A Braided Narrative for Digital History

Lincoln A. Mullen
{"title":"A Braided Narrative for Digital History","authors":"Lincoln A. Mullen","doi":"10.5749/j.ctvg251hk.34","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"​ Computational digital historians have tended to elucidate their methods rather than advance interpretative arguments. While this attention to method is salutary, given the absence of methodological discussion in history generally, it is not clear how computational historians can advance historical arguments while also explaining methods. Drawing on a classic essay by David Hackett Fischer, \"The Braided Narrative: Substance and Form in Social History,\" this essay proposes a model for argumentative writing in computational digital history. Rather than using models such a methods section drawn from other disciplines, a braided narrative weaves together methodology and interpretation. The two strands strengthen one another when digital historians can elucidate how their methods and interpretations are mutually constitutive. A Braided Narrative for Digital History Lincoln A. Mullen, George Mason University \"It is a rare monograph today which is not festooned with lorenz curves and punctuated with numbers.\" That is how the historian David Hackett Fischer described the current state of his discipline in 1976 (132). Substitute network diagrams for Lorenz curves and blog posts for monographs, and one would have a fair description of the current state of scholarship in digital history. It is apparent to observers of digital history, as it was apparent when Fischer commented on the rise of social history, that digital history trades in methods more than most other forms of history. Digital historians delight in writing and reading tutorials on how to use tools and software for their research and teaching; they teach workshops on those methods and line up to attend them. Blog posts in the field more often recount the steps that the researcher took than the conclusions that he or she came to. And digital history is fortunate to have a burgeoning methodological literature for humanities computing, including ​The Programming Historian​, ​The Historians' Macroscope​, and several books on specific programming 1 2","PeriodicalId":345757,"journal":{"name":"Debates in the Digital Humanities 2019","volume":"26 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Debates in the Digital Humanities 2019","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5749/j.ctvg251hk.34","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

​ Computational digital historians have tended to elucidate their methods rather than advance interpretative arguments. While this attention to method is salutary, given the absence of methodological discussion in history generally, it is not clear how computational historians can advance historical arguments while also explaining methods. Drawing on a classic essay by David Hackett Fischer, "The Braided Narrative: Substance and Form in Social History," this essay proposes a model for argumentative writing in computational digital history. Rather than using models such a methods section drawn from other disciplines, a braided narrative weaves together methodology and interpretation. The two strands strengthen one another when digital historians can elucidate how their methods and interpretations are mutually constitutive. A Braided Narrative for Digital History Lincoln A. Mullen, George Mason University "It is a rare monograph today which is not festooned with lorenz curves and punctuated with numbers." That is how the historian David Hackett Fischer described the current state of his discipline in 1976 (132). Substitute network diagrams for Lorenz curves and blog posts for monographs, and one would have a fair description of the current state of scholarship in digital history. It is apparent to observers of digital history, as it was apparent when Fischer commented on the rise of social history, that digital history trades in methods more than most other forms of history. Digital historians delight in writing and reading tutorials on how to use tools and software for their research and teaching; they teach workshops on those methods and line up to attend them. Blog posts in the field more often recount the steps that the researcher took than the conclusions that he or she came to. And digital history is fortunate to have a burgeoning methodological literature for humanities computing, including ​The Programming Historian​, ​The Historians' Macroscope​, and several books on specific programming 1 2
数字历史的编织叙事
计算数字历史学家倾向于阐明他们的方法,而不是提出解释性的论点。虽然这种对方法的关注是有益的,但考虑到历史上通常缺乏方法论的讨论,计算历史学家如何在解释方法的同时推进历史论点尚不清楚。引用David Hackett Fischer的一篇经典文章“编织叙事:社会历史中的物质和形式”,本文提出了一种计算数字历史中议论文写作的模式。而不是使用模型,如从其他学科的方法部分,编织叙事编织在一起的方法和解释。当数字历史学家能够阐明他们的方法和解释是如何相互构成的时候,这两股力量就会相互加强。林肯·A·马伦(George Mason University):“这是当今少有的一部没有用洛伦兹曲线装饰、没有用数字点缀的专著。”这就是历史学家大卫·哈克特·费舍尔(David Hackett Fischer)在1976年(132页)对该学科现状的描述。用网络图代替洛伦兹曲线,用博客文章代替专著,人们就会对数字历史上的学术现状有一个公平的描述。对于数字历史的观察者来说,这是显而易见的,就像费舍尔评论社会历史的兴起时一样,数字历史比大多数其他形式的历史更容易交换方法。数字历史学家喜欢撰写和阅读关于如何使用工具和软件进行研究和教学的教程;他们教授这些方法的研讨会,并排队参加。该领域的博客文章更多地讲述了研究人员采取的步骤,而不是得出的结论。幸运的是,数字历史有一个新兴的人文计算方法论文献,包括《编程历史学家》、《历史学家的宏观》和几本关于特定编程的书
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信