Based on what I watched, I would define “digital book history” as the analysis and discussion of a digital book’s history, completed entirely digitally to respect and match the media of the book. As Trettien states in the video, the goal of digital book history is to use “digital tools and methods” to examine a book made/appropriated for digital media. I think digital book history is an essential feature in literature because of the digitized advancements in our place in time. A digital approach to the book study that I’m most drawn to is studying the idea of interface, which Trettien states is used to grasp “a form of relation [which helps] us go a bit deeper into the mechanics of the codex.” From what I gather, interface is the specific digital mode in which the reader interacts with the book itself. Therefore, I think it is an essential point of the study, as that we can then analyze the effectiveness of digital experience, and whether it hinders or improves the experience for the reader. Personally, I found Trettien’s terminology for explaining the studies in digital book history very confusing. I don’t think she properly explained the terminology, and it made for a strained understanding. So far, I’ve thought about using the short story/children’s story titled “Nappy Has a New Friend” by Inez Hogan. I will be using the photos included in the story and the text itself because they help provide context for the viewers of the project, especially with photo aid.
This entry is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International license.
Hi Allison ,
I am so interested and what to see your final project as I’m focusing on a children book as well so it’s going be interesting to see the similarities /differences that may occur. I agree with you 100% Trettien’s terminology for explaining digital book history was confusing , and that reminds me of the point you bring up about the interface “ we can then analyze the effectiveness of digital experience, and whether it hinders or improves the experience for the reader.” In a way this digital representation of discussing what book history hinder you and I experience as readers if it’s alright to state that. All in all this was a great analysis.
Hey Allison
I am interested in your focus on children’s books and how I work with them. It will be eye-opening to see such development with children’s books and digital understanding of them. Like many other virtual children’s books. Even televised children’s shows, I feel, in a way, are books because they broadcast a learning objective and etc. But I can’t wait! Also, Trettien’s terminology is confusing; it’s annoying to understand a more profound concept.
Hi Allison,
I really enjoyed reading your post. You gave a great summary of your definition of digital book history. I do think, however, there is quite a bit of study of the analog that is also present in the field, in addition to the digital studies that you mention. I also find the interface aspect of this field interesting, and would like to learn more about those studies.
I really like your final project idea, it sounds fun! Good luck with it!
Allison, I think it would be productive for you, Lisbel, and Diamond to compare notes for your project as you think through the kinds of ways you hope to present information about your primary source and how/why you wish to remediate it. For our next blog we’ll be digging deeper into the specific narrative you want to create around the primary source, and definitions/understandings of interface will definitely come in handy!
Hi Allison,
I agree with your point when you said, “Personally, I found Trettien’s terminology for explaining the studies in digital book history very confusing. I don’t think she properly explained the terminology, and it made for a strained understanding.” I myself had trouble understanding and keeping up with Trettien but it really goes to show how in-depth and complex the studies in digital book history are. It also doesn’t help the fact that she had clearly stated in the beginning of the video that she didn’t have time to go in detail about every little thing, which would explain the inconsistent and strained understanding. Furthermore, your point about interface reminded me a lot about the materiality of books. Specifically, when you said, “interface is the specific digital mode in which the reader interacts with the book itself”, it reminded me of how books have that special thing about them that allows the reader to interact with the book itself (albeit not digital). One example would be S. and how it contains supplementary materials like letters and postcards, etc.