Hi Sara,

Thanks for this post!

Piggy-backing off of Leo’s comment a bit, I’m interested in this concept of “academic influence” as opposed to the sort created by popular social media influencers. Is there a clear difference (in your and/or Stewert’s opinion)?

I’m also curious about this idea of trust and credibility. How can an academic…[Read more]

Hey Faith,

Thanks for analyzing this podcast! I think podcasting can be a great way for academics to share their research with the public in a really digestible way.

I’d like to hear more about how Call Her Daddy fits into your definition of the Public Humanities (PH). What is your definition of PH, and how does this podcast fit?

Hi Jen,

Thanks for covering this fascinating article!

It seems like there are a lot of points of connection between Gregory and Shumway’s work.

I really liked your points about “evolving” towards a more inclusive, engaged, and unified public humanities, as opposed to one in which the public looks on from the outside. Again, I have to…[Read more]

Hi Faith,

Thanks for sharing your thoughts!

Yes, there are different motives for engaging in purely academic work versus public humanities work. Public humanists engage with other public humanists and the public, who are choosing to volunteer their time towards learning from and/or participating within humanities work as a means of pure…[Read more]

Cesar,

Thanks for this response, and for bringing in this activist perspective. Yes! A major benefit of doing public humanities work is that it can help new voices to be heard. It can also help us, as humanities scholars, to reach new groups and engage with concepts that might otherwise have been beyond our reach had we not turned toward the public.

Hi Brenna,

Thanks for sharing your thoughts!

I agree that – at least according to Lubar – public humanities might entail a focus shift from working inwardly to outwardly. Many humanities scholars can feel isolated in their research, but, by shifting to public work, we are required to work with others and engage with others’ perspectives.…[Read more]

Jen,

Thanks for sharing your thoughts!

YES – the risk of sharing your work and your process is real. Especially when sharing with strangers online. Trolls and rude people are unfortunately part of the territory (I have some stories of getting negative responses and reviews, as I’m sure most people do when engaging with the public online).…[Read more]

Raj,

Thanks for this response!

The public will likely be able to understand the meaning of academic texts if they really want to; however, it’s up to public humanists to actually make the public want to engage with our work (otherwise, why bother?). So I think part of making our work accessible includes making it engaging and enjoyable.…[Read more]

Hi Riannon,

Thanks for this response! I’m glad you found my question helpful. 🙂

I really like your point about who benefits from certain academic work. This made me think about the function of the work itself. If someone were to publish their work in a traditionally academic way and for an academic audience, it likely has a totally…[Read more]

Ziqing,

Thanks for your response!

You bring up the important idea of co-construction. In other words, a co-constructed public humanities (PH) project is something that is not built by a single scholar, but is instead built by both the scholar and their public. There is some disagreement within the field whether co-construction is needed in…[Read more]

Sara,

Thanks for this response!

And thanks also for touching on your last point. We won’t have time to fully cover it, though I might have included space for this question of anxiety had this been a longer course. Whenever you share anything publicly online, you’re taking a huge risk. This is why I made this blog private to our class -…[Read more]

Leo,

Thanks for sharing your thoughts!

First of all, you’re not alone in having a hard time distinguishing DH from PH. Both of these terms are pretty controversial in their respective fields. For now, I’m viewing the two as having a lot in common, though I’d argue that not all DH is PH – just because something is digital, won’t necessarily…[Read more]

Shannon,

Thanks for this response!

I liked your discussion on Lubar’s points on community. I think there’s also something to be said for being respectful of the public with whom you’re working. One way to do that is to join their already-formed community/organization, rather than making them change their ways and come to you. This also…[Read more]

April,

Thanks for sharing your thoughts!

You touch on two really important topics, both of which we will discuss more in Module 2: making our work “interesting” and making it “collaborative.”

I think the biggest thing we can do is make our work interesting and engaging. This is how we can make it accessible to anyone. See my response to…[Read more]

Chang,

Thanks for this response!

I think it’s not so much that professors might know more about something, but more that some academic writing isn’t the most engaging or interesting. Unfortunately, academic writing – unlike journalism, or most other forms of writing and communication – doesn’t come with the expectation that it must engage…[Read more]

Brittany,

Thanks for sharing these thoughts!

It may not be surprising, but I agree- making academic work open and not behind a pay-wall is very important. We’ll talk even more about this issue in our next module.

You note the importance of gaining the public’s support near the end of your post. I found this interesting! What sort of…[Read more]