Trying to define digital history is not as simple as one might think. There is no one basic definition, and to me, digital history brings many questions about the direction of teaching and learning history. Unlike some, the digital age has not been easy or natural. My love of holding a book in my hands and perusing a museum far outweighs looking at a computer screen. With that said, history and our understanding of it is changing with new technology constantly. It is important to move with the times and embrace it, instead of fighting against it. History on the web will never replace those books and museums, but it does give the opportunity for history to reach a larger audience and for that audience to experience things and places they may never get to otherwise.
The vast amount of information a person can pull up on a subject just through Google is astounding. This can be a positive and a negative. It is great to see the how easy someone can do research on a subject, however, how reliable is the information? Anyone can post on the web and put information out there for others to view. This has brought about a new group of amateur historians (some accurate, some not so much). What good is the information if it is not reliable and how can reliable sources be found amongst the unreliable? To solve this issue one must sort through the quagmire of sites and papers to find the more accurate scholarly sites and journals.
One astounding achievement the web and computers have given historians and history buffs is the digitization of archives ranging from journals, records, magazines, to pictures, documents, and countless other items. What would normally take a trip to some town hall or library can easily be accessed via the web in seconds. The Library of Congress has digitized much of its collection granting access to anyone who may be interested instead of only to those with the proper authority to enter its halls. For me, this is the crowning achievement of digital history because the information and knowledge that once had a limited audience can now reach anyone who may be curious about a particular subject.
Although there are many pros and cons to the digitization of history, we and future generations can choose the track on how to manage the information for the better. Computers and the web will never replace those original documents, texts, photos, and so forth, but if used properly digital history is and will become more of a vital tool for those curious about the past.
I actually think most historians feel the way you do about materiality. We want to hold a book. We want to look at artifacts. We want to touch history, not just see it on the web. But public historians have to make that history available to the public. That's our job. So we have to adapt to changing technologies and audience expectations, and I think perhaps historians might have a harder time adapting than other people.
ReplyDeleteI completely agree--nothing compares to holding a book or spending some quiet time sauntering around the halls of a museum. But you are right, the digitization of the LOC has been great!! It is so nice to be able to access all of that information now with the click of a mouse. Even a traditionalist like me cannot hate on that part of the techno-age too much.
ReplyDelete