Edward Vanhoutte

Director of Research & Publications, Royal Academy of Dutch Language & LiteratureHon. Research Associate, UCL Centre for Digital HumanitiesEditor-in-Chief, LLC: The Journal of Digital Scholarship in the Humanities (OUP)

edward.vanhoutte@kantl.be@evanhoutte

Social, Digital, Scholarly Editing – Saskatoon – 12/07/2013

A Bag of Words

Social Perspectives onScholary Editing

No edition is more social than the full blown conventional printed scholarly edition

No edition is more social than the full blown conventional printed scholarly edition

1. Accessible2. Clearly targeted audience3. Explicit

1. Accessible

● Well known technology● Book shops● Libraries

Myth 1

Digital editions are more accessible

Nuances

Digital editions are more accessible

● may provide faster accessibility

Nuances

Digital editions are more accessible

● may provide faster accessibility● may provide better & direct accessibility to

representations of source materials

Nuances

Digital editions are more accessible.

● may provide faster accessibility● may provide better & direct accessibility to

representations of source materials● may provide better accessibility for analytical tools

More accessible?

Only when the digital edition overcomes the problems connected with the technology of reading

Conclusion

Digital editions do not provide a quantitative higher accessibility than printed editionsbut a qualitative different accessibility

Myth 1

Digital editions are more accessible.

2. Clearly Targeted Audience [implied]

● Domain specialists:

● Fellow textual critics● Fellow textual/literary scholars● Students● Publishing professionals

2. Clearly Targeted Audience

● Different audience = Different type● Different intent = Different type

● Student edition ● Reading edition● Facsimile edition

→ Typologies→ Formal orientations of editing

2. Clearly Targeted Audience

Problem 1:

Digital edition is not a type of edition

→ 'Most digital scholarly editions were just souped up books' [O'Donnel]

[Descriptive Classification Generator – 2007]

2. Clearly Targeted Audience

Problem 2:

Exploration of technological possibilities

replaced

Clear articulation of intent and audience

→ Everything for everyone

Nuance

Digital editions reach a wider audience than printed editions

● may potentially reach a wider audience

Nuance

Digital editions reach a wider audience than printed editions

● may potentially reach a wider audience

● Audience ≠ online world● Audience ≠ pagehits● Audience ≠ crowd sourcers

Conclusion

Digital editions reach/attract a different audience

And pagehits don't prove anything!

Myth 2

Digital editions reach a wider audience

3. Explicit

● Editorial principles● Citeable text● Critical apparatus / Record of variants

3. Explicit

● Editorial principles● Citeable text● Critical apparatus / Record of variants

3. Explicit

Critical apparatus / Record of variants

● Formalized● Formulized● Representation of research data● Account for editorial choices

3. Explicit

Critical apparatus / Record of variants

● explicit invitation for engagement with● The edition● The editorial choices / the editor● The text/work● Peers

→ Scholarly debate / publications

3. Explicit

2 Problems:

● Economics● Emotion

3. Explicit

Central aim of textual scholarship:

Provide the humanities with the foundational data for any sensible statement about texts/works

Scholarly edition [functions]:● Transmissional: establishing the best possible

text for transmission over time● Communicative: make sure it reaches as many

people as possible

3. Explicit

Problem 1: Economics

● Reduction to meaningful variants only● Stripping out all scholarly apparatus

3. Explicit

Problem 1: Economics

● Reduction to meaningful variants● Stripping out all scholarly apparatus

'Scholarly editing is a transaction between editor & reader' [Eggert]

→ taking out the evidence of this transactional act removes the main instrument for engagement

3. Explicit

Problem 2: Emotion

● Barbed wire [Mumford]● Cemetery of variants [Friedhofen – Koopmann]

3. Explicit

Cemetery

● Historical function: testimonies of our past● Social function: places to mourn● Cultural function: record of meaningful lives● Esthetic function: place for monumental art

3. Explicit

Cemetery

● Historical function: testimonies of our past● Social function: places to mourn● Cultural function: record of meaningful lives● Esthetic function: place for monumental art

● Freely accessible ● Very well organised layout● Tools: find any tombstone within walking distance

3. Explicit

Cemetery● Confrontational place to engage with life

Cemetery of variants● Confrontational place to engage with the text

→ But people fear confrontation→ Clear best text editions were preferred model for publishers whose main goal is to sell books

Myth 3

Communicative and transmissional function is best fulfilled by the clear best text edition

Myth 3

Communicative and transmissional function is best fulfilled by the clear best text edition

[Social] Digital Edition

● Engaging researchers● Engaging readers / general public

Teleurgang van den Waterhoek [2000]

● User choice of orientation text● User text/image annotation● User text/image links● User link annotation● Reading paths

→ Exchangeable between users

SGML [TEI] / HyTime

● Hard to produce● Hard to deliver● Hard to engage researchers / readers

Targeted audience: researchers

→ False presumption: there is a readership that wants to engage with the edition/text in a social way

In Oorlogsnood [2005]

● Calender driven● No further dynamic user interaction

Targeted audience: general public

Huge success→ 2 editions in print● Theme: WW I● Looking up birthday

De trein der traagheid [2012]

● Dynamic views on textual archive● Dynamically generated scholarly● Full record of variants● Fully annotated● Stable citeable edition included

Targeted audience: researchers

→ Request for clear text print edition for general public

Correspondence of Stijn Streuvels [2013]

2,500 letters ● Archive: extension to catalogue● Edition: fully annotated / images / indexed ● Text-base

Targeted audience: researchers / general public

Correspondence of Stijn Streuvels [2013]

→ Failed attempt at crowd sourcing

● Profound distrust of amateur editors● Overvaluation of professional editors

Correspondence of Stijn Streuvels [2013]

A bag of words

● Corpus of ego-documents● Exportable subcorpora● XML files → Analytical tools

De Leeuw van Vlaenderen [2012]

● Text-critical reading edition● Genetic essay● Selective scholarly apparatus

Targeted audience: specialized readers / researchers

→ Engagement: citations / scholarly debate