Reading Response - Nov 20

It is only fitting that for our last topic of class discussion we return to an issue that each of us have debated heavily over the last year.  How do historians handle everyone being able to share their story of an event in this new “information age?” 

I thought that the Boston Marathon article was awesome in that the historian was reaching out to the public through the media to have people tell their stories.  While prior to this we have been focused on actually documenting people’s stories for our own use, we have not really gotten into how a historian would reach out to the public to find these people.  Some of the public history articles we read today helped me out with that problem, but that is one thing that I wish we could discuss a little more today.

The scientific research piece was interesting for me because I had never thought about the different ways to compile research (especially in relation to a museum).  I have never taken a public history class here, so in a way some of this is foreign to me.  The majority of my experience has been conducting my own research for projects, and I have not ever gotten a good feel for how museums do theirs.  There must be some differences or there would not be a Public History emphasis area here.

Even though coming into this class I had the idea that history was moving closer to some of the sciences in the way we are able to conduct research, I struggled defending that case.  This class has exposed me to many unique programs, and projects that I probably would not had much exposure to anywhere else.  Most importantly, now that I have a feel for some of the new technologies that are out there, I have been given new ways to refute the constant jabs from the biologists and engineers around this campus.

Reflection on Listening Lab / Reading 11-6-13

Last week we spent the second half of the class in the digital listening lab in Daniel.  I thought that it was very interesting learning the ways that people compile information out of tweets and facebook posts.  I do not believe that anyone here was shock that the technology is available to do things like this, but what is amazing is knowing that if we needed social media information for our research projects this lab could be at our disposal. 

It seems like a very difficult way to do research because it seems to take hours of work on the part of the researcher to even set up the project.  Then he or she would have to work hard to make sure that the data they were receiving was accurate.  It would take a very specific project for the lab to help a historian, first because social networking is still relatively new and you average historian researching would not go through the process.  This research process is more like what I would be used to seeing in a science class than history. 

Today’s blog reading is touching on an issue that extends into history in general, and not just digital history.  The writer is making an observation that people have different perspectives on history, and as a “public historian” the writer is trying to ask what the best way is to share these thoughts.  People say daily that history is typically written by the winners, but is it a public historian’s job to go the extra mile to get both sides of the story? 

The Giant Pumpkin - Oct 30

Today’s readings were primarily geared at using social networking and specifically twitter to help us in our field of history.  Dr. Gulliver focused her article on how twitter helps her in her field, and how building up relationships with other historians assists her in research.  I found that particular article interesting because while I have an account for twitter, I do not use it in any of the ways she was trying to stress.

The other half of the readings dealt with the crossroads we are in right now as historians who are trying to document more recent events are trying to figure out how to incorporate twitter and other forms of media into our research.  We’ve been talking throughout the semester about how important social media is becoming in our society, and I thought it was cool to see some of the ways that people are beginning to display the information from these sites. 

I enjoyed looking at some of the maps that the Wall Street Journal put together for twitter responses to major events like the 2010 elections and the earthquake in Virginia.  The ability to display the time it took people to react to the earthquake can be very useful to a historian that is trying to do research on the speed at which information is being shared among people. 

While there are still some people that are skeptical of social media, it is proving to be very useful for entertainment and professional purposes.  It is one of the areas that will continue to evolve over the next five years, and will be our responsibility to keep up with the changes. 

Reading Response - Oct 23

The digital history collection project in the WEB 1.5 article really got me thinking about how much this field has evolved over the last 20 years.  I realize that this is the point of the class, but prior to that historians never were met with as many new developments as have occurred over my life time.  The project that I am planning for this class was not even possible back then, and now an undergrad student has the resources necessary to attempt it.  Reading how historians are beginning to compile these digital histories and allowing more people than ever to have voices is very exciting, but as the writers point out brings about challenges as well. 

I feel like the issues drawn upon in this article reflect on the discussions that we have had all year in class, but Brennan and Kelly do a good job of articulating the dilemma that new digital histories give us.  When we open these collections up to anyone, then eventually the day will come that we cannot read all of them.  If we cannot be sure that our collections are completely accurate, how are we supposed to display them?  I do not think that there really is an answer to this question, but also believe strongly that the creators of the databases need to be able to make these decisions on their own with out interference.  It is possible that out of twenty years from now this will no longer be an issue and the field will reach a consensus, but the only way for that to occur is for us to work through our differences now.

Blog for October 16

So far the biggest issue that I have run into in my project is getting familiar with arch GIS.  I know that the only way to lean it is to continue to work through it, but it gets frustrating at points.  For now, I am still trying to gather research from Clemson’s archives.  I can now begin to see the project coming together the way I was hoping and that is very exciting.