Loading...

Influences

These readings have been selected to offer an insight into influences on my research and digital practice. They are managed in my Zotero citation management system and presented here using a version of zot_bib_web by David Reitter modified for Django. Being overt about intellectual influences is important for most disciplines but it is especially important for digital humanities, where research goals and practices vary widely.

Bibliography

Theory

Schreibman, S., Siemens, R., & Unsworth, J. (2016). A New Companion to Digital Humanities. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.
Verhoeven, D. (2016). As Luck Would Have It. Feminist Media Histories, 2(1), 7–28.
Rosenberger, R., & Verbeek, P.-P. (Eds.). (2015). Postphenomenological Investigations: Essays on Human-Technology Relations. Lanham: Lexington Books.
Terras, M. M., Nyhan, J., & Vanhoutte, E. (Eds.). (2013). Defining digital humanities: a reader. Farnham, Surrey: Ashgate Publishing Limited.
Gold, M. K. (2012). Debates in the Digital Humanities. Minneapolis: Univ Of Minnesota Press.
Prescott, A. (2012). An Electric Current of the Imagination: What the Digital Humanities Are and What They Might Become. Journal of Digital Humanities, 1(2).
Kroes, P. (2012). Technical Artefacts: Creations of Mind and Matter. Dordrecht: Springer.
Hodder, I. (2012). Entangled : An Archaeology of the Relationships between Humans and Things. Hoboken: Wiley.
Berry, D. (Ed.). (2012). Understanding digital humanities. Houndmills, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Bevir, M. (2011). Why Historical Distance is not a Problem. History and Theory, 50(4), 24–37.
Floridi, L. (2011). The philosophy of information. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Liu, A. (2008). Local Transcendence: Essays on Postmodern Historicism and the Database. University Of Chicago Press.
Ginev, D. (2007). A (Post)Foundational Approach to the Philosophy of Science: Part II. Journal for General Philosophy of Science / Zeitschrift Für Allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie, 38(1), 57–74.
Kirschenbaum, M. (2007). Mechanisms: New Media and the Forensic Imagination. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Healy, P. (2007). Rationality, Dialogue, and Critical Inquiry: Toward a Viable Postfoundationalist Stance. Cosmos and History: The Journal of Natural and Social Philosophy, 3(1), 134–158.
Liu, A. (2004). The Laws of Cool: Knowledge Work and the Culture of Information. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Beck, U., Bonss, W., & Lau, C. (2003). The Theory of Reflexive Modernization Problematic, Hypotheses and Research Programme. Theory, Culture & Society, 20(2), 1–33.
Ginev, D. (2001). Searching for a (Post)Foundational Approach to Philosophy of Science: Part I. Journal for General Philosophy of Science / Zeitschrift Für Allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie, 32(1), 27–37.
Floridi, L. (1999). Philosophy and computing: an introduction. London; New York: Routledge.
Giddens, A. (1990). The Consequences of Modernity. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Bibliography

Method

Rockwell, G., & Sinclair, S. (2016). Hermeneutica: Computer-Assisted Interpretation in the Humanities. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Arthur, P., & Bode, K. (2014). Advancing Digital Humanities: Research, Methods, Theories. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Scheinfeldt, T., & Cohen, D. J. (Eds.). (2013). Hacking the Academy: New Approaches to Scholarship and Teaching from Digital Humanities (Online). Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
Warwick, C., Terras, M., & Nyhan, J. (Eds.). (2012). Digital Humanities in Practice. Facet Publishing.
Ramsay, S. (2011). Reading Machines: Toward an Algorithmic Criticism. University of Illinois Press.
McCarty, W. (2005). Humanities Computing. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Moretti, F. (2005). Graphs, Maps, Trees: Abstract Models for a Literary History. New York: Verso.
Bibliography

Blog Posts

Posner, M. (2015, July 27). What’s Next: The Radical, Unrealized Potential of Digital Humanities [Blog]. Retrieved July 27, 2015, from http://miriamposner.com/blog/whats-next-the-radical-unrealized-potential-of-digital-humanities/
Scheinfeldt, T. (2012, December 2). Stuff Digital Humanists Like: Defining Digital Humanities by its Values [Blog]. Retrieved May 12, 2011, from http://www.foundhistory.org/2010/12/02/stuff-digital-humanists-like/
Underwood, T. (2011, December 27). Why digital humanities isn’t actually “the next thing in literary studies.” [Blog]. Retrieved October 31, 2012, from http://tedunderwood.com/2011/12/27/why-we-dont-actually-want-to-be-the-next-thing-in-literary-studies/
Bibliography

Reports

Collins, S., Harrower, N., Haug, D. T. T., Immenhauser, B., Lauer, G., Orlandi, T., … Wandl-Vogt, E. (2015). Going Digital: Creating Change in the Humanities (Allea eHumanities Working Group). Berlin: All European Academies.
MLA. (2014). Report of the MLA Task Force on Doctoral Study in Modern Language and Literature. Web publication: The Modern Language Association of America.
CLIR. (2013). Research Data Management Principles, Practices, and Prospects. Washington, DC: Council on Library and Information Resources.
Williford, C., & Henry, C. (2012). One Culture. Computationally Intensive Research in the Humanities and Social Sciences: A Report on the Experiences of First Respondents to the Digging Into Data Challenge. Council on Library and Information Resources.
American Council of Learned Societies. (2006). “Our Cultural Commonwealth”  The Report of the American Council of Learned Societies Commission on Cyberinfrastructure for the Humanities and Social Sciences.


Dr. James Smithies

Director | King’s Digital Lab

King's College London

Strand | London WC2R 2LS

Blog Categories
Digital Humanities | History