Barry
Wellman and Milena Gulia's Virtual Communities as Communities
addresses the fundamental question concerning online communities: are
online communities real communities? To answer that question, the authors
consider some of the characteristics of traditional communities--geographic
proximity, levels of commitment to the community, common social bonds--and
uses those traits as a framework with which to consider the nature of
online communities. As I ask myself the same questions posed by Wellman
and Gulia, my own conclusion (and, I believe, the one reached by the authors)
is that online communities can be communities in some sense. By pointing
out that geography has come to mean less and less in the formation of
traditional communities (thanks to technology and the increasingly complicated
nature of people's lives, which perhaps has led community to "move
indoors to private homes from its former semi-public" space), and
by reminding us that people have real intellectual and emotional exchanges
online, the authors suggest that community may be in the eye of the beholder.
Using Wellman and Gulia's argument as a framework, it seems reasonable
to examine an online community to which I belong,
H-SHEAR (Society for Historians
of the Early Republic), and to ask some fundamental questions about it,
as well.
First, I think it is important to consider who makes up the SHEAR community.
The SHEAR statement of purpose makes it clear that the society "is
a nonprofit organization of provessional and avocational historians interested
in the encouragement of studies in the history of the early United States."
Like many other academic or intellectual societies, SHEAR publishes a
quarterly journal, with scholarly articles and reviews of relevant works.
H-SHEAR, the online component, has much the same purpose and audience.
A quick look at discussion logs for any month shows the range of contributors:
from graduate students to history professors, and from librarians to attorneys,
amateur and professional historians alike regularly participate in discussions.
Students of the early Republic period will recognize names like Jane Kamensky
(Brandeis Univ.), David Waldstreicher (Notre Dames), Winthro Jordan (Ole
Miss), and Frank Grizzard (Univ. of VA), all of whom have contributed
within the last month or two. Sometimes they argue back and forth about
ideas: connections between the United States Constitution and religion,
James Madison's idea of the proper relationship between church and state,
whether the term "runaway" is a disparaging one and should therefore
be abandoned in favor of a less offensive one (fugitive, escapee, refugee?).
Top of page
As well, community members use the forum for disseminating information. The community has been approved by the SHEAR governing council an an offical voice of the society, and the site further states the goal of H-SHEAR: to enhance scholarly communication by fostering the productive exchange of ideas and materials among historically-oriented scholars. To that end, a significant portion of H-SHEAR's discussion traffic is devoted to informing: one recent posting is an announcement for an available fellowship; another reminds society members of the date and location of the 2004 annual conference (22-25 July, at Brown University in Providence, RI, in case you were wondering); still another posts employment opportunities. And just as members discuss (even argue) the merits or weaknesses of particular ideas, they also frequently ask for help. These requests range from calls for conference papers to assistance in locating sources or information. Recent requests include the following: a November contributor wants to know if anyone has ever run across the occupation of "tender," and if anyone can explain what a tender did. Another wants to know how to figure travel speed in 1800: how fast could one have travelled from New York to Baltimore using horse and carriage? It seems, then, that community members are sharing information and ideas quite vigorously. Top of page
Finally, it strikes me as important to consider whether there is some advantage to using H-SHEAR instead of (or in addition to) the journal, or some other more traditional media to achieve its goals. I believe that there is indeed advantage: first is speed. One of the primary benefits to this forum is the speed in which responses can be posted and read. Rather than wait three months for the society to publish a journal (which, in any case, cannot possibly respond to individual requests for research assistance, or most other individual requests), a member can post a message asking for help and receive dozens of responses within hours or days. Too, members can maintain lively discussions about ideas or interpretations, and can carry on this "conversation" over days or weeks, rather than months. Second, discussions are only lightly moderated. Community members can post their messages and read their responses without regard to editorial considerations (except, of course, for conventions of civility). This gives graduates students or librarians (or engineers or bus drivers) equal voice in the conversation, where journals are almost exclusively reserved for professional historians. Obviously, not every opinion carries the same weight, since reputation matters, but at least there is access to nearly everyone. Top of page
In conclusion, I find myself agreeing that online communites can have much in common with traditional ones. And depending on how one defines community, online groups can be everything that an old-fashioned community is. Further, I see in H-SHEAR many of the traits I value in community, and it even allows some possibilities that journals or other media do not permit.
Home
HIST 696,
Clio Wired: An Introduction to History and New Media
HIST 697,
Creating Digital History