"Action is eloquence"-Another reply!

Last week I posted that I had contacted a Shakespeare class from a university in New York. New Paltz to be more specific. Now, to refresh your memories a little bit, these students are studying Shakespeare through interpretation of the text and only that. They don't use anything (other than posting on their blog) in their studies.

Needless to say I found that fascinating.

So I contacted the professor and he quickly responded to my inquiries of why he chose to teach that way and what he felt about digital humanities. And, while he answered these he also posed questions on his own!

Here's a recap of his e-mail:

"Dear Kaleigh,

Thank you for your e-mail and interest in my blogging assignment. I've pasted below a rather full reflection on my thinking behind the blog that I posted for my students a few semesters ago:

http://npshakespeare.blogspot.com/2010/04/blogging-on-blogging-on-blogging.html

You might also find the assignment that the students respond to helpful:

http://npshakespeare2012.pbworks.com/w/page/50141590/Detailed%20Assignment%20and%20Rubric%20for%20Blogging

The only thing I'd add is that the assignment has been successful for me, and as a professor, I enjoy reading my students' open reflections on Shakespeare. It makes my students better readers of the text, too, as the assignment forces students to respond very carefully to the material before they share their thoughts with the class (and general public).

Let me know if you have any other questions. Also, may I ask how you came to the blog? Was it through a google search, or did someone refer it to you?

Best wishes,

 

Cyrus Mulready"

To be honest I do have a few more specific questions to ask him and I'm also hoping to see if he'd be willing to do a debate/conference with out class if at all possible to explore his teachings methods and compare it to the structure of our class.

Sounds like a good thing eh? :) 

I need some advice!

Alright guys,

I must confess that I'm a little uncertain as to where to go at this point. One of our requirements this week is to view or listen to the work we've chosen to analyze further. For me and the topic I've chosen (a study of the digital humanities and Shakespeare) I've come to debate of whether I should place my attention to a specific play or diversify things a bit more. Maybe two plays? Any suggestions? I'm viewing one play right now and I want to make sure I cover things thoroughly enough while at the same time showing the correlation between digital humanities and Shakespeare. So should I expand my horizons a little more?

Does that make sense?

Any advice guys?

"The golden age is before us"-The Digital Humanities....digitized!

Did the title make sense?

Anyway, if not I'll explain.

What I have here is a almost a 2 hour lecture that I came across on youtube. I it is promoted by Columbia University and has a lot of information available on it. I realize that this may be WAY longer than anyone will want to listen to, but I thought that I would post it for those of you who may be interested in noting what I'm up to or to investigate it for yourself!

The lecture and lecturers go into detail as to why the digital humanities are significant and how things have changed towards more acceptance of the digital humanities genre. It really is interesting. I'll have to listen to it again in order to fully understand everything.

"Can one desire too much of a good thing?"-More Answers!

I confess that I've started several different posts only to have them saved rather than actually uploading them! Shame on me! So, here's yet another blog-a-thon for your enjoyment. Rest assured that I'm not slacking in my research, I'm just a terribly silly person for not actually uploading anything! Geez!



Anyway, As I was saying last week Dr. Jonathan Hope was another contact who actually wrote me back! What a great thing it was to hear from him. And, not only did he write me once, but twice! With amazing information and links to follow up on. Here's what he had to say to me when I inquired about how he got started in the digital humanities and why he was so interested in them:


"Mike Witmore and I got into digital humanities by accident really, but we both feel that it offers new, and in many cases, better, ways of understanding texts and the relationships between them. Though we do not think, unlike some in the field, that it is a replacement for traditional reading - we see it as a prosthetic. To understand the results you get from digital analysis, you need to know the texts in traditional ways.

If you want to look into this more, you should listen to a lecture Mike gave at the Folger Shakespeare Library http://www.folger.edu/template.cfm?cid=3988

- here's the transcript: http://www.folger.edu/documents/DataminingShakespeare_transcript.pdf

and here's an article about our work:
http://www.fastcompany.com/1800987/shakespeare-data-mining-michael-witmore-folger-library

and there's more detailed stuff on our blog: winedarksea.com

In case you are interested, I've also attached a piece I wrote on Shakespeare's language - not digital humanities as such, but it has been mentioned in the press recently

let me know if you have any more questions!
best
Jonathan"

I won't attach the article because it is over 12 pages long! But, if anyone is interested in it I would happily e-mail it to you! And as for the other links he posted, they are really informative and interesting and I advise following them and investigating things further!

Also, when I inquired further for me detail and information about what he found to be significant about digital humanities and whether or not he felt like they helped or hindered understanding Shakespeare (and specifically whether or not he felt like this form was superior to traditional ones) he replied again stating:

"well, we don't think digital approaches take the emphasis or significance away from the text: quite the opposite.

Have a look at the blog post I just did at winedarksea on Midsummer Night's Dream: digital tools enable us to identify shifts in pronoun use in that play that you couldn't discover any other way - but in order to understand those shifts, you have to go back to the text, and think about it as a work of drama: what is it in the way the play works that makes Shakespeare write like that?
best
Jonathan"

I like how he made a plug for his own blog as answer for me! It really was informative and I appreciated him writing back and giving me a heads up about what he's working on. It's really awesome!


 

"Boldness be my friend!"-HE ANSWERED ME!

Yay!

I would have written this post much sooner but alas my internet was down and I'm STILL feel pretty crummy...

HOWEVER....

I'm finally writing this post finally to tell you my amazingly awesome news! I received replies from TWO of my contacts! One of which was.....STANLEY FISH!



I know I squealed excitedly (much like a little girl) and couldn't function for ten whole minutes. All I could repeat was:

"I can't believe he replied! Oh my goodness. Oh my goodness..."

My husband stared at me for a few seconds to let me calm down and then asked what he had written.

"I haven't looked at it yet."

And I couldn't! I just couldn't look at it! I stared at my computer and my stomach just churned, my thoughts provoking all my insecurities.

'What is he thinks I'm an idiot' I kept musing. 'What if he writes a really mean reply?'

Or worse, as Dr. Burton suggested: 'What if it's only an automated response?'

Ah! Talk about a motivation to actually click on the e-mail and read it.

I confess it took A LONG time to work up the courage to click on the e-mail. A simple click and I couldn't do it for hours! Hours!

But, finally I did it. I clicked on the e-mail....

And, well, I'll let you read it.

"In genreal my view is that digital techniques can do some tasks of sorting and frequency either more quickly or on a vaster scale than can traditional interpretive methods . But what they can't do is provide or come up with the interpretive thesis without which text mining is just a form of play. If you had formulated a reading of Shakespeare and wanted to know whether certain formal patterns would lend it support , it might well be useful to run the numbers . I think Hope agrees with me. All my considered views on this matter are contained in the three NYTimes pieces--sf "

It wasn't so bad! He wasn't mean or critical or anything. Actually, he was very simple in his response. I appreciated his reference to his other articles on the subject. He answered the questions I proposed to him concerning his opinion about digital humanities and he took the time to clarify information for me. I suspected that perhaps he didn't like digital humanities AT ALL, but he surprised me. I guess I just didn't read his articles well enough, but it is nice to have him clarify things for me personally. He even mentioned another of my contacts, Dr. Hope and his views on the matter (I'll post that in the next blogging).

All things considered I'm pretty happy. It may be a short response but it really gives me a great understanding of what a major critic thinks about the digital humanities. I think that helps a bit!

Don't you?

"The makings of..."-Progress Report

As a review for the last week, I've done several things to try and cover all my bases in the research department. It has been a lot of interesting and exciting work and I'm anxious to see what this week brings me.

Here's a recap of Phase 1:

Exploration:

- I've really worked hard to understand the digital humanities aspect of researching Shakespeare and grammar and why it is so significant. I've posted several things about this, from contacts I've made to things I've noticed. Here's a few links to some of the posts I've done:

http://spoonerkaleighj382.blogspot.com/2012/01/words-words-mere-words-grammar-and.html

http://spoonerkaleighj382.blogspot.com/2012/01/stage-where-every-man-must-play-part.html

Textual Analysis:

-This area is one that I'm in the process of delving into more deeply. There are just so many different facets of language that I'm working to understand with Shakespeare! I can see why it is truly a lifelong pursuit! But for the sake of keeping you all informed as to what I've done, here's a link to the post I wrote:

http://spoonerkaleighj382.blogspot.com/2012/01/stage-where-every-man-must-play-part.html

Social Proof:

-I would have to say that this is the most complete aspect of my research thus far. I've contacted SEVERAL people in an attempt to understand their reasearch as well as the digital humanities movement. Here's a link to some of my posts about my efforts:

http://spoonerkaleighj382.blogspot.com/search/label/Social%20Proof

I hope this helps you understand my research a little better! As always if you guys have any suggestions or insight for me, I'd love to hear it!

"The play's the thing"-Textual Analysis

I thought that since I haven't already done so, I need to give a quick little review of what I've been doing, textually, to enhance my research and understand Shakespeare better.
qui
While I do feel as though this is one area that I need to put more emphasis on, I have been studying the texts and noting many grammatical quirks that Shakespeare employed. I'd like to share something with you.

Shakespeare certainly liked to mix up the sentence order!

- If you look closely at some of the texts, like "Hamlet" for instance you may notice that not all sentences and speeches are written in the form of:

Subject-verb-object, etc.

Rather, Shakespeare took great pains to mix things up a bit write his sentences backwards to our modern tastes. Let me give you a few examples:

In ACT I Scene I of "Hamlet" Horatio speaks:

HORATIO

Before my God, I might not this believe
Without the sensible and true avouch
Of mine own eyes.

Another can be noted here in ACT III Scene II

  QUEEN GERTRUDE

Hamlet, thou hast thy father much offended.

HAMLET

Mother, you have my father much offended.

It is interesting to note these difference in grammatical structure. And they are scattered throughout the entire play! I think that this structure helps to bring the poetic and artistic flare to the production, but I almost get the impression that there's more to it than just that.

It certainly is interesting to see how he plays with the structure! It sort of reminds of of this guy: