Mike Wesch’s digital scholarship…oh, and he speaks to the Library of Congress

Digital Ethnographer (and anthropologist) Mike Wesch spoke to the Library of Congress about YouTube, providing an anthropological introduction to the global phenomenon. On his YouTube channel, Wesch (and his digital enthnography students) have posted a video of this presentation (which can be seen below). Aside from the dynamic content, and beyond the quality of scholarship involved in this presentation, the Wesch et al.’s video creation really showcases a different way of thinking/making with/about scholarship in our current culture. While I am sure the presentation was good, I have to believe that the video posted on YouTube works better, as it becomes a more integrated way of working through the material. In this one creation, there is oral discourse (and we can see parts of Wesch’s oration—the gestures, the facial expressions, and so on [hearkening us to Ong’s discussions of secondary orality), textual discourse (with text on screen, among other literate-based influences), visual/image discourses (with still shots, but also with issues of juxtaposition or examples of collage in various moments), and numerous other discourses. We could classify some as video-based practices (though not sure if that is “discourse”), where the use of jump cuts and other editing techniques help communicate the message(s) involved. Or we might see comic-based techniques emerging, with sections that work relationally—multiple things that together communicate something greater than they can individually: where text, image, video, oration, etc. work together intricately, relationally, not mimetically.

This creation, in terms of our focus here, is by far as interesting, if not more interesting, than Wesch’s discussion of YouTube, which itself is fascinating. The video mode opens things for the message that traditional print-based text cannot do. It creates a possibility for communication that text, even multimodal text (e.g., image/graphic and alphabetic writing) could not do. This, I think, is the kind of scholarship that Virginia Kuhn’s dissertation tried to open up, but because her constraints were within the genre of doctoral dissertation, she had to adhere (or remain noticeably close) to the expectations of that kind of creation: a print-dominate culture, adhering strictly to literate practices; thus, her TK3 dissertation was noticeably print-literacy based. More than just incorporating multimedia (like Kuhn’s approach, which itself challenged many limitations and significantly pushed boundaries for digital/multimedia scholarship in positive directions) Wesch’s video opens us to something else. It is scholarship that works orally, but also scholarship that works literately, and scholarship that works electrally. The medium, and the creation, do as much for the message as does Wesch’s scholarship (and the situation…as this would be received in completely different terms if he wasn’t speaking at/to the Library of Congress).

Nonetheless, I am once again amazed, informed, and inspired by Wesch’s work, and despite its lengthy viewing time (55 minutes), especially for YouTubers, it is an excellent piece of digital/multimedia scholarship.

___________________________________
http://www.clemson.edu/~hodgson

technical difficulties

One of the major arguments against doing a digital dissertation, or generally dissertations in other media formats, is the issue of access. What do we do when the technology moves on and this current “new” media becomes old, outdated media? becomes perhaps even inaccessible media? Right now I am battling a bit of this issue as I try to locate a TK3 reader so I can view Virginia Kuhn’s digital dissertation (one of the first to ever be done). But as TK3 was a forerunner to Sophie, and as the progress has moved specifically to Sophie, I cannot seem to find a current, active download for this program. Sophie, yes. TK3, no.

The issue is not about my particular frustrations, though they are also involved, but rather the legitimacy of the argument of access. But I think the situation is one that perpetuates itself. These fears drive part of the resistance to other media dissertations. But the lack of widespread access to certain media platforms, the lack of a mandatory TK3 download as an option on every University Library’s homepage, is partly because these things are not generally considered acceptable. As long as print remains, books will be available. But because these other media creations aren’t prolific, maintaining access to the software isn’t prolific, which only sustains/supports this argument of access. It is quite a cycle, and in the meantime I have to figure a “work around” to find/locate/install a TK3 reader.

___________________________________
http://www.clemson.edu/~hodgson