<\/a><\/p>\n

I’m\u00a0<\/i> at the end of the first semester of my MA in Digital Arts and Humanities at UCC so it seems like a good time to sit back and reflect on what I’m doing here, where its going and what exactly Digital Humanities\u00a0is.<\/em>\u00a0Much time seems to be spent in a debate about this and whilst debate keeps things vibrant it can become a bit exasperating\u00a0 at times to be working in such an all encompassing field. The title Digital Humanist seems to mean different things to different people.<\/p>\n

<\/a>The fundamental concept is about connecting the Arts and Humanities with Technology. Its also about how we use technology and how technology uses us, about making best use of digital tools for humanities based projects and asking questions about this very process. Its about transformation, democratisation, activism. It begs for definition and at the same time rejects it. The Digital Humanities Manifesto<\/a>\u00a0is a frustrating and confusing document with multiple contributors that challenges our conventional way of reading and defining. Whilst being limited in its design – it appears very amateurish , like desk top publishing from the nineties – its refusal to conform to a standard is beginning to make more sense to me the longer I engage with DH.<\/p>\n

Can DH really be all things to all people? According to a useful blog I came across by\u00a0Dr. Amanda Visconti, who writes under the\u00a0 pseudonym Literature Geek<\/em> the answer to the question ‘Am I DH? ‘ is simply : ‘Yes, if you want to be.’ Her clear and interesting\u00a0 post\u00a0‘What, where and<\/a>\u00a0how of Digital Humanities’<\/a>\u00a0helped me to move towards some kind of definition of DH.<\/p>\n

<\/a>