Mapping Freedom- Edward L. Ayers, University of Virginia June 2007.

     Ayers opens this piece with a quote from Bob Dylan: 'I wasn't so much interested in the issues as intrigued by the language and rhetoric of the times. . . . Everybody uses the same God, quotes the same Bible and law and literature. . . . You wonder how people so united by geography and religious ideals could become such bitter enemies. . . .It's all one long funeral song.' This piece by Ayers is ultimately about visualizing history while using the American Civil War as an example. Dylan refers to the Civil War as 'all, one long funeral song' although a funeral song which resulted with 4 million people becoming free. 'Dylan's anxiety, his sense of the disconnect between the purposes of the war and the outcome of emancipation,' the reasons for this can be seen from the visual image represented in this piece. Another example is used: 'Charles Minard. His map of Napoleon's March on Moscow. . . shows this elderly man reflecting, like Dylan, on a costly and haunting war from his nation's past.' Dylan sees history alive in his own life a hundred years later while Minard contains history. Minard's graph details what happens it exposes the numbers who died.

     Following this Ayers discusses the real issue of the piece: visualising history. 'personal memory we file away sets of coordinates: this room and that argument, this smell and that school hallway, this corner and that song on the radio.' This is an important statement by Ayers I believe as this is how in fact we visualise our history perhaps even without knowing it. When graduating from school we were asked to pick a song which represents who we are, The Kooks 'She moves in her own way' may then in fact cause a visualisation of a character through the lines of a song, or at least one may think that visualises their history! Everyone remembers and associates happenings in this way that Ayers discusses, while personally I remember things by what clothes I was wearing at the time or what song was playing if there was one!

      'a handful of historically 'eventful' mountains interspersed among wide, seemingly empty valleys in which nothing of any historical significance seems to have happened. We build metaphorical bridges to close the gap between the past and ourselves, to hold things together.' 'We also map the historical literature in this way, seeing its tributaries, its gathering, and its diffusion. Historians, it seems, don't have lists of books in our heads, databases of footnotes and citations, but instead an information landscape with its own peaks and valleys, streams and lakes.' Individual historians have an area of history they find themselves most drawn to, a period in which they research the most perhaps. We may connect the parts of study we are most interested in and then bridge over the points we are not as interested in. 

     'telling ourselves that the beginning point and the ultimate destination were connected in an inevitable way, but that would neglect to mention all kinds of detours, decisions, and surprises in between that made the journey seem anything but straightforward or certain. History never travels as the bird flies; history walks across a varied and landscape of time.' This is obviously very true of history, as history is in fact everything that has happened, we do at times neglect to mention parts whether it be by choice or otherwise. We may exaggerate or interpret differently parts of history, as a result of personal opinion or bias, Ireland after all has said to not possess a history but instead it possess historiography. This historiography does possess a huge amount of debate within it particularly in parts I am most interested in such as politics and the Irish Revolution. 'our rich narrative traditions have generally relegated visualization to textbooks and heavy atlases in the reference sections of the library.' However the issue highlighted in this piece is the relationship between space and time. History is continuously occurring. 

     'But most historians don't like abstractions; we like concrete people, stories, and events. We see patterns as they are constituted of individuals and embodied in specific places and times.' I completely agree with Ayers in this point as I find from my study people do stand out in history, of course. The 'Great Man' approach has been taken in the biography writing of many Irish historical figures such as Michael Collins and Eamon De Valera. The emphasis on the individual is highly present within Irish historiography and so often we find ourselves associating a whole period of time with one individual or a small collection of people. The Irish Revolution could be associated with those who signed the Proclamation and those who signed the Treaty, however there was of course so many more people involved as well as the years prior to the Irish Revolution, the other rebellions are all connected to the years spanning from 1916-1923, however they are often placed in one section they are the peaks Ayers speaks about, the metaphorical peaks and valleys which are joined over by metaphorical bridges!

     'Might we be able to do something Minard could not do with the tools available to him: portray not merely group experience but also individual, family, and community experience?' Using the Civil War as an example: some good was shown- families survived. However some bad was also shown- children were sold, widows were left alone. There is not a lot available in concern to these topics. In my thesis I am covering community radio in Limerick which has not been written on previously, to my knowledge anyway, hopefully I will be able to record some information on this topic, as it plays its role in local life whether it be deemed important or otherwise. In 100 years, will people study us, or merely individuals? Are we significant history? Or are we lost in time in an empty valley on the historical weather map? As we are the age who lived through the Celtic Tiger and are currently suffering its demise I am certain we will be recorded in history perhaps for all the wrong reasons! The bubble burst and some individuals will most likely be recorded as playing a major role in its causation, particularly Brian Cowan, maybe Bertie Ahern might avoid some blame due to his incredibly good judgement of getting out when he did!

     'Each one of those golden dots held thousands of stories and we have only begun to glimpse them.' Its hard to see us being recorded as merely golden dots at least as a collection of people our time here shall be recorded but of course as individuals the people of the future may visualize history perhaps with the association of certain figures to this time period. 'Exposing my language-based discipline of history to the visual, the graphic, and the dynamic throws it off balance. And that's exactly what the humanities, like all academic disciplines, need to do if they are to stay alive and vital.' The age of the Internet is upon us everything is becoming more visual and it is important and useful to learn new ways and new tools to remember and record history, to visualize it in the hope of gaining from it the most that we can. As arts and humanities students we are often accused of showing fear when a graph or statistics or anything other then a written form are placed in front of us! I feel that it is important that this changes, as learning history with visual aids is very useful as many people find learning this way easier, although not only would visual learners reap rewards from this but every learner would as people are being continuously exposed to the visual and so are learning to adjust to this style of learning. It also offers something different to the typical way of learning which may be from the traditional way Ayers spoke of in the reference sections of the library. This piece by Ayers I feel to be the way forward in the recording of, the learning of and the visualizing of history.  

Thesis Topic number...??...I lost count!

     Having initially proposed The Portrayal of the IRA in Film to be my area of research for my thesis I have gone through several changes ever since! I eventually settled on researching Limerick Radio. Basically I hope to do a history of radio, but more narrowly a history of Limerick radio and its contribution and interaction with life and society in Limerick. As a Limerick woman I am proud of where I come from and so would like to research locally to find out more about where I come from but also to shine a more positive light on a county that is often portrayed in a negative light which I believe is unfair as Limerick has a lot to offer!

     For one of my chapters I am looking at Community Radio and I am quite lucky in that West Limerick 102FM which is the biggest Community Radio Station in Limerick it is also my local Station. I am very familiar with the station and I know many people who have worked and some who continue to work at the station. This has proven to be valuable to my research as they have been very nice in allowing me to sit in during some broadcasts as well as making the time for me to interview them. I found interviewing people from the station to be very helpful to my research and I am currently reading all that I can about community radio so I can conclude where it is WL102 fits in to the history of radio in Limerick.

     I also hope to research Limerick's Live 95FM which I then wish to place within the radio categories of Pirate and Local broadcasting as Limerick's Live 95FM would have started off as a pirate station which then went through several changes before becoming a Local station bearing its current name of Limerick's Live 95FM. For the case of a regional radio station I wish to consider Spin South West. Interestingly all these stations can be connected in one way: some people who currently work at Limerick's Live 95FM and Spin South West were once volunteers at the community radio station of West limerick 102FM.

     So a lot of reading ahead, but hopefully it will prove interesting reading!

zoh-TAIR-oh!!Where have you been all my life??

     At the beginning of the year Mike introduced us to Zotero and we have been best friends ever since. 'Zotero [zoh-TAIR-oh] is a free, easy-to-use tool to help you collect, organize, cite, and share your research sources. It lives right where you do your work—in the web browser itself.' At the very moment when Mike unleashed the phenomenon that is Zotero to us it is fair to say a piece of me sank inside. I had just realised that when I was slaving away in final year history attempting to put together my dissertation bibliography and completing what seemed like a million footnotes I actually could have used Zotero to save me so many hours. For that moment I felt very sad with the knowledge that I was never going to get those hours of my life back but then my heart filled with joy when I realised I will not make the same mistake twice and so this year when doing citations and bibliography I shall have my friend Zotero to aid me.

     Firstly Zotero works only in conjunction with Firefox. I firstly downloaded Firefox and then installed Zotero which now lives in my web browser. It allows me to collect such information as information on books as it recognises such sites as the UCC Library website. I can collect such information and then store it in my very own library.  I thought this was very impressive. As I changed my thesis topic so many times Zotero proved very helpful in allowing me to gather new information on my new topic quickly. It allows one to organise the data one has saved by placing notes next to the items saved which is helpful when looking at items after a long time. The best part I am sure will be when I am putting together my final bibliography for my thesis, to know that this is only a click away makes me very happy! My library is ever growing thanks to Zotero, hopefully I will get round to reading all of the books stored in my library! Zotero I see as being a must have to every student I do not understand how I survived without it!

  http://www.zotero.org/   

Writing a Digital History Journal Article from Scratch: An Account- William G. Thomas, III, University of Nebraska—Lincoln.

     In 2001 the above author along with Edward L. Ayers were asked to contribute a ''digital article'' to the American Historical Review. Thomas states the aim of the AHR in the opening paragraph 'The AHR had decided to experiment with the form of scholarly communication and production in a series of works that would be peer-reviewed and published as "born digital" pieces of scholarship.' This piece then goes on to look at this process and considers some of the lessons learned from it.

     The piece they wrote for the AHR was titled "The Differences Slavery Made: A Close Analysis of Two American Communities" and was wrote in two forms. There was the print edition: in December of 2003 the AHR published a short  piece which they had wrote to explain the digital article it included a link to the digital article both in the print edition as well as in the online version on The History Cooperative Website. The digital article was published on the servers at the University of Virgina. Following this the authors began to ponder who it was that engaged with the article in its various forms and how it was that they ''read'' it. When an article is available in several forms it is often the case that some people will always go to the library first and read the print edition and as a result may see it as almost a waste of time to then go and read the digital form as well.

     An economic historian contacted the author about reviewing his new work. He informed the author 'that he had read "the actual article" but had "not seen the web site."' As a result of this the authors acknowledge the following fact that 'It is clear to us now, in a way that it was not when we set out, that an entirely new form of scholarly communication is emergent in the digital medium and that its structures are not worked out, not nearly as defined as those we are comfortable with.' The author speaks of how scholarship has been separated in to important categories, which results with boundaries being blurred. '''Digital scholarship'' was welcomed', he says, 'but its process for review would be treated as much as possible like print.' The real issue he declares is 'would a digital article conform to the conventions of print, or more pointedly, should it do so? Was the "actual" article only what appeared in print...?' The following question should then be considered; 'Does "a web site" imply something less permanent, something less significant?

     To take myself as an example to answer the above question, for very long I became prone to doing the same thing all the time when going about researching for an assignment. I would firstly go to the library and search for the books from the bibliography I was given and then search for books in general on the area of study. I would then search the UCC Library website for any online articles and then thirdly do a general search on Google or Google Scholar in the hope of discovering further material. This can often be the case that the hard copies bear preference over the digital scholarship perhaps out of habit or as a result of the bibliography one has received from a lecturer. If a lecturer has preference to the written form of scholarship this could rub off on their students who could then view the written hard copies as the first place to turn to or even the only place.   

     Next the author became curious to discover how his piece of writing was being used and read. To achieve an insight in to this he simply searched the title in Google. He was shocked to discover a varied answer. 'The article was assigned in the syllabi of several Civil War and Reconstruction courses, as well as required reading in some history methodology courses. But it was also listed as the example for a journal article with two authors in the 6th edition of the MLA Citation guide.' He noticed a difficulty had arose- how to cite his work appropriately, problems deciding whether its ''an electronic source'' or a ''journal article'' surfaced. 'The large problem we faced, in retrospect, was whether what we were producing what should be classified as an "article" at all. The scholarly article is a highly structured form of communication with a century or more of intellectual craft behind it. Would an "article" in the digital medium, specifically the World Wide Web, bend or break these structures? Would it conform to them? If so, then how conforming would it need to be?' Such questions then intrigued the author. Such questions were in retrospect, initially when pursuing their work they simply 'wanted to explore how we might integrate the digital form of presentation with the argument we hoped to make.'

     I believe as the digital form is so different to the written form I do not think it should conform to the same structures to a high extent at least. On the web I believe presentation is far more important than anything else when something catches your eye you are obviously more likely to read it. Therefore I think more emphasis should be put upon presentation in the digital form than in the written form. Also quality over quantity should be a factor in the digital form as no one wants to sit in front of a computer and go googly-eyed from reading a long version of something which could be written shorter and still contain the same important points but has not been quilted out so to meet a word count! An example of keeping it short and sweet is Twitter where one has to catch someones attention in and around 140 characters, of course I am not suggesting digital articles should be this short merely stating that the title or opening few lines should grasp the readers attention so they will then read all of the article.

     The authors viewed the article 'as an applied experiment in digital scholarship.' He notes how in recent years historians have used networked information resources a great deal in their work, and how we are very much familiar with our library research and professional discussion through digital means. While this may be the case, scholars he states had only just began creating 'scholarship designed specifically for the electronic environment.' He states what it was they attempted to do; 'We attempted to translate the fundamental components of professional scholarship—evidence, engagement with prior scholarship, and a scholarly argument—into forms that took advantage of the possibilities of electronic media.' At this time when scholarship was only beginning to be created specifically for the electronic environment a difficult task was set to the authors. However I think it is important such works increase as technology and the web are a huge part of our lives today and is very accessible to people and therefore has the ability to reach a huge audience far more than a written form left to go dusty on a library shelf can reach!

     'McAdams and Berger explained that electronic text and narrative could not be written in the same way as print text and that this difference could not be reverse engineered.' Put simply one cannot write for a print edition and then break it up and use it for a digital edition. Their first attempt was torn apart by the AHR readers and rightly so believes the author as he recognises that it was a weak attempt. 'They were, on the whole, right to do so. We had not been very clear about our argument; we had not been clear about the article's navigation; and we had used several technologies that some older systems did not support.' They were also criticised for having 'too many buttons, too many moving parts, too much obscurity, and too little guidance...we simply had not nailed down how to convey the most salient points we wanted to make.' When the important points are not so clear it is hard for one to get all that they should have from a piece of work, this is a shame especially if it is a result of too much going on as it was in this case where they were accused of having ''too many buttons''. It is important that such a work is accessible to and appeals to every type of digital user: that is both the advanced individual and the beginner, then everyone can avail of such works.

     'The final version of the digital article offered an introduction and a summary of the argument but retained the deep interlinking among evidence, historiography, and analysis.' Personally I think the inclusion of an introduction and a summary is a must in every digital article so one can browse more quickly through such sources so to identify if the source is useful or not to their area of research without having to read the whole article. 'the difficulty of joining traditional forms to the electronic medium', can prove to be problematic at times but as digital scholarship increases such problems will be battled with. 'Another lesson we learned was that readers will need to adapt. So will historians.' This point is very true especially in the case of the traditional historian who is so used to the old books in the library and is happily reliant and comfortable in this sphere it is important such people open their minds up to other options in this case the digital realm as when it is used properly it offers a great deal. Change is encouraged by these authors and is needed 'one thoughtful reviewer admitted, "to most of us on the outside, history is like an old sofa or a well-worn cardigan," I agree that it is time we cast off this ''well-worn cardigan'' and welcome a new and more modern attire.

     'We need to cast aside the comfortable if we are to truly understand how to communicate in the digital medium.' 'We historians might have to cast aside our illusions of permanence and our penchant for the "cardigan." If we experiment, however, we might discover that the openness of the digital medium is what allows us both to create vibrant new scholarship and to speak to a rising generation of students,' this concluding point sums up this piece of writing, the lessons learned from this work help people realise how important it is to learn to adapt to new structures such as the digital form all in the hope of offering useful scholarship to students.

 http://digitalhistory.unl.edu/essays/thomasessay.php

Go forth and do great things...

     I read the article titled The Digital Future is Now: A Call to Action for the Humanities by Christine L. Borgman and found it really interesting. Having read it I felt that we should all 'Go forth and do great things' as the main point I got from the article was that the humanities need to step up and 'make digital scholarship a leading force in humanities research.' The article lists the pros and cons, so to speak, of the humanities option to use digital scholarship, it considers this option by pitting it against the sciences and social sciences who have already led the way to the digital age. However there are obviously differences between humanities and sciences data though that does not stand out as the big point in the article, the point being made is that 'digital publication has become the norm' and that the humanities need to get on board with it so to avoid being left behind, especially since it is an exciting option to explore.

     Unfortunately we are in a time burdened by declining budgets and so the humanities may suffer while the sciences may not. Their argument may appear better as funding them may seem more justifiable in the hope of gaining medicine advancement etc. as a consequent of the funding, while Borgman reminds us that in contrast, by supporting the humanities one may wish to gain a more developed sense of cultural understanding and critical thinking etc. Science may seem the better option, however a lecturer having heard that Arts students are often deemed somewhat less important so to speak to other faculties acutely said, while the world needs engineers to build roads and bridges, while we need doctors and scientists to help people and find cures, none of this could be done unless their humanity is in tact! He encouraged us to make it clear that 'at least I have my humanity!' when someone chooses to look at us as lesser in the future! I think he made a fair point! Hence, I believe that the humanities have an equal right to the funding as the sciences do and should receive it so to allow the humanities grow and prosper in the digital age. However Borgman is simply pointing out that the humanities may be limited in contrast to the sciences and so when comparing the sciences place at present in the digital age to the humanities, we need to keep that in mind.

     Cyberinfrastructure and eScience initiatives which are used by the sciences can be used as a guide for the humanities to learn from. Both have proven successful for the sciences as has arXiv which, we are informed, gets typically 50,000 visits per hour and has at least three iPhone applications available for it. 'It is little wonder that our science colleagues claim they never go to their campus libraries anymore; their libraries come to them.' Unfortunately the humanities have not been as quick as the sciences to leap in the same direction. Frischer's definition of what digital scholarship means I found to be the best one, it is Frischer says, 'the application of information technology as an aid to fulfill the humanities' basic tasks of preserving, reconstructing, transmitting, and interpreting the human record.' While this great option which offers all of this to us is available the reasons for not leaping into the digital age are; 'not trusting online dissemination to a general reluctance to experiment with new technologies.' 

     However there are two important advantages of digital they are; work can be published quicker and it can reach a wider audience online. Digital can be very useful in that it can be more accessible and easier to find. When I am researching for an essay I always look online as often it can prove difficult to get books from the library as there are often limited numbers of copies of a book available, hence the online option is always good to have. As the sciences have taken to journal publications quicker than the humanities it is evident that some journals in the sciences are dropping print publication altogether which the humanities may hold as a reason for reluctance to enter the field. The issue of the book getting 'widowed', where by scholars search online only is a shame however humanists should recognise the greatness of having both options which widen their field for research, having more options available to humanists is better than being in the library all the time one can get a break from it from time to time and search the web. 'Maureen Whalen's concern for art history, with its continuing reliance on print publishing, is that ''the voices of authority ... will be talking amongst themselves.' Whalen makes a fair point here, it is time the humanities recognised the importance of the digital outlet so to avoid this happening. 

     Johanna Drucker is 'concerned that her fellow scholars are deferring responsibility for action to librarians, computer scientists, technology developers, publishers, and others.' This is a significant point as is the fact that 'those who conduct the research must take the lead' because they know 'what should be built.' This is when the issue of collaboration becomes vital as yes humanists need the help of these people yet humanists need to stand up and represent themselves in this area so to gain the best from what digital has to offer. Digital has a lot to offer to humanists and represents the way forward in a world which is more and more becoming dominated by digital technologies. 'Now is the moment to consolidate that knowledge and to articulate the community's requirements and goals. Go forth and do great things...'         

http://www.digitalhumanities.org/dhq/vol/3/4/000077/000077.html