Note: My copy of Handbook of Digital Public History somehow omits page numbers, so I will not be including specific numbers, but rather the chapter name in citations.
Handbook of Digital Public History is both an overview of the current state of digital public history (as it says in the name) and the history of the topic. It covers the historiography, projects that brought the subject to where it is today, and the general definitions of not only digital public history, but also digital history and public history. One of the most interesting points the book tackles is how digital public history is “at the margins of both fields” and the ways in which it tries to “build scholarship” for and “with audiences beyond the academy.”[1] The general structure of the book covers the past, but also best practices in the field, examples of current and ongoing work, as well as how it can evolve in the future.
Within “The Historiographical Foundations of Digital Public History”, Anaclet Pons discusses the past, mostly focusing on the “start” of digital public history as the “Valley of the Shadow” project, but also looking at the “precursors” to the subject as it stands today.[2] Throughout the whole chapter, an overarching theme is that history, as a digital public item, would be “skillfully transformed by experts into an accessible product.”[3] This turn, both digitally and accessibly, has led to history being both available to and from people who have not been able to contribute or learn in the past. We now have so many digital “archives”, thanks to the digital turn in our overall world as well, that almost anyone can share their own version of history. While we still need historians to interpret these things, everyone can now “do” history, and as historians we need to ensure that we are keeping up with the times.
"Digital Public History in the United States” speaks more specifically to the history of the field in the U.S., versus the world as a whole. In particular, Thomas Cauvin explores how “digital historians reimagined the concept of authority and relations with the public.”[4] Initially, “digital history…[was] a collection of materials with little historical interpretation” which, while probably helpful to those in the academy to use for their own work, it would not provide much help to the public.[5] Projects developed over time, incorporating more and more of the public at a conscious level; historians actively worked to involve more voices. For example, the September 11 Digital Archive “collected ‘more than 150,000 digital items’ related to the attacks on the World Trade Center” which were all crowd sourced.[6] In the end, Cauvin stresses that digital aspects of public history will continue to grow in importance, in and outside the academy.
"Individuals in the Crowd: Privacy, Online Participatory Curation, and the Public Historian as Private Citizen” by Tammy S. Gordon delves into the more worrisome aspects of crowd sourcing and digital public history projects. She created the NC HB2: A Citizens’ History project in response to the House Bill 2 (commonly known as HB2) from North Carolina, proposed in 2016.[7] Because of the divisive nature of the bill, anonymity was desired both by people who donated items and by those who volunteered. Gordon was forced to consider how to make donations accessible to those people, while also “considering both privacy and safety when designing online, public-facing collections projects.”[8] Another key point in Gordon’s chapter is her discussion on the inclusion or exclusion of voices. When considering who to include, it is important to also consider the project’s main message and if we are “columbusing” a narrative.[9]
Whereas in the past, living history was more about observation on the part of the public rather than participation, “Living History: Performing the Past” discusses the development from that more disconnected past. Recent attempts at living histories include the use of social media, such as in the case of “the Facebook page of a young Danish woman…chronicl[ing] her daily life in eighteenth century Copenhagen”.[10] This allows interaction between a public on one end, with her entries on another. There are also options now for “mixed reality”, which “utilize both AR technologies and the real world”, enabling a more interactive living history than at any point in the past.[11] The new digital technologies that have been integrated into living history have not only benefitted the field as a whole, but also led to greater interaction and interest from the public.
[1] Serge Noiret, Mark Tebeau, and Gerben Zaagsma, “Introduction,” in Handbook of Digital Public History, ed. Serge Noiret, Mark Tebeau, and Gerben Zaagsma (De Gruyter Reference, 2022).
[2] Anaclet Pons, “The Historiographical Foundations of Digital Public History,” in Handbook of Digital Public History, ed. Serge Noiret, Mark Tebeau, and Gerben Zaagsma (De Gruyter Reference, 2022).
[3] Pons, “The Historiographical Foundations of Digital Public History.”
[4] Thomas Cauvin, “Digital Public History in the United States,” in Handbook of Digital Public History, ed. Serge Noiret, Mark Tebeau, and Gerben Zaagsma (De Gruyter Reference, 2022).
[5] Cauvin, “Digital Public History in the United States.”
[6] Cauvin, “Digital Public History in the United States.”
[7] Tammy S. Gordon, “Individuals in the Crowd: Privacy, Online Participatory Curation, and the Public Historian as Private Citizen,” in Handbook of Digital Public History, ed. Serge Noiret, Mark Tebeau, and Gerben Zaagsma (De Gruyter Reference, 2022).
[8] Gordon, “Individuals in the Crowd.”
[9] Gordon, “Individuals in the Crowd.”
[10] David Dean, “Living History: Performing the Past,” in Handbook of Digital Public History, ed. Serge Noiret, Mark Tebeau, and Gerben Zaagsma (De Gruyter Reference, 2022).
[11] Dean, “Living History: Performing the Past.”