Digital World History: An Agenda
When I read the title of this article, I assumed straight away that it would not suit me as I have never been too interested in general world history. That is exactly why I chose to read and blog about it, if I am not willing to broaden my focus now then I never will be. Manning even says in the article that the problem with world history is that is too unfamiliar to most historians as institutional training tends to focus on national and area specific study. I cannot argue with that, since first year Arts we were given the choice of which modules we could take, the majority of them focused on different aspects of Irish history while the rest of the world was broken into genreal courses. I do no see this as a negative though, I'm sure institutions in other countries operate in a similar manner, to each his own.
The structure of this essay is simple; Manning makes general points about the study of world history, then general points about digital processes and techniques and finally links to two together by explaining the benefits, potential and advantages which the two combined can have.
One of the points about world History which Manning emphasizes is that it is multi-dimensional because it involves the assembly and interpretation of diverse knowledge which spans all ages and time periods. He then goes on to say that because this is all brought together in a "grand approach" that it does not fit well with the structure of digital history because it is changable and often subdivided. I do not think this is a fair conclusion to make so early in his arguement. From what I know about digital history, I think its application to world history would be a great success. The opinion I formed before reading the advantages outlined in this article, was that digital history would change the format of world history for the better. Who is to say that world history has to be a grand single narrative? Techniques such as hyperlinking would allow individual histories and diverse opinions to be drawn together to create a narrative that is beyond universal, one that is all inclusive.
The example Manning uses to explain the integration of digital methods in historical research is his examination of the African slave trade demography figures and how he used software techniques for calculations etc. Interesting enough as this was, I felt it was slightly irrelevant because it is now obvious to us that calculations, stimulations and the manipulation of figures or data is all easier with the help of digital technology.
The totality of the past is impossible, we must choose a means of simplification which best suits our purposes. I found this to be the best part of the article because although we all subconciously choose the structure of our work, we may not really be aware of what we are really doing. He subsequently explains three main approaches to writing history; chronology, linear narrative and multi-dimensional narrative. Digital or not, I think that these approaches can be applied to any historical research topic and that it will be easier for both the historian and the reader to work through if we could just decide which method we intend to use and then try to adhere to it. What is even more helpful is that he then outlines the problems encountered with each method of "simplification" or narrative; scale, persective, balance and centrality. The last one is particularly interesting as too often when we are presenting our research on one particular event or person we tend to over exaggerate their role. It is therefore important we acknowlodge their actual place within the grand narrative, whether it was really a central role or not.
The benefits of using digital tools in world history are the same as in any other field; enhancing, storing data, retrieving data, translations, approximations, animations etc.. However, there are some characteristics of digital technology and world history which fit together like a jigsaw; both reach an expanded audience, both are interactive, both are open to variations in approach and in progression through either, choices and decisions must be made regarding which pathways to follow. As I stated earlier, it is all about the multi-dimensional structure which in the beginning Manning thought was a negative and an obstacle in the combination of the two. In the course of this short essay he seems to have completely changed his mind, this shows just how easy it is to become part of the digital world. Come over to the dark side, not only do you want to, but you have to.
2 comments:
I agree with your concluding statement to come over to the dark side not only due to wanting to but simply because one has to. The Digital age is upon us, the internet is huge in everyday life as is technology in general, the use of digital tools is massive and offers so many exciting opportunities that it is often difficult to understand why one does not jump more quickly into grasping the ideas of the digital age. Historians in particular I think can often be reliant upon the tradition of hiding in the library burdened with dusty books and feel it is time we snapped out of this!Both in the hope of avoiding insanity and welcoming the new, opportunity- filled, unknown and exciting world that is digital!
I totally agree that historians tend to be set in their ways. I once had a tutor for politics who was also a history lecturer who had been given an electronic book reader as a gift but insisted on printing off realms of text and hauling them around as he just could not seem to concentrate when reading off of a screen!
Post a Comment