“What’s in a name? That which we call a rose, by any other name would smell as sweet.” This is a quote from the famous Shakespeare play Romeo and Juliet. This statement really makes us ponder what the purpose of a name really is. Because as Juliet tells us, something’s name doesn’t really change anything about the thing itself. “That which we call a rose, by any other name would smell as sweet”.
So why do we focus so much on the name of Digital Humanities, or should I say The Digital Humanities?
In the article “The Humanities, Done Digitally” Kathleen Fitzpatrick tells us about how she struggled to know whether she should refer to Digital Humanities as plural or singular. She later tells us about how Digital Humanities got its name. She mentions “Blackwell wanted a title that might appeal to a wider range of readers and so proposed ‘A Companion to Digitized Humanities.’ Unsworth countered with ‘Digital Humanities’ to keep the field from appearing to be about mere digitization, and the name has stuck”
I find it quite interesting that so much focus has been and still is put into the name of Digital Humanities. I feel like we don’t need the Digital Humanities to have a name in order for it to make a contribution. Although names can be very informative, as is such in this case. The name of Digital Humanities gives us an idea of what is being studied. However, it’s not as much about the name as it is what is being studied. So why is there such a focus on the name?
0 Comments