[Humanist] 28.810 pubs on note-taking and on concerns for digital humanities

Humanist Discussion Group willard.mccarty at mccarty.org.uk
Fri Mar 13 07:23:28 CET 2015


                 Humanist Discussion Group, Vol. 28, No. 810.
            Department of Digital Humanities, King's College London
                       www.digitalhumanities.org/humanist
                Submit to: humanist at lists.digitalhumanities.org

  [1]   From:    Willard McCarty <willard.mccarty at mccarty.org.uk>          (29)
        Subject: books of note

  [2]   From:    Willard McCarty <willard.mccarty at mccarty.org.uk>          (13)
        Subject: note-taking


--[1]------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2015 07:06:34 +0000
        From: Willard McCarty <willard.mccarty at mccarty.org.uk>
        Subject: books of note

Allow me to recommend two books, one new, one old.

The new one is Jim Ridolfo and William Hart-Davidson, eds., Rhetoric and 
the Digital Humanities (Chicago 2015). It is a strong attempt to bring 
together rhetoric studies and digital humanities, which share much in 
common. It is a sad reflection on our disciplinary conditioning that one 
must argue for the interrelation of these two fields, and a warning to 
us that the popularity of digital humanities doesn't continue to lead to 
an exclusionary attitude either from within or without. How do we 
achieve the "big tent" without become indefinite? Through exercises such 
as this one, I'd think, through looking for and finding common ground, 
then asking what makes it common.

The old one is Evelyn Fox Keller and Elisabeth A. Lloyd, eds., Keywords 
in Evolutionary Biology (Harvard 1992) -- not for the whole book, as 
valuable as it is for those who find interest in biology and its 
development, but for the editors' Introduction, 6 pp. You may know 
Keller's long preoccupation with language as a way into an historical 
understanding of the sciences, biology in particular. This is another 
expression of that preoccupation, which I'd say needs to be ours as well 
for the many disciplines that contribute or could contribute to the 
growth of digital humanities. We need but do not yet have a language. 
Keller has helped enormously in showing how to tease out that which 
comes with the disciplinary languages we inherit.

Comments?

Yours,
WM
-- 
Willard McCarty (www.mccarty.org.uk/), Professor, Department of Digital
Humanities, King's College London, and Digital Humanities Research
Group, University of Western Sydney


--[2]------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2015 13:17:06 +0000
        From: Willard McCarty <willard.mccarty at mccarty.org.uk>
        Subject: note-taking


Obvious (to me at least), true (in my own experience) and now supported 
by some research: note-taking of lectures is better done on paper. See 
Carol E. Holstead, "The Benefits of No-Tech Note Taking", Chronicle of 
Higher Education, 4 March 2015, 
http://chronicle.com/article/The-Benefits-of-No-Tech-Note/228089/?cid=wc&utm_source=wc&utm_medium=en.

Reading ditto, I think. (Cane-tumping distinctly audible.)

Anything to add?

Yours,
WM
-- 
Willard McCarty (www.mccarty.org.uk/), Professor, Department of Digital
Humanities, King's College London, and Digital Humanities Research
Group, University of Western Sydney




More information about the Humanist mailing list