Enjoy! It's been a real pleasure
P.S. I almost reshot the video to take back every shining word I said about DH after the ordeal of getting this darn video up. However, now that the ordeal is over, I have returned to shiny feelings :)
There are many different tools available in the digital
realm that can enhance the experience, analyzing, and critiquing of literature.
The tools include things like GIS mapping – which is now being used to bring
more than just geographic data to life – visualizations like word clouds, and
interactive archiving. As a culture that is obviously not static or stagnant,
we would be remiss to continue our scholarly experience of literature without
incorporating these digital tools into assignments.
The types of tools used in an assignment must be contingent
on the familiarity of the students with the technology and the grade level of
the students. For instance, for younger students, I think that visualization
assignments might be most accessible. Creating visualizations like word clouds
and graphs through programs like Voyant is hugely easy and introductory. The
meat of visualization assignments are the conclusions that students can make by
analyzing them. It’s all in the questions you ask. For example, when a student
is tasked with creating a word cloud for each chapter in a novel, they are in
no way mentally engaged. All they have done is to dump words into a processor
and press a button. However, when the student is asked to recognize patterns in
word usage and compare that to the close reading they have accomplished in
class, they might be privy to a new and more extensive understanding of the
story as a whole. The combination of close and distant reading can have a
tendency to paint a fuller portrait.
Let’s take a high school English class in which students
read one – five chapters of a novel per week. What if, for each block or
section of text that bore geographical significance, each student were asked to
map it. For each mapping they would have to provide a multimodal summarization
of the section of texts. By the end of the unit, each student would have their
own individual comprehensive map of the story.
When you dump a collection of texts into Voyant, the program
recognizes word repetition and presents it to the user in a variety of ways
such as graphs, clouds, text highlighting, etc.. I was let down to find that
the most used words in the readings were “the,” “of,” “to,” “a,” etc.. I
searched and searched, but couldn’t find a filter that would eliminate those
seemingly benign words. (I call them benign, because they didn’t align with my
interests. However, as one article pointed out, Gothic literature can be
defined by the overwhelming use of “the.”) While it is seemingly missing a
filter, Voyant does allow the user to manipulate the data. I was able to select
as many top words as I wanted and see how their graphs compare. Each word’s
graph maps how often it was used in each reading. When comparing graphs of
certain words we can start noticing trends throughout the readings. As Mae
Capozzi noted in her blog “Reading at a Distance” having visuals like these
maps bring literary theory out of the phase of abstraction and gives it a
presence that is almost physical (Capozzi). No longer do theorists and critics have to
simply talk about their ideas; now they have visualizations.
When I manipulated my data to show me a graph of how the top
more important words were distributed throughout the readings, I got an
interesting result. The words I chose to map out were: reading, more, books,
topic, digital, humanities, literary, new, moretti, literature, words, and
distant. These were the top words excluding articles, pronouns, state-of-being
verbs, qualifiers, etc. If I had only seen this list of top words but never
read the articles and blogs, I would still be able to infer that distant
reading is a new development in the way we read literature that incorporates
the digital humanities. If I had a larger sample of texts, I would probably be
able to hone my understanding of distant reading down to an even more accurate
and precise definition.
The way Jackson decided to format
her hypertext plays a huge part in the way the reader is able to connect with
the text. When first entering into the digital world of Jackson’s My Body: A Wunderkammer, the reader is
introduced to the sketch of a woman’s body. From there, the reader is able to
click on any part of this body to get a vignette from Jackson’s life. As
mentioned, the reader can choose to click on hyperlinks throughout that
vignette to be transported to other vignettes, but at any point they can return
to the safe and familiar sketch and begin anew. The participatory artwork on
the homepage that she provided for the navigation of her text truly reinstates
her “focus [on] the relationship between human identity and the body's
constituent organs, fluids, connective tissues, and other parts” (My Body),
because it literally connected her memories and stories – her human identity –
with these images of her body parts. While the same artwork, in a static form, could
have been added to a print rendering of her memoir, its potential would have
been completely lost, because although the interactive art is recognized as a
signifier of the body – not the body itself – it brings with it a sense of
literalness that would be absent in print. The reader of this hypertext is
almost literally able to jump inside the body of the character he/she is
reading.