Even though digital humanities are an every emerging field of study, it is arguably one of the most important. Digital tech is pervasive in our modern world. So, it is imperative that digital humanities be more focused on as a field of study. Scholar and rhetorician, Douglas Eyman, writes how rhetoric and areas of digital study are interlinked.
Human Computer Interaction and Critical Code Study
Human Computer Interaction (HCI) and Critical Code Study (CCS) are two examples Eyman provides of digital fields of study that simultaneous interlink rhetorical analysis with digital technology. HCI tends to focus on the power of the user has when they interact with digital technology. Eyman notes that the field’s focus on usability can benefit from inclusion of digital rhetoric.
Since code is composed by humans, it’s natural that literary and rhetorical analysis can be applied to code composition. I mention in a previous post, Rhetoric, Code, and Bias, that code is rife with rhetoric. There I argue that rhetoric should be studied by coders, due to the potential of bias being present in supposedly neutral code. Mark Marino, a scholar that Eyman cites, seems to agree with me. CCS as a field would explicitly focus on how code interplays with rhetoric and meaning-making.
The Importance of New Digital Humanities
Eyman calls attention to the fact that while the digital humanities is this expansive field, very little of it is dedicated to what he calls “digital born” products of culture. Which is strange, given how many contributions to contemporary culture spawn from digital culture. Eyman also advocates for digital rhetoric being included in journals or conferences for internet studies. To not include digital rhetoric in internet studies heavily limits the fields understanding of many aspects of online communication.
If there is anything to be taken away from this article it’s that digital rhetoric deserves to have more of a place in the field of digital studies.
Leave a Reply