In her article, “A rationale of digital documentary editions”, Elena Pierazzo claims, “the digital medium has proved to be much more permissive and so editors need new scholarly guidelines to establish ‘where to stop’.”(463). By digitally analyzing text at a micro level, I have been able to look into aspects of the manuscript that I wouldn’t have done otherwise. For example, I’ve learned to take note on which specific words the author tends to use, in what way the author tends to describe people and places, and even observe the author’s past experiences, and how that in effect can make an impact on their writing.
Nobody looks at a text close enough for full understanding until he or she has completed a transcription of that text. In the beginning of this assignment, I knew very little about Linn and his travels just from reading his diary. However, now that I have meticulously gone into detail transcribing multiple entries of his diary, I am able to connect with Linn on a level that I wasn’t able to before. The action of transcribing has caused me to engage with Linn’s diary and help me discover aspects of his writing that I never would have noticed before.
What is interesting about transcribing a document is that everybody will do it a different way. Pierazzo states on page 465 that, “if every editor necessarily selects from an infinite set of facts, it is evident that any transcription represents an interpretation and not a mechanically complete record of what is on the page.” This is why it is impossible to exactly replicate the document in a transcription; it is subjective to the person transcribing it. What’s good about this is that one can see how engaged a person is with the material by looking at how marked up the document they’re transcribing is. Because everybody transcribes differently, it becomes evident who is focusing on what aspect of the text through his or her transcription. This in turn gives a well-rounded view of the document as a whole, and one will be able to look into multiple aspects of the document with ease.
Pierazzo couldn’t have said it better when she stated, “The preparation and publication on the Web of digital scholarly editions, especially those based on transcriptions of manuscripts, are at the centre of lively debate among scholars.”(463). Though we are considered more of students than scholars, I would wholeheartedly agree with Pierazzo on this point. As a class, we have had multiple discussions on whether certain things are objects or places and event versus time. Personally, I believe these discussions are the most beneficial part of the transcription process because it allows everybody to hear different perspectives. To resolve our disputes, we would vote, majority winning. However, before that vote was made, each side would have to give an appealing argument to support their claim. This kind of action in class made for a very productive work environment, and helped bring about discussion that benefitted everyone.