Skip to main content

Unit 1 Overview

Unit 1 Overview

Question: Does Data Belong in the Humanities?

“Computational literary studies (CLS for short) — the most prominent strand of the digital humanities — applies computational methods to literary interpretation, from a single book to tens of thousands of texts. This usually entails feeding bodies of text into computer programs to yield quantitative results, which are then used to make arguments about literary form, style, content, or history…Not only has this branch of the digital humanities generated bad literary criticism, but it tends to lack quantitative rigor. Its findings are either banal or, if interesting, not statistically robust. The problem appears to be structural. In order to produce nuanced and sophisticated literary criticism, CLS must interpret statistical analysis against its true purpose; conversely, to stay true to the capacities of quantitative analysis, practitioners of CLS must treat literary data in vastly reductive ways, ignoring everything we know about interpretation, culture, and history. Literary objects are too few, and too complex, to respond interestingly to computational interpretation — not mathematically complex, but complex with respect to meaning, which is in turn activated by the quality of thought, experience, and writing that attends it.”-“The Digital Humanities Debacle” Nam Z. Da

It is the goal of this unit to enable you to craft and defend an arguable and original claim about a scholarly conversation (in this case CLS) and present that argument in the form of a scalar academic article that could be published in an undergraduate research journal.

To that end, we will undertake two “feeder” or preparatory assignments leading up to the final “Unit Project”: 1,200-1,500 word journal article on CLS.  We begin by practicing two techniques (“starting with what you don’t understand” and “finding the mysteries in a text that seems simple”) for discovering and investigating the academic conversation through an annotated bibliography (Feeder 1), and in Feeder 2 we’ll practice using a literature review as a drafting tool for narrowing and justifying a humanities research question that you’ll answer in your final project for this unit.

For your final Unit Project (first draft will be due in Week 5), you will draw on the tools and draft material you’ve accumulated throughout these first weeks to compose a Journal Article that makes an arguable claim about the articles you read in this unit and defends it against a strong counterargument.   This final assignment will include an outline in order to give you practice using outlines as tools for drafting and revision.

 

Key Due Dates:

FRIDAY, 9/6: UNIT 1 FEEDER 1 DUE BY MIDNIGHT

FRIDAY, 9/13: UNIT 1 FEEDER 2 DUE BY MIDNIGHT

FRIDAY, 9/27: UNIT 1 PROJECT DUE BY MIDNIGHT


Rhetorical Chart

 

 

Scalar Website:http://scalar.usc.edu/works/the-computational-literary-studies-debate/index

 

Last spring, a premier journal in the humanities, Critical Inquiry published a now infamous article by Nan Z. Da called “The Computational Case Against Computational Literary Studies” and a series of reactions both for and against the use of algorithms in the analysis of literary objects.  Computational Literary Studies (CLS) raises hope for the potential of new methodologies and understandings of literature. Whether CLS will create “bad literary criticism” or “lacks quantitative rigor,” it is clear that opposing sides have very different assessments of the implications of using computation in literary studies. While each writer challenges the foundations, definitions, and positions of the other, in some ways, they seem to be talking to one another in a manner that lacks the sincerity of an intellectual debate.

As a new student of Digital Humanities (and budding writer), you are now confronted with two problems.

  1. Beyond what I have learned from Da and others, how do I develop my own critical understanding of the CLS debate?
  2. As a critical reader of Da and others, how might I further, challenge, remedy, question, or interrogate their core claims and methods of argumentation?

In consideration of these problems, you are now asked to compose an evidence-based, multi-media argument in Scalar that helps your reader to:

  • Understand, beyond a pro/con debate, the complex issues, potential dangers and potential benefits of CLS.
  • Understand at least one aspect of struggle in the academic conversation between Da and another scholar.  As an example, where are these two writers failing to connect with each other? Where is communication breaking down in this exchange exactly, and how?  Instead of taking a side in the debate, this assignment gives you a chance to explore the problem, enter into the conversation, and comment about (and perhaps resolve) the debate.

As you craft your response, consider: What do I already know about “good academic writing” that can transfer to a Scalar Page — allowing for the embedding of links, traditional text, images, audio, video and other media? In regard to genre, think about your composition as an online magazine article that includes images, text, links, and even embedded video.  If you’d like to examine a model of online magazine with an academic tone, check out:

Contexts (https://contexts.org/articles/marijuanas-moral-entrepreneurs/)

Edible Geography  (http://www.ediblegeography.com)

 

Throughout this course, you’ll learn a good deal more about transferring traditional rhetorical skills into modern digital genres.  For now, however, I’m curious what sense you can make of the Scalar genre through your own insights, creativity, and past exposures to web-based writing.  As an example, while you compose your response, consider:

  • Where and how might I cite the sources I use within the Scalar page?
  • How do I embed links, video, images, and other media in ways that maintain an “academic” tone and voice within my “page.”

 

We will be using Scalar, which is a free, open source authoring and publishing platform that’s designed to make it easy for authors to write long-form scholarship online. Scalar enables users to assemble media from multiple sources and juxtapose them with their own writing in a variety of ways.Scalar also gives authors tools to structure essay- and book-length works in ways that take advantage of the unique capabilities of digital writing, including nested, recursive, and non-linear formats. The platform also supports collaborative authoring and reader commentary.

 

 

The Scalar page should be between 1200-1500 words.