Category Archives: Outside readings

11/15/17

“…Nick Couldry, a British media scholar, who argues in his book Why Voice Matters that we are experiencing a contemporary crisis of voice—across political, economic, social domains.  At root, he argues, is a pervasive doctrine of neoliberalism that denies voice matters.”

Documentary studies — close reading, “close enough to hurt”

“Get proximate” to the social justice issues that need our attention

  • Audrey Watters, “The Web We Need to Give Students” (this is one of my favorite pieces about Domain of One’s Own — many of you may have already read it, but I figured I’d add it to the list in case)

Social Justice and education

What do our students’ domains look like after they leave the course in which it was created?

How do faculty use these in “later” classes?

Archive of our own

Digital minimalism

10/4/17

§ Readings for today:

¶ President Paino’s Vision statement for UMW

“Investment of Hope” — 4 goals, each with action steps:

1.Service and social justice

2. Reconstitute the liberal arts for the digital age

3. “Immerse students in impactful learning experienes”

4. Diverse and conclusive community for success

What does a public institution look like with digital liberal arts?

¶ Bryan William Van Norden, “What’s with Nazis and Knights?” Huff Post, 9/19/17

¶ Nathan Heller, “What’s Roiling the Liberal Arts?” The Big Uneasy, The New Yorker, May 30, 2016

¶ Dorothy Kim, “Teaching Medieval Studies in a Time of White Supremacy,” In the Middle, August 28, 2017

¶ Dorothy Kim, “Race, Gender, Academia, and the Tactics of Digital Online Harassment,” SCS Newsletter (Sept. 2017), Medieval Studies and Harassment: https://classicalstudies.org/about/scs-newsletter-september-2017-medieval-studies-and-harassment

“This lack of a website has been a regular talking point for institutions and colleagues who have invited me out for lectures or workshops. It’s an inconvenience but one I plan to continue doing because of the mass of harassment I expect to get when Digital Whiteness and Medieval Studies (forthcoming, ArcPress/WMU) comes out as it discusses online white supremacy (white supremacists/white nationalists/KKK/MRA etc.).”

 

§ See also:

¶ DK mentioned: Being Black at Michigan

¶ stablish a Social Media Policy, SCS

¶ Rebecca Mead, “The Troll Slayer, A Cambridge classicist takes on her sexist detractors,” The New Yorker, Sept. 1, 2014.

¶ Mary Beard, “Women in Power”

¶ Sarah E. Bond, “Why we need to start seeing the Classical world in color,” Hyperallergic, June 7, 2017.

“Most museums and art history textbooks contain a predominantly neon white display of skin tone when it comes to classical statues and sarcophagi. This has an impact on the way we view the antique world. The assemblage of neon whiteness serves to create a false idea of homogeneity — everyone was very white! — across the Mediterranean region. The Romans, in fact, did not define people as “white”; where, then, did this notion of race come from?”

¶ Colleen Flaherty, “Threats for what she didn’t say,” Inside Higher Ed, June 19, 2017.

§ Pedagogical take-aways:

¶ Be patient, be diligent, teach awareness, have their back, support

Lo and Behold: Reveries of the Connected World

For 9/13/17

Werner Herzog

“Will our children’s children’s children need the company of humans, or will they have evolved in a world where that’s not important?”

Lawrence Krauss, Cosmologist, Arizona State University

Teaching students to live with ambiguity

How does having the internet change our expectations of students?

Storytelling

“the web students bring me”

Sign up for a new app

Digital art history

Working now on digital art history.  Here are some resources:

Diane M. Zorich’s report to the Kress Foundation on the role of digital scholarship in art history;  “Transitioning to a Digital World:  Art History, Its Research Centers, and Digital Scholarship,” June 2012.

A post from Emory University’s Woodruff Library on Zorich’s report for the Kress Foundation.  Quick links here to digital art history projects cited in the report.

A post by Hasan Niyazi with references to recent discussions, December 2012.

Five participants in the Digital Art History Lab held March 5-7, 2013 at the Getty discuss the state of the field and the principles of networked scholarship:

• Hans Brandhorst, editor of the Iconclass system (http://www.iconclass.nl) and the Arkyves Web catalogue (http://www.arkyves.org/)

• Johanna Drucker, Bernard and Martin Breslauer Professor Bibliography in the Department of Information Studies and founder of the Digital Humanities program at UCLA

• Emily Pugh, Smith Postdoctoral Research Associate at the Center for Advanced Study in the Visual Arts (CASVA) at the National Gallery of Art, and Web developer for the online journal Nineteenth-Century Art Worldwide

• Nuria Rodríguez Ortega, chair of the Department of Art History at the University of Málaga, Spain

• Moderator: Susan Edwards, art historian and digital humanities technologist, J. Paul Getty Trust

Digital art history

Here’s something I came across in the CAA News (May 22, 2013). “It’s time to rethink art history for the digital age,” by Nuria Rodríguez Ortega. It’s old news (March 5, 2013) from The Getty Iris, but something I need to think about now. Digital art history. Good references and questions, interesting comments. But it isn’t clear to me what “digital art history” looks like or how one does it. Anne Helmreich’s response resonates for me. “This points to another opportunity afforded by the multi-layered digital environment—that of including both one’s scholarly conclusions as well as the evidence on which these conclusions are based. This can be a daunting proposal—the equivalent, perhaps, of putting one’s file drawers out for public viewing. It also means making easily accessible a document that may have taken years of sleuthing to track down and identify. But it is also an exciting opportunity: such shared documentation can become a platform around which a robust and dynamic scholarly community can be formed. It also can help to push forward the development or adoption of intellectual argument in a more rapid (and global) fashion than was previously possible.” This is exactly the sort of thing we were discussing in the Domain workshop.

Here’s a great post on getting started in Digital Humanities by Lisa Sprio for the Journal of Digital Humanities (2011).

Digital Humanities

William Pannapacker’s article in today’s online Chronicle of Higher Education speaks directly to some aspects of our project’s concerns and what we’re presently developing.  He includes recommendations for building Digital Humanities (or Digital Liberal Arts for greater inclusiveness) at small liberal-arts colleges.  One area he discusses where I think we need more focus is informing administrators about our work.  His recommendation here:

“Seek the support of the higher-ups. Your administrators are probably pro-technology in general, but they may not know a lot about DH. Show them how digital methods enhance the college’s mission and can promote its image. Call attention to the value of encouraging faculty and staff members to use new technologies.”

What are our plans for highlighting the work of the Domain project?  How might we talk/write about it as central to the mission of UMW?  Images on the home page are an indication of some support or awareness.  But is that sufficient?  The fact that we have this Domain project at all clearly indicates support.  But here we owe our thanks to Mary Kayler and everyone in DTLT.  What, if anything, does the administration want to see come out of this?  That’s a conversation we need to direct.