Session Title

Revisiting Remediation

Sponsoring Organization(s)

Dept. of English, Ohio Univ.

Organizer Name

Heather Blatt, Mary Kate Hurley

Organizer Affiliation

Florida International Univ., Ohio Univ.

Presider Name

Mary Kate Hurley

Paper Title 1

Digital Manuscript Studies: Beyond Digitization and Editions

Presenter 1 Name

Angela R. Bennett Segler

Presenter 1 Affiliation

New York Univ.

Paper Title 2

From Text to Turf: Curating Textual Evidence of Anglo-Saxon Land Use

Presenter 2 Name

Kevin Caliendo

Presenter 2 Affiliation

Rose State College

Paper Title 3

Recovering Joy: The Changing Fortunes of an Anglo-Saxon Rune

Presenter 3 Name

Peter Buchanan

Presenter 3 Affiliation

New Mexico Highlands Univ.

Paper Title 4

Respondent

Presenter 4 Name

Dorothy Kim

Presenter 4 Affiliation

Vassar College

Start Date

14-5-2015 7:30 PM

Session Location

Bernhard 205

Description

Recent discussions of the digital humanities have criticized the field’s lack of broad innovation, suggesting that the “bubble of expectations may have popped,” as an Inside Higher Ed article noted in early May. Critics ranging from mainstream journalists to digital humanist scholars have argued that the interest in big data raised false expectations about the transformative promise of digital humanities in education; that the digital turn has obscured the real work of the humanities by drawing support to tools that may supplement pedagogy and research, but has distracted from the teaching of essential skills like close reading and writing; and that its resource requirements are restrictive and elitist, limiting participation to major research universities.

Such discussions mark a turning point for digital humanities and the scholars whose work falls within them. It is a particularly thorny issue for medievalists, who are often at the forefront of digitization endeavors, electronic publications, and theoretical projects that fall under the digital humanities’ domain. As those who once praised digital humanities begin to voice their disillusion, we think it is precisely at this moment that continued engagement with the possibility, promise, and even failures of the digital is most important. We contend that medieval studies, as one of the fields that had the most to gain from the advent of the digital humanities, is also a field well positioned to critique the work done, the work as it stands, and the work still to do.

This panel includes papers exploring the work of digital humanities in medieval studies, considering what it is we do when we digitize, remediate, and return to the medieval. We'll be exploring questions such as: Now that the digital humanities’ initial promise is beginning to be questioned, can we better see the shifting boundaries of the field? How do old tools or theoretical constructs respond to a changing environment? What are the digital humanities to medieval studies, and—after years of work in digital projects—how can we better understand the ways we might analyze, theorize, implement, and sustain them?

--Heather Blatt, Florida International University, and Mary Kate Hurley, Ohio University

This document is currently not available here.

Share

COinS
 
May 14th, 7:30 PM

Revisiting Remediation

Bernhard 205

Recent discussions of the digital humanities have criticized the field’s lack of broad innovation, suggesting that the “bubble of expectations may have popped,” as an Inside Higher Ed article noted in early May. Critics ranging from mainstream journalists to digital humanist scholars have argued that the interest in big data raised false expectations about the transformative promise of digital humanities in education; that the digital turn has obscured the real work of the humanities by drawing support to tools that may supplement pedagogy and research, but has distracted from the teaching of essential skills like close reading and writing; and that its resource requirements are restrictive and elitist, limiting participation to major research universities.

Such discussions mark a turning point for digital humanities and the scholars whose work falls within them. It is a particularly thorny issue for medievalists, who are often at the forefront of digitization endeavors, electronic publications, and theoretical projects that fall under the digital humanities’ domain. As those who once praised digital humanities begin to voice their disillusion, we think it is precisely at this moment that continued engagement with the possibility, promise, and even failures of the digital is most important. We contend that medieval studies, as one of the fields that had the most to gain from the advent of the digital humanities, is also a field well positioned to critique the work done, the work as it stands, and the work still to do.

This panel includes papers exploring the work of digital humanities in medieval studies, considering what it is we do when we digitize, remediate, and return to the medieval. We'll be exploring questions such as: Now that the digital humanities’ initial promise is beginning to be questioned, can we better see the shifting boundaries of the field? How do old tools or theoretical constructs respond to a changing environment? What are the digital humanities to medieval studies, and—after years of work in digital projects—how can we better understand the ways we might analyze, theorize, implement, and sustain them?

--Heather Blatt, Florida International University, and Mary Kate Hurley, Ohio University