[Humanist] 30.750 hands on

Humanist Discussion Group willard.mccarty at mccarty.org.uk
Thu Feb 16 07:59:16 CET 2017


                 Humanist Discussion Group, Vol. 30, No. 750.
            Department of Digital Humanities, King's College London
                       www.digitalhumanities.org/humanist
                Submit to: humanist at lists.digitalhumanities.org

  [1]   From:    Franz Fischer <franz.fischer at uni-koeln.de>               (112)
        Subject: Re:  30.748 hands on

  [2]   From:    Paul Fishwick <metaphorz at gmail.com>                       (74)
        Subject: Re:  30.748 hands on


--[1]------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2017 09:35:19 +0100
        From: Franz Fischer <franz.fischer at uni-koeln.de>
        Subject: Re:  30.748 hands on
        In-Reply-To: <20170215062439.DBB138A0F at digitalhumanities.org>


Dear Willard,

Sword fighting is probably the most physical method of textual criticism 
- applied by enthusiasts of historical martial arts to create a digital 
variorum editions of fencing books from the 15th century. If your 
reading or interpretation is wrong you're dead.

Ben Brumfield gave an introduction in a pub on a memorable night in 
Cologne last year:
https://youtu.be/7X6rj35rE1k

Here is the actual demonstration of the sword fighters:
https://youtu.be/rupktpz0Xrg

Franz

Am 15.02.2017 um 07:24 schrieb Humanist Discussion Group:
>                   Humanist Discussion Group, Vol. 30, No. 748.
>              Department of Digital Humanities, King's College London
>                         www.digitalhumanities.org/humanist
>                  Submit to:humanist at lists.digitalhumanities.org
>
>    [1]   From:    Joris van Zundert<joris.van.zundert at huygens.knaw.nl>      (75)
>          Subject: Re:  30.746 hands on?
>
>    [2]   From:    Bill Pascoe<bill.pascoe at newcastle.edu.au>                 (56)
>          Subject: Re:  30.746 hands on?
>
>
> --[1]------------------------------------------------------------------------
>          Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2017 08:55:15 +0000
>          From: Joris van Zundert<joris.van.zundert at huygens.knaw.nl>
>          Subject: Re:  30.746 hands on?
>          In-Reply-To:<20170214083118.A26B38606 at digitalhumanities.org>
>
>
> Dear Willard,
>
> It would involve non trivial preparation and in itself would not be trivial
> and effortless, but neither is computing: I'd recommend a clock makers
> workshop.
>
> - Clock making is a highly skilled craft, yet with proper means and
> instruction anyone can device a simple mechanical clock.
> - It requires understanding of transformation, mechanism, formalization.
> - Clocks have an interface (the hour plate and hands).
> - They have discrete parts with discrete functions (the minute hand and its
> wheel, the escapement, the pendulum/spring).
> - They have input (gravity) and output (time indication, not time itself
> obviously, however convenient it would be).
> - A workshop is probably doable by using Legos as course material.
>
> I admit that it is less intimate to humanities than calligraphy or
> bibliography, but a nice philosophical/historical lecture on the relation
> between time and humans could mitigate that maybe?
>
> If anyone is organizing one for DH2018, I'd like to reserve a spot.
>
> Cheers
> --Joris
>
> On Tue, 14 Feb 2017 at 09:31, Humanist Discussion Group <
> willard.mccarty at mccarty.org.uk> wrote:
>
>>                   Humanist Discussion Group, Vol. 30, No. 746.
>>              Department of Digital Humanities, King's College London
>>                         www.digitalhumanities.org/humanist
>>                  Submit to:humanist at lists.digitalhumanities.org
>>
>>
>>
>>          Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2017 07:45:38 +0000
>>          From: Willard McCarty<willard.mccarty at mccarty.org.uk>
>>          Subject: hands on
>>
>>
>> There are a number of practices in which physical craftsmanship and digital
>> making rub up against each other if not mingle, even interpenetrate. Let's
>> think about these practices for a moment.
>>
>> It may be that my personal history and training exert a prejudicial
>> influence that limits the appeal of how I think about digital humanities.
>> Perhaps that history and training explain why in reading Tim Ingold's
>> illuminating book, Making: Anthropology, archaeology, art and architecture
>> (2013), I am drawn eagerly to the pedagogical expressions of his
>> anthropology in such class exercises as weaving baskets and see in them
>> (changing what needs to be changed) a model for training digital humanists.
>>
>> The link between baskets and computing was made explicit to me this morning
>> by the announcement of the Rare Book Summer School (Humanist 30.742), which
>> quoted a former student as saying, "œI will never look at a book -- ”any
>> book -- ”the same way again." (Would that all digitizers of books had such
>> experience!) As a much younger man I once studied and then taught
>> bookbinding, and then as a graduate student at Toronto studied analytical
>> bibliography, and so, yes, have never looked at a book -- any book -- the
>> same way again. But the lesson from those experiences and others, the
>> acquiring of 'Fingerspitzengefühl' as experimental physicists call it, grew
>> from books and writing to flesh out and animate the idea of craftsmanship.
>> And that in turn (I am guessing!) has had much to do with how I think about
>> computing, down to the extravagant engineering of the hardware so well
>> concealed and so important in the machines we use.
>>
>> Programming is one way of teaching our digital makers, but I fear that it
>> is
>> too much in the head to make that link with craftsmanship. (Long ago I took
>> to assembler-language programming immediately because -- more guessing -- I
>> already had the feeling for it from making things with wood and metal as a
>> child.) Physical bibliography is closer, bookbinding and calligraphy closer
>> yet. What would you recommend?
>>
>> Yours,
>> WM
>> --
>> Willard McCarty (www.mccarty.org.uk/), Professor, Department of Digital
>> Humanities, King's College London; Adjunct Professor, Western Sydney
>> University and North Carolina State University; Editor,
>> Interdisciplinary Science Reviews (www.tandfonline.com/loi/yisr20)


--[2]------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2017 10:13:57 -0600
        From: Paul Fishwick <metaphorz at gmail.com>
        Subject: Re:  30.748 hands on
        In-Reply-To: <20170215062439.DBB138A0F at digitalhumanities.org>


Dear Willard:

 I would have to second Joris’ suggestion about clock making or even clock analysis
and repair. But to step back a bit, to what extent is the digital humanities really a study of
information processing and management within the broader context of culture? I would
vote for the latter, as we all tend to become enamored of “the digital.” This may sound
peculiar coming from a computer scientist, but the field (CS) needs the humanities at least
with respect to history. Clocks are definitely one of many technologies that contain key
concepts and elements of what we now term “programming.” To the extent that clocks,
and classical automata, are not covered in CS classes is due to the evolution of
engineering education where the curriculum has no room for history due to external,
vocationally-driven, pressures. I can understand the pragmatics of this shift, but believe
it is up to those of us on the edge (digital humanities, arts & technology) to create a way 
forward. I am working on an honors class syllabus proposal where the focus is on
an experiential approach. But, there are major challenges. Demonstrating that a gear
train is like a subroutine, and that the train computes through multiplying ratios may not
satisfy everyone.

-paul

Paul Fishwick, PhD
Distinguished University Chair of Arts, Technology, and Emerging Communication
Professor of Computer Science
Director, Creative Automata Laboratory
The University of Texas at Dallas
Arts & Technology
800 West Campbell Road, AT10
Richardson, TX 75080-3021
Home: utdallas.edu/atec/fishwick
Blog 1: medium.com/@metaphorz
Twitter: twitter.com/@PaulFishwick


More information about the Humanist mailing list