All those who wander are not lost.

Category: work Page 15 of 24

A Better Day in New Orleans

We woke this morning in our smallish hotel room — it turns out that the Renaissance Arts was not the hotel I thought it was — but enjoyed our late rising and our breakfast in the hotel, despite the absolute chaos of the restaurant.

IMG_0037
Yung and Lily in Bed

Tina and Felix picked us up at the front door and we headed off to the Aquarium of the Americas, which seemed smaller, or at least more chopped up then either Yung or I remembered. We decided it must, in part, be from the increased number of gift shops scattered about the place and the food court that is now also part of the place. (Revenue is revenue, and it’s all part of the overall package that museums find themselves having to offer.

The tunnel you walk-through is still pretty amazing, and the rain forest area was impressive. The passages and hallways, however, are pretty narrow and so even a smallish number of visitors begins to feel like a crowd.

The fun part was the chance to hang out with Tina and Felix and to watch Tina and Lily get to have more time together. Afterwards, T and F dropped us off at our hotel, we grabbed our bags, fetched our car, and got on the interstate as quickly as we could, not stopping until we got to Des Allemands for gas and lunch.

Lily Plays Follows Her Own Labyrinth
Lily Follows Her Own Labyrinth

A Culture of Thugs

In our hotel room now, safe and sound, which is not something we take as much for granted in the wake of what happened only a few hours ago.

We are in New Orleans to celebrate the engagement of my sister and her boyfriend, who both have strong ties to the city. Felix grew up here and still has family here. Tina lived a long time here and has the kind of attachment to the city that so many of us find both alluring and puzzling at the same time. (Even before the storms, the city was deeply troubled.)

Yung-Hsing, Lily, and I joined them and the small number of folks they were able to invite to a party in a really lovely atrium that is part of the condo complex that Felix’s sister lives in. The complex is on Saint Charles and only a few blocks away from the interstate.

It was easy to get to, and we were lucky to find some parking on the street a mere thirty yards or so from the building’s front door. The party was terrific, and we were some of the last to leave. My sister insisted on walking us out, and we paired her with Lily, who was thoroughly enamored of her aunt. I walked out with my backpack on my back and the large roller bag in one of my hands. Yung had her back on her shoulder and Lily’s pink suitcase.

We headed out the door in high spirits because we planned on staying overnight and all getting together again the next day to visit the Aquarium of the Americas. As we stepped out of the building and began our way to the car, coming up the street were four young black men. I really thought nothing of it. The same group in Lafayette would have been just four young men walking down the street. They were taking up the whole sidewalk, but I figured they were just feeling their oats. I even made eye contact and said hey to one of them.

What happened next I don’t really know. I was in the lead, but as the group moved along our group, one of the young men made to grab Yung’s bag. She held on and he went to pull harder. She yelled “Hey!” and I guess she startled him enough that he gave up. I looked back to see my wife stumbling, as if she had tripped, and the four guys sprinting down the sidewalk — and I swear one of them looked back and smiled.

I was caught completely off-guard. Yung was first-rate. She said two things: “I’m okay” and then “Get Lily in the car.” We moved quickly, my poor sister both upset that this had happened. She was particularly worried about Yung.

We explained to Lily as best we could, with as little coloring of the events as possible, what had happened, but in that moment, all I wanted was to get out of the city and put it, and its many problems, behind me. I think the worst of it was that I don’t think those four men set out to rob us. It was simply the case that one of them, with sympathy and support from the others, saw an opportunity and seized it. That’s thuggery. Exploiting others when the chance arises is pure thuggery, and I feel sorry for New Orleans that it has these four roaming its streets.

I am not looking to excuse these four. Far from it. But when I thought about it as we drove to our hotel, I couldn’t hep but think that we are surrounded by images of thuggery. In the days leading up to Christmas, I saw in the local paper that the executives of the failing, flailing banks paid themselves $1.3 billion in bonuses using taxpayer funds. That’s exploiting a momentary weakness for your own benefit, and that’s thuggery. A lot of entrepreneurs and developers bought up hundreds and thousands of properties in New Orleans after Katrina, taking advantage of the poor’s inability to deal with disaster. That’s thuggery, too.

I know thuggery of both kinds stretches back as far as humans. It’s the bandits of the Middle Ages and the Robber Barons. I don’t know if, in this moment, I hold out any great hope for humankind, but I do know that I will be glad to leave New Orleans behind.

Words and Music for “The Book of Love”

*** Capo on Fret #1
*** Actual Key Is Ab / Play in Key of G
*** The entire song is G/C/D/G Progression

Intro - G/C/D/G  G/C/D/G  G/C/D/G  G/C/D/G

G           C       D        G
The book of love is long and boring
G          C        D    G
No one can lift the damn thing
G            C                    G
It's full of charts and facts and figures
G   C            D      G
and instructions for dancing
G     C  D  G
But I........
G         C        D    G
I love it when you read to me
G       C   D   G
And you..........
G   C           D  G
You can read me anything
G                C      D     G
The book of love has music in it
G              C           D     G
In fact that's where music comes from
G          C       D        G
Some of it is just transcendental
G             C    D      G
Some of it is just really dumb
G     C  D  G
But I........
G         C        D       G
I love it when you sing to me
G       C   D   G
And you..........
G       C       D     G
You can sing me anything

Bridge:  G/C/D/G  G/C/D/G  G/C/D/G  G/C/D/G

G           C       D        G
The book of love is long and boring
G       C        D    G
And written very long ago
G            C           D            G
It's full of flowers and heart-shaped boxes
G                C       D     G
And things we're all too young to know
G     C  D  G
But I........
G         C        D       G
I love it when you give me things
G       C   D   G
And you..........
G            C       D       G
You ought to give me wedding rings
G    C  D  G
And I.......
G         C        D       G
I love it when you give me things
G       C   D   G
And you..........
G            C       D       G
You ought to give me wedding rings
G    C  D  G
And I.......
G         C        D       G
I love it when you give me things
G       C   D   G
And you..........
G            C       D       G
You ought to give me wedding rings
G            C       D       G
You ought to give me wedding rings

Tools and Content for the Digital Humanities

The following was posted as a comment to the Project Bamboo Tools and Working Group’s main wiki page.

Let me begin by saying how sorry I was not to be able to make it to W2. Having participated in the conference call – thank you Tim for setting that up – I feel like there is some common knowledge within the group that I am missing to enable to glimpse the commonality in the potential demonstrators that have so far been discussed.

And so I am going to try to sketch out a framework here and, I hope, in the process back my way into understanding what it is we are up to.

I should begin by noting that I’m a humanities scholar, a folklorist to be exact. Those of you who saw my 4/6 presentation at the Chicago W1 know that my current research focuses on the rise and development of a boat peculiar to south Louisiana, the crawfish boat. But I’ve also done work on a variety of verbal traditions, literature, and done some work in history.

With that as preface, I offer up a sweeping generalization about humanities studies: it is the study of complex artifacts (understood broadly) in service of understanding human nature. (Historians will be somewhat disgruntled by such a definition, but if a census document isn’t a complex artifact, then I don’t know what one is.)

What humanists need, want access to are these artifacts as well as the variety of information clouds that surround them. Now, too often we assume that this stuff that humanists work with is limited to scribed texts of one form or another. What I like about all the proposed demonstrators is that they are clearly not bounded by such precepts: Tim wants to find a way to cite images and their derivatives – I’m assuming the digital form of both. Mark Williams is trying to find a way to make the steady stream of news reporting available for study. And both Ray Larson and Sorin Matei have as one of their proposed demonstrators some form of geographic-aware tool / methodology.

Ray and Sorin’s proposals are particularly appealing to me because as an ethnographic researcher, I have long been interested in some way of “tagging” objects I find in the field and beginning to build a data / metadata cloud around them in their original context – and both objects and contexts being available to other researchers (either in situ or virtually). Objects in this context are stretchy – or “fuzzy” if you prefer. An object could be a town, a building, a boat, a field, et cetera.

So all this is great news. It’s what we’ve long wanted as a complement, not a replacement, for our extant (call them traditional if you like) data structures which were built around centralizing information in places like libraries and museums. One of the promises of the digital revolution is that information focuses on the object itself, which need not be removed from the variety of contexts which give it its multiple meanings.

I stumble upon “promise” here, because I remember working for a short time with a team at Indiana University back in the early nineties which had been commissioned by AT&T to work on what it was calling a “WorldBoard.” (I think the term was supposed to stand in contrast with the electronic bulletin boards of the time, for those who are old enough to remember, in being “location-aware” information.)

Fifteen years later and it doesn’t really seem like we’ve made all that much progress. There is KML and there is the Dublin Core. But there is nothing like a Zotero that allows one either to write data to some sort of common database or to “browse” it.

I bring up Zotero here because I find myself using it and liking it. It’s not the world’s greatest UI, but it offers a fair amount of flexibility for me as a particular researcher and it seems on its way to offering a way to share information with me as part of a greater collective of individuals studying humans as they move through the world. I can even imagine Zotero becoming a kind of front-end for prior Mellon Foundation funded projects like JSTOR and Project Muse.

What I would like to see, and maybe it would be something like what Tim is proposing, is a parallel project to ARTstor which might be something like DATAstor. ARTstor is a great resource for getting access to quality images of physical artifacts that are either drawn from the fine arts or that have been of the kind of nature that they would be acquired by museums. The chief problem is, first, that museums have their own biases (and they tend towards the fine or visual arts) and, second, that the promise of the IT revolution is that we would not be so dependent upon museums for providing metadata about objects.

Interacting with such an infrastructure could mean either making 3D scans or building 3D models of objects and then locating them in time and space. Google has done a great deal towards this, but it does not seem to have caught on. The reasons are probably multiple: First, 3D work is hard. (I know. I have ten thousand images for my current project and only a few primitive models done in SketchUp.) Second, the Google landscape is a bit of a wild west: you’re just not really sure about the quality of the work done there. (Could one peer review within Google Earth?) Third, it is an impoverished infrastructure, at least in my experience, because it principally focuses on geographic concerns with little room, or at least structure, for other dimensions.

Okay, I’m approaching 1000 words, which is probably some sort of limit. I will think some more and write more when I get a chance. I hope this is useful to someone.

All the Big Questions at Once

Tonight was my turn to get Lily to sleep. As always, we read a few books — my favorites, the Frog and Toad stories — and then we turned off the light. We usually talk for a little while, as I slowly encourage Lily to quiet both her body and her mind — the former twitches while the latter races. Christmas is a week away, and the graduating students in her school are putting on a Christmas pageant for the younger kids. My understanding is that most of the action is narrated by her teacher, but even without speaking lines, she seems to be taking a great deal of the action in. (She is, in her own words, the “indoor keeper,” which she likes because her robe has pink in it.)

So there have been some discussions about Jesus and the fam.

Tonight, as we lay in bed, her small voice reached out to me and asked, “Daddy, is Jesus alive?”

How to answer such a question? I tried to be honest. Jesus is alive in us, I told her. Some people think he lives on in Heaven with God, but the most important thing is that he lives in our hearts. I asked her if Nai-Nai was with us. No, she said. But we can feel her with us when we think about her, yes? Yes. Is Mommy here in the room with us? (Yung was in the kitchen and we could hear her washing dishes.) No. But she is our minds when we think about her? Yes. And when we think about her we feel good don’t we? Yes.

“Daddy?”

“Yes, Lily.”

“Is Mary alive?”

And then she asked about Joseph. I gave similar answers for both of them, but her next question was really the hardest:

“Daddy, is Santa Claus alive?”

Throughput Speeds for the Rest of Us

As I anticipate moving from my MacBook Pro to one of the new MacBooks, one of the things I have to consider is that I am losing not one but both Firewire ports. I have come to depend upon Firewire — also known as IEEE 1394 (1394a for Firewire 400 and 1394b for Firewire 800) — for moving data back and forth on hard drives. In particular, I use a small LaCie Rugged drive to hold my Lightroom library. It has a USB port on it, but I don’t know that I still have the necessary, and awkward, power bricked cord. Will I be able to use my Netgear network hard drive instead? Loyal readers of this log want to know, and so let’s do some math:

The table below lines up the protocol, its claimed throughput speeds in bits, and then a more realistic speed in megabytes. (As a reminder: there are 8 bits in 1 byte.)

table{border:1px solid black}. |. Protocol |. Speed |_. In Use | | USB | 12Mbps | n/a | | USB2 | 480Mbps | 20-25 MBps | | FW400 | 400Mbps | 40MBps | | FW800 | 800Mbps | 80MBps | | Ethernet[1] | 1000Mbps | 47 to 60 MBps |

The important difference between USB and FW is that the latter does not require a computer host port, and, I believe, it is capable of bidirectional traffic. Firewire ports can also carry enough power to support 2.5″ drives, which makes it extremely useful for moving large chunks of data by sneakernet. Newer iPods, however, can be powered off USB ports, and so I’m guessing that USB carries enough power for 1.8″ drives. (Time to down-size my portable drives, I guess.)

fn1. These speeds are based on using a wired ethernet connection to an Airport Extreme gigabit router hooked up to the Netgear ReadyNAS Duo drive unit which also has gigabit ethernet.

Two More Text Analysis Tools from HDG

  1. Coh-Metrix

Has anyone here experimented with this tool (http://cohmetrix.memphis.edu/cohmetrixpr/)? It is described as follows:

Coh-Metrix is a computational tool that produces indices of the linguistic and discourse representations of a text. These values can be used in many different ways to investigate the cohesion of the explicit text and the coherence of the mental representation of the text. Our definition of cohesion consists of characteristics of the explicit text that play some role in helping the reader mentally connect ideas in the text (Graesser, McNamara, & Louwerse, 2003). The definition of coherence is the subject of much debate. Theoretically, the coherence of a text is defined by the interaction between linguistic representations and knowledge representations. When we put the spotlight on the text, however, coherence can be defined as characteristics of the text (i.e., aspects of cohesion) that are likely to contribute to the coherence of the mental representation. Coh-Metrix provides indices of such cohesion characteristics. http://141.225.213.52/CohMetrixWeb2/HelpFile2.htm

The tool has recently been used to analyse (surprise, surprise) the language of the candidates in the US Presidential election (http://wordwatchers.wordpress.com/). It would be particularly interesting if this had been tried on more demanding text or with more demanding questions.

  1. Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count (LIWC)

LIWC (http://liwc.net/liwcdescription.php) seems at first glance to be methodologically much simpler. As far as I can tell from a quick reading, it computes scores based on occurrences of target words pre-defined to belong to different affective categories, plus scores based on counts of sentence length and the like. It depends centrally on a dictionary of 4500 words:

The LIWC2007 Dictionary is the heart of the text analysis strategy. The default LIWC2007 Dictionary is composed of almost 4,500 words and word stems. Each word or word stem defines one or more word categories or subdictionaries. For example, the word cried is part of five word categories: sadness, negative emotion, overall affect, verb, and past tense verb. Hence, if it is found in the target text, each of these five subdictionary scale scores will be incremented. As in this example, many of the LIWC2007 categories are arranged hierarchically. All anger words, by definition, will be categorized as negative emotion and overall emotion words. Note too that word stems can be captured by the LIWC2007 system. For example, the LIWC2007 Dictionary includes the stem hungr* which allows for any target word that matches the first five letters to be counted as an ingestion word (including hungry, hungrier, hungriest). The asterisk, then, denotes the acceptance of all letters, hyphens, or numbers following its appearance.

Not being up-to-date with research in this area (psycholinguistics?) I don’t know how this tool compares with affective research via text-analysis that has been going on for decades. Perhaps someone here can say. How reliable is such research?

PhiloLine announced on HDG

This is from a recent posting in the Humanist Discussion Group:

We are pleased to announce the alpha release of PhiloLine, an extension to PhiloLogic designed identify similar passages in relatively large collections of documents. PhiloLine is based on a simple implementation of a sequence alignment algorithm, a generalized technique used in bioinformatics and other disciplines. This implementation performs an all-to-all comparison of a set of documents loaded in PhiloLogic and generates results which can be linked to and from the database. PhiloLine is an experimental implement of our more generalized PAIR (Pairwise Alignment for Intertextual Relations) implementation which functions without PhiloLogic bindings to be released in Winter 2009.

Source code, documentationand release notes, links to relevant papers, and a slide show discussing sequence alignment in digital humanities are available at [Google Code][http://code.google.com/p/text-pair/].

PhiloLine, like PhiloLogic and PhiloMine, are open source systems. Please feel free to contact us at the address listed on the site with your comments, complaints, bug reports (yes, there will be bugs), suggestions and, always most gratefully accepted, code.

Right Back Where I Started

When I first began blogging four years ago, when blogging was just getting started, I started with WordPress. At that time, the name of my blog was foobawooba — based on a traditional song with that title that I liked a lot — and I blogged about everything. I ended that blog in a fit of pique — long story untellable on-line.

I have, in the interim, wandered the blogging wilderness in search of an application that would do everything I wanted it to do: offer me the control I wanted, the user interface I wanted, and the URL structure that I wanted. I found it in a couple of Rails applications, Mephisto and RadiantCMS, but both got broken when my shared hosting provider upgraded some Ruby gems without much warning. I was willing to fix Radiant, but the fact of the matter is that battling FastCGI errors was not how I wanted to spend my time. I am committed to learning Rails and Ruby — more on that in a moment — but I don’t have time right now to fix what ails Rails when it comes to shared hosting. And I don’t have a good enough reason to spend the money on a dedicated hosting set up that would allow me to run Rails using a native web server.

So here I am back to using WordPress, which has grown up quite a bit since last I used it. In particular, the admin interface has gotten a lot less crowded and a lot of the functionality that was missing is now available through a wealth of plug-ins. How weighty and creaky all this is going to get, I don’t know. WordPress is certainly the 800-lb. gorilla in the blogosphere these days — why TextPattern looks positively svelte by comparison — but it does seem to be what everyone is using, and like Microsoft Office, ubiquity has its advantages:

  1. First, it means there are a lot of people coding additional functionality in terms of plug-ins, widgets, and themes. One doesn’t have to code it by hand — which is a good thing because I hate PHP.
  2. Second, it means that a lot of shared hosting providers tweak their servers to make the welter of PHP scripts which are the muscle, sinew, and bones of WordPress run smoothly. My experience is that being a user of a minority application means you don’t get that kind of tweaking at all.  

Louisiana Digital Humanities Lab

THE CURRENT SITUATION

Institutional Description

The University of Louisiana at Lafayette, the largest member of the University of Louisiana System, is a public institution of higher education offering bachelor’s, master’s, and doctoral degrees. The University is home to over 16,000 students and more than 1,200 faculty and staff, making it Louisiana’s second largest public university. Classified by the Carnegie Foundation as a Doctoral/Research Intensive University, UL Lafayette is home to national research facilities, including the USGS National Wetlands Research Center and the National Marine Fisheries Laboratory, as well as several nationally recognized programs and centers like the Center for Advanced Computer Studies (CACS).

The College of Liberal Arts is one of nine colleges within the University and houses all the departments within which humanistic research and education is pursued. The College’s departments within which the humanities are studied and taught are English, History and Geography, Modern Languages (home of Francophone Studies), and Philosophy. Within those departments, faculty and students engage in a wide variety of disciplinary practices: literary studies, linguistics, folkloristics, rhetoric, oral history, public history, and cognitive studies. And they do so in pursuit of the Bachelor and Master of Arts as well as the Ph.D.

Rationale for Project

The days of humanists being defined by their pursuit of knowledge among library shelves, alone except for their books, are gone. Today’s humanists realize that such singular pursuits, while still foundational to who we are and to what we do, cannot eclipse the necessity of creating a shared space within which a variety of others may also participate in our inquiry into the human condition.

New tools, like those coming out of the digital revolution, have become a part of our practice, in ways very similar to those of other knowledge workers. We e-mail students, each other, and diverse constituents. We maintain web pages and web sites. We depend upon on-line collections and databases, whether they be free, like Project Gutenberg, or fee-based, like JSTOR and Project Muse. We are increasingly, sometimes with institutional support but most often without, using older media — like images, audio, and video — which has been made more convenient, and cheaper, by the digital revolution. Sometimes, but not as often as we would like, we are creating our own media content.

For twenty years now some of us have engaged in new forms of analysis by harnessing the astonishing power of the computer to perform a variety of simple but repetitive tasks — powerful in their recursive nature but tedious because of it — to search texts and other artifacts (rendered as texts) for patterns that were heretofore only sensed by our own brains. Like scientists before us, we have begun to realize that data mining not only produces new results for older kinds of inquiries but makes new kinds of inquiries possible, producing new kinds of knowledge (McCarty 2005).

This new kind of knowledge has given the sciences a new branch, computational science, and the models it produces help us to know what section of coastline to evacuate here in Louisiana while storms are still in the Caribbean. Elsewhere those models, now running backwards in time, suggest that HIV-1 may have been born in the same firmament, and during the same era, as Joseph Conrad’s Heart of Darkness.

While it is not yet clear what a computational humanities will look like, there is an emergent consensus that it will have a widespread impact across all four of the core humanistic processes of interpretation, exploration, collaboration, and realization.

In addition to new computational methods and models emerging out of this rich digital milieu, a radical leveling of the playing field is occurring across numerous scholarly fields: forms of analysis and communication which were once limited only to well-endowed institutions or to well-entrenched industries have become available to everyone. Six-figure video editing suites can now be housed in a laptop with the right software. Audio need not be broadcast but can be “podcast.” Images once available to humanities scholars as well as general audiences only in expensive “coffee table” books or in galleries or archives can now be found on any of dozens of specialized or personal websites, as photostreams, collages, and interactive experiences.

More importantly, these media productions need not be sized to fit the channels of distribution but can be “right-sized” for their content. If a topic can be covered in twelve minutes, then that’s all that needs to be produced. Just as importantly, productions can go as long as they want or be segmented, and linked, in any of a variety of ways. One recent podcast series began as audio only in order to encourage people to listen and think about concepts and then turned to video when it was time to get “hands on” with the materials.

The opportunity this presents to humanities scholars is to produce materials that fit the topic being studied and/or communicated. Moreover, communication can now cover the spectrum: from the primary audiences of the scholarly community and the classroom to secondary audiences of distance learners, community members, and others. The multiplication of potential audiences also encourages a refinement of our humanistic principles and paradigms.

Fifteen years ago, faculty and students were roughly at the same place when it came to using technology for communicating and understanding the world around us. At this point, students have clearly leapt ahead on many fronts. Their embrace of a highly social, always-on environment both confirms certain humanistic principles and tenets and challenges others. We need not, however, simply mimic or follow what they, or those in other disciplines, are doing. The humanities must determine their own path, and we can only do so if we explore the territory for ourselves, discerning what works for us as individuals, as disciplinary practitioners, as teachers, and as members of our local communities. If we always look to others to determine the best use of technology for us, then we will never know for ourselves what it can truly do for us. More importantly, we will never be able to tell our story for ourselves. Perhaps just as importantly, we will never have a chance to inject into the many digital streams which seem to be always on and always flowing our own ways of seeing, something which seems terribly urgent now more than ever.

We propose the establishment of a digital humanities lab as a theoretical, physical, technological, and social space within which humanists, both faculty and students, can explore both independently and in a guided fashion the possibilities for new kinds of inquiry, new kinds of objects, and new kinds of communication as well as ways to enhance traditional, but still quite viable and vibrant, forms of inquiry, objects, and publications. The proposed lab will be of a size suitable for teaching graduate seminars and enabling hands-on instruction for a wide array of computer-based tools — from sound and video editing to computational text analysis — and for the creation of new methodologies and new software applications to support ground-breaking humanities research.

Impact on Existing Resources

Currently all professors in the College of Liberal Arts have desktop computers, equipment which the University views as sufficient for operating a humanities teaching and research program. Like all University instructors, CLA faculty have access to basic internet tools such as email, a small personal web space, and a flexible open source course management tool (Moodle). Also available are research accounts in a Unix environment and the standard statistical packages that are useful to science and social science research analysis. Our proposal grows out of the recognition that Humanities departments need an intermediate level of computing resources for both teaching and research, analogous to the kinds of teaching and research tools provided now by the Humanities Resource Center. Adding a research-teaching lab to the Humanities Resource Center will enable faculty to develop or utilize packages that are either too expensive or resource-intensive to run effectively on the relatively isolated desktop, allow graduate students access to such tools, and encourage professors to use these tools in graduate and community instruction.

THE ENHANCEMENT PLAN

Project Goals and Objectives

With regards to the digital revolution, one observer has noted that the future is here, but it’s just unevenly distributed (Gibson 1999). Thus it is the case that some faculty wanted this lab yesterday and some are not yet aware what benefits working with bits offers them. For those already “there,” the goal is to give them a space to work and to teach, and we will be able to measure their productivity in terms of concrete products and outputs: papers published based on data analysis using tools available in the lab, production of audio or video podcasts and made available to students or to a larger audience. We will document each project and its products and ask each such user to leave a trail behind them, so that others might follow.

The Modern Language Association has already taken the first steps to encourage administrators to recognize and value the importance of digital publications and new forms of scholarship in its most recent guidelines (MLA 2006).

This proposal focuses on the development of a digital humanities lab as the best possible space within which to expose scholars and students to new tools and methods, to train scholars and students in both traditional and new tools and methods, and to provide scholars and students with a place to work, and to discuss, on their own projects — with the idea that shared physical space frequently leads at least to interdisciplinary cross-fertilization and often to collaboration. The great thing about a computer lab is its inherent flexibility: add new software or a few peripheral hardware items and it can become whatever kind of lab you happen to need. We propose to build such a lab, available for use for faculty and graduate seminars as well as an open production facility, available to any and all university faculty, as well as graduate students and select undergraduate students, who need the facilities for realizing the full potential of their research and/or teaching.

In order to realize our goal of building upon, and expanding, the core humanistic processes we propose to build a digital infrastructure that is, from the start, designed to:

  • Enable new and innovative approaches to humanistic scholarship;
  • Provide scholars and students deeper and more sophisticated access to cultural materials;
  • Bring innovative approaches to education in the humanities, enriching how material can be taught and experienced; and
  • Facilitate new forms of collaboration among those who interact with the record of human action and expression. (See Frischer and Unsworth.)

Work Plan of Proposed Project

Goal 1: Enable New and Innovative Approaches to Humanistic Scholarship

The digital humanities make it possible to analyze traditional objects of study in new ways and to create new kinds of objects of study as well as new kinds of scholarly outputs. A number of our faculty are already working within this digital realm or are waiting for a facility like this to make it possible for them to do so. Our first goal is to meet their needs and allow them to become models for others. Our follow-on to this goal is to initiate a series of workshops utilizing both University faculty as well as outside experts to demonstrate and instruct faculty in emergent ideas and practices.

Two examples might serve here, one from linguistics and another from folkloristics. Current state of the art computational analysis of literary and cultural texts involves access to both literary e-text and standard linguistic corpora to use for comparison (cf. Toolan, Johnson and Ensslin). Many linguistic corpora, and especially those constructed for current languages, are under fairly stringent copyright restriction and require site licensing. Several faculty members in different departments utilize these corpora for research and teaching, so the lab’s server can be used to store such tools and serve them on a limited basis, holding down per-user license costs and allowing more resources to be stored and used for less money. If a professor constructs his or her own corpus, it too is quite likely to be under current copyright restriction. The lab’s server will allow several faculty and students to work in concert to construct such a resource, and the seminar lab environment will allow faculty to give students access to such restricted corpora for their own learning and research needs. In addition, most corpora require some sort of preprocessing before use. If one faculty purchases a corpus and pre-processes it in certain useful ways, such as marking it up with part-of-speech tags or semantic tags, then other faculty will be able to access this corpus without violating any copyright restrictions. Again, the intermediate level of the resource will save money on licenses — we will not be paying for a University-wide license, but only for up to a maximum of twelve (12) simultaneous users.

The folkloristics example is quite similar in its rationale. Our folklore researchers, like others around the country, are adopting data-gathering methods that resemble social science and film art documentation techniques — essentially digital video and sound recordings. All such data requires post-production for analysis, storage, and presentation. Expensive commercial tools such as digital asset management, audio production, and video production software prepare cultural artifacts for consumption by students and the public, but are cost-prohibitive for equipping our large (25-seat) teaching labs. If a professor masters a complex analytical tool, having it installed only on his desktop will not allow for teaching that tool or even effectively demonstrating its use to graduate students. More importantly, the availability of post-production tools helps motivate other researchers to consider the benefits of digital collection, storage and presentation, facilitating the shift from paper-based methods that currently still predominate in many of our fields. For example, the Folkstreams project, in association with the Southern Folklife Collection in the library of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, has preserved hard-to-find documentary films about American folk or roots cultures, and made them accessible to users around the world by placing film previews on YouTube and by making full streaming video and audio available on the project’s website (Barnes). Even something as simple and effective as database storage and analysis is avoided by many humanities faculty due to the complexity of tool interfaces. Having an intermediate size lab will create the environment of shared knowledge that humanists recognize from seminar contexts.

Goal 2: Provide Scholars and Students Deeper and More Sophisticated Access to Cultural Materials

As discussed above, the storage capabilities of a server added to the display and manipulation capabilities provided by a lab will provide a deeper and more sophisticated access to research materials. The appropriate analogy here is something like the ability to lift the needle on a record player and repeat a section of poetry recitation or music for instructional purposes. It did not make sense to put a record player in every classroom, because it would not be used every day and because they are effectively portable. The Humanities Resource Center was established to provide such instructional tools to teachers. And it is in using these kinds of tools, which enable a new interaction with the cultural material, that new ideas about the material are conceived, and new research is envisioned.

In our lab, we specifically imagine adapting image, audio, and video production software to the close analysis of the many kinds of performances that are the focus of humanistic research and teaching: linguistic, dramatic, ethnographic.

Goal 3: Bring Innovative Approaches to Education in the Humanities

Business and engineering pedagogies now regularly take advantage of case studies and projects. This lab gives humanists a chance to engage students in a similar fashion. By offering students a chance to engage in complex projects that require either an investment of time or collaboration among one’s peers, and by offering students a chance to work across media, humanists can prepare students for the kinds of environments and careers that will greet them at the end of their studies.

A quick example might help here: a current folklore studies student is engaged in a history of the pedal steel guitar for his dissertation project. While the instrument is widely known, there is little to no written documentation of who adapted what in terms of the physical device itself or styles and methods of playing it. Thus the student has had to conduct a number of interviews with individuals in order to create as full and rich a historical record as possible. Along the way, some of the musicians have approached him with the possibility of helping them to create an instructional DVD on the pedal steel guitar. This kind of long-term investment in a project, in which the student essentially teaches himself what he needs to learn, and which yields a reciprocal relationship with a community outside the academy that wishes a scholarly product be created for them, is exactly the kind of work we wish to make possible with this lab.

Goal 4: Facilitate New Forms of Collaboration

An intermediate level of computing resource encourages collaboration by providing a space for shared activities such as guest lectures, for research projects that require several persons — such as the digitization of existing materials (like those housed in the Archives of Cajun and Creole Folklore or in the newly-established Earnest Gaines Center), for the interaction between researchers as they use the space for divergent purposes, and as virtual collaboration begins to become more usual or accepted among Humanities faculty. While many are familiar already with the practice of co-authoring from a distance, the new server and storage capabilities will encourage faculty to expand such collaboration to the analysis and production of texts, images, audio, and video. CoPI Claiborne Rice’s current instructional project will involve collating maps on which subjects have hand-written dialect data. Scanning the maps into a database and storing them there will allow access from remote desktop for transcription, while display abilities of the lab will allow the training of several graduate researchers at once. Students who do not have MS Access on their own desktop would be able to use the lab as a place to collate, while others can work from their laptops or desktops.

Evidence of Potential to Achieve Recognized Eminence

Created in 1921, the College of Liberal Arts has not only continued to offer the core liberal arts courses required of every university undergraduate, but it has pursued a variety of innovations at various points in its history, seeking out new possibilities for scholarly research and communication. Those innovations are easily glimpsed in the series of centers and programs it has established, two of which were designated as Centers of Excellence (asterisked below) by the University of Louisiana Board of Supervisors:

  • Center for Louisiana Studies (1972)*
  • Interdisciplinary Humanities Program (1975)
  • Center for Acadian and Creole Folklore (1977)
  • Humanities Resource Center (1993)
  • Center for Cultural and Eco-Tourism (1999)*
  • Cinematic Arts Workshop (2005)
  • Ernest Gaines Center (2008)

These innovations have not gone unnoticed at the national level. The Interdisciplinary Humanities Program was cited as one of the Outstanding Projects for the NEH in both 1977 and 1978. In addition to such distinctions, humanities initiatives at the university have regularly been recognized for their innovation and merit with funding from the following organizations:

  • National Endowment for the Humanities: 1974 ($29,507) and 1975 ($179,225) for the Interdisciplinary Humanities Program.
  • Rockefeller Foundation: 1977 ($12,700) and 1978 ($6,000) for the Center for Acadian and Creole Folklore. (See Ancelet 1977).
  • National Endowment for the Humanities Development Grant: 1980 to 1984 ($333,950; matched by university).
  • Grammy Foundation: 2003 ($31,800) for the Archives of Cajun and Creole Folklore.

In addition to the funding above, the Board of Regents itself has previously recognized prior efforts to build an infrastructure for the humanities at UL Lafayette. The Humanities Resource Center could not have opened its doors without the generous $79,914 funded through the LEQSF program. Since their establishment in 1978, the Friends of the Humanities have also contributed over $300,000, with a commitment to continue supporting innovation in the humanities in the future. Finally, the kinds of innovation that we are seeking to encourage were recognized when the Lafayette Convention and Visitors Center allocated $20,000 to build a dual-purpose (tourism and humanities) database of local folk culture in 2006.

Most recently, the University was privileged with an invitation to become a member of Project Bamboo, an international, multi-institutional, interdisciplinary, and inter-organizational effort supported by the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation. Bamboo brings together arts and humanities researchers, computer and information scientists, librarians, campus information technologists, and other interested groups to tackle the question of how to enhance arts and humanities research through the development of shared technology services. Participating institutions include private firms like the Getty Research Institute and Sun Microsystems; internationally recognized research facilities like the British Library and the Sorbonne; private universities like Harvard, Stanford, and MIT; public universities like Michigan, Illinois, and Washington; and a few southern universities like UNC and Virginia. UL Lafayette was one of only five southern universities to be invited to join the consortium and the only university from Louisiana — in fact the only university from the Deep South. PI John Laudun was one of six participants chosen to present on what should be the essential elements of a national plan for harnessing the digital revolution for the purposes of advancing not only humanities research but also its dissemination through publications and teaching, among other channels (Laudun 2008b). The project’s leadership seemed particularly interested in the kinds of innovations and collaborations in which University Humanities faculty had engaged and how our explorations of new methodologies had led to new ideas and new forms of knowledge creation.

With the establishment of a digital humanities lab, we seek to capitalize on this moment, demonstrating our ability to produce scholarly forms that are only now being sketched out in discussions at the national level. Already, two of the investigators, as well as several other College of Liberal Arts faculty, have achieved some level of prominence for their work in the digital humanities; the lab will enable the university to solidify its place at the vanguard and to expand the ability of its faculty to continue to innovate.

Continuing faculty who have already completed successful research projects that constructed computer-based tools available to users around the world through the internet include John C. Greene (English), constructor of the Belfast Newsletter Index, 1737-1800, a computerized index for the Belfast Newsletter that enables researchers to quickly and easily locate relevant articles that they can then find in the print version of the Newsletter; and Keith Dorwick (English), who publishes widely in the area of computer and composition studies and whose Acadiana Moo is still used by writing classes around the United States (http://acadianamoo.org). Other faculty have projects in progress that will benefit from an improved workplace, such as Leslie Bary (Modern Languages), who is creating a hypertext edition of the poetry of César Vallejo and who attended the Humanities Computing Summer Institute at the University of Vancouver in 2005, and Charles Richard (English), director of the University’s new Cinematic Arts Workshop, whose new courses in documentary film production will be able to make immediate use of an appropriately equipped teaching lab.

In addition to enabling our own faculty to produce analytical and communicative materials that will be on par with, or even more advanced than, those at the national level, the kinds of digitization of materials and making them available in new ways that are a concomitant part of this lab will also attract scholars to the University. In particular, the Ernest Gaines Center is currently under development and eventual construction, and the ability to support scholars from around the world as they comb through those materials, as well as those in other research archives on campus, will make a lasting impression. It is one thing to travel to an archive to thumb through box upon box of papers. It is quite another to travel to an archives, either physically or virtually, and flip through those same papers, but now with the ability to mark them in a variety of ways. Perhaps just as importantly, scholars will be able to build upon the marking of previous readers. The slow accrual of metadata, which is what we are discussing here, is clearly one of the new forms of scholarship, and those who get it and get there first will find their materials become central to the new paradigms as they develop. Eventually we hope to sponsor a variety of both internal and external projects, similar to what is being done with the TAPor Project in Alberta (http://tapor.ualberta.ca/Projects/).

Impact on Curriculum and Instruction

The College of Liberal Arts is currently amending its curriculum to add courses in humanities computing that fulfill the University wide requirement for Computer Literacy. CLA faculty consider it crucial that our course not shield humanities majors from exposure to what goes on under the hood, so to speak, of computers, but we also understand that most humanities students will be more likely to innovate with existing tools than program new ones. The coursework will require students to learn the rudiments of a markup language such as HTML or XML, then create marked up texts that can be processed by web browsers or more specific analytic tools like WordSmith. Faculty need a lab where they can develop projects and materials for this course. In addition, we plan to leverage the lab to apply for Teacher Institutes for Advanced Study courses in humanities computing funded by the Louisiana Endowment for the Humanities (LEH). These summer Institutes are targeted to the state’s secondary educators.

Impact on Quality of Students

While the “new economy” is much heralded, no one is quite sure what it is going to look like. Much of the past decade of growth in information technologies has focused on the technologies themselves. In the past five years, the business community has begun to demand that the use of IT be examined more closely. It is no longer enough for individuals merely to be competent using technology, they must be able to think with it, imagine new possibilities with it. It is critical, then, that computing not exist only in computing classes, it must permeate all disciplines in which students are engaged. Only by having a multidisciplinary toolkit of ideas and methods will today’s students become tomorrow’s leaders in industry, science, and the arts.

The proposed lab supports engaging students across the wide spectrum of disciplines and topics. It also creates a space within which graduate and advanced undergraduate students can learn, experiment, and produce their own analyses and outputs. One of our best English graduate students is currently completing a dissertation in digital poetics that is both criticism and poetry, set entirely within a Flash application and programmed in ActionScript. Because we have no computers in the department or college equipped with the necessary software, all of her work has been done at home on her own machine. A critical learning opportunity has been missed: new students have not been able to collaborate with her or see the project in development.

Impact on Faculty Development

Jerome McGann forecasts that “in the next 50 years, the entirety of our inherited archive of cultural works will have to be re-edited within a network of digital storage, access, and dissemination.” We have some pioneers in this process, such as John C. Greene in the English Department, whose Belfast Newsletter Index, 1737-1800, is a frequently accessed resource in Eighteenth-century studies (http://www.ucs.louisiana.edu/bnl/). Other humanities faculty are currently engaged in building such a network, through Project Bamboo and other means, while our enhanced infrastructure will help to attract new faculty who are aware of the need for institutional support for humanities computing.

While faculty currently possess desktop workstations in their offices capable of basic IT tasks (e-mail, web browsing, word processing, spreadsheet usage), few of the machines are capable of running today’s resource-intensive productivity and analytical applications. A well-equipped seminar room will provide space for training faculty on more advanced software. We will schedule and implement workshops on particular software packages, hardware features, and methodological practices through fall and spring terms, reserving the summer term for focused institutes. Such rapid advancement in skill sets will be requisite of faculty as the University begins to roll out the new Humanities computing courses.

The majority of faculty receive no formal training, and little exposure, to developments in information technologies pertinent to their own discipline and to their teaching. For many, the last time they will have had the opportunity to explore new kinds of resources and tools was in graduate school. PI Schilling has instituted in her tenure as director of the HRC an informal tutoring regime for faculty. We seek to expand that tutoring, bringing more faculty into the pool of potential tutors and also to formalize instructional possibilities.

Performance Measures

Obviously we will keep a careful record of who uses the lab and what kinds of classes they teach and products they create as well as the kinds of projects being developed and to what end. (Much of the work of measuring this lab must, by definition, be qualitative in nature.) Beyond such a first step, some of the necessary data for quantifying the success of this proposal is already collected annually at the university in the form of the Faculty Workload Document. The College, in cooperation with the Office of Institutional Research, can report the progress of digital projects gleaned from those documents and then compile it into meaningful measures. We will first establish a baseline metric based on activity over the past five years and then look to measure the amount and kind of activities transpiring once the lab is in place.

Any measurement of activities done in and through the lab will have to fall in line with current and/or emergent disciplinary practices. A number of Humanities faculty at the University fall under the umbrella of disciplines that make up the Modern Language Association, and so we will turn to their most recent statement, “Guidelines for Evaluating Work with Digital Media in the Modern Languages,” for best practices that will also align with established and/or emergent tenure and promotion guidelines at the University (MLA 2004). As per those guidelines, we plan to review works in the media in which they are produced and to seek reviewers capable of estimating the profundity and impact of the work. Academic work in digital media should be evaluated in the light of the rapidly changing institutional and professional contexts within which practitioners find themselves.

EQUIPMENT

The lab we propose is one that will accommodate both a group of users, faculty or students, working / learning on a project, as well as individual users pursuing their own projects. Classes meeting in the lab will be limited to two sessions per day (three hours) to guarantee individual availability. To maximize flexibility we have chosen Mac Pros capable of running all three of the current major operating systems, and their attendant specialized applications. We chose Macs for two reasons: (1) they are capable of running all three of the major operating systems (Windows, Mac, Linux) either in a virtual machine or at boot, which means (2) we will be free to use any hardware and software without regard to platform limitations. Certain applications have achieved the status of an industry standard. In the film and video industries, Final Cut Pro is such a standard, but it runs only on Macs. A standard computational text application like WordSmith runs only on Windows. A number of analytical packages that are increasingly of interest to humanists run only in a Unix environment, which requires either a Mac machine or a Linux machine. Moreover, we cannot anticipate what tools and applications will emerge over the next five to ten years and we want this lab to be in a position to take advantage of all emergent technologies and methodologies. We considered alternate equipment, but each configuration we examined limited users in terms of analyses that could be performed, materials that could be produced, or methods that could be tried.

Equipment Request

  1. Workstations. Each core workstation is a Mac Pro equipped with a scratch drive capable of temporarily housing the large directories that media projects require as well as a 23” monitor that makes it possible to work with the multiple windows and palettes that most creative software (such as Final Cut Pro or Photoshop) requires. The software available on each machine will allow it to be used for textual analysis, XML coding, and the complete range of creative products: print, audio, and video. The packages include: Adobe’s Creative Suite, Apple’s Final Cut Suite, and WordSmith Tools. The cost for each core workstation is $3,803. The lab will be equipped with 12 workstations, enough to accommodate a graduate seminar or an appropriately-sized faculty workshop. The total cost for all twelve workstations is $45,636.
  2. Specialized Workstations. While each workstation will be equipped with analytical and production software, three groups of four machines will be equipped with additional peripherals to turn them into specialized workstations. One group of four machines will be equipped with graphics tablets and scanners in order to acquire and/or edit images either for analysis or for publication — and by publication we hope to have made it clear by this time that we do not simply mean print but use on websites, in presentations, and in video productions. The cost for these additional peripherals is $ 3059.56. Another group of four machines will be equipped with Digidesign’s Mbox2 for audio acquisition and will come with Pro Tools LE for analysis of sound recordings and the production of audio programming. The cost for these additional peripherals is $ 2,040.. A final group of four machines are focused on analysis and production of video and will be equipped with Sony HD Walkmen for acquiring DV video. The cost for these additional peripherals is $ 5,224.

  3. Lab-wide Equipment. The focus of the digital lab is a server which will deliver a number of basic corpora for students to use as a basis for learning how to work with corpora as well as a model for developing their own. It will also deliver sample audio and video files so that instructors working with groups in the lab may make sure everyone is working with the same material. We plan for the server to become a model for content distribution across the University’s campus, understanding that the larger the network to which one distributes, the more complex and challenging systems become. The cost for the server is $4,679.

Other new pieces of equipment which will be accessible to everyone in the lab include a sheet-fed scanner — for quick conversion of paper documents into PDFs which can then be OCRd for use in research projects; a large-format color laser printer; a microfilm/fiche scanner for digitizing historical documents—including maps and lithographs; and an HD LCD projector which can be used for demonstration purposes, for sharing screens within a class, and for previewing new potential products. The total cost for these lab-wide peripherals is $20,484. Our request is only for the workstations, the software, and the peripherals listed above. The university will provide custom furniture for the workstations and other necessary room enhancements for the lab. Our total request is for $104, 463[1].

Page 15 of 24

© John Laudun