Blogs for Review
While low on graphics and visuals, Pepys’ Diary (http://www.pepysdiary.com/) is a clever way to share material culture for historians and the public. And it’s very helpful to link to more background within the diary entries. However, I thought this was a verbatim digitization of his actual diary at first. I was glad that the project manager noted: “It should therefore be remembered that this is not Pepys’ diary as he wrote it, but a 19th century transcription which has in turn been used to create an electronic version.” After reviewing portions of History Carnival, this approach of using a blog to showcase a historical diary appears to be more popular than I realized.
I had no idea that History Carnival (http://historycarnival.blogsome.com/) even existed! I love the idea that each “issue” is created by a different contributor and looks different in addition to hosting a new topic each time. It’s interesting that the site is so upfront about the parameters for who can submit a blog for possible inclusion. For example, there is no formal definition of “historian,” enthusiasts as well as academics are welcome, giving this site a very welcoming and open feeling not usual found in the academic world. Like Wikipedia however, the major downfall of this approach though is the trustworthiness of the information shared. While a blog might look “credible,” can visitors accept the analysis as valid? However, the site appears fairly stricter about topics for inclusion. For instance, only blogs that tie current controversies to analysis of past events will be included.
Blogosphere (http://clioweb.org/blogosphere/) included an intriguing section on academic blogging that talked about the various arguments for and against it such as the potential for stealing a historian’s work or acting as a deterrent against theft. One article (http://www.earlymodernweb.org.uk/emn/index.php/archives/2005/09/so-why-would-i-champion-academic-blogging/) talked about the benefits of blogs, sharing research ideas and the sense of community when one blogger said nice things about another’s site. However, given that the history blogging world is still small relative to the entire academy, will this sense of camaraderie evaporate when more historians actively engage in the digital realm? Or will early history bloggers abandon their blogs when it becomes more commonplace to do it? I’m not sure what the answer is, but thinking about other technology trends, it’s possible. For instance, Apple/Mac users consider themselves an elite and special group, but now that Apple has revolutionized music with the iPod, has it turned off some of its diehards by becoming too mainstream? In addition, I thought about acceptable behavior in today’s history blogging world and how that might change as the concept grows in popularity. Not to criminalize traditionalists, but are early adopters of technology more inclined to try to promote community and advance the use of blogging technology by behaving nicely and not pilfering from the research of fellow historians? Will it become easier to “borrow” from another historian’s work when so much more of it is available online in draft form?
April 4th, 2006 at 10:37 am
I had the same thought about the Pepys diary. I’m really glad it was made clear to the reader that this was not the word for word translation but a transcription turned into an electronic version. This gives the author of the site a little bit of freedom/flexibility in what is included as well. People can’t nitpick about the content and translation if the author claims upfront that it is not supposed to be an exact version.