Digital Humanities as a discipline deals mainly with the application of digital techniques such as text and data analysis and text encoding to traditional humanities academic work for the purpose of answering new questions, discovering new insights about familiar texts or documents, or for subverting familiar understandings. Digital Humanities approaches are not scientific and are often more like art in the inexact way they open traditional works more widely to interpretation and experience.
Definition of DH : (Taking some of the wording from History Moves abstract)
The intersection of the digital medium and the humanities field. In an attempt to collect, edit, manipulate, store, display, distrubte, and otherwise produce humanities work such as art, history, language, literary analysis and works via a complex network of digital technologies and media.
Thoughts on defining DH:
I have spent the last semester trying to explain what in the world is a DH course to a wide variety of ‘outside folk’. On the surface the definition is ‘simple’: it is the idea of using digital tools to enhance the understanding of humanities field. But as you peel back each layer of that sentence you get into the nuances of what does it mean to be a digit tool? What does it mean to enhance? And […]
Digital humanists use the theoretical frameworks of the traditional humanities to understand society’s new interactions with technology. At the same time, the field employs new digital tools to better understand the humanities of the past. The link between the digital and the humanities is a natural one—the history of computing is connected with the task of composition.
Digital Humanities is the intersection of cultural studies (art, literature, film, theater, performance, history) and computer science. The combination(?) of Humanities and Computer Science’s methodological approaches create new structures in which to create, model, and analyze human forms of expression.
Digital humanities appears to me to be the study of humanities using or enhanced by digital platforms. I’m not sure if it constitutes a different definition than the humanities or if it is a subcategory of the humanities – in other words, digital humanists are also humanists, in my opinion.
Because of the fluidity of the term “Digital Humanities” and the rapid pace by which it is redefined, I decided to look back at my first attempt at defining DH from last semester. Highlights include:
- “…concerned with the pursuit of non-linear knowledge found in producing a tool-based theory that emphasizes collaboration in a fluid field…”
- “…it is a scholarly approach to humanist theory that utilizes the building of, or access to, digital tools to express theories wherein the results of the production of an application of said tools requires a qualitative, human reading to construct validity or meaning.”
Honestly, not bad for my initial swing at it – I sounded very scientific for my first week of grad school. But let’s be honest, I was probably just doing my best to string along pieces of other people’s […]
The Digital Humanities looks at the study of humanities through the lense of computing, and looks at the world of computing through the theoretical framework of the humanities. It is both theoretical and practice-based; both qualitative and quantitative; it encompasses both atoms and bits.
My first attempt to define Digital Humanities might be too reckless, this is due to my absolute ignorance in the field.
For now, I see Digital Humanities as a tent under which the Humanities have been gathering a range of new projects and methodologies regarding research, teaching, and other academic activities. Digital Humanities concern both the new digital tools to tackle old-school research fields, and approach the age-old epistemological concerns regarding new media and technologies. In this sense, I see “Digital Humanities” as a useful label for a transitional time, in which scholars of all kinds are inventing new forms of working within the Humanities, both using new digital technologies and reflecting on them.
Picking up on Thomas Haigh’s article “We Have Never Been Digital”, I believe that Digital Humanities might eventually expire as a concept, as soon as it becomes redundant. Someday all […]
Despite the fact that I am a humanities student and (as is almost unavoidable by now) a user of technology, until about a year ago I thought of “Digital Humanities” as a completely foreign concept, something that felt beyond my ability to understand, much less utilize. It was only when I was given a practical example of a DH project that I was able to attach any meaning to the term. Now I feel able to describe broadly what I believe Digital Humanities encompasses, but I still find it more helpful to think of it as a set of practical applications, a series of use cases that can vary widely. This is because to me, a defining quality of Digital Humanities is its active nature. Although reading a novel online is a digitally-based […]
What is Digital Humanities? The answer to this question has been in flux for several years and is an active topic of debate among academics and scholars who practice this discipline. (I’m sure there could be many colloquies about whether “practice” is the correct verb and “discipline” the right noun, but if I take too much time to address it, I may never have time to learn Digital Humanities). Opinions vary, even veering into territory viewed as extreme by academia. Stephen Ramsey, for example, caused a stir when he answered “yes” to his own question about doing digital humanities: “Do you have to know how to code?” (He later suggested that “build” was a more apt word than “code.”) A completely different viewpoint came from the Rhode Island Council for the Humanities enumerating […]