{"id":41,"date":"2020-02-02T19:21:35","date_gmt":"2020-02-02T19:21:35","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/ahropenreview.com\/HistoryCanBeOpenSource\/?page_id=41"},"modified":"2020-04-13T00:51:38","modified_gmt":"2020-04-13T00:51:38","slug":"readers-report-1","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/ahropenreview.com\/HistoryCanBeOpenSource\/readers-report-1\/","title":{"rendered":"Reader&#8217;s Report #1"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<p> <strong>*Note: The period for public comment ended April 10, 2020.*<\/strong>  <\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>This article endeavors \u201cto provide a critical evaluation of OER\u2019s place in the historical profession\u2014its history, the nature of open licensing, debates over neoliberalism, the problematic emphasis on digital \u201caccess,\u201d the promise of mass collaboration, and an evaluation of major trends in contemporary digital history projects.\u201d It is well written and provides an elegant framework for exploring certain guiding questions that surround open access and its relationship to the expansion of the digital humanities as a field.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>As a reader, I was glad to see the impressive\ncontours that traced digital history\u2019s inception. However, if we look to Sharon\nLeon\u2019s recent work we find that, as Leon notes,&nbsp; that \u201cthe community of\ndigital historians today have an obligation to question the conditions that\nhave contributed to women\u2019s erasure[within the field], and to consider what\nsystems and conditions become visible when women are returned to the origin\nstories for the field.\u201d To that end&nbsp; the authors may want to review Leon\u2019s\narticle, <em>Complicating a \u201cGreat Man\u201d Narrative of Digital History in the\nUnited States<\/em> to assure that the origin story of digital humanities is\nbalanced in terms of gender.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Since one of the important threads driving the\narticle is democratization it is fair to think of democratization in its myriad\nforms. Not only as a mode of knowledge access by also as a means of who\nproduces knowledge in the digital humanities.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>This reader was glad to see Kim Gallon, Safiya\nNoble, Lisa Nakumura, Jessica Marie Johnson and other PoC scholars mentioned,\nhowever it seems they are all clustered in one section which suggest that the\npiece does not actively engage the deeply complex scholarship that each of\nthese scholar\u2019s digital humanities investigations provides. The authors\nwill&nbsp;want to make sure that scholars of color\u2019s work is considered on the\nsame basis as some of the early adopters quoted throughout the piece. Again,\nwith democratization being a central principle the methods of analysis used to\nframe the piece along with citation must reflect this as well.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Overall the piece was extremely impressive. It is my understanding that the piece should be considered for publication once the authors consider integrating the aforementioned scholar\u2019s work more prominently to reflect the democratization theme driving the piece as well as the gendered origins of the emergence of the digital humanities that can be explored through&nbsp; reading Leon\u2019s work.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>*Note: The period for public comment ended April 10, 2020.* This article endeavors \u201cto provide a critical evaluation of OER\u2019s place in the historical profession\u2014its history, the nature of open licensing, debates over neoliberalism, the problematic emphasis on digital \u201caccess,\u201d the promise of mass collaboration, and an evaluation of major trends in contemporary digital history [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"parent":0,"menu_order":4,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"","meta":{"bgseo_title":"","bgseo_description":"","bgseo_robots_index":"index","bgseo_robots_follow":"follow","_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0,"footnotes":""},"class_list":["post-41","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/ahropenreview.com\/HistoryCanBeOpenSource\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/41","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/ahropenreview.com\/HistoryCanBeOpenSource\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/ahropenreview.com\/HistoryCanBeOpenSource\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ahropenreview.com\/HistoryCanBeOpenSource\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ahropenreview.com\/HistoryCanBeOpenSource\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=41"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/ahropenreview.com\/HistoryCanBeOpenSource\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/41\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":107,"href":"https:\/\/ahropenreview.com\/HistoryCanBeOpenSource\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/41\/revisions\/107"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/ahropenreview.com\/HistoryCanBeOpenSource\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=41"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}