The Inability to Disappear & Literary Criticism
In “Hamlet.doc? Literature in a Digital Age,” Matthew Kirschenbaum writes:
We may never know if Shakespeare had a sister, but we can be certain he didn’t have a hard drive. What if he had? Details of his writing process and his life currently a mystery might be pitilessly exposed.
Kirschenbaum couldn’t be more accurate in his assessment. Interestingly, although academics find this period of unknowns in Shakespeare’s life fascinating, it frustrates most modern students studying his work. Undoubtedly, their exasperation is primarily rooted in the following belief – in their digital worlds, it is impossible for anyone to completely disappear.
In this particular article, Kirschenbaum goes on to argue that even if Shakespeare did have a hard drive, the same questions about his work would still likely emerge, because they are human, not technological questions. However, he lists possible benefits of The Bard being ‘wired’ as knowing his start and finish dates, the possibilities of multiple versions, as well as what he might have been reading on the Internet that could have influenced plays such as Hamlet.
The most interesting part of his article surrounds the significance of creative pieces being born digital and the notions of digital preservation. For instance, consider the body of work by Emily Dickinson, and the painstaking study of her handwriting used to determine the chronology of her poems. Through the years, fading has occurred, which has led to discrepancies in how scholars have interpreted meaning. The existence of digital preservation, as well as digitally birthed work, certainly affects the way research is conducted, and negates many of the avenues of potential ambiguity. It’s a bit sad to think about this process as extinct.
Ultimately, the 21st century makes it extremely difficult for an author (or anyone) to disappear. For instance, on any given day, it is entirely possible to determine where a person has traveled, eaten, and oftentimes what thoughts he or she has entertained. This is discoverable through the variety of media an individual has accessed or come in contact with, such as blogs, social networking sites, and email. More impressively, it is possible to acquire this information without having a single exchange with the subject in question.
Even though many of these long-term effects have yet to be seen, the inability to disappear in today’s society is simultaneously producing drastic ramifications for the future of literary criticism. Part of the enjoyment that accompanies literary scholarship and research is derived from creative guesswork, and the meticulous research process. Arguably, many enter the field for the sheer experience of inquiry, and the digital world is slowly altering this process of discovery. So, what will become of the debates concerning handwritten manuscripts when they no longer exist, or the dialogue created over the possible errors due to such things as fading ink? One can only hope for typos, and avant-garde methods of inquiry for what lies ahead.
Leave a Reply