This wiki space contains archival documentation of Project Bamboo, April 2008 - March 2013.
Small table discussion: Janet Broughton (Berkeley), Tim Cole (U of Illinois), Jared Johnson (George Washington), Elizabeth Edwards (George Washington), Harlan Wallach (Northwestern), Claire Stewart (Northwestern), Kaylea Hascall Champion (U of Chicago), Yem Fong (CU Boulder), Lori Emerson (CU Boulder)
• we talked about how faculty tend to re-invent the wheel over and again; thus, educational training might support not wasting time; we can imagine tools and services that might change the direction of scholarship (ie imagine that you can search the WHOLE of English literature---how might that change how we do scholarship and what we discover, the kinds of things we discover)
• on the other hand, some scholars get something out of the process and inventing the wheel
• there's also the fact that faculty are encouraged to create individual projects---they are not normally supported if they simply work of an already-existing project
• we also discussed the overall problem, related to all future directions for Bamboo, of institutional tension, institutional resistance to digital humanities
• we have heard stories of dissertations being rejected if they draw from online sources
• we also know people who are concerned about losing the ability to poke around the bookshelves, libraries turning into book museums, also concerned about bodies (lying on a couch with a book vs. using computer)
• we need to open up existing technologies and build a continuum across disciplines and resources; technologies need to support this and we'll be less successful if we build separate resources
• it is also worth noting that different disciplines have different ways of accessing digital images/materials and also different goals behind the push to digitize---how, then, will we ever agree on standards and tools if this is the case?
• inevitably we're going to disagree with the concepts of standards
• this is why standards are tied up with education and training---but the question is who should do the training?
• there should be a feedback loop between faculty and IT/librarian builders
• also need to create a self-consciousness about interfaces, self-consciousness about standards itself
• we need to be attentive to the tension between making concrete what tools can do to the user and creating tools that are task-specific; most tools are abstract unless they are tied to specific resources
• further, we need to be aware of the boundary between how tools/standards shape what we see and how they give us access to materials
• critical for humanities, therefore, to be involved---they know that digitization is not neutral
• context is key---the digitized object cannot be separated from the associated material
• there is also the problem of a reward structure that is related to all seven categories---also related to standards (related to peer review) that is recognizable by committees and outside members
• need to make things transparent so that context is visible
• that said, online journals are easy to account for because of the structure of editorial boards, peer-review et.
• it's possible that discipline organizations might have a special role to play---maybe it's the job of discipline organization to vet online/digital projects?
• OR, if there's some outside credible peer review, might be good to build into the process; might also provide sense that there is credibility to project