From Digital Humanities 09 to THATCamp, or The Humanities And Technology Camp. It’s an unconference: we (well, Jeremy Boggs, to whom profound thanks) came up with the schedule first thing in the morning. It’s a bare-bones event which apparently cost about $3500 to put on, and has about 100 participants. And we have everything we need — coffee, food, and rooms with projection. And smart people around the table. Note to self: a fairly large [un]conference is possible without a $100k investment, as long as someone (or five someones) is willing to put in a lot of organizational work.
The first breakout session I’m attending is, as will be obvious from the title, is Libraries and Web 2.0. People attending include “straight-up” librarians, digital humanists, a programmer at NCSA even. Let’s see if I can capture what we talk about.
Last session of the conference, and a good thing, because I’m just about burned out on the intense blogging for hours on end. The sadness over this exciting, inspiring, fun conference ending will set in in a few hours.
Claire Warwick makes an announcement about the poster competition: the award for outstanding poster goes to “Bringing Southern Oral Histories Online” by Natasha Smith and her group from UNC Chapel Hill! Congratulations!
Next up, Harold Short and Julia Flanders, presidents of ALLC and ACH respectively. They thank the organizers, it’s truly been a fantastic conference. Harold invites us to London in July 2010 for DH10! Kings College London will be hosting. KCL is situated right on the Thames, is culturally partnered with BL, BM, Tate, Globe, National Theatre, National Gallery, Guildhall School of Music & Drama… what’s not to like? Conf co-hosted by Centre for Computing in the Humanities and the Centre for e-Research; conference itself takes place on the Strand campus of KCL. Affordable student accommodations at $55/night! (Holy cats, that’s fantastic for the center of London!) All roads lead to DH10, 7-11 July. And check out the website.
The conference after that, Digital Humanities 2011, will be at 2011, with local hosts Glen Worthey and Matt Jockers.
Neil Fraistat presents the last dance: “we have the best chance of keeping you the longest if we put the money at the end.” Each panelist speaks for up to 7min, discussing an actual grantee or a few important challenges that their grantees have tackled, or identify what they see as the 2-3 most important challenges to the field at present. When presentations are done, floor will open for general discussion.
Walked in in the middle of Stuart Moulthrop’s talk; a big shame–I’d been looking forward to it. Right now he’s talking about cranky digital poets, like for example John Cayley who reportedly has a problem with people making distinctions between literature and the literary.
Louisa Connors is up first; “Complementary critical tradition and Elizabeth Cary’s Tragedy of Mariam.”
Proposition: a computational stylistic analysis of function words in two sets of texts from the same period and related genres can support more traditional approaches to literary analysis of those texts.
The first paper was mine; naturally, I’m not going to blog it. But I’ll post a link to a PDF version of my talk here, and will Tweet it too. Stay tuned.
First up, Stan Ruecker and Alan Galey (Stan presenting), “Design as a Hermeneutic Process: Thinking Through Making from Book History to Critical Design.”
Oh, this’ll be good.
The Association for Computers and the Humanities wants YOU to be a member. You get an OUP journal subscription out of it! And ACH, one of the organizations putting on this conference, is funded by its membership dues. Do it, folks.
Stefan Sinclair, chair of the ACH jobs effort, is putting on a jobs slam! Like speed-dating, but different. Job seekers are going to spend 30 seconds each presenting themselves, and perhaps they’ll get hooked up with jobs. But first, job opportunities:
First up, Melissa Terras of University College London. “Digital Curiosities: Resource Creation Via Amateur Digitization”
Melissa has spent a lot of time studying images, and in most cases was studying images in/from institutions. But what about collections (of all sorts, not just images) created by people who aren’t affiliated with institutions? They’re actually quite interesting, and Melissa studied them using the following methods: