Katrina Merz

Scholars in the field of the Digital Humanities have been asked the same question:  What is Digital Humanities.  However, these brilliant scholars cannot agree on an answer.  Those who watch the field ask this question themselves.  It is difficult for Digital Humanists to choose which works fall under the category of DH and which do not.  As Unsworth states in his article, “charlatans” try to represent work as belonging to DH when in fact it is shallow.  Melissa Terras says touches upon this in her closing plenary.  She says that “It’s not enough just to whack up a website… If we are going to be in the business of producing digital resources, we have to be able to excel at producing digital resources, and be conscious of our digital identity and digital presence.”

This is where Mullen is wrong.  Not every scholar searching the web is a Digital Humanist.  Making notes in a Word document is not considered Digital Humanities.  Everyone is not a Digital Humanist.  So how does one decide what exactly is charlatan and what is true DH? In my opinion, Digital Humanities includes works of the basic humanities, for example, novels, speeches, and art, includes it on the internet, and creates powerful tools to analyze, break down, and pick out the patterns in a text.  DH is information gathered together in order to study and better understand.  While it may be used be for pleasure, pleasure is not its sole purpose.  The purpose of DH is for academia and research.  This is what differentiates DH from charlatans.

3 Responses to Katrina Merz

Leave a Reply