Constructing “Know Your Neighborhood”

May 8th, 2006

Since I moved here in September, I have marveled at the oddness of Washington DC. It is just so unlike the northeastern cities I’ve experienced. I had been meaning to look into its history to try to understand what makes it seem so foreign, when a guest speaker from Cultural Tourism DC came to speak to my public history class (Cultural Tourism creates cultural heritage trails—you may have seen the signs on the sidewalk—and works with community partners to help bring tourists off the Mall and into DC’s other neighborhoods). She helped clarify the difference by explaining that most of the attention DC receives is from outsiders who come to view only its national landmarks. This, plus the fact that residents come and go so quickly with politics that they rarely set down roots, helps explain why DC tends to have little sense of its own history.

I wanted, therefore, to make a site that would address local history for local residents. The other sites I saw provided only summaries of each neighborhood without offering something tangible for viewers to relate to. This is why I wanted to rely more heavily on pictures than text. I also wanted to tap into viewers’ spatial thinking by using a map, partly because I wanted them to recognize that places and environments have a past (an important concept in collective memory). As residents, moreover, they most likely would be able to make connections between the past and the present by thinking about the familiar streets they pass down every day. When the map is on satellite view, it is especially effective because one can see contemporary buildings while looking at pictures of what used to be there. The only serious flaw with my topic, I think, is that some residents might have a clearer understanding of their neighborhoods than I do. I might not be attuned to local quirks or traditions, for example. Still, I hope that my site offers a bit of history that residents haven’t seen and that helps them understand the character of their neighborhoods better.

Interestingly, it felt like I was doing two separate projects, or, at least, integrating two totally separate tasks into one project. I conducted the historical research as if I were preparing a paper or regular historical project—collecting images and writing down their source information, tracking down facts about each place, verifying them with a second source, and citing everything. I was meticulous, organized, and as thorough as I felt I needed to be for this purpose. The technical aspect, however, was a total departure from the traditional methods of the independently minded historian. It was a completely different challenge because there were some aspects of the technology (like source code) that there was just no way for me to guess, or even to learn myself. (Where does one find directions for embedding a Google map in a Dreamweaver table cell? Certainly not at the library.) I found myself relying heavily on Ed for advice, since he also used a Google map, or comparing my code to his to find the difference. I also spent a good deal of time in the unscholarly practice of trial and error; I couldn’t just logically think the code into doing what I wanted it to do, so I tried and borrowed and compared and tried again …a very different way of going about a historical project!

One of the advantages of working in digital media for this particular site was the easy manipulation of photos. I could simply surf the Library of Congress’s online photo catalogue and save the images I wanted to use. I also used some images from PDF sources (a brochure published by the DC Historic Preservation Office, for example…though I only used publicly accessible photos!), which I converted to jpegs in Photoshop. Finally, I took pictures of a few images in books (again, publicly accessible ones) with my digital camera. I was able to brighten these and clarify them for the viewer, all without having to leave my house and travel to four or five different libraries spread out over town. Fortunately, our guest lawyer seemed to indicate that, as long as we appropriate information (images in this case) for a sufficiently different public use on the Web, we wouldn’t be breaking copyright law. (I would still like to verify this though, especially in terms of library reproductions policies, if given more time.)

Certainly, the biggest drawback of the project was my limited knowledge of the technology, especially when putting the site together. Making the map in Google maps was wonderfully easy, but it was much harder to integrate it into the site along with the sixteen popup windows I made in Dreamweaver. First it took me a little while to think out how I would use the popup windows provided with the map; I decided to make them only include links since I knew I didn’t have the expertise to format pictures and text within them. Understanding how to register the map, get an API key, and then put the map on the Web in the right place so that it would actually appear was even more challenging.

Otherwise, had I the knowledge, I certainly would have finessed my site to make it look as polished as the version in my head. Ideally, I would have been able to manipulate the layout of images and text within tables better to make each popup page look less tablelike. I also would put some kind of logo banner image across the top, have the map load in satellite view, and make each popup window appear without the whole Firefox/Explorer navigator frame around it. I also liked the suggestion during my presentation of having the popups appear in a frame next to the map rather than in a new window.

There is much more to do for the site, as the home page indicates. (I made it to lay out the scope of the project.) First, I would include links to some of the sources I used, such as the LOC Prints and Photographs Online Catalogue, Cultural Tourism, and the HPO brochure. This way I could better demonstrate the credibility of my site and also encourage viewers to pursue local history further if they wanted to look up more locations on their own. Then I would finish the few points still under construction for Capitol Hill (these proved to be the hardest to research). Finally, I would repeat the whole process for other neighborhoods in DC. I would keep up the theme of neighborhood institutions and try to strike a balance of houses, people, schools, parks, hospitals, transportation, points of industry/employment, and markets or stores.

If given the time and access, I would love to consult with members of each neighborhood in order to learn those particular quirks that I wouldn’t find in a book. I also would like, as I originally intended, to use audio technology to share oral histories about the places on the map; a resident could tell a story or relay memories of a place when a popup window opens, for example. My other idea was to incorporate a message board so that people could share memories. Historians often forget that the public itself is an amazing untapped resource of historical information…perhaps longtime residents have old photos, newspaper clippings, or scrapbooks as well as stories to contribute. I think these aspects, if incorporated, would help viewers recognize the sense of community, founded on a collective past, that is inherent but often overlooked in being the resident of a Washington neighborhood.

Know Your Neighborhood

May 2nd, 2006

here is my site: Know Your Neighborhood

Wikipedia edit

April 3rd, 2006

I added a line about tourist destinations in my hometown, Norfolk, VA.

Very exciting, I know.

wikis, etc.

April 2nd, 2006

Looking at some of the blogs this week finally eased some of my concerns about blogging…especially in scholarship. This award-winning post exemplifies the kind of academic musings that I would think of as belonging on a blog…clearly an individual’s train of thought (one which links together some interesting ideas), but still supported with quotes and obvious background knowledge. True, it’s not exactly accessible to an uninformed public, but it’s nice to imagine some stuffy history professor sitting in front of his/her computer with a glass of wine in hand, shoes off, chuckling over this post. I guess my point is, it’s just a blog. It doesn’t have to be academic. And if it’s not your personal cup of tea, chances are there’s a blog that is. I get it now….

The article on wikipedia was quite interesting, though I am certainly not sold on the whole idea. Especially because it’s probably not clear to most people what the nature of the site is, so they are likely to assume credibility when they shouldn’t. I suppose it’s true of any other written summary of information, but you just really have to wonder with these authors what their motivation is. This is not a job, it’s not something they’re paid to do, their reputation isn’t on the line, etc. so some of the checks on, say, a published work aren’t necessarily in place here. I was glad that Rosenzwieg pointed out that there’s a type: male, internet saavy, and (i would add) people with time on their hands to devote to their often peculiar interests. Now I am picturing a very different sort of person sitting in front of the computer. Makes me a bit nervous.

That said, however, I CAN appreciate wikipedia as a bizarre mirror of the public mind (at least among internet devotees). It would be fascinating to see which topics get the most attention in history, or to compare related elements, such as a president’s administration and a conspiracy theory pertaining to that president. It would also be interesting to know what all the taboo or difficult subjects are. I looked up the kkk as an example of a controversial topic and, interestingly, it is indeed locked for editing. I don’t know about history, but, as a phenomenon, wikipedia is certainly an odd window into popular culture.

copyright issues

March 26th, 2006

Well I was certainly happy to read about the Bridgeman/Corel case in Digital History, since it addresses exactly what I planned to do to put some images on my site (in my case, take digital pictures of images already reprinted in books). I imagine the book publisher had to pay the libraries to use the images, but I have to say, if the only difference is that I could go down to the Library of Congress and take a picture of the picture there, I don’t feel all that guilty. The fact that Corbis can claim the rights to images in the public domain, though, is pretty shocking.

Also shocking is the fact that music will not be in the public domain until 2067! Unfortunately, I would recommend steering clear of getting into music licensing if you can avoid it…we had a lawyer and signed a contract about licensing rights and publishing rights (two separate things–two separate costs–two separate groups who make money) and I still don’t understand it all. This seems a shame, though, to lose access to historical music, since the Internet would grant access to it as never before (especially music recorded in outdated formats). Hopefully we can talk about this more with our guest speaker.

In contrast, it was somewhat refreshing to read the standards for fair use in filmmaking. At least there it seems like there is some leeway (assuming you can get your hands on whatever it is you want to use). I thought all of their points were logical and, well, fair. It’s interesting, though, that these same standards can’t quite be applied to music…

March 21st, 2006

An example of good design is the exploredc.org site, mostly because it is highly structured and yet very easy to navigate. This is especially apparent when you get into the content of the site. The color scheme gives it a nice uniformity and the colors are unobtrusive. More importantly, they are used well to delineate different sections of each page (menu bar on the side for the topic at hand, menu bar across the top for all the topics, and white for body text). Links and layers (photographs, audio, lesson plans) are all neatly laid out and are accessible either as a group from the home page or in relation to a topic (linked from the topic page). The use of art is minimal (only as menu headers), which makes the page seem very professional.

design

March 20th, 2006

The emphasis on accessibility in the two readings was interesting, since I’d never considered it before today. Interestingly, it just came up this afternoon…someone was complaining that census.gov hasn’t put the manuscript census online yet because they can’t figure out how to make it accessible to the blind which, by law, all federal sites have to do. I didn’t realize there were already so many ways to make the internet accessible (braille readers, etc). Good to know.

As historians, it’s great to get some pointers on layout, and it’s true, it would be beneficial to look at it as an artistic form of graphic design. I especially like the idea that the layout itself can encourage the viewer to think a certain way (association), or to move their eyes in the order you want them to (through a pattern). I wonder if our generation is used to thinking this way already?

And the final lesson of the week: subtlety is always better. Nothing says amateur like lime green font on a bright red background. I appreciated the suggestions for using neutral background colors to compliment text layout.  Something I’ll definitely keep in mind for my project…

project proposal: local history

March 20th, 2006

Once again, I’ve revised the concept of my final project. I had intended to focus on neighborhood history in Brooklyn, until I realized that the Brooklyn Historical Society archives are undergoing serious cataloging and aren’t readily available. For another class I’m working on a project on Eastern Market, so I thought maybe I’d transfer my idea to DC, with Capitol Hill as a neighborhood prototype.

I did a quick web survey, and found that these two sites are closest to what I want to do: Explore DC and Cultural Tourism DC. The target audience of Cultural Tourism is out-of-town tourists, with the aim of luring them off the Mall by promising shopping and restaurants in other historic districts. Explore DC provides much more information, with historical summaries of different neighborhoods and a few contemporary photographs. The audience for this site seems more general.

I’d like to target the local audience in an effort to inform them about the history they see around them every day. I think there’d be a good audience for this in DC, especially since house histories have become popular and as people are investing in real estate in the city again. They would take away from the site a better understanding of their environment, and of the importance of local history. Therefore I’d like to make a site that sort of functions like an online walking tour but with more detailed historic information.

The first page would show a map of the district with different neighborhoods delineated by colors and labeled. The viewer would click on a neighborhood to enter the site. Each neighborhood would have the same metadata/structure: a written summary of the neighborhood’s history (very short), a map, and a menu across the top. The map (probably a Google map) would contain street names and points of interest (like the 9/11 site), and by rolling the mouse over these points, the viewer would call up a historic image or possibly a quote from a primary source. I would try to balance historical periods across the points. The viewer would click on the image/quote to open a new window with information particular to that site. I hope to use a lot of images, because I think they convey a sense of place, and the intent is to have the viewer, who presumably is a resident, compare the “then” of these images with the “now” with which he/she is familiar. I’d like to include pertinent quotes from historic sources, along with summary information of the place/object/person. Lastly, I hope to use voice board technology (courtesy of a friend) so that residents can share memories about the neighborhood by leaving a message.

The site, then, is not intended to cater to tourists. Some locations may be familiar ones, like Eastern Market, but others may be unmarked houses, or street corners, or longtime neighborhood businesses or churches. Hopefully residents of the neighborhood (and DC at large) will learn to appreciate the history of the familiar around them. This also compliments my research in local history this semester.

digital scholarship

March 6th, 2006

There were several interesting points in this week’s readings, and they seemed to hit a bit closer to home than some of the other articles we’ve read. The AJH’s experiment with hypertext essays, for instance, is something we might all reasonably do in the next couple of years. When I first looked at the samples I was a bit disappointed, because I thought “these look more like traditional text…why not just make it a full-on website?” Then I realized that 1) I apparently am used to the “look” of websites (even something as simple as a background color) and more importantly, 2) these actually are a great bridge between traditional scholarship and new media. And I think that’s absolutely necessary in a time of transition such as this, when scholars are more willing to use the Internet as a tool, but not so open to completely rethinking the concept of scholarship presentation itself. That said, I thought these attempts were good, and that the strongest, as a user, had solid structures (metadata/menus/navigation).

One thing that stuck in my mind was the mention that the Arnold S. site included “the kinds of discoveries and reflections more traditionally relegated to the margins of research.” Here it seems like hypertext/web use could push the boundaries of scholarship conceptually (and where we might find the most resistence). Of course the possibility of expanding to include secondary/sideline kinds of research (and also new sources) is appealing, but I wonder if it could endanger or shift the standards of scholarship? Might we at some point get confused between blogging and presenting scholarship?

Finally, I was glad to read Bell’s essay because it reflects some of the concerns I’ve had. It responded well to the Hermalin essay, which seemed a bit idealistic and was clearly written from the scholar’s point of view, without taking into consideration the realities of the publishing industry. I was not aware of the booklike technology that Bell mentions and would be interested to find out more. But what most resonated with me was Bell’s discussion about reading itself, and I’m very curious to know what kinds of psychological studies are going on about how people interact with computers. Because I do think that reading online is different, and I think those differences change how we read. It is taxing and somehow more tedious, to me anyway, and it just doesn’t carry the same weight. I don’t remember what I’ve read as soon as the lines have scrolled up off the page. But then, I am of a transitional generation, and I’m sure people who grow up online will have a much easier time of it. I just don’t like or trust virtual text…give me a good old fashioned table of content, an index, and page layout. Then I’ve got something whole to work with, and it’s easier to keep that whole in mind as I’m reading. For some reason it’s much harder to keep the context and the thesis/point in mind with something digital, or else I just haven’t learned to take online reading seriously.

my web page, finally

February 28th, 2006

view my lovely little web page here.