 |
|
|||
 |
||||
 |
Skip to:
October 28, 2002
October 15, 2002
September 23, 2002
September 16, 2002
|
November 18, 2002 Online Communities In “Virtual Communites as Communities,” Barry Wellman and Milena Gulia describe topic-oriented discussion groups on the internet as “a technologically-supported continuation of a long term shift to communities organized by shared interests rather than by shared place.” One online discussion that easily fits this description is H-Teach, which is part of the H-NET Humanities and Social Sciences On-Line initiative. As the introduction on their homepage indicates, “H-Teach encourages scholarly discussion on the wide range of policy issues involved in teaching history…at all levels…in diverse settings.” Not surprisingly, this online community consists primarily of history teachers, a significant proportion of which are teaching at the college level. There are, however, occasional references to “lurking publishers.” A sampling of entries from about six months out of the past eighteen seems to indicate that almost all of the actual participants in the various discussions are currently teaching history at the undergraduate level or beyond. Discussion topics among these teaching professionals focus on the classroom. Although there are some references to salary issues and announcements about conferences and other events, most of the discussions are concerned with teaching methods, course content, grading issues and student advising. There are really no entries that stray from relevant topics, but that is to be expected since this is a moderated discussion. The number of participants in the discussion seems to average fifty to sixty in a given month. Most of those participants have only one entry during the month and those with more than one entry seem to be the most active contributors, submitting as many as a dozen entries on as many different topics. The number of topics addressed varies, but is usually more than twenty. H-Teach is intended to foster online discussion, which it obviously does. But is it a community? The discussions address professional issues, but most of the entries are informal and some are even humorous. There seems to be a conscious effort among participants to avoid political controversy, but bits of sarcasm do surface. Overall, the atmosphere is similar to what one would encounter during lunch at a professional conference. All of the members have a common interest – teaching history – but they do not seem to know one another outside this realm. The discussion is open and the participants are lively, but polite. Requests for information or ideas typically receive numerous responses from members who appear to be eager to share their experiences, both successful and unsuccessful. As a forum dedicated primarily to sharing information, the relationships formed here appear narrow and specialized. What cannot be determined is how much this online discussion has fostered private relationships. All the entries sampled for this analysis were addressed to the group as a whole, but participants have the option of contacting other participants individually. It would be interesting to know how often this occurs and whether or not these relationships extend beyond the resolution of a particular issue. One important component of community that appears to be missing among the participants on H-Teach is that of permanence, the presence of some mutual obligation or responsibility. There is no commitment, implicit or otherwise, to respond to inquiries or to help those who request it. In fact, in my limited research I discovered several entries that received no response at all, and some of these appeared to come from teachers who had the least access to other kinds of resources, teachers who needed “community” the most. For example, one entry was from a lecturer at a college in Cyprus who was seeking help in developing an outline for a U.S. History course. It had been posted for over two months with no response. Since this is my first experience with online history discussions, I briefly sampled some other discussion groups for the sake of comparison. H-History and Theory, also affiliated with H-NET, had about half the participation level as the H-Teach list and it was impossible to determine specific information about the participants. The discussions were all very philosophical in nature. The participants usually signed their names, but rarely mentioned any kind of affiliation, professional or otherwise. The H-Local discussion was the most limited one I encountered. Sometimes this one only had five or six entries in a month and most of those were announcements about museum exhibits. On the other hand, the H-Francais list was much more active than the other lists I sampled. Almost all of the participants here were located in France. The discussions, however, appeared to be choppy. Most of the participants had only one entry and very few of the topics included more than one or two entries. There was heavy participation (150 participants for the first half of November), but not much in the way of ongoing discussion. It was as if each participant was performing a monologue for the group. Of the discussion groups described here, none comes as close to achieving “community” as H-Teach. Perhaps that is because the focus is both narrow and practical. It appeals to a specific group of people (history teachers) with a fairly well-defined set of concerns and interests (teaching and learning). The discussions, therefore, tend to be both practical and compelling. When a novice lecturer in Western Civilization asks about the quantity of reading expected from students in a survey course, dozens of experienced teachers reply, not just with advice, but with their own personal experiences, both good and bad. It is difficult to determine, however, why some of these kinds of inquiries are ignored. As Philip E. Agre observed (“Designing
Genres for New Media: Social, Economic, and Political Contexts) “[t]he
lives of people in communities are similar largely because of the similarities
of their relationships, and much of the community’s shared thinking
is concerned with these relationships.” It is these shared relationships
– those between teachers and their students – that makes the
participants of H-Teach a community. H-Teach has simply provided the medium
to enhance and enlarge that community. Which of the follwoing sites most effectively conveys the past to a “general” audience? Why? This question has been considered in reviewing five websites. They are arranged here in the order of their effectiveness—from least to greatest—at conveying the past to a general audience. History Wired: A Few of Our Favorite Things HistoryWired can be likened to a private tour through the Museum storage areas. Visitors select the objects that interest them; curators explain the items' significance. Like an actual tour at the Museum, information is presented conversationally and is backed by the impeccable scholarship of Smithsonian curators. And, like a real museum experience, visitors can share with others their enthusiasm (or lack thereof) about what they see and learn. True to its own description, the History Wired site targets a general audience, and it appeals to such an audience, if only for the varied nature of the objects it presents. The question, however, is whether or not the site conveys the past. The answer must be a resounding “no.” Because the site is an eclectic exhibit of curators’ “favorite” objects, the collection has no theme and no coherence. Visitors can find a 1970s race-car crash helmet, Bell’s “box” telephone, a turn-of-the-century dress, and the desk on which Thomas Jefferson wrote the Declaration of Independence, all with virtually no interpretation. President Grant’s pen is accompanied, not by an informed discussion of Grant’s presidency or his historical significance, but by a sound file of a campaign song and only a brief explanation. Little historical context is provided for the objects in the collection and few, if any, links to other sources are available. While the user can determine which objects and which categories to view, the limited number of objects and their lack of relationship to one another make the museum into little more than a collection of curiosities. The History Channel The History Channel is another example of a site that targets a general audience and perhaps even successfully appeals to that audience, but does not succeed in conveying the past. Intended as a companion to the television channel, this is primarily a commercial site complete with advertisements and gimmicks to draw the user into watching the television shows and/or purchasing videos. The tabloid-style presentation gives the appearance of accessibility, but the interface clearly targets the “browser” rather than someone who is searching for information on a particular topic. The only searches available are general ones. For example, in the area called “Historians,” the search for a particular historian provides dozens of hits from all over the site instead of category-specific matches. On the other hand, the “Speeches” area is difficult to sort through because the sound files are not listed in order of date or speaker and are not organized by topic. The quality of the history that is contained here is also seriously lacking. The only content from professional or academic historians comes in the form of talking-head interview clips, but even these are not clearly indexed. The content of the site has absolutely no coherence and no theme. Where interpretations exist, they are like so much paint thrown against a wall. The colors are there, but they convey little of value. The History Channel is definitely a popular history site. There is virtually no controversy here, but only what the viewer wants and only what will draw him or her into the site. And there is certainly no challenge except to dodge the flashing advertisements. George Washington: A National Treasure - The Portrait Considered alone, the portrait portion of the George Washington: A National Treasure project does convey some information about the first president and his historical context. Because of the subject matter, however, it most effectively conveys information about the portrait itself. What is actually considered on this web page is not George Washington himself or even his historical significance. Instead, the portrait provides a way of understanding Washington’s public image, at least as perceived by the artist and a few critics of the painting. The site makes effective use of digital technology in reaching out to a general audience. Features such as the magnifying glass are not only helpful in viewing the details of the painting, but also add an element of novelty to the site. The user is presented with twelve different details of the portrait which can be explored from three different aspects: symbolic, biographic, and artistic. The overall design of the site makes it not only easy to use, but also engaging. Use of shifting light and shadow, automatic zoom-ins and clickable thumbnails of related images all tend to draw the user into the site. Clearly this project is not meant to be a critical look at Washington or his significance. In fact, the site even lacks a truly critical look at the portrait. It does explain the views of the artist and at least a majority of his audience, but it does not really challenge the user or offer any alternative interpretations. Without Sanctuary: Lynching Photography in America In this site, the author has assembled a collection of photographs and postcards that depict images of lynching in America. The incidents depicted occurred from the last quarter of the 19th century through the 1960s. Beginning with the introductory film, the user is drawn, emotionally and visually, into the site. The site clearly appeals to a general audience by its heavy emphasis on visual resources and brief, simple explanations. Perhaps it is because of his desire to attract this kind of audience that the author fails to include sufficient historical context for many of the images. Indeed, judging from the reactions in the Forum section, the impression that most readers have is that white Americans are brutal, violent and racist, without qualification. It appears that some readers even have a sense that these photos are from the present or the very recent past. Perhaps a more clear presentation of the historical context could prevent such a misconception. On the other hand, the actual presentation of the materials effectively communicates a highly-charged message about atrocities that have occurred in our own land, atrocities that were apparently ignored or even condoned by authorities in some cases. Through the use of visual provocation and emotional appeal, the author challenges his audience to consider such events. It is unfortunate, however, that more resource information is not provided. Links to other resources, related newspaper articles, interpretive essays and perhaps even oral history accounts would certainly enhance the presentation of this material. Monticello: The Home of Thomas Jefferson Many websites developed for historic buildings and estates are intended to attract visits to the physical location. The Monticello site certainly does that, but it goes far beyond the typical function of the electronic brochure. The site itself targets a general audience, but scholarship is not sacrificed in the interests of usability or attractiveness. The site conveys the history of Monticello and of Thomas Jefferson quite well. The text reflects sound scholarship, but is not complex. Narratives are presented in brief sections and the site is organized so that the “general” user can locate information in a variety of ways. The user can visit the house and grounds through a virtual tour that includes panorama shots of the rooms and enlargeable photographs of objects. The site also takes full advantage of hypertext to link multiple topics and narratives together. The user can also choose to explore Monticello and learn about Jefferson and his times through a “Day in the Life of” segment. This allows the user to follow a linear path through a typical day in the life of Jefferson at Monticello, or the user can choose to jump into the narrative at any given point in the day. While the site is based on solid historical investigation, the interpretation
is presented in ways that do not overwhelm the general reader. There is
an archive available and there are links to more scholarly sources. Controversial
topics are not avoided, but they do not really challenge the user, either.
For example, there is a sense of ambivalence about the Sally Hemmings
allegations, but the issue is not avoided. Various viewpoints and arguments
are included and the user is left to investigate and decide. Still, the
site presents an overwhelmingly favorable view of Jefferson, which is
what most users would expect from the Thomas Jefferson Foundation.
What does scholarship look like in digital form? A brief look at two examples of digital scholarship can begin to answer that question. Hearsay of the Sun: Photography, Identity, and the Law of
Evidence in Nineteenth-Century American Courts This online essay studies the reception of photography as a type of legal evidence during the last half of the 19th century. Thurston presents “forty-two court decisions, articles, and excerpts from various fiction and non-fiction sources, including approximately 50 individual images.” The essay itself is quite traditional in that it is presented in linear fashion with a stated thesis and clear arguments, but these are presented using at least three features that are unique to the digital format. 1. The most evident digital feature is his use of frames in presenting his work. The browser screen is divided into sections for the menu, footnotes, sources and the essay. The user simply clicks on a footnote or source and that item will appear in the space indicated. 2. Thurston’s use of the frameset is uniquely suited to another digital feature that is essential to his topic: the presentation of visual sources. In this way, Thurston can provide the user with visual examples of the work he is describing, something that could be done in print, but only in a much more limited way. 3. While the visual advantages of the digital format are immediately apparent, perhaps the most important feature of Thurston’s project is his heroic effort to overcome the encumbrances of footnotes. He explains that his entire essay is “formatted according to a convention I call ‘anchored html’ which features a citation scheme of internally-linked, numbered paragraphs. I have done this to facilitate linking to specific paragraphs within a given text. This necessary condition to the development of scholarly hypertexts, I would argue, simply adopts for this new medium the linking and navigational techniques used in print publishing.” This innovation allows the author to direct the reader, not just to a document, but to a specific location within the document. Indeed, in his use of ‘anchored html’ alone, Thurston has taken a giant step forward in demonstrating at least one aspect of the possibilities for digital scholarship. The Spanish-American War in U.S. Media Culture In this example of digital scholarship, Castonguay examines relationship of early film and ideologies of race, gender, and imperialism during the Spanish-American war, the first American war exhibited on film to the U.S. public. Castonguay’s work shares with Thurston’s project a simple, uncluttered presentation. In fact, this work is even simpler since Castonguay chooses not to use frames. The contents and the essay appear in simple text with some illustrations. The only immediate evidence of the digital medium is the presence of hyperlinks scattered throughout the text. Indeed, the site initially appears to be simply an essay posted online. But what is most remarkable about this site is that the reader can go directly from a reference to an early film to view the film itself. In this way, Castonguay uses the digital medium to break the barriers of print. What could never be presented in book form is immediately accessible to the reader. The Promise of Digital Scholarship Neither of the above examples is remarkable for their flashy graphics or artistic design. What they do demonstrate, however, are some of the possibilities of digital scholarship. Edward Ayers has suggested that the use of digital media “could weave text and source together more tightly.” (1) In tying the sources themselves directly into their writing, both of these scholars have clearly demonstrated this enhanced relationship between the narrative and the source material. As Ayers has suggested, this will likely require a new way of thinking about sources and their uses in the presentation of scholarship. Jerome McGann has suggested that the medium of print limits scholarship in important ways, but that the use of new media can “lift one’s level of attention to a higher order,” that the digital media have “greater powers of consciousness” in scholarship. (2) Although Castonguay might have attempted his project in print, its impact would be severely reduced by the limitations of the medium. For it is through the use of the combination of text with the video capabilities of the digital media that his project accomplishes its goal.
(1) Edward L. Ayers, “The Pasts and Futures of Digital History,” (1999) http://www.vcdh.virginia.edu/PastsFutures.html. (2)Jerome McGann, “The Rationale of Hypertext,” (1995) http://www.village.virginia.edu/public/jjm2f/rationale.html.
September 23, 2002 Response
to Reading Assignment: Perhaps the most important influence of critical theory on the historian’s craft is that it has forced us to recognize and admit our biases. No longer would many historians claim that they can write history in a completely objective fashion. In addition, it has forced us to recognize that the sources themselves are not purely objective and the process of selecting sources makes them even less objective. But Cronon demonstrates that the historian can recognize and understand perspectival problems in history without having to descend to the nihilistic tendencies of postmodernism. Cronon states that “[t]he danger of postmodernism…is that it threatens to lose track of the very thing that makes narrative so compelling a part of history and human consciousness both. After all, the principal difference between a chronicle and a narrative is that a good story makes us care about its subject in a way that a chronicle does not.” This element of ‘caring’ effectively expresses the ties between past and present and lends meaning to both. The problem is that postmodernism objects to this very aim – the pursuit of meaning. If the historical enterprise has no meaning, then we are all wasting our time. Beyond that, the postmodernist would argue that narrative is inherently selective and that the creation of narrative is fundamentally hierarchical. The historian is required to make value judgments to determine that some people or events or settings are more important than others and, thus, that they warrant a more or less prominent place (or any place at all) in the story. Yes, narrative is selective. To choose something is to leave something else out. But perhaps that is where the new media become valuable to historians. With digital and hypertextual tools, the historian can include more and more information without losing the structure of the narrative. The possibilities of multiform narratives, of hypertextual narrative forms, allow for a more complete (while still not totally complete) picture. Even with the virtually unlimited possibilities of digital media and hypertext, narrative will still remain selective. That is where Cronon’s community enters the picture. He points out that historians write for a community of historians and that this community enforces certain limits on historical interpretation. This accountability effectively limits the ‘power’ about which postmodernists are so concerned. This community of scholars can also have a democratizing effect on the narrative itself. Opening up this community and welcoming scholars from a multiplicity of different backgrounds and perspectives will open up the narrative possibilities. Again, there is an important role for the new media in this process. Perhaps in the future, multiple historical perspectives will be presented together, along with the sources and an explanation of the process of interpretation. Such a multilayered approach would be cumbersome, if not impossible, in print, but could be quite accessible through the use of new media.
Web Review Essay Proposal For this project, my interest has turned toward local history. By studying what has been undertaken in other cities and/or regions that are of similar size and background, I hope to identify some ways that new media can be used to enhance the discovery and interpretation of the past in my own hometown of Lynchburg, Virginia Listed below are four of the websites I have located for this project. Tri-County Genealogy and History Threadcity.com – Gateway to eastern Connecticut Skokie Local History Center Schenectedy Digital History Archive September
16, 2002 How does an eighteenth-century New England midwife find her way into 21st century cyberspace? She is escorted by the creativity and ingenuity of the creators of the DoHistory website, “[a] site that shows you how to piece together the past from the fragments that have survived.” Although the inspiration for the site originated from a book followed by a film, this project does something that could hardly be accomplished in print, film or traditional museum exhibits. It draws the user into the historian’s craft allowing her not only to witness, but also to participate in the interpretive process. And incredibly, the authors succeed in making the site as useful for the middle-school student as for the academic scholar and for many others in between. The central feature of the site is the diary of Martha Ballard, a midwife who lived in Hallowell, Maine. Beginning in 1785 at the age of 50, until her death in 1812, Ballard recorded the events of her life – the mundane as well as the remarkable – in a diary that includes almost 10,000 entries. The basic building block for the DoHistory project, the diary is reproduced here in its entirety. The user has the option of searching the text of the diary or browsing by date. Each of the diary’s pages is available as a scanned image or the user can choose to view the same page in transcripted form rather than laboring over Ballard’s 18th-century scrawl. Numerous items in the transcripted version are linked to explanatory notes or other related documents. It is this central source that makes the site most valuable for sophisticated historical research.
But what makes the project unique are the abundant related resources that open up the processes of discovering and interpreting history. In a feature called ‘Doing History,’ the user can study two different lines of historical investigation. One centers around the controversy of Ballard’s day concerning the advent of the ‘man-midwife.’ Ballard’s diary and other primary source materials are presented along with explanatory notes about the nature of the controversy. Another alternative for ‘Doing History’ focuses on a single incident in Hallowell, an alleged rape, and gives the user the opportunity to use evidence to do historical detective work. Both of these exercises allow the user to enter into the process of historical discovery and interpretation. While exploring the site, the user inevitably encounters some of the challenges that historians face in working with primary sources. But the ‘History Toolkit’ provides information about such things as how to read 18th-century handwriting, how to search deeds and a guide to oral history, to name only a few. Each of these features links in turn to relevant primary sources included on the site and demonstrates the practical side of the work of historians. Another unique feature is the ‘Stories and Themes’ section. Here the authors have compiled diary entries and other related documents that all pertain to a particular topic such as ‘Premarital Pregnancy’ or ‘Courtship and Marriage.’ This allows the high school or undergraduate student to pursue a particular topic without having to wrestle with the overwhelming volume of the 1400-plus-page diary. Within this feature, the diary entries are hyperlinked to related documents and include “Questions to ask these pages” in the margins. Clearly the intention here is to allow the user to form his own interpretations, but the nature of the questions encourages predetermined conclusions. Still, the exercise effectively demonstrates the nature of historical inquiry. One of the most unique and exciting features of the site is a hands-on section that includes exercises for budding historians. Enthusiasts from middle-school through adult will enjoy the ‘Magic Lens,’ ‘Try Transcribing,’ and ‘Decoding the Diary,’ features which use digital technology to allow the user to get a feel for the challenge of working with very old, handwritten documents. Other important features of the site include a hyperlinked Martha Ballard timeline which puts the events recorded in the diary into the larger historical context, a gallery of maps and pictures of Ballard’s world, large chunks of the book that started it all, Laurel Ulrich’s A Midwife’s Tale, and scenes from the companion film. The value of this project goes beyond its valuable collection of primary source materials and its effective use of new media. It would be simply another history website if not for the impressive amount of technical and design skill that went into making the site user-friendly. Navigation is a breeze. All links are clearly marked and the user can jump from any page in the site to almost any other area without using the ‘back’ button on the browser. A drop-down menu called ‘Your Interests’ allows the user to immediately begin navigating the most pertinent parts of the site. Most pages also include a ‘jump to’ feature at the bottom. The abundance of hyperlinks and cross-referencing between sources and topics allows the user to create her own narrative, but a more linear narrative is available for those who prefer it. The DoHistory project succeeds in its mission of allowing the user “to explore the process of piecing together the lives of ordinary people in the past.” At the same time it demonstrates some of the possibilities of the uses of new media in the hands of historians. Donna D. Donald
|
|
|
history teacher |
my history |
