can become tedious, frustrating, and sometime unproductive. This leads to spending more time looking at a screen and figuring out how to use certain methods and tools, rather than focusing attention on the physical archive itself.

Creating a digital artifact from archival documents gives way to so many advantages. First of all, the majority of archival documents are in rough condition, and are very fragile to the touch. If digital artifacts were not a thing, most of what we know about history from these archival documents would be unknown. Some documents are illegible to the human eye but with technology, historians are able to recreate a lot of these archival documents.

Image result for archived documents digital humanities

I think it is true that our physical and emotional relationships to our objects of study are shifting as we move deeper into a digital age. I think they are getting stronger and more intelligent, because a lot of the content that is being created connects directly to our natural human instincts, and can be very beneficial for people. As Whitley says in his paper, “Humans are quite adept at perceptual visual cues and recognizing subtle shape differences…humans are pre-wired for understanding and visualizing shape.” Because of this natural ability that humans possess, these digital tools that transform textual patterns into visual shapes naturally help people grasp certain skills of shape perception. There is even speculation that because this portion of the mind is being activated by these digital tools, it could potentially be accelerating the reading process.Image result for textarc

Whitley talks about creating these things called “concept shapes” out of texts,  to graphically represent data patterns. In order to better understand the content of a document, a group of scholars came up with a method for representing texts as “semi-spherical objects in a virtually rendered three dimensional space.” Wherever there are patterns in the text, the spherical objects “blend together to create a variety of quasi-organic shapes.” This method is one that seeks to help readers identify different patterns that would otherwise be overlooked if it was in a large body of text. For this, I believe it is true to say that digital versions of material texts highlight physical elements of texts that might otherwise pass unremarked.

One way to create online reading interfaces that can more closely approximate the experience of reading physical materials, that Whitley talks about in his paper is TextArc. It is an experiment in spatial reading, and is based off of the idea that seeing and reading are two complimentary processes. Whitley describes it basically as a “balancing act between reading and seeing.” As people are experiencing the text visualization, the eyes and the mind “scan for ideas, then follow the ideas down to where and how they appear in the text”.

 

Categories
Blog #1

Blog #1

The relationship between technology and digital archives is linear. As our society modernizes we turn to technology more than ever before. With that being said, our society is now the most efficient it has ever been. Digital artifacts is an example of how much more efficient our society is, in ways we probably never expected.

With one click we can see a variety of data presented in graphs, charts, tables and maps. Digital artifacts can draw conclusions in the form of visuals that physical words cannot. The variety of visuals “help us to perceive patterns in data that we might otherwise miss” (187). As Whitley says, “they challenge us to read texts differently than we otherwise would” (186). Digital artifacts open the door to a lot more than words can and ever will. Although Whitley addresses that some literature scholars may argue that words are considered data, cognitively words cannot conclude the same patterns that visuals can.

Digital artifacts have many advantages as they can reach a much larger population in a short amount of time. The accessibly is increased to anyone who is interested and has internet available. Those who are interested don’t have to travel to these physical artifact sights, they can simply find the information they need in a couple of clicks at most.

However this lowers the value of the physical artifact. The historical value is lost as all the information is taken from it and displayed for anyone interested online. I believe that as our society is advancing we are losing value in physical objects. Is this necessarily good or bad? I am not sure. I believe there should be some value in the physicality of objects and artifacts. Seeing the true artifact is rare and much more moving than seeing the same words typed in the same font online. The general population is starting to lose this attachment to physical objects because of the benefits and normality of having digital copies so accessible.

Having the same information, if not more, available online is much more efficient and productive. This shift towards digital value does shape our interests. There is a bigger focus on developing the skills needed with technology. There are computer sufficiency exams for many jobs and education programs as well as a push towards computer science and technology based skills. Because of the massive amount of jobs that need to be filled, the push towards these majors has increased. Years ago, computer science and digital humanities was not anywhere near the popularity it currently is. These areas of interest are constantly increasing as the need for them is growing.

There are many jobs available to continue to digitize our world. This can be seen as a disadvantage because of the amount of money it costs to change artifacts into accessible digital artifacts. It is an economic investment that will pay off in the long run. After exploring the Moravian Lives website as well as the Old Weather project, a similarity I found was that they both are crowdsourcing. This search for large groups of people to help with a project is an example of how the public is being asked to help modernize our world.

 

The opportunities that the use of digital artifacts brings to our society seem to outweigh the disadvantages. I believe we should continue to use the technological advantages to benefit us but to keep using printed sources for certain aspects of life.

Categories
Blog #1

paige whitney blog I

After researching archival artifacts that have been changed by digital humanities, I have become more aware that our ways of researching historical artifacts are progressing so much.

I have learned while researching that one of the benefits of creating a digital artifact from archival document is that it becomes accessible to everyone, instead of one or just a few people. People no longer need to travel long distances to see a historical artifact, instead it is at our fingertips. One example in the artifact collection I have searched through is Jane Austen’s fiction manuscripts. So much of her incredible work and manuscripts were spread out all over the world making it difficult for people to appreciate them. Fortunately, with our technological advances, the digital edition has become available and almost anyone is able to read them. It allows people to have access all different types of rare work so easily, which is amazing.

Although there are many advantages and perks of historical artifacts becoming digitalized, there are also disadvantages as well. One main disadvantage includes the loss of true meaning and importance of the rare, historical artifact. In many cases, there is a significance behind traveling to a specific place to see a famous historical artifact. Seeing the artifact in person is a different experience, which may impact one to view the artifact differently. Also, if the artifact is so easily accessible, then the value may decrease and people may not have as strong of a love and desire for the piece of work. Another advantage of digitalizing that is present in the Jane Austen’s work is transcription; side by side one can read the original version while also seeing it transcribed, which brings a sense and feeling of the original document.

This is an example of Jane Austen’s work
transcribed. As you can see, it is a lot easier to
read and understand the text.

Another archive that I enjoyed researching was “Database of Indigenous People in North America”. I believe that an artifact like this has many advantages to when digitalized. It is a form of visual learning. It this project specifically, it located the important places where people use to settle. This form helps allow people to learn about history of this time period without having to read long, detailed articles. It also offered pictures, which is helps the audience feel more interested and involved with the history at this time.

This is one of the artifacts from the project. You can see that the picture captures the moment and allows the audience to feel connected with what it was like in 1901, which enhances learning.

I believe that as technology is advancing and progressing, so is digitalizing important, historical artifacts. Speaking from personal experience, it seems that more of the population are interacting with textual material on screen more than page. I hypothesize that is because it is easier/ more accessible than going to a library and searching for relatable books, etc. I think that it is positive change that will affect so much of the population. For example, students who are writing research papers are now able to access artifacts that will benefit their work. Digitization also allows a more in-depth research process, while also being shown so many new historical events and moments that may be of one’s interest.  This being said, I do believe many people use digitalize materials to supplant and replace physical originals because the majority of the population doesn’t have the recourses able to see the original artifacts. But, like I stated before, I believe that there is a stronger emotional connection when viewing the original artifact.

 

Categories
Blog #1

Blog #1

After analyzing several digital humanities projects, I have come to see the importance of DH. Digital humanities brings texts and other humanity studies to life, providing a new way study more words than ever before possible. Perhaps the best part: digital humanities makes these works available to EVERYONE, not just scholars. This is a huge deal; even some scholars struggle to access archives because of their demanding requirements. With methods like visualization and mapping, scholars have been able to make humanities more interesting and easier to study for the masses.

Although digital humanities come with several benefits, there are still many skeptics/objectors. Many people, oftentimes scholars, argue that digitizing these works takes away its essence, the beauty of analyzing them in person. They point out that moment of serendipity that comes with analyzing a 200 year old map or reliving a pioneer’s life through the same journal they’d record their thoughts and feelings in. Many people also feel that the elements of DH can take the meaning away from a document. For instance, it could be argued that visualization distracts from the true meaning of its work, making the reader analyze vast amounts of information when they should instead be studying every word,  contemplating its meaning.

For me, digital humanities is just like anything else in modern society, a product of evolution. In a world that is constantly improving, it is not surprising to see the digitization of archives. This “Age of Technology” that the world is going through mainly centralizes around one idea: convenience. DH is convenient. Instead of searching for an archive, traveling to it, gaining admittance, searching for materials, and then trying to study materials that are more often then not too worn down from use over time to even read, you can simply open your laptop and go online and study virtually anything. In my opinion, all scholars should really be embracing Digital Humanities. I understand the reliance and comfortability with traditional ways of studying archival materials, but the digitization of these materials has made them more available to the world, making the scholar’s job more efficient and sometimes providing them with jobs. Although, yes, I’m sure falling in love with a historical document in person, being able to touch it, is an ethereal experience, DH provides new ways to fall in love with humanities. Whether it be seeing a document or study in a new perspective because of visualization 0r being able to better understand the travel patterns of a specific group because of mapping, digital humanities is packed full of information that can inspire.

As with anything, digital humanities comes with its pros and cons. Although the world is shifting away from tradition, away from the physical and more towards the digital, these works are still valued and loved. There must be an understanding that the way we study the humanities must evolve with society or they will become irrelevant and forgotten. In a world that is moving ever-so-rapidly, the benefit of having these archives just a few clicks away at the tips of your fingers is a huge accomplishment in the world of humanities. The blend of a modern study with a classical one is something that needs to happen more often and hopefully will because of the example that DH sets.


Image result for digitized archives

Image result for humanities