Skip to content

Earth Wide Moth

Menu
  • Home
  • Illustrations
  • Course Descriptions & Fliers
  • Tag Cloud
  • Contact

Missing: Cultural Criticism

January 9, 2011 / dmueller

Alan Liu’s MLA 2011 paper, “Where is Cultural Criticism in the Digital Humanities?” arrived this morning in Google Reader. Basically, Liu introduces the 4Humanities advocacy initiative and then argues that a lack of cultural criticism in digital humanities may thwart the growth of this emerging field. Making data and making things out of data may not matter if, when deploying these things, digital humanists have not been able to demonstrate their value.

This inquiring into the status and location of specific, identifiable ingredients, e.g., “cultural criticism,” does seem like a common enough quest when we are confronted with something new and in-becoming as is the case for digital humanities. Up for discussion, though, is whether “cultural criticism” ought to be one of the building blocks in this new domain and what, exactly, is at stake should digital humanists neglect critique. Liu positions as rivals “close reading” and “distant reading,” and while I have questions about this matchup (i.e., equivalency) in the context of Moretti’s work, Liu ends up suggesting an improved, harmonious, cultural-critical blend. Distant readings (e.g., abstractions, models, visualizations) need to be cycled back through a critical apparatus, or people will not find relevance in them. Liu puts it this way: “To be an equal partner–rather than, again, just a servant–at the table, digital humanists will need to find ways to show that thinking critically about metadata, for instance, scales into thinking critically about the power, finance, and other governance protocols of the world.” A cynical reading of this argument finds the presumed nuturalness of critical thinking and hermeneutics in the humanities overstated, and, likewise, it appears to minimize (or altogether overlook) the heuretic-inventive edge of distant reading.

Still, for traditional-minded humanities scholars given to digital treatments of rare and special texts, this makes a certain sense. These methods and insights related to them should scale into other domains. But will their value go missing if that scaling–a scaling of “cultural criticism,” at that–is not fully realized (a rhetorical challenge, indeed)? Keeping in reach the advocacy motives of 4Humanities, the talk also hearkens to broader concerns about the dwindling cultural status of the humanities in general. If humanists’ digital expertise is not valued in other domains because those folks are capable of data-mining, coding, etc., then, in one scenario, what awaits is the continuation of a value-it-how-you-will interpretive enterprise. Much is at stake in how the digital humanities goes, in other words. We can expect its failures and successes to have residual bearing on the humanities more traditionally understood. This thinking is a degree removed from Liu’s central assertion. I think it’s as likely the case that digital humanities, for its investment in computation, is not as much at risk as the non-digital humanities. If the digital humanities are going to be preservation-minded, in other words, perhaps they should be as much concerned with the heuretic and inventive aspects of their work as they are with the critical and hermeneutic aspects.

Share this:

  • Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
  • Click to print (Opens in new window)
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window)

Like this:

Like Loading...
advocacy, argument, close reading, criticism, culture, digital, distant.reading, humanities, metadata, methods, relevance, scale

Post navigation

Older post
links for 2011-01-09
Newer post
Title Case

Search

Recent Posts

  • Fourth Mug ☕️ January 22, 2023
  • Rinse in River Lethe December 29, 2022
  • A Lap at Pickerel Lake July 30, 2022
  • Miscalculations 🧮 July 5, 2022
  • Rosemeal 👁🌹👁 June 11, 2022

Dialoguers

  • Derek Mueller on As HRR Grows
  • Mark Higbee on On Riffraff
  • dmueller on On Riffraff
  • Geoff Larcom on On Riffraff
  • Derek on Second Days

Archives

Categories

Twitter

My Tweets

Meta

  • Log in
  • Entries feed
  • Comments feed
  • WordPress.org

“Alarm no sun, alarm is thinking, alarming is determination an earth wide moth is something.”

Ypsilanti, MI 48198
+1 734-985-0485

On This Day

Compulsory Blogging
Published On: February 1, 2004
This semester is my first Continue Reading →
Kremers, “Sharing Authority on a Synchronous Network”
Published On: February 1, 2008
Kremers, Marshall. "Sharing Authority on Continue Reading →
Pass
Published On: February 1, 2007
A mighty smiley hi and Continue Reading →
Rrove
Rrove
Published On: February 1, 2006
Rrove is one of Continue Reading →
Rundown
Published On: February 1, 2008
A rundown: looong day and Continue Reading →
2004-present. All writing, reservedly.
%d bloggers like this: