Category: CHI Fellowship 2022-2023

I am excited to announce the launch of my ‘22-’23 CHI project, the Stratford Heritage Guide.

The presentation of Shakespeare’s legacy has evolved over the centuries, and narratives regarding the greatness of the playwright have been curated in very specific and intentional ways to cement him as an English cultural icon. Although Shakespeare wrote all his plays in London, his hometown of Stratford-upon-Avon has grown to become more closely associated with the playwright through these constructed histories. However, this gravitation toward the playwright’s childhood home and grave site did not become popular until the 19th century. By analyzing guidebooks from this period, I aim to demonstrate how public understanding of the various monuments in Stratford has evolved and analyze how the information provided in these guidebooks has been continually reinvented over time. Ultimately, this project demonstrates the subjective nature of Stratford’s relationship with Shakespeare and explores how narratives about that town that are presented to visitors as completely objective have attempted to influence visitors’ perspectives in this space.

The map was created using Leaflet with MapBox tiles and pinpoints the various tourist sites related to Shakespeare in Stratford and the surrounding area. There are twelve layers on the map, each representing a different guidebook. On a layer, the pins are numbered to indicate the order that a guidebook suggests visitors tour the different sites. The popup tied to the pin includes an image of that site as portrayed in that guidebook (if available), and a link to a page analyzing the way that site is described across the corpus of guidebooks. The methods for developing the visualizations on each of these site pages can be found on the “Method” page. Each of the guidebooks can be accessed via the “Guidebooks” tab, which includes a collection of buttons that take you to the Google Books copy of each guidebook.

I will be continuing to work on this project over the next year as I finish up my dissertation project, and I am excited to see how it continues to evolve. I will be visiting Stratford this summer, and will hopefully be able to fill in some of the gaps that currently exist in this project. I hope this project as it exists now and as it continues into the future provides a helpful look into the cultural heritage of Shakespeare’s hometown.

This post was originally published at https://chi.anthropology.msu.edu/news-updates/

In my January post, I discussed the new workflow I was developing for my project. Last year, I prioritized content while this year I am prioritizing technical infrastructure. So, how are things going after one month compared to last year? Perhaps it shouldn’t be surprising, but the answer is much better. 

So far, I’ve already managed to create the entire bootstrap framework for my website in Bootstrap Studio. I may change colors, fonts, and other elements of the site’s appearance later on in the process, but at this stage every part of the website exists and is navigable. I have finished the home page, about page, methods page, and narrative page. Even the modal is already in place, which is something I didn’t add until the last second with my previous project. Granted, there is still no content, but there is a place for the content to be easily inserted at a later date. Additionally, I have already created individual pages for each of the heritage sites that will be featured on the map. 

I have also already completed the map itself–newly created tiles have been added to my website (although, those may change if I change the overall color scheme of the website). I’ve inserted the coordinates for all the heritage sites, and I’m now working on creating layers. This is probably the first new skill I’m having to develop this time around, and it has slowed down my progress a bit. After almost two weeks of work, I think I have the layers themselves figured out. There will be a total of twelve layers–one for each guidebook–and numbered pins indicating the order they are referenced in that particular guidebook. Due to some sloppy coding and the pins being essentially in the same place on each layer, I was having trouble figuring things out at first. However, now I think I’m on the right track and am in the process of fixing the layers control. By my next post, I should have everything at least functional.

But, do things seem to be going better because I’ve essentially reversed the order of how I’m working on the project, or is it because I already have a year and a half of the fellowship under my belt this time? Honestly, it’s probably a bit of both. Last year I was so caught up in combing through the guidebooks and making a decision on how best I wanted to present that information that I ended up leaving all the technical elements to the very end of the fellowship year. The major reason the data was represented by word clouds is I did not leave myself enough time to explore other ways to convey it.

This year, I already have so much more to show for the short time span I’ve had to work on the project. However, I have several advantages–for one, I’m using Bootstrap Studio again, which took some time to learn last year. I also struggled with inserting my Leaflet map last time around, but that meant I knew exactly where to drop in the code this year. As I move further into the semester, there will be more new elements I need to work on so I have a feeling things might slow down even more. At least as of now, everything seems to be on the right track, and my project is (and will hopefully remain) word cloud free.

This post was originally published at https://chi.anthropology.msu.edu/news-updates/

This past Friday marked the beginning of the new semester and the phase of the fellowship in which our weekly meetings become more oriented to our individual projects. However, things are going to be slightly different this year. For my ‘21-’22 project, I spent the early weeks of developing the Stratford Memory Map sifting through the guidebooks and creating content for my website rather than working on any of the technical infrastructure. This year, Ethan has asked that we develop a detailed list of tasks that we need to complete as part of the project and prioritize the more technical aspects before content. His reasoning is that people tend to focus on the content and run out of time actually building their project, which is exactly what happened to me last year. Hopefully, with careful planning, things will be different this time around.

For this year’s project, I have divided my tasks into four main categories: website, map, topic modeling, and content. Under the website category I’ve included the tasks related to creating the general framework for each page including the header, navigation bar, and footer. For the map, I will need to create the base map in leaflet. Then, I will need to add pins for each of the various locations and a layer for each guidebook. As part of the topic modeling work, I will OCR the guidebooks, clean up the texts, run them through Voyant, and then use the data produced by the topic models to create data visualizations. Finally, the content category includes the essays for the narrative and methods pages as well as the contextualization on each of the individual sites pages. When going through this process of identifying the different tasks that needed to be done, I tried to be as detailed as possible. Yet, I can’t help but feel that I am missing something after I’ve added these tasks to the schedule I created. I’m guessing I’ll stumble along these forgotten tasks, I just hope it’s sooner rather than later.

I also created a schedule when planning my project last year, but all of my plans quickly went out the window. Looking back, I’m ashamed to admit that I only followed my planning document for the first two weeks. This year I’m hoping that I will be able to more closely follow the schedule I developed and start actively engaging with the workflow I’ve outlined. This week, I plan to start creating the framework for the website before jumping into the map (which I think that will be the most difficult part of this project). Since I’m simultaneously working on my dissertation, I’m hoping the narrative and methods section will be partially developed through my writing process outside of the fellowship. I’ve been working closely with MSU’s wonderful digital archivist Kate Topham who has been helping me figure out the OCR process and topic modeling, so some of my schedule may change up depending on her availability. In my previous job as a project manager for a digital humanities center I was used to developing work plans as part of grant proposals and was able to help project faculty and staff stay on track, but now that I’m having to do so for my own project I’m gaining a new perspective on the actualities of having to do all elements in the workflow on my own.

At the beginning of our meetings each week, we participate in an adapted version of scrum from the agile framework to try and keep us accountable as we work on our projects. For those that are unfamiliar, we are asked to quickly share what we did for the week, what we’re hoping to complete the following week, and anything that is standing in our way. Retrospectively, I’m realizing how much of my sharing for last year was focused on how frustrated I was with the guidebooks rather than using it as a time to ask for help on the technical side of things. I’m sure that was partly due to my “backwards” workflow. This year, I’m hoping to keep a diary of what I share during scrum alongside my schedule to try and track how well I’m following my work plan this year. As the semester continues, I’ll use these blogs as an opportunity to share the progress I make on the project, but also how well I’ve managed to follow through with the work plan I’ve outlined for myself.

This post was originally published at https://chi.anthropology.msu.edu/news-updates/

I am excited to announce that for my CHI Fellowship project this year, I will be creating the Stratford Heritage Guide. This project will explore the subjective nature of Stratford-upon-Avon’s relationship with Shakespeare and examine how narratives about that town that are presented as completely objective have attempted to influence visitors’ perspectives. The presentation of Shakespeare’s legacy has evolved over the centuries, and narratives regarding the greatness of the playwright have been curated in very specific and intentional ways to cement him as an English cultural icon. However, the gravitation toward the playwright’s childhood home and grave site did not become popular until the 19th century. By analyzing guidebooks from this period, I hope to demonstrate how public understanding of the various monuments in Stratford has evolved and analyze how the information provided in these guidebooks has been continually reinvented over time.

Over the course of next semester, I will create a website that consists of four main sections: a map, a narrative with data visualizations, an account of methodology, and an access point for users to easily explore the guidebooks I used through Google Books. There will also be an about page with information about how the project connects to my dissertation and credits any contributors to the project. The map will be created using Leaflet and include a layer for each of the individual guidebooks. Each layer will demonstrate the way visitors are instructed to approach the town per that guidebook. Markers will include an image of that site and a brief excerpt from the guidebook about that site. The icons will be numbered so users know the order described in that guidebook. All popups will have a link to further information about that site on a webpage that compares how the site is described across the corpus. The narrative page will include an analysis of topic models I run on the guidebooks in Voyant. This narrative will include an analysis of a series of data visualizations created in Flourish from the data generated by the topic models. The methodology page will account for the decisions I made when data cleaning the OCR copies of the guidebooks, running iterations for the topic models, and deciding what choices I made when creating the visualizations to represent this data. Finally, I will have a page that links to each of the guidebooks in Google Books so they are more easily findable for users. 

In contrast to the Stratford Memory Map, which I created last year, this project will be geared more specifically to a scholarly audience. However, it will still be accessible to the public. Ideally, the map will be useful or interesting to a wider audience while those who would like to explore the data in a more in-depth way could do so via the topic modeling analysis. I am also hopeful that this year (although most likely not until summer) I may have opportunities visit archives and libraries such as the Shakespeare Birthplace Trust, Folger Shakespeare Library, and Newberry Library to work directly with the guidebooks rather than via the inconsistent scans on Google Books.

I am looking forward to keeping the CHI community posted on this project in the coming months, and I am hopeful that I can take everything I learned from last year to create a website that is well-constructed and conveys a clear narrative.

This post was originally published at https://chi.anthropology.msu.edu/news-updates/

During October, we completed our first Rapid Development Challenge of the year. This first project consists of developing a two page project vision document and then transforming that document into a website. Brainstorming a new project with new collaborators was exciting–despite having the same options of heritage institutions to choose from as last year, my group was able to come up with something that never even crossed our minds last year. My collaborators Eric Kesse, Emma Creamer, and I came up with the idea for the Robben Island Forum–a discussion based website dedicated to connecting community members with each other and with archival materials related to the Robben Island Museum’s collections.

While it was incredibly exciting to come up with this idea, I want to focus this reflection on my experiences working on the second component of this challenge. Last year, when we began building our website for our London Wall Walk project idea, I had no web development experience. I had completed the required tutorials for fellowship participation and I have previously worked with content management systems such as WordPress or Omeka, but I had never before had to be so involved in working with the actual code of a website. This was both a frustrating and rewarding experience. I learned a lot, but often only by making many errors first. However, by the end of the project I knew how to organize HTML, modify CSS, and work in GitHub. The senior fellows in my group were incredibly patient and helpful, and it helped prepare me for building my final project.

This year, I was the senior fellow in my group. At first, I was afraid this would be daunting. Despite my experiences in the CHI fellowship last year, I relied heavily on the senior fellows in my group for the set up of the project and walking me through the more difficult tasks. I was unsure how I would be able to act in this role in my own group, but I ended up surprising myself. I was able to set up the repository with our preferred Bootstrap template on GitHub and demonstrate for my group members the process of using GitHub desktop (something I failed at last year which resulted in some accidental pushes to the wrong repo–sorry again, Ethan!). I was able to easily edit individual pages for content and theming in a way that was unimaginable during the same challenge last year. I was also able to help my collaborators add images, insert hyperlinks that would open in a new tab, and reorganize the website’s navigation. Although this may sound simple to more experienced developers, realizing I was able to show others even the smallest elements of web development was very fulfilling. 

Of course, this was all by (Ethan’s) design, but I didn’t realize how impactful this would be on my understanding of myself as a digital humanities scholar. This week, we begin our second rapid development challenge for the year on Mapping Memory. Since my final project from last year was dependent on what I learned from this challenge in 2021, I’m curious to see what new realizations I will come to this time around.

This post was originally published at https://chi.anthropology.msu.edu/news-updates/

It’s hard to believe that it’s already October–it feels like I was just in Stratford doing some research for my dissertation yesterday, but it has been three months. At the end of last year, I was awarded funds from MSU’s College of Arts and Letters to conduct research abroad. As such, I spent the end of June in Shakespeare’s hometown of Stratford-upon-Avon, which is not only the focus of one of my dissertation chapters but also the basis for my CHI project from last year. While in Stratford, I photographed the locations I had included on my Stratford Memory Map project so I could replace the photos I had used with my ones that I own. Previously, my website used photographs labeled for reuse under Creative Commons licenses. Of course, now that I’ve left Stratford I have thought of all sorts of additional images I should have taken that I might use in the next phase of my project. My plan is to return to Stratford to conduct further research next year, so I’m hopeful I will be able to collect materials that will improve on the CHI project I end up developing this year. 

While I did have a lovely time walking around Stratford taking new photos for my website, I also visited the Reading Room of the Shakespeare Birthplace Trust (SBT). The SBT houses one of the largest collections of Shakespeare related materials in the world, but due to covid related restrictions I was only able to book eight hours of research time throughout the course of a week. There were also digitization projects underway and building renovations that made some portions of the collection inaccessible–such as the visitor logs for the different heritage sites managed by the SBT. However, I was able to access a variety of prompt books and first-hand accounts of visitors to Stratford during the Victorian period, both of which were significant to my dissertation and CHI project. Additionally, I was able to begin looking through the collection of guidebooks, although in the time allotted I was only able to look through a small portion of them. Some of the guidebooks were ones I had been able to access online via Google Books, but there were a number of others that I had found no other record for online.

It was enlightening to walk around the town after I had spent last year’s fellowship working on mapping it. I referenced some of the guidebooks I had used in my project and tried to view these heritage sites from the perspective of their authors. Some locations, such as Anne Hathaway’s Cottage, seemed almost the same as described by these Victorian tour guides. However, it was hard to view locations like the Birthplace amidst the crowded tour groups and modern shops and imagine the same place described in the guidebooks (I was incredibly lucky to get the above picture with no one standing in front of the Birthplace–although you can see some ongoing restoration work). For this year’s project, I hope to in some way reflect how the town has changed (and continues to change) over time. I want to address the narratives that are created through these sites–particularly in regard to the construction of Englishness–and trace how these narratives are restructured as time passes. 

This post was originally published at https://chi.anthropology.msu.edu/news-updates/

Hello again, CHI community–I’m so excited to be back as a Senior CHI Fellow and have the opportunity to work with the wonderful group of scholars that make up the ‘22-’23 cohort.  My name is Katherine Knowles, and I just started my fourth year in the English department here at Michigan State. My research interests include early modern drama, affect theory, performance studies, cultural heritage, and digital humanities. I am currently working on the proposal for my dissertation, which is tentatively titled “Bodies in Space: Imagining Place and Producing Heritage through Shakespeare’s Plays.” I aim to explore the ways in which the cultivation of English heritage related to Shakespeare is heavily reliant on the subjectivity of space. Space is often presented as subjective in the plays, and this subjectivity has been transferred to the way audiences are instructed to react to performances and literary heritage sites.

Last year, I developed the Stratford Memory Map project. As part of this project, I created a website that featured a map of the cultural heritage sites in Shakespeare’s hometown of Stratford-upon-Avon. Each marker included a word cloud that showed the words most commonly used to instruct visitors on how to react to cultural heritage sites in guidebooks from the 19th century. Over the summer, I was able to visit Stratford-upon-Avon and take pictures of these heritage sites myself. As such, the project has changed slightly since the end of my previous time as a CHI fellow.

This year, I want to expand on the ideas from this project while taking things in a slightly different direction. I still want to focus on the cultural heritage industry in Stratford-upon-Avon, but I want to move away from mapping and word clouds. While I am still slightly unsure what form my new project will take, I’m hoping to perhaps take a look at the history of the Shakespeare heritage industry in England and how it has evolved over time. I think there is an interesting line of inquiry in examining how interactions with literary heritage sites in Stratford were curated via instructions in guidebooks, but I’m wondering if there is a better way to collect and represent this information digitally. 

I am very much looking forward to exploring these ideas further this year, and I’m so excited to have the opportunity to be a CHI fellow again.

This post was originally published at https://chi.anthropology.msu.edu/news-updates/