back to lectures

Computational humanities—digitized, digitalized, or digitally transformed humanities?

Michael Piotrowski

What is digital humanities? Is it "the use of computing technologies to allow humanities research that would otherwise prove impossible" (Melissa Terras), and thus primarily a matter of processing more data more quickly? Or can it "mean anything from media studies to electronic art, from data mining to edutech, from scholarly editing to anarchic blogging, while inviting code junkies, digital artists, standards wonks, transhumanists, game theorists, free culture advocates, archivists, librarians, and edupunks under its capacious canvas" (Stephen Ramsay)? Or is it a question you're not supposed to ask, as "we will never know what digital humanities is because we don't want to know nor is it useful for us to know" (Matthew Kirschenbaum)?

Some people are (quite understandably) tired of the discussion, but I contend that it is not only "useful" to explicate digital humanities, but crucial: the creation of academic positions, departments, and programs requires a consensus around an explicit definition—otherwise, how would one ensure the relevance and quality of research, the comparability of degree programs (and thus student mobility), or the adequate evaluation of research programs and thus their financing?

I firmly believe that the digital humanities are more than digitizing sources, using digital research infrastructures and tools, and publishing research results online—and I also believe the problem of defining digital humanities is unnecessarily exacerbated by confounding a number of related, but actually distinct issues. In this talk I will present some fundamental thoughts on this question and derive a definition of digital humanities that is both concise and precise.

 Lecture Slides

Video footage will be added in the future.