RSS Feed

Cautiously Optimistic

3

February 3, 2015 by jeldredge1

After reading the rest of Roy Rosenzweig’s Clio Wired, and Chapter 2 of History in the Digital Age written by Luke Tredinnick, I am still cautiously optimistic about the opportunities that the  digital age and the web have and will offer for historians and the members of the public interested in history.  Time has proved that many of the extreme prognostications for the future of history on the web have failed to come true, both positive and negative.  The web has neither completely revolutionized the way that history is practiced, nor has it been overrun by capitalist motivators to the extreme of snatching the creation and consumption of historic sources out of the greater public’s hands.

Instead, the occurrence of important events like 9/11 during the digital age has allowed for a “democratization of history,” as Tredinnick categorizes, as anyone can capture and contribute materials in real time that will be useful and enlightening for historic research in the future.  I agree that this “participatory mode” is one of the most promising aspects of the web for the broadening of the understanding of history as experienced by a much broader swath of the human population than ever before.  Such immediate, relatively un-filtered reactions and chronicles of events will also prove an important resource for scholars to study and analyze the changing opinions of various factions and popular and fringe interpretations to events over time.

In reading the histories of computer technology and the creation of the Internet in Clio Wired, it is obvious that the capacities of search engines and the availability of primary and secondary sources of history have certainly improved since the publication of the book.  Certainly, there is a continuing need to exercise caution and teach web novices how to discern the authenticity of sources.  The web still calls for an information caveat like “buyer beware.”

Still, the wide open aspect of the net also brings the beneficial aspect that the public can freely publish their own collections and interpretations of history, and I do see this as more of an overall benefit to the discipline.  True, this opens consumers up to the opinions of crackpots, etc., but here again is where the importance of understanding how to evaluate sources is essential.  The web has also become more democratic in its ability to educate and simplify the ability of people to create their own pages and add innovative, new effects and content to their pages.  Many younger students who read Rosenzweig’s book today would hardly recognize the web page layouts as seen on p. 177.  Archives now have the ability to present books and other written sources and holdings as visually similar to the physical object; viewers can see the waterspots, ragged edges and even ‘flip’ the page like they are holding the real book.  My point is that the technology of today and the future can increasingly mimic the traditional mediums of historic research while also creating new innovations for collaboration, interpretation, and dissemination of history.

One aspect of digital history that I personally plan to utilize is outlined in Chapter 8 of Clio Wired, “Collecting History Online.” In my future work with Oakland Cemetery, I plan to create a page on Oakland’s website that will outline and facilitate a project to collect accounts and materials about our residents.  Many people still send in handwritten family histories, pictures and newspaper clippings through the mail to our offices.  I believe that a web presence specifically asking and advertising for submissions would greatly broaden our historic resources.  I appreciated some of the helpful and practical advice that the authors offered to historians who want to implement such a project.

A final aspect that was covered repeatedly in this weeks’s readings concerns the need to make more primary and secondary works of history free to the public.  I do agree that too much scholarship and source material is kept behind gateways, and this can only prohibit the promising democratization of history for the present and future.  As the chapter outlined, there are many thorny aspects of making all scholarship free, but I think that self-archiving by authors is an important first step.  If I have found that a paper I want to read is stuck behind a pay gateway, I next look for the author’s own or university page to see if they have a free copy there.  I would, myself self-archive any published works I author or co-author whenever possible.  I have found sites like Academia.edu are also very useful for searching and collecting scholarly work.

 


3 comments »

  1. kdaly3 says:

    I do agree with you both when you say that the web has opened up opportunities within the discipline, but it is always best to proceed with caution. I think that digital technology is useful when it comes to basic search engines, but historians’ ease of use seems to primarily come from such sources as online materials from established journals, archives, and others. When it comes to things that aren’t filtered, such as the web, anyone, not only historians, should proceed with at least mild suspicion. I also like your points about democratization of history and the dissemination of information and the ability of digital formats to increase both of these aspects of history through the web’s collaborative format.

  2. Alexandra Troxell says:

    I think your assessment of digital access speaks to a much greater issue in our digital society- credibility and follow-through. The issue of fact-checking is especially important in historic research, but it also applies to every aspect of online life. I find it still incredibly common for many people to accept online information from questionable sources or even with no source cited. In grade school, now, they are starting to teach kids about how to properly use internet sources for school project and also for personal means. I think this is an incredibly important skill for both purposes. The problem still remains that there is a gap in the population that still does not understand this skill. I think there is great potential to utilize historical information to teach the public about the proper use of online information, or vice versa. It seems like there is an opportunity for collaboration in learning and teaching between disciplines that could be utilized further.

  3. Adina Langer says:

    Jennie, I appreciate your observation about how improved technology is enabling the rendering of digital materials in a format that more closely resembles their originals: “Archives now have the ability to present books and other written sources and holdings as visually similar to the physical object; viewers can see the waterspots, ragged edges and even ‘flip’ the page like they are holding the real book. My point is that the technology of today and the future can increasingly mimic the traditional mediums of historic research while also creating new innovations for collaboration, interpretation, and dissemination of history.” Do you think that researchers will feel increasingly comfortable referring back to a digital source as a true “primary source” when making an argument based on a detailed physical or aesthetic quality of that item?

Leave a Reply to Adina Langer Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Skip to toolbar