Digital Humanities Journal #4: Meta-Issues in Digital Humanities

Continuing with my weekly Digital Humanities "Journal," I will comment on the question, "What are meta-issues?" Of course, I will be referencing this topic concerning Eileen Gardiner and Ronald Musto's book The Digital Humanities: A Primer for Students and Scholars, the leading textbook for my Fall semester course. I will also outline my four most significant meta-issues in digital humanities based on the ones listed in chapters 8 and 9 of Primer. According to the information presented by both authors, a meta-issue is an area outside of traditional academia and methodology that impacts how digital humanists, and humanists in general, operate (1). These issues cover a broad range of topics and situations that 21st-century scholars deal with when working with digital tools, technology, and systems. From fundamental logistical problems to tactile properties and legal procedures, meta-issues can surprise an unsuspecting digital humanist. I will now outline four meta-issues in no particular order of importance that I feel are essential to understand when working in the Digital Humanities. I would also like to preface that I find value and significance in all of these issues. Still, for the case of this journal, I will be falling back on what I have seen impact the field the most from my education and experiences.

1) Education

In chapter 8, Gardiner and Musto begin by talking about the issue of education in the Digital Humanities, both as a formal educational pathway (undergraduate, graduate, and beyond) and the hard and soft skills gained throughout life. To stimulate thought, the authors ask the reader how the humanist can translate their original mission into the digital, what is the digital equivalents of grammar, rhetoric, and other literary devices, whether the questions of the past outmoded by 21st-century problems, and whether a digital humanist need to be trained in the digital context of their discipline or that of someone in STEM (2)? I have a few thoughts on this, mostly centered around the educational pathways that digital humanists follow. I am fortunate enough to attend a university where students in the Digital Public Humanities minor (of which I am one) are offered courses that teach the foundational skills of digital humanists, primarily through public-facing collaborative work. Through my research and digital media-related projects, I have broadened my skillset and found a path toward a hopeful career as an archivist. Within that process, I have also understood what kind of education is necessary to find a reasonably paid career in Archives, Library, or Information Sciences/Services. Most entry-level positions range from 30k-80k dollars, and while there is no shortage of jobs, just about 8/10 require a master's degree in Library/Information Science, Archival Studies, or Museum Studies. For many, this means two or more years of upper-level education to find a career in a niche field. I do not mean to bash the process, as the training is essential to the occupation. I understand how the questions proposed by Gardiner and Musto are on the mind of a digital humanist. I would like to share this post I saw on LinkedIn by Andrew Chernevych, the Head Archivist at the Galt Museum and Archives in Alberta, Canada.

2) Preservation

Like education, preservation as a meta-issue connects many avenues that cannot all be tracked in a single blog post. Any physical and/or digital preservation relies on many external resources to be possible, usually time and money. Archives must be able to pay for the database software that they use to store and present their documents and artifacts. There also needs to be a plan to maintain and routinely check how the software functions, whether an upgrade or additional storage is necessary, and backups for all the data. The same can be said for websites. Without institutional backing, many websites fall victim to time and neglect, often becoming buried beneath more popular pages and broken hyperlinks. Often, these websites contain valuable information with digital collections and resources for viewers, but they disappear due to improper upkeep. Gardiner and Muso write that even in the beginning of the library and information technology fields, scholars developed strict standards for keeping track of "what goes where." Unfortunately, as the internet grew, projects started to be put by the wayside and passed along for new ideas and technologies (3).

Below is an example of database software, PastPerfect.

3) Copyright

Here is another significant meta-issue that I continuously struggle to understand. Copyright is a concept that dates to ancient Mediterranean times and still governs the way documents and information as a whole are used today. Created to establish limited exclusive rights for artists and authors' work, copyright has come under fire in contemporary circles as the digital world emphasizes and downplays its overall need. Gardiner and Musto write that because information can be spread so quickly, the thought that the value of a work is diminished does not hold up as well as one would think. This works inversely with the values of many traditional art historians and scholars who believe that strict standards should be put in place to protect significant pieces of work from losing their intrinsic value as physical and one-of-a-kind objects. Ultimately, there is so much to this topic, so I would like to share this website that gives excellent information about copyright (4). Cornell Copyright Term and Public Domain.

4) Open access

For my last meta-issue, I will focus on open access and try to keep it shorter than the first three. To stay true to the traditional humanistic ideal of free and open access to knowledge, humanists must grapple with how the digital world changes and what quality information is disseminated. One interesting point of view raised by the authors is what audience gains more from open access. To that, Gardiner and Musto turn to a quote by Peter Suber, the director of the Office of Scholarly Communication at Harvard University. He said, "OA isn't primarily about bringing access to lay readers. If anything, the OA movement focuses on bringing access to professional researchers whose careers depend on access" (4). I feel that open access is valuable to both the public and the professional researcher. Still, there can be issues with how much information becomes available at one time. This can create an environment that is either too daunting to enter or too crowded to navigate through the overflow of books, periodicals, and sources. For another opinion on this topic, please read this article by environmental historian William Cronon.

Thank you for following along! It looks like I might have accidentally ranked my four meta-issues anyway! Regardless, I hope these examples were informative in understanding the critical discussions in Digital Humanities today.

- The workflow for the Civil War and Reconstruction Governors of Mississippi (CWRGM) project, a multifaceted digital humanities initiative (MDAH = Mississippi Department of Archives and History, MDL = Mississippi Digital Library, USM = University of Southern Mississippi).

Notes:

1. Eileen Gardiner and Ronald Musto, The Digital Humanities: A Primer for Students and Scholars (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2015) 117, https://archive.org/details/digitalhumanitie0000gard/page/n9/mode/2up.

2. Gardiner and Musto, The Digital Humanities, 118.

3. Gardiner and Musto, The Digital Humanities, 128-129.

4. Gardiner and Musto, The Digital Humanities, 146.

5. Gardiner and Musto, The Digital Humanities, 164.