We argue that the radicality of the digital humanities is the potential it offers to expand our understanding to the vertical plane, or more precisely, planes of research. In vertical interdisciplinarity, there is a rich layering in both the method and the practice of teaching and scholarship, and this poses challenges to the very discursive categories employed. The disruptive components are the creative, aesthetic, and non-alphabetic elements, which once deployed vertically within a field radically transform its formal properties. If horizontal strategies make us imagine new narrative lines within a field, then the vertical approach forces us to rethink the narrator, what narrative form could be, and how we think, reflect, critique and express.
Virginia Kuhn & Vicki Callahan, “Nomadic Archives: Remix and the Drift to Praxis”
The term ‘interdisciplinary’ typically refers to a kind of additive component, history plus literature, history plus art, and so forth. The perspective is essentially a horizontal one, linking fields without any fundamental change to the formal structures of any one discipline.
Virginia Kuhn & Vicki Callahan, “Nomadic Archives: Remix and the Drift to Praxis.”
Okay, its 2015 and I’m still loving the 80s redux.
Good morning! Here, have a mini-Scissor Sisters dance party. ;)
Today’s writing playlist includes… (What else should I add to it?!)
only those for whom a sexual fantasy ‘works,’ that is, those who are aroused by it, have a chance of telling us to what particular set of conditions that fantasy speaks, and can analyze how and why it works and for whom. Sexual fantasy materials are like icebergs; the one-tenth that shows about the surface is no reliable indicator of the size or significance of the whole thing. Sexual fantasy that doesn’t arouse is boring, funny, or repellent, and unsympathetic outsiders trying to decode these fantasies (or any others) will make all sorts of mistakes.
Joanna Russ, “Pornography By Women For Women, With Love,” 89