Handbook of Digital Public History, edited by Serge Noiret, Mark Tebeau, and Gerben Zaagsma
This week in the course I am taking, History in the Digital Age, we read selections from the Handbook of Digital Public History, edited by Serge Noiret, Mark Tebeau, and Gerben Zaagsma. The Handbook of Digital Public History seeks to analyze “connections with local and different publics worldwide when engaging in digital activities with the past, and indicate directions for future research, practices and teaching activities” (Handbook 1). The book emphasizes an international and comparative approach that also acknowledges what the editors call “tensions of the handbook,” including analyzing “the intersections between digital humanities, digital history, and public history, as well as how each has been transformed by the digital” (Handbook 2; 3).
The book is divided into four sections: Historiography, Contexts, Best Practices, and Technology, Media, Data & Metadata. I read selections out of three of the four sections, and have below takeaways from each chapter I read.
The Historiographical Foundations of Digital Public History by Anaclet Pons (19-33)
This chapter looks “at the background of digital history and public history” while demonstrating where there has been overlap, as well as the “challenges public digital history faces” (Handbook 19).
Key Takeaways
There is a long history of digital humanities and digital public history that predates the start of the era of the Internet in the 1990s.
With the development, popularization, and accessibility (to an extent) of the Internet in the 1990s, a new kind of digital history appeared, arguably spearheaded by digital projects including The Valley of the Shadows and Who Built America?
Pons argues that digital history can be understood in two ways (see page 23): it is “the result of a global process whose effects are revolutionary” and “it entails a new perspective and new methods.”
Pons states that we “need to be digitally aware,” including thinking about the change in materiality from physical to digital. (Handbook 25; 28)
This chapter really emphasized the change in the notion of the archive, not only because of digital tools, but also thinking about “popular history” and the rise of citizen scholars (Handbook 30).
A key quote from Pons: “The archive now is everywhere.” (Handbook 31).
Archivists as Peers in Digital Public History by Trevor Owens and Jesse A. Johnson (151-163)
In this chapter, the authors examine how archives, archivists, and archival practices are transforming because of the addition of the digital. Additionally, the chapter talks about the relevance of the digital and the archive in the area of digital public history (Handbook 152).
Key Takeaways
This chapter emphasizes the importance of cross-training and collaboration between historians and archivists, as well as communities and historians and archivists.
The chapter quotes Margaret Hedstrom, who stated, “archivists have literally lost control over the definition of archive” (Handbook 153). With the addition of the digital and thinking about how the term “archive” is used in numerous ways, the term is no longer limited to the brick-and-mortar institutional entity.
For example, GMail uses the term “archived” to place emails no longer needed in a folder store without deleting.
Archivists and historians need to become “digital peers” (Handbook 161).
Key questions from this quote: Historians and archivists always been peers, have they not? Why should the digital change that? Does it change that? If so, how do we reconcile that and become “digital peers?”
Mapping and Maps in Digital and Public History by Fred Gibbs (301-308)
This chapter discusses the use of maps and cartography in digital public history.
Key Takeaways
The chapter discusses “deep mapping” and how it needs to be used to “reinvigorate… the humanist potential of GIS and mitigating some of its positivist and reductivist tendencies” (Handbook 303).
The author discusses the “trade-off between depth and usability” (Handbook 304).
Key question: do we need to “trade-off between depth” in favor of usability or vice versa?
Key quote: “Maps have an unusual power to resonate with their broader audiences” (Handbook 307).
