Humanist Discussion Group

Humanist Archives: Nov. 30, 2025, 7:32 a.m. Humanist 39.241 - aggressive style as symptom? deference as opportunity?

				
              Humanist Discussion Group, Vol. 39, No. 241.
        Department of Digital Humanities, University of Cologne
                      Hosted by DH-Cologne
                       www.dhhumanist.org
                Submit to: humanist@dhhumanist.org




        Date: 2025-11-28 06:14:59+00:00
        From: Willard McCarty <willard.mccarty@mccarty.org.uk>
        Subject: writing scholarship

An observation concluding in questions.

Recently I was alerted to an article in digital humanities by someone I
know on friendly terms. The article, however, bristled (and undoubtedly
still bristles) with fortifications of theory and reference. I reacted,
I'm afraid, like a turtle to a porcupine, seeking the protection of his
shell, glimpsing no more than the first few sentences. Mea culpa, but I
offer a further reaction I think may be helpful--a question, as it
happens: is this fortified, aggressive writing the best way to
communicate? Wouldn't a confident modesty, drawbridge down, spears
withdrawn, doors open, presenting some idea slightly spiced so as to
provoke hunger for argument, be better? Would this not be better than
presenting an appearance of unassailable truth to be followed?

Perhaps the aggressive style to which I refer is a mark of uncertainty 
and insecurity. Are these emotional states more characteristic of 
some disciplines than others? Newer ones (such as digital 
humanities) more than others (such as history) that no one would 
think to question? Schools of thought within disciplines get into 
disputes, but the style I'm talking about communicates (to me) 
insecurity not secure righteousness.

What has changed since the early years, when almost all 
conversations with academics in established disciplines 
would induce severe insecurity, is the degree of cultural 
authority that technological work has gained -- if not 
(in the case of AI) a deference to be quickly backed away 
from and turned into discussion whenever possible, 
discussion that pulls the wizardly curtain away.

Comments?

Best,
WM


--
Willard McCarty,
Professor emeritus, King's College London;
Editor, Interdisciplinary Research in the Arts,
   Sciences and Humanities (Berghahn); Humanist
www.mccarty.org.uk


_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe at: http://dhhumanist.org/Restricted
List posts to: humanist@dhhumanist.org
List info and archives at at: http://dhhumanist.org
Listmember interface at: http://dhhumanist.org/Restricted/
Subscribe at: http://dhhumanist.org/membership_form.php