Hacking the Humanities: Twenty-First-Century Literacies and the ‘Becoming-Other’ of the Humanities

  • Mark J. V. Olson

Abstract

After a recent discussion with colleagues about the role of ‘practice’ in proposed revisions to our graduate curriculum, I sat down and listed all of the different practices that had consumed my time over the previous few days, focusing on those that I would consider particular to my work as a humanities scholar. Most of them likely would be legible to the public as the kinds of work ‘humanities people’ do: starting to read Becoming Undone, the latest book by Elizabeth Grosz (2011) on Charles Darwin, and then rereading parts of Marx’s Grundrisse in preparation for an upcoming conference presentation on Marxism and New Media; revising (again) the third chapter for my book manuscript, and sketching out an outline for this essay; preparing a lecture on social memory and archives for an upcoming class; and trudging through the IRB (institutional review board) paperwork for a new ethnographic project involving medicine, gender, and visual culture.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Arns, I. (2005) ‘Code as performative speech act’, Artnodes 4, http://www.uoc.edu/artnodes/eng/art/arns0505.pdf
  2. Balsamo, A. (2011) Designing Culture: The Technological Imagination at Work, Durham, NC: Duke University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Barad, K. (2003) ‘Posthumanist performativity: toward an understanding of how matter comes to matter’, in Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 28(3), 801–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bogost, I. (2005) ‘Procedural literacy: problem solving with programming, systems, & play’, in Telemedium, Winter/Spring, 32–6.Google Scholar
  5. Bogost, I. (2007) Persuasive Games, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 233–60.Google Scholar
  6. Bogost, I. (2012) Alien Phenomenology, Or What It’s Like To Be a Thing, Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bolter, J. D. (2003) ‘Theory and practice in new media studies’, in G. Liestøl, A. Morrison and T. Rasmussen (eds), Digital Media Revisited, Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 15–34.Google Scholar
  8. Bradley, A. (2011) Originary Technicity: The Theory of Technology from Marx to Derrida, London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  9. Conquergood, D. (2002) ‘Performance studies: interventions and radical research’, in The Drama Review, 46(2), 145–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Coole, D. and Frost, S. (eds) (2010) New Materialisms: Ontology, Agency, and Politics, Durham, NC: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Crawford, M. (2009) Shop Class as Soulcraft: An Inquiry Into the Value of Work, New York: The Penguin Press.Google Scholar
  12. Davidson, C. N. (2011) Now You See It: How the Brain Science of Attention Will Transform the Way We Live, Work, and Learn, New York: Viking Press.Google Scholar
  13. Davidson, C. N. and Goldberg, D.T. (2004) ‘A manifesto for the humanities in a technological age’, 13 February, Chronicle of Higher Education, http://chronicle.com/article/A-Manifesto-for-the-Humanities/17844
  14. Fish, S. (2008) ‘Will the humanities save us?’ The New York Times, 6 January, http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/01/06/will-the-humanities-save-us/
  15. Graham, P. (2004) The Word ‘Hacker’, http://paulgraham.com/gba.html
  16. Grosz, E. (2011) Becoming Undone: Darwinian Reflections on Life, Politics, and Art, Durham, NC: Duke University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hansen, M. B. N. (2006) ‘Media theory’, in Theory, Culture & Society, 23(2–3), 297–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hunter, R. and Vee, A. (2009) ‘The literacy of proceduracy: a conversation with Annette Vee’, Blog Post, http://hastac.org/blogs/rikhunter/literacy-proceduracy-conversation-annette-veeGoogle Scholar
  19. Kac, E. (2007) Signs of Life: Bio Art and Beyond, Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  20. Kirschenbaum, M. (2008) Mechanisms: New Media and the Forensic Imagination, Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  21. Kittler, F. (1999) Gramophone, Film, Typewriter, Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Lenglet, M. (2011) ‘Conflicting codes and codings: how algorithmic trading is reshaping financial regulation’, in Theory, Culture & Society, 28(6), 44–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Manovich, L. and Douglass, J. (2011) ‘Visualizing change: computer graphics as a research method’, in O. Grau (ed.), Imagery in the 21st Century, Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 315–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Marino, M. (2006) ‘Critical code studies’ (Electropoetics Thread). Electronic Book Review, http://www.electronicbookreview.com/thread/electropoetics/codology
  25. Marx, K. (1845) ‘Theses on Feuerbach’, http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1845/theses/index.htmGoogle Scholar
  26. McPherson, T. (2011) ‘U.S. operating systems at mid-century: the intertwining of race and UNIX’, in L. Nakamura, P. Chow-White and A. Nelson (eds), Race After the Internet, New York: Routledge, 21–37.Google Scholar
  27. Moesch, J. (2011) ‘Code concepts I: performing the algorithm’, Blog Post, 10 October, http://hastac.org/blogs/jarah/2011/10/10/code-concepts-i-performing-algorithmGoogle Scholar
  28. Montfort, N. and Bogost, I. (2009) Racing the Beam: The Atari Video Computer System, Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  29. Murray-John, P. (2011) ‘About hacking the humanities’, Hacking the Humanities (Blog), http://hackingthehumanities.org/aboutGoogle Scholar
  30. Pariser, E. (2011) The Filter Bubble: What the Internet Is Hiding from You, New York: The Penguin Press.Google Scholar
  31. Perry, D. (2010) ‘The MLA, @briancroxall, and the non-rise of the digital humanities’, Blog Post, http://academhack.outsidethetext.com/home/2010/the-mla-br iancroxall-and-the-non-rise-of-the-digital-humanities/Google Scholar
  32. Puig de la Bellacasa, M. (2009) ‘Touching technologies, touching visions: the reclaiming of sensorial experience and the politics of speculative thinking’, in Subjectivity, 28(1), 297–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Ramsay, S. (2011) ‘On building’, Blog Post, http://lenz.unl.edu/papers/2011/01/11/on-building.htmlGoogle Scholar
  34. Ratto, M. and Hockema, S. (2009) ‘FLWR PWR: tending the walled garden’, in A. Dekker and A. Wolfsberger (eds), Walled Garden, Amsterdam: Virtueel Platform, http://criticalmaking.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/2448_alledgarden_ch06_ratto_hockema.pdfGoogle Scholar
  35. Stiegler, Bernard (2010) ‘Memory’, in W. J. T. Mitchell and M. B. N. Hansen (eds), Critical Terms for Media Studies, Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 64–87.Google Scholar
  36. Suiter, Tad (2010) ‘Why Hacking?’ Hacking the Academy, http://www.digitalculture.org/hacking-the-academy/introductions/#introductions-suiter
  37. Svensson, P. (2012) ‘The digital humanities as a humanities project’, in Arts & Humanities in Higher Education, 11(1–2), 42–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Wark, M. (2004) A Hacker Manifesto, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  39. Wohlsen, M. (2011) Biopunk: DIY Scientists Hack the Software of Life, New York: Current / Penguin.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Mark J. V. Olson 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mark J. V. Olson

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations