If Emerson’s work and thought were to be encoded in some shape or form, archived or distributed computationally, beyond what is available currently (which strikes me as little, in comparison with a Whitman or a Dickinson), what type of encoding? And to do what? Where do we need an Emerson 2.0?
What kind of presence should or could Emerson have in the emergence and distribution of a digital humanities? My project continues to assume that Emerson has something to say about the digital humanities, has insight for us as we continue to grapple with and grasp literacy and learning and–more specifically, for academics–literary scholarship in the age of Google. Emerson’s “American Scholar”–that is to say, Emerson’s characterization of literary scholarship in that address (and elsewhere) along with Emerson’s interest in literary pedagogy (as I see it)–can be updated for Google Scholar. My initial approach has been largely historical: what is in the Emersonian pedagogy of the literary scholar that speaks to, associates with, offers insight into the potential of digital scholarship, of writing and reading in networked environments? I have long had a passage like this one in mind, from “American Scholar,” when I think of ways that Emersonian literacy (and pedagogy–since he is talking about how scholars should read) speaks to or even anticipates a kind of literacy that digital medai and web 2.0 seems to usher.
When the mind is braced by labor and invention, the page of whatever book we read becomes luminous with manifold allusion.
In reminding us that “there is then creative reading as well as creative writing” (the same passage), doesn’t Emerson speak to a kind of read/write world of literacy that he is looking toward, and perhaps searching in vain for what he describes? I have thus thought about the topic of an “Electronic” or “Extensible” Emerson. But beyond an Emersonian reading of extensible and hypertextual writing, which I do think is valuable (and part of what I have set out to do), is there practice that I can add to the theory? In other words, what digital projects and processes call out for an Emerson? What in Emerson scholarship needs digital remediation?
Some initial ideas–with hopes (taking advantage of this read/write tool) that others, digital humanists and Emersonians and others, will help me illuminate my allusions.
- My primary interest and inclination, I recognize, lie not with textual editing. I don’t know if there is a need for a digital archive of Emerson’s texts–beyond what is available: two sites, so far as I know, that offer searchable, html versions of Emerson’s works in the public domain (the Houghton edition). Of course, a searchable site for what is not public domain–particularly the Journals and Miscellaneous Notebooks–would be wonderful. But is Harvard UP interested in that? Perahps there is more to do with enhancing the text mining capabilities of the works that are available at rwe.org and emersoncentral.com. Put machine learning tools to work there and see what kind of manifold allusions emerge.
- My primary interest and inclination are, so far as I can tell, to do something with Emerson’s text from the reader’s position. Or, to put into practice some of the read-write potential I see in his texts in theory. In broad and perhaps now too vague a term: to let the Emersonian hypertext out. I don’t know what forms this could or should take. An Emerson wiki or blog? What is it that readers want to do with Emerson? I think there is pedagogical value here–for students and for their teachers; some sort of digital gathering place where the process of reading Emerson and his proto-wiki “cyclopedia,” ideas and essays and entries and sentneces that keep sliding and linking into others, can become more evident by being more actively enacted, collaborated upon. This kind of collaboration (mashing up Emerson) makes me think of another key passage in Emersonian thought and theory that, I think, stands in need of enactment for readers out there who are trying to make sense of this author. The passage is from Self-Reliance, where he describes the process of seeing our ideas and thoughts in another’s work, come back to us with “alienated majesty.” Shouldn’t the same hold true for when we find our thoughts and ideas and aspirations in reading Emerson? Perhaps we have been too cordial and respectful of Emerson’s writing, more than he would want from us. Some sort of textual remediation of our interaction with him as “wreaders” might be in order; help us slay this giant that we might also understand him. What digital humanities projects are possible in this vein?
- Another that comes to mind, or at least to the point of wondering. As a way to understand some senses of Emerson’s notions of spirit and genius or over-soul, his interest (more than many would think) an otherness that makes us who we are bit also pass for who we are: his understanding, in other words, of virtual presence. Is there a VR experience of Emerson (and Emersonian experience) that is conceivable? Such that to grasp a reading experience of Emerson truly (the essay of that name, for example), we should, so one could argue, experience it virtually, somehow? Is there a VR experience of nature’s virtuality (in Emerson’s senses: the apocalypse of the mind) that would be a way to grasp his Nature?
