Digital History

Where to go with this week's reading? To reference one of my classmates, "my head was swimming" after reading this week. The web and history; where do we find the intersection? I have to say that this was the over-arching question I kept asking myself as I was reading. In their own ways, each of the readings was asking us to consider how the web can move forward.

The introduction from Digital History laid-out a framework for which we can think about the role of the web in the study of history. I liked the seven qualities of digital media he listed because he was able to clearly label, and elaborate on, what makes the web such a useful resource. While I think his qualities were a strong-suit within his introduction, I appreciated how he tempered his excitement. He recognized the possibilities of digital media but new technology brings new challenges. Cohen and Rosenzweig (C & R) are not disillusioned in how they conceive of the web but they seemed excited about the potential.

"Haunted Mouse" challenged me to think about how we understand the space of the internet to exist. In the term space, I am referring to the capacity of the medium. The article begins with a roll-call of websites and social-networking sites which have gone the way of the dodo bird. But, with the internet, nothing ever becomes extinct. The web seems to be this infinite repository for just about anything we want to use it for. We can load junk, significant scholarship and everything in between. The questions this raises in my mind is, do we need to keep adding to the excess? Regardless of what we make live on the web, it will eventually lose its luster and become a ghost. Personally, I think the endless capacity is a hindrance of the web. It has the ability to reduce the quality of the material which can be uploaded.

(Deep breath) What was Nate Hall discussing? Maybe I am lacking a certain tech-savvy that would allow me to understand the concept of QR. In the beginning of his article, Hall wrote about wanting to greater connect his online community to his physical community. It already seems we have this connection and constant plug into all that is digital. Each site he reference brings you one step closer to a complete breakdown of barriers. The space between Hall's online life and physical life is minuscule. With the click of a button or the flipping open of a phone, Hall's physical life becomes part of a new community. Do newer technologies need to be created to make that gap even more narrow?

Earlier in the post, I referenced C & R's hesitance with technology. I think this is the biggest takeaway from this week. It always seems as if we are one step behind the technology. We are always attempting to find ways to conform what we do to fit. I don't know if there is any way to reverse that reality. The problem is that there are no set guidelines for how to interact with the web. It feels like we are doing it on the fly. Though spontaneity can yield great results, we don't necessarily have the ability to police what is being produce. C & R gave great examples of how the web can create a false sense of truth. It's a medium which theoretically is open to all. A democratic medium for all to share ideas. Unfortunately, the ideas might not always be the correct ideas, especially when it comes to history. As professionals, we should strive to create cohesive guidelines which allow for proper scholarship.