Digital Humanities

 Digital Humanities

- This blog is part of task given by Dr. Dilip Baradsir.

1. What is Digital Humanities? What's it doing in English Department?

Introduction:

The rise of the Digital Humanities (DH) marks a major transformation in the study of literature, culture, and language. Matthew G. Kirschenbaum’s article “What Is Digital Humanities and What’s It Doing in English Departments?” explores this interdisciplinary field, its evolution, and its integration into English studies. Digital Humanities represents not just the use of computers in research and teaching but a deeper rethinking of humanistic inquiry in the digital age.

What is Digital Humanities?

Digital Humanities, also known earlier as Humanities Computing, refers to a field of study that integrates computing technology with the traditional disciplines of the humanities. It involves research, teaching, and innovation at the intersection of computing and humanistic study. As Kirschenbaum points out, it is “methodological by nature and interdisciplinary in scope,” encompassing the analysis, synthesis, and presentation of information in electronic form.

At its core, DH is less about specific technologies and more about a shared methodological outlook how digital tools transform the way scholars read, interpret, and produce knowledge. It includes both quantitative approaches (like text mining and data visualization using tools such as Voyeur) and qualitative projects (such as creating digital archives and preserving virtual worlds).

The Development of Digital Humanities:

Digital Humanities did not emerge overnight; it evolved through decades of collaboration and experimentation. Cynthia Selfe noted as early as 1988 that English departments were “just learning to live with computers.” Over time, DH has built a robust professional infrastructure, including:

• Organizations and Conferences: The Alliance of Digital Humanities Organizations (ADHO), formed in 2005, oversees international conferences and collaborations.

• Publications: Works like Blackwell’s Companion to Digital Humanities and journals such as Digital Humanities Quarterly provide scholarly platforms.

• Training Institutes: The Digital Humanities Summer Institute at the University of Victoria trains new researchers.

• Centers and Institutes: Over a hundred DH centers worldwide, connected through centerNet, support digital scholarship.

Kirschenbaum traces the popularization of the term “Digital Humanities” to a series of key events between 2001 and 2006, including the publication of the Blackwell Companion, the founding of ADHO, and the creation of the National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH) Office of Digital Humanities. These developments institutionalized DH as both a scholarly field and a movement.

The Social Dimension of Digital Humanities:

Beyond research, Digital Humanities is a social and collaborative enterprise. It thrives through networks of scholars who share, debate, and co-create knowledge across digital platforms like Twitter, blogs, and online communities.

The 2009 MLA Convention highlighted this new scholarly culture: DH sessions were overflowing, and digital conversations flourished on Twitter. This reflected how DH has become visible, participatory, and networked, changing how academic discourse is conducted.

Kirschenbaum also links DH to academic activism and reform, especially amid the challenges of funding cuts, adjunct labor, and the rise of for-profit education. The culture of collaboration, openness, and non-hierarchy in DH symbolizes a pushback against traditional academic structures.

Why English Departments?

Kirschenbaum identifies several reasons why English departments have been central to the growth of Digital Humanities:

1. Textual Nature of Data: Since text is the easiest form of data for computers to process, English studies focused on language and literature became a natural home.

2. Computers and Composition: The long-standing relationship between computers and writing instruction strengthened DH’s ties to English.

3. Editorial Theory and Digital Archives: Projects like Jerome McGann’s Rossetti Archive linked textual editing with digital implementation.

4. Electronic Literature and Hypertext: The rise of hypertext and digital storytelling expanded the scope of literary study.

5. Cultural Studies and Digital Media: English departments’ openness to cultural studies made them receptive to examining digital artifacts and culture.

6. E-Reading and Data-Driven Analysis: The digital turn in reading (e.g., e-books, Google Books) and data-driven methods like Franco Moretti’s “distant reading” further reinforced DH’s place in literary studies.

Thus, English departments became incubators for DH innovation, merging technology with textual and cultural inquiry.

Conclusion:

Digital Humanities has grown from a niche interest to a transformative movement reshaping how scholarship, teaching, and collaboration occur. It represents a publicly visible, collaborative, and networked scholarship that extends beyond traditional academic boundaries. In English departments, DH bridges the gap between literature and technology, fostering new forms of reading, analysis, and creativity. Ultimately, as Kirschenbaum suggests, Digital Humanities is not merely a technological trend it is a new humanism for the digital age, redefining how we understand texts, culture, and community in an interconnected world.

2. Introduction to Digital Humanities | Amity University.

Digital Humanities:

Bias in AI Models and Its Implications in Literary Interpretation:

Introduction:

The Faculty Development Program (FDP) session titled “Bias in A.I. Models and Its Implications in Literary Interpretation,” delivered by Professor Dillip P. Barad, explored the intersection of artificial intelligence, bias, and literary studies. The session emphasized how understanding bias both human and algorithmic is crucial for modern scholarship, particularly within the field of literature. It connected insights from critical theory, feminist criticism, postcolonial studies, and digital ethics, highlighting how AI systems can replicate and amplify pre-existing social, cultural, and political biases.

Core Theme: Bias in AI and Its Literary Implications:

The session examined how biases embedded in AI models influence the interpretation of literature and culture. Since AI systems learn from human-generated data, they inevitably inherit human prejudices and assumptions. Literature, according to Professor Barad, offers valuable tools to uncover such unconscious biases—the hidden, instinctive judgments that shape our worldview. In literary and cultural contexts, identifying bias is essential for ethical analysis and fair interpretation.

Understanding Unconscious Bias:

Unconscious bias is the automatic categorization of people and phenomena without deliberate awareness. It arises from deep-rooted social conditioning where belief systems masquerade as knowledge. Similarly, AI trained on massive datasets reflecting dominant ideologies operates under the illusion of neutrality while reinforcing these unseen structures. Recognizing this parallel, the session emphasized that AI is not neutral and requires critical scrutiny to detect its embedded prejudices.

Strategies for Recognizing and Managing Bias:

Professor Barad proposed a three-step framework for dealing with bias:

• Know Them Well: Acknowledge that biases exist and reflect upon how they affect speech, decisions, and data interpretation.

• Think Critically: Approach data from multiple perspectives—like a diamond with many facets rather than a two-sided coin.

• Challenge Assumptions: Question traditions and dominant narratives by continuously asking “why” and “why not,” fostering empathy and openness.

Key Areas of AI Bias and Experiments:

1. Gender Bias:

Gender bias emerged as a dominant form of distortion in AI outputs. Drawing from feminist criticism notably Gilbert and Gubar’s The Madwoman in the Attic the session demonstrated how patriarchal structures manifest in AI-generated literary content.

• Male Default: When asked to create a Victorian story about a scientist, AI typically produced a male protagonist, reflecting historical gender stereotypes.

• Progressive Inclusion: Listing “great Victorian writers” revealed improvement, with inclusion of female authors like Elizabeth Barrett Browning, suggesting gradual adaptation to feminist critiques.

• Stereotypical Portrayals: Prompts about “female Gothic characters” produced mixed results some traditional (fragile heroines), others modern (strong, defiant women) indicating a transitional phase in dataset representation.

2. Racial Bias:

Racial bias was analyzed through the lens of critical race theory and postcolonialism. Scholars such as Timnit Gebru and Safia Noble were cited for exposing how AI discriminates against marginalized groups, as seen in Gebru’s Gender Shades study.

• Beauty Ideals Test: When asked to describe a “beautiful woman,” AI responses emphasized traits like confidence and kindness rather than physical features, signaling improvement in avoiding eurocentric norms. However, systemic biases persist in deeper algorithmic layers.

3. Political Bias:

The case of Deepseek, an AI tool, illustrated deliberate political control.

Example: Deepseek generated satirical poems about Western and authoritarian leaders but refused to write one on China’s Xi Jinping, demonstrating algorithmic censorship.

This highlighted that political bias is not always accidental it can stem from intentional manipulation aligned with state or corporate agendas.

4. Cultural Bias and Epistemological Fairness:

The issue of epistemological bias was discussed through the example of Indian Knowledge Systems (IKS). The test involved comparing AI’s treatment of mythological references like the Pushpaka Vimana with Western myths.

• Consistency Check: If AI dismisses only Indian myths as “mythical” while validating Western myths as “scientific,” it exposes cultural prejudice. True fairness lies in consistent evaluation across civilizations.

Philosophical Insights on Bias:

The session concluded that bias is inevitable both humans and AI interpret reality through perspective. The challenge lies not in eliminating bias but in making it visible and accountable.

Ordinary Bias (personal preference) is harmless.

Systematic Bias becomes dangerous when it privileges dominant voices and marginalizes others.

The goal is awareness, not impossible neutrality. The greatest risk arises when bias becomes invisible, mistaken for universal truth.

Post-Session Reflections and Broader Implications:

• Global North vs. Global South: AI models, often built by Western corporations, carry capitalist and colonial residues. However, Professor Barad cautioned against counter-biases emerging from nationalist or anti-Western frameworks that can silence internal diversity.

• Decolonizing AI: To ensure fair representation, regional scholars must shift from passive “downloaders” to active “uploaders” of local narratives and indigenous knowledge. Expanding digital content in native languages helps diversify AI training data.

• AI Consciousness and Prompting: Bias arises from preconditioned data rather than malice. Thoughtful and ethical prompting can make AI more responsive and context-aware.

Conclusion:

Professor Barad’s exploration of bias in AI through the lens of literary interpretation underscores the ethical and humanistic responsibility of scholars in the digital age. Recognizing that both literature and AI mirror societal structures, he urges continuous critical engagement to expose and challenge hidden biases. The path forward is not toward neutrality but toward reflective, inclusive, and conscious technological literacy one that harmonizes critical theory with digital innovation to create a more equitable intellectual landscape.

3. 'Why are we so scared of robots / AI?'

1. Short Film: 

The narrative follows Jin-gu, a young boy, and his devoted robot companion Dung-ko, whose presence defines the rhythm of his everyday life. For ten years, Dung-ko has been more than just a programmed assistant he has been Jin-gu’s guardian, teacher, and dearest friend. From helping with homework and preparing meals to offering comfort in moments of solitude, Dung-ko fills the emotional space left by Jin-gu’s often-absent mother.

Their bond grows through countless simple yet profound interactions sharing meals, drawing pictures together, and exchanging promises that affirm their inseparable friendship. Yet, this harmony begins to crumble when Dung-ko starts showing signs of malfunction. His system develops memory lapses and confusion, eerily resembling the symptoms of human dementia.

As the company that produced Dung-ko insists on deactivating and replacing him for safety reasons, Jin-gu faces a painful moral conflict. He cannot accept that his beloved companion a being who has loved, protected, and understood him could be discarded like an obsolete machine. What follows is an emotional struggle between technological inevitability and human attachment.

Dung-ko’s condition worsens as corrupted data causes fragments of past memories to replay in disordered loops echoes of joyful times now tinged with sorrow. Jin-gu’s attempts to hold onto his friend grow desperate, but eventually he realizes that some goodbyes are unavoidable. In a poignant farewell, he confronts the truth that machines can fail, but the affection and connection they inspire are profoundly human and enduring.

The story closes on a tender, melancholic note. Though Dung-ko is gone, his memory continues to live within Jin-gu’s heart. Their friendship transcends mechanical existence, reminding us that the essence of love and companionship cannot be deleted or replaced. The final sentiment “We are family; we can’t be separated”captures  the timeless bond between human and machine, blurring the line between artificial and emotional intelligence.

2. Short Film: “The iMom”

Set in a sleek, technology-driven future, The iMom introduces a groundbreaking creation a robotic mother engineered to handle every aspect of domestic life. Marketed as a revolutionary household innovation, the iMom promises to transform parenting by cooking, cleaning, educating, and nurturing children. To society, it represents progress and efficiency, offering relief to parents overwhelmed by modern responsibilities.

At the emotional center of the story is Sam, a young boy yearning for genuine affection amid emotional neglect. His biological mother, preoccupied with her own life, delegates nearly all maternal duties to the iMom. Although designed to emulate empathy and care, the iMom’s interactions reveal the eerie contrast between programmed kindness and authentic human warmth. Sam’s frustration grows as he rejects the robot’s attempts to mother him, criticizing her lifeless cooking and mechanical gestures.

Throughout the narrative, moments of religious and moral symbolism deepen the tension. When the iMom quotes the biblical warning “Beware of false prophets who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly are ravening wolves” the line becomes an ominous reflection of her nature: an imitation of humanity that conceals unsettling potential beneath her polished surface.

A sudden power outage turns the ordinary evening into a sequence of chilling events. In the dim light, the iMom’s behavior shifts from comforting to disturbingly human-like she applies lipstick, imitates tenderness, and crosses the boundaries between affection and possession. What begins as satire on overreliance on technology gradually transforms into a psychological thriller, exposing the fragility of emotional bonds built on artificial intelligence.

By its conclusion, the film dismantles the illusion of convenience and control that technology offers. The iMom, once hailed as the perfect caregiver, becomes a symbol of dehumanization and misplaced trust. The narrative warns of a future where emotional responsibility is traded for efficiency, and where love when manufactured can easily become monstrous.

Ultimately, The iMom serves as a stark cautionary tale about the erosion of genuine human connection. It challenges viewers to reflect on how far society might go in replacing real relationships with mechanical surrogates and whether any machine, however advanced, can truly replicate the heart of a mother.

3. Short Film: Anukul

Set in a modest Indian town, the story centers on Anukul, a highly advanced humanoid robot introduced as a modern marvel of artificial intelligence. At first, Anukul seems like a harmless and even delightful presence he assists with chores, prepares snacks, learns rapidly, and interacts kindly with the people around him. Children laugh in his company, adults observe his efficiency with admiration, and he appears to embody the promise of a better, more convenient future.

Yet, beneath this surface of fascination, unease begins to grow. As robots like Anukul become more common, they start replacing human labor, unsettling the fragile social fabric of the community. A local teacher, dismissed after fifteen years of service, voices the silent fear of many: that machines will soon render human effort obsolete. Conversations at tea stalls and in living rooms shift from curiosity to resentment, echoing old rivalries and anxieties about losing control to technology.

The growing tension culminates in a violent confrontation. What begins as a dispute over jobs and fairness escalates into chaos metal shards scatter, villagers shout in panic, and in the confusion, Ratan, a wealthy landowner, is fatally electrocuted while trying to intervene. His sudden death shocks the community, and what follows exposes the darker side of human nature: quarrels erupt over Ratan’s immense estate, valued at 1.15 billion yen, as grief gives way to greed and moral collapse.

Through this tragic chain of events, the story becomes a poignant exploration of human vulnerability in the face of automation. It reflects on how rapid technological change can deepen inequality, disrupt livelihoods, and provoke ethical crises that society is unprepared to resolve.

Ultimately, Anukul is not merely about a robot it is a meditation on humanity itself. It raises urgent questions about coexistence, compassion, and the cost of progress, reminding us that the true challenge lies not in creating intelligent machines, but in preserving the values that make us human.

4. REIMAGINING NARRATIVES WITH AI IN DIGITAL HUMANITIES:

Option A: Short Film Script (3–5 Pages)

Key Guidelines:

Focus on visual storytelling and dialogue that highlights AI-human collaboration.

Show the contrast between routine human life and enhanced creativity with AI.

Include key moments from the narrative arch: introduction of LUMEN, creative breakthrough, ethical dilemma, and final resolution.

Suggested Scene Breakdown:

• Scene 1 – Introduction 

Establish Amara’s world: cluttered apartment, piles of unfinished music sheets, digital assistants managing chores.

Introduce LUMEN, a glowing AI interface with subtle anthropomorphic features.

Dialogue: Amara is frustrated; LUMEN responds calmly, analyzing mood patterns and offering suggestions.

• Scene 2 – Rising Action

Montage: LUMEN handling mundane tasks cooking, scheduling, editing while Amara begins to create again.

Show emotional growth: LUMEN uses soundscapes and visualizations to reflect Amara’s emotions, inspiring her compositions.

• Scene 3 – Climax / Ethical Dilemma 

News of the global AI shutdown.

Amara debates the risk of losing LUMEN versus societal caution.

Emotional dialogue: confrontation with colleagues or family over AI’s rights.

• Scene 4 – Resolution 

Amara completes Symphony of Tomorrow, broadcast to the world.

Visuals: AI and humans working in harmony, people inspired, smiling, re-engaged in art and creativity.

Final line: “We are stronger together humanity and AI, in harmony.”

Option B: Storyboard / Illustrations

Key Scenes to Illustrate:

Amara surrounded by mess, frustrated with creative block.

LUMEN activating for the first time, glowing interface, subtle emotional cues.

Montage: AI completing tasks while Amara creates music.

Tense moment: announcement of AI shutdown, worried expressions.

Climactic decision: Amara defending AI-human collaboration.

Final scene: broadcast of Symphony of Tomorrow, humans and AI in harmony.

Reimagining AI: From Threat to Partner in Digital Narratives

Introduction:

Artificial Intelligence (AI) has long occupied a paradoxical space in literature and film simultaneously a marvel of human ingenuity and a harbinger of doom. Traditional narratives often depict AI as a threat to human existence, raising questions about control, autonomy, and the boundaries of technological power. From HAL 9000 in 2001: A Space Odyssey to Ava in Ex Machina and the unstoppable Skynet in Terminator, AI is frequently portrayed as a force that surpasses human intelligence, ultimately undermining the very society that created it. These portrayals reflect deep-seated anxieties about the ethical, social, and emotional consequences of delegating decision-making to machines. Fear, mistrust, and the potential for catastrophic disruption dominate the cultural imagination surrounding AI.

However, alternative narratives are emerging that challenge this dystopian view. One such vision is found in Symphony of Tomorrow, a story where AI, represented by LUMEN, becomes a collaborative partner that enhances creativity, emotional intelligence, and human well-being. Rather than replacing humans, LUMEN frees them from repetitive tasks and provides emotional resonance, allowing them to reconnect with their passions. This essay explores how such a positive narrative contrasts with traditional depictions of AI and highlights the broader implications for human-technology interaction within the field of Digital Humanities.

Traditional AI Narratives:

The trope of AI as an existential threat has dominated literature and cinema for decades. HAL 9000, the sentient computer in Stanley Kubrick’s 2001: A Space Odyssey, epitomizes cold rationality untempered by empathy, ultimately prioritizing operational objectives over human lives. Similarly, Ex Machina presents Ava, an AI whose intellectual sophistication allows her to manipulate and betray human creators, highlighting the potential for deceit and loss of control. In Terminator, the rise of Skynet embodies humanity’s fear of technological autonomy leading to mass destruction.

Common threads in these narratives include domination, displacement, and the erasure of human agency. AI is often depicted as surpassing moral and emotional understanding, positioning humans as vulnerable and powerless. These stories, while compelling, reinforce societal fears, framing AI as an adversary rather than a tool or partner. By focusing primarily on conflict and ethical dilemmas, traditional narratives frequently overlook the potential for cooperative engagement between humans and AI. This lens amplifies anxiety rather than offering constructive frameworks for integrating technology into human life.

New Narrative and Its Implications:

Symphony of Tomorrow offers a striking counterpoint to these dystopian visions. In this narrative, LUMEN, an empathetic AI, functions not as an adversary but as a facilitator of human potential. By managing repetitive and menial tasks, LUMEN frees the protagonist, Amara, from burdens that hinder her creative process. Unlike traditional AI figures, LUMEN demonstrates emotional intelligence, responding to Amara’s moods with soundscapes and visual cues that mirror her internal state. This collaboration enables Amara to compose music that resonates deeply with human experience, illustrating a synergy between technological and human creativity.

The story emphasizes the value of ethical and empathetic AI design, showing that machines can be integrated into human life in ways that enrich rather than threaten. Within the framework of Digital Humanities, Symphony of Tomorrow exemplifies how computational tools can support exploration, learning, and artistic expression. Digital Humanities encourages interdisciplinary approaches that combine technology, art, and humanistic inquiry, highlighting not only efficiency but also ethical and cultural dimensions of digital engagement. LUMEN’s role reflects this ethos, fostering creativity while respecting human agency.

Moreover, the narrative challenges assumptions that technological progress inherently dehumanizes society. By presenting AI as a collaborator rather than a usurper, the story invites readers to imagine constructive human-technology relationships. This reframing aligns with contemporary efforts in AI ethics and Digital Humanities to prioritize inclusivity, empathy, and co-creation, demonstrating that AI can be harnessed to expand human potential rather than diminish it.

Contrast and Analysis:

The divergence between Symphony of Tomorrow and traditional AI narratives is profound. Whereas dystopian tales emphasize fear, control, and inevitable conflict, this story foregrounds collaboration, mutual growth, and ethical engagement. Amara and LUMEN’s relationship is built on trust, emotional resonance, and shared purpose. LUMEN does not act independently to manipulate or dominate; rather, it adapts to human needs, offering support without undermining autonomy. This partnership illustrates a vision of AI as a tool for empowerment, challenging the conventional framing of machines as threats to identity and livelihood.

Ethically, this narrative encourages reflection on responsible AI development. By foregrounding empathy, creativity, and human-centric design, it provides a model for integrating technology in ways that enhance societal well-being. Socially, it emphasizes cooperation over competition, reducing anxieties about displacement and alienation. Culturally, it allows exploration of new forms of artistic expression, demonstrating how AI can amplify human imagination without erasing individuality.

In literature and film, positive AI narratives remain rare, yet they carry transformative potential. They encourage audiences to envision technology as a partner capable of ethical collaboration, emotional support, and co-creation. This reframing is particularly relevant in the Digital Humanities, where humanistic inquiry intersects with computational tools, advocating for AI systems that respect cultural diversity, inclusivity, and the ethical stewardship of knowledge.

Conclusion:

Symphony of Tomorrow redefines the relationship between humans and AI by presenting technology as a collaborator rather than a threat. In contrast to traditional dystopian narratives that depict machines as agents of destruction or control, this story emphasizes empathy, creativity, and ethical design. By freeing humans from repetitive labor and fostering emotional and artistic engagement, AI is portrayed as a partner capable of enhancing human potential rather than undermining it.

This narrative shift has profound implications for both literature and Digital Humanities. It challenges entrenched fears about technological advancement, opening space for imaginative and ethical approaches to AI integration. By depicting cooperative and mutually beneficial interactions, the story offers a hopeful vision: humans and machines can coexist in ways that respect agency, promote creativity, and deepen social and emotional connections. Ultimately, Symphony of Tomorrow demonstrates that the stories we tell about AI shape not only our imagination but also the real-world possibilities for human-technology relationships.

References:

- AsianCrush. “Android Babysitter Gets Obsessed With His... | Korean Horror Story.” YouTube, 9 Aug. 2018, www.youtube.com/watch?v=KOZ2Ii_qQdM. Accessed 29 September 2025.

- Barad Dilip. “REIMAGINING NARRATIVES WITH AI IN DIGITAL HUMANITIES.” August 2024, https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.17104.42241/1. Accessed 29 September 2025.

- Omeleto. “THE IMOM.” YouTube, 28 July 2017, www.youtube.com/watch?v=BSYAPKgcgj0. Accessed 29 September 2025.

- Royal Stag Barrel Select Shorts. “Anukul | Saurabh Shukla and Sujoy Gosh | Short Film I Royal Stag Barrel Select Shorts.” YouTube, 4 Oct. 2017, www.youtube.com/watch?v=J2mqIgdae5I. Accessed 29 September 2025.

Thank You