The humanities in simplest of terms is the study of humans. Yet centuries of slavery and colonialism add layers of racial complexity to this understanding. For those who were nonwhite, particularly Black people in the United States, were seen as less than human, subhuman. Looking at the simplest definition of humanities, an enormous assumption is afoot. In her article, Kim Gallon cites Alexander Weheliye believes (and rightfully so) that “nonwhite subjects are systematically shut out from ‘the category of human as it is performed in the modern west.’” This understanding shatters the idea that every kind of person is included in the field and subject of humanities. People of color, lgbtqia, and other minority communities have had (and still have) their share of being seen and understood as less than, both in and outside of academia, within the humanities. But where do the digital humanities fit in with this narrative? Building on Weheliye’s argument, Gallon posits that, “any connection between humanity and the digital therefore requires an investigation into how computational processes might reinforce the notion of a humanity developed out of racializing systems.” Gallon sees a solution to this tension within the digital humanities noting that a “‘technology of recovery,’characterized by efforts to bring forth the full humanity of marginalized peoples through the use of digital platforms and tools.” This concept of recovery has a profound effect on what is invisible or missing from humanities. “Black digital humanities troubles the very core of what we have come to know as the humanities by recovering alternate constructions of humanity that have been historically excluded from that concept.” It is an opportunity to fill in the gaps of history.
But how can one bridge these gaps within history? With acceptance and diversity being the only way further, Roopika Risam shares an important perspective from Global Outlook::Digital Humanities (GO::DH) on this (and similar) issue(s) in their article “Navigating the Global Digital Humanities: Insights from Black Feminism”: “digital humanities, as a field can only be inclusive and its diversity can only thrive in an environment in which local specificity – the unique concerns that influence and define digital humanities at regional and national levels – is positioned at its center and its global dimensions are outlined through an assemblage of the local.” Risam broke this perspective down to laymen’s terms in their Digital Humanities 2014 talk stating, “accent is a fitting metaphor for negotiating the relationships among local contexts.” The local-global conundrum within the digital humanities must be addressed so that it becomes more and more of an inclusive and understanding environment, and community. Space and regional differences only add to the (needed) diversity within digital humanities work. And studying these tensions and connections can only improve the outlook. However, this is not an easy task and requires frequent examination and reflection. Either way, it is work that needs to be done. Space for and respect of intersectional histories, theories, and experiences must be the ultimate goal of the digital humanities field.
Amber Sophia 