If youâ€™re in a history graduate program, odds are you like to read. A lot. Youâ€™ve probably already discovered which areas of history interest you the most and youâ€™ve made it your mission to read as much about it as possible. But on your first trip into the archives in search of primary sources, you probably realized with a sense of dread that itâ€™s physically impossible to read and give a proper analysis of everything thatâ€™s out there.
Computers have made this process significantly easier. Archives are digitizing and transcribing more and more historical documents. We have the ability to run searches of key words and phrases to locate sources. But as Matthew Jockers writes in Macroanalysis: Digital Methods & Literary History, â€œClose reading, digital searching, will continue to reveal nuggets, while the deeper veins lie buried beneath the mass of gravel layered aboveâ€ (9).
So how can we access the deep recesses of the archives without engaging in a close reading of the sources we find? According to Jockers, the answer lies in computational analysis. In light of technological advancements, Jockers argues that historians and other practitioners of the humanities need to embrace new methodologies for utilizing the massive amount of information available to us through digitization. Macroanalysis, or distant reading, allows scholars to look at patterns and trends as they appear within an entire collection. Here are a few examples of how Jockers uses macroanalysis in the field of literary history.
Jockers examined 758 works of Irish-American literature over a period of 250 years by using metadata embedded in bibliographies. He was able identify larger trends in the literature based on the gender of the author, geographical region in which the work was produced, and the setting in which the story takes place (among other variables). With the full-texts available digitally, Jockers demonstrated how computing software could trace word use, book length, and ethnic markers. In subsequent chapters, Jockers examined how macroanalysis could provide insight into the style, nationality, theme, and influence of a large body of literature by looking at something as simple as the use of â€œtheâ€ or how many times the author used a particular pronoun. He describes how literary scholars could use correlation coefficients, topic modeling, and information cascades to draw conclusions about how texts relate to each other over time.
Some of you may be thinking that this sounds a bit too quantitative for you. (It sounds too much like math to me, and I hate math!) After all, the humanities is about contextualization and interpretation, which is absent from a distant reading of the literature. Jockers agrees with you. He points out that there are significant drawbacks to conducting macroanalytical research. These massive data sets produce outliers and exceptions. There is always a possibility that the metadata is incorrect (Jockers points out that in many instances the publication dates and authorâ€™s genders were incorrect). Computational analysis cannot provide context and interpretation. And in many cases, sources and books are not available digitally due to copyrights laws and the significant time it takes for archives to digitize their collections.
The main point Jockers is trying to make is that macroanalysis should not take the place of microanalysis. They â€œshould and need to coexistâ€ (9). A macroanalysis of literary or historical data can help scholars better understand the broad patterns and trends of their research interest. Those patterns and trends, taken from a massive data set, provide the context in which a close reading of a smaller set of texts can take place.
Jockers book is an excellent resources for those historians resistant to change. He is not lauding computational analysis as the new way of conducting research in the humanities. He is urging scholars not to ignore a tool that can provide new insights into their field of study.
As a diplomatic historian, this methodology is intriguing. If any of you have ever perused Foreign Relation of the United States (the last one I looked at was 4,752 pages long in epub form and only presented selected State Department documents on the Suez Crisis), you will recognize the benefits of having a tool that can identify trends in language and style in diplomatic correspondences or determine which themes are the most prevalent. As David Allen and Matthew Connelly suggest in â€œDiplomatic history after the big bang: using computational methods to explore the infinite archive,â€ distant reading can reveal what kinds of documents are more likely to be redacted or rank documents according to their relevance to your research interests (83). The results of this type of analysis are not sufficient by themselves, but when used to inform, conceptualize, and direct your microanalytical research, they are extremely beneficial.
Allen, David, and Matthew Connelly. â€œDiplomatic History after the Big Bang: Using Computational Methods to Explore the Infinite Archive.â€ In Explaining the History of American Foreign Relations, 3rd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2016.
Jockers, Matthew L. Macroanalysis: Digital Methods and Literary History. Urbana and Chicago: University of Illinois Press, 2013.