Pat Leary’s article “Googling the Victorians” summed up the feelings I have had throughout the semester as an Americanist focused on the early republic: the benefits of online research and communications are infinitely positive only if they are combined with traditional non-digitized sources. I have felt myself pushing back against the digital world because I do not see it is as a replacement of the traditional form of research methodologies that I have been trained in at George Mason. However, Leary confronts my fears head-on by explaining that the digital realm and the Internet have done wonders for historians and will continue to do so IF we don’t neglect our traditional training in the meantime.
Early on in my history studies I was taught that it was important to understand the audience and context of a source. In other words, I would read a diary, a letter to a friend, and a speech to an audience all in a different light. The diary most likely was not written for eyes other than the writer’s; the letter to a friend uncovers the intimacy of the friendship and information that the writer was willing to share; the speech reflects a message and persona that has been created for consumption by an audience. This same understanding needs to be explored regarding digital sources: blogs, twitter, submissions to an archive, etc. If I were asked to tell a story about my experience on 9/11, for example, the story I would write in a journal, a letter I would write to a friend, and a submission to an online database would all be different. The latter would be the most contrived and self aware, so that I could believe I had some control over how I would later be perceived. Is this just me? I can’t say. This is just an issue that I have thought about and that Leary made me reconsider yet again.
Leary’s explanation of the use of Google to explain unfamiliar allusions which would otherwise most likely remain unknown to historians (“remember the grotto”) and the benefit of finding related articles that would never be uncovered in a traditional search is right on point. In sum, I agree with Leary’s assertion that it is imperative for today’s historians to gain new skills in digital research while remaining proficient in the original skills of “traditional” research.
