WM Fellowship at King’s

I have exciting news! I have been nominated the Willard McCarty Fellowship 2018-2019 at the Department of Digital Humanities at King’s College London. It is one of the largest and most prestigious departments of digital humanities worldwide and the first department of DH established in Europe. I couldn’t imagine a better place to share and develop my research interests! I will give a talk “A Laboratory as Critical Infrastructure in the Humanities” at King’s on 23rd May. More information soon!

The abstract of my talk:

Laboratories have entered the humanities as a new infrastructure aimed at transforming the humanities into an experimental, collaborative, and technology-driven discipline. With the spread of the idea of the laboratory into academic spaces, city spaces, and cultural institutions, the definition of lab has been extended significantly. A laboratory goes beyond the notion of a physical place involving specialized instruments and hands-on scientific exploration, becoming, instead, a widely understood project. A laboratory is thus more than infrastructure; it is a “conceptual vehicle” (Critical Media Lab at the Academy of Art and Design FHNW) and it involves “new ways of engaging with public audiences” (the Humanities Laboratories at Duke University). In short, a laboratory can be conceptualized as a way of thinking that entails new social practices and new research modes. Thus, a lab can be established anywhere. The only condition for creating a lab is community: a lab is constituted by and for the people gathered together to address particular challenges.

My goal is to present the impact of the laboratory through two different perspectives: infrastructural changes in the humanities and structural changes through the humanities. I attempt to go beyond the discussion of a laboratory as a research infrastructure to investigate it as the infrastructure of engagement in social and global challenges. Hence, I pose the following questions: How does a laboratory grow from a physical workspace into actions taken around challenges? How does a laboratory become the driving force of the engaged humanities? How can changes be made through the (digital) humanities infrastructure? Drawing on the sociology of scientific knowledge, laboratory studies, and critical infrastructure studies, I will address these questions and explore the laboratory as a platform for systemic changes.

This talk will consist of two parts. In the first part, I will present three discourses that gave rise to the laboratory in the humanities: the transformation of the humanities infrastructure within the university, the paradigm shifts in the social sciences, and the expansion of particular cultural categories. Further, based on an interactive map of laboratories (humanities labs, digital humanities labs, and media labs) established around the world, I will sketch the history of the lab in the humanities within a global context from the 1980s to 2018. Next, I will determine models for humanities labs based on laboratories’ statements and operations, including the techno-science, workstation, and virtual models. The second part of the lecture aims to examine the lab structure critically and reflect on its potential for the engaged humanities. Referring to social lab theorists, I will seek to answer questions as to how humanities research can be translated into action and how a laboratory drives this process. The analysis will be based on different forms of laboratories seen as sites of interventions: the lab as a challenge-centric space, coalition, and community platform.

Materials: Presentation and Mapping

In the “Materials” section, I have uploaded my presentation “Mapping a History of the Humanities and Media Labs” which I am showing today, on March 21, at the Global Digital Humanities Symposium at Michigan State University. You can also find a link to an interactive map of “(Digital) Humanities and Media Labs around the world” created in StoryMapJS tool. The map will be available for a week so please feel free to explore it! If you have any comments or suggestions, please email me: urszula.pawlicka@aalto.fi

Global Digital Humanities Symposium

I am presenting my research at the Global Digital Humanities Symposium held at Michigan State University (March 21-22, 2019). The Symposium will be livestreamed at go.cal.msu.edu/globaldh. So if you are interested in the phenomenon of humanities labs, please join my session today, on March 21, at 2.40pm (EDT time zone)!

Below, the abstract of my presentation, titled Mapping a History of the Humanities and Media Labs:
The last years can be called as a boom of laboratories in the humanities created as a physical space and as a ‘placeless’ project (virtual labs, lab podcasts) for a specific purpose and for a fixed period. The multiplication of labs has led to a state of emergency when it becomes significant to investigate their objectives and operation. Hence, I pose the following questions: What does a laboratory mean in the humanities? How did a laboratory grow from a physical workspace into an action taken around people and challenges? How did the transition occurred from the first experimental generation to the second wave of the humanities labs?

My goal is to present a lab history in the humanities, digital humanities, and media studies within a global context from the 1980s to 2018. The main part of my presentation is a map of laboratories established in the humanities and media studies around the world. Based on a survey and laboratories’ statements, I created an interactive map with labs’ descriptions and timeline to analyze the concept of the humanities lab from geographical and historical perspective.

It is vital to understand the phenomenon of laboratory in the humanities that entails significant changes in the research practices and scholarly communication. The humanities labs do not represent a unified structure but they are a cluster of various models which have their own architectures and practices. Hence, the humanities labs do not purely imitate the science lab but adapt this new structure for its own purposes and needs.

ARTS Open Science drop-in sessions

I am co-organizing two-day drop-in sessions about open science and research data management at the School of Arts, Design and Architecture of Aalto University. You are welcome to join us and learn how to make your research and artistic outputs more visible and boost your academic career!

When: October 30-31 at 12pm-4pm
Where: Aalto, Väre building

Find solutions to open science, research data management and copyright issues:

  • How to comply with your funders’ and university’s requirements about open access publishing and data management.
  • How to find open media on the web and how to define Creative Commons -licences you need.
  • How to share code, publish data in the Research Catalogue, get more citations.
  • How to apply funding from Aalto Open Access Fund and other funders.
  • How to write the Data Management Plan (DMP).
  • How to get an ORCID iD and distinguish yourself from other researchers.
  • Get to know open access in practice, e.g. the local tools and services we provide you.

We hope to see you there! 

CFP: Special Issue for the Digital Humanities Quarterly!

I am excited to announce that my special issue proposal, edited together with Dr. Mila Oiva, for DHQ: “Lab and Slack. Situated Research Practices in Digital Humanities” has been accepted!

Below, you can read more about the special issue topic and timeline. Full CFP is available here.

You are welcome to submit an abstract!

“Lab and Slack. Situated Research Practices in Digital Humanities”. CFP: Special Issue for the Digital Humanities Quarterly

Editors: Mila Oiva (University of Turku) and Urszula Pawlicka-Deger (Aalto University)

Although the concept of digital comes with an assumption of placelessness and detachment from physical space and geographical location, these matters still play a significant role in the way the digital humanities research is practiced today, and also in the future. The location, the surroundings and infrastructure open the questions of accessibility and equality: space shapes the opportunities for doing digital humanities research, both enables and hinders collaboration, and both unifies and divides scholars.

The purpose of this special issue is to examine the different aspects of situated research practices of the digital humanities covering two perspectives: physical and virtual. The physical places of research refer to the various digital humanities sites (laboratories, centers, departments) all over the world and more widely to the surroundings a location in a particular city, country, cultural sphere or continent affecting research practices. As virtual environments of digital humanities scholarship, we define the digital internet-based platforms, services, and tools that enable research and scholarly collaboration. The aspects that determine digital humanities research in both physical and virtual places are infrastructure (material and non-material), social interaction (communication and collaboration), and context (social, cultural, and political situatedness). The aspects influence each other and changes in one of them can affect the others. They have also impact on what is studied, the ways research can be done, and, in the end the results of our knowledge, what kind of knowledge digital humanities research can provide.

We seek a series of articles that address the following issues, but not limited to, organized in two thematic clusters: 1) Lab: Physical Situatedness; and 2) Slack: Virtual Situatedness.

Deadline for 200-Word Abstracts emailed to the Editors (milaoiv@utu.fi and; pawlickadeger@gmail.com): October 15, 2018
Decisions on accepted abstracts: November 1, 2018
Deadline for final paper sent to the Editors: February 1, 2019

Please contact us with any questions!

“Literatura cyfrowa. W stronę podejścia procesualnego”

Z przyjemnością mogę powiedzieć, że moja publikacja podoktorska Literatura cyfrowa. W stronę podejścia procesualnego już ukazała się drukiem! Poniżej zamieszczam ustęp ze wstępu oraz fragment recenzji naukowej Prof. Wojciecha Józefa Burszty.

“W 2011 roku, kiedy rozpoczęłam badania, literatura cyfrowa analizowana była z perspektywy historycznej awangardy, teorii narracji i semiotyki. Na gruncie polskim był to czas przed głoszonymi i rozpowszechnionymi zwrotami w humanistyce: praktycznym1, nie-ludzkim (nonhuman turn) i cyfrowym (rozwój humanistyki cyfrowej), które wyznaczyły nową perspektywę badawczą. Obecnie wskazać można przejścia teoretyczne w historii literatury elektronicznej: od cybersemiotyki i cyberstrukturalizmu do studiów zorientowanych na obiekcie (object-oriented studies) i jego operacyjności, od tekstualności do procesualności, czy od interpretacji do doświadczenia. Pojawiające się zwroty i przesunięcia znacząco wpłynęły na praktyczny i teoretyczny rozwój literatury elektronicznej. Literatura cyfrowa jest tematem dyskusyjnym, ewoluującym i interdyscyplinarnym. Stąd staram się oddać w swej pracy jej dynamiczność, wielokierunkowość i wielogłosowość: od problematyki jej definiowania przez eksplorowanie metodologii teoretycznej po obecne wyzwania związane z kondycją współczesnej humanistyki i wzrastającym wpływem nauk ścisłych na humanistykę” (ze Wstępu)

Literatura cyfrowa to swoista hybryda intencjonalnych „społeczności praktyki” (w sensie nadanym temu pojęciu przez Ėtienne’a Wengera) i możliwości nowych mediów. Stąd – jak słusznie zauważa autorka tej książki już na wstępie – „napisana dziś praca teoretyczna, jutro okaże się tylko częścią historii”. Krótka jeszcze historia rozważań nad rolą internetu, technologiami komunikacyjnymi czy choćby prace poświęcone telefonom komórkowym sprzed kilku lat dowodnie pokazują, jak niepewne i tymczasowe bywają diagnozy, które w momencie ich formułowania sprawiają wrażenie „przełomowych”. O wiele zatem bezpieczniejsze, i tę drogę wybrała Urszula Pawlicka, jest podejście „procesualne”, analizujące procesy, teorie, praktyki i dokonania literatury w środowisku cyfrowym od momentu ich pojawienia się do dnia dzisiejszego (który najpewniej od jakiegoś czasu jest już zapisem o walorze ledwie historycznym). (prof. dr hab. Wojciech Józef Burszta)

Serdecznie zapraszam na stronę wydawnictwa Katedry!

Literatura cyfrowa. W stronę podejścia procesualnego, WN Katedra, Gdańsk 2017. http://wnkatedra.pl/pl/p/Literatura-cyfrowa.-W-strone-podejscia-procesualnego-Urszula-Pawlicka/22522528

‘The Making of the Humanities VI’

Last month I had a pleasure to present my current research on laboratories in the humanities during the conference ‘The Making of the Humanities VI’ taking place at the University of Oxford, Humanities Division and Somerville College on September 28-30, 2017. The goal of my presentation, titled ‘The Emergence of Laboratories in the Humanities: Impetus, Implementation, and Impact’ was to trace a history of the humanities labs, covering the impulse and the mechanism of their creation. Below, I have attached my abstract and presentation available also in the section of ‘Projects’.

The humanities has made significant conceptual shifts that include fostering strong innovative and collaborative research, employing technologies, and building a bridge between the academy, industry, and community. Above changes mean designing and defining the humanities anew. Creating an academic discipline requires an ‘administrative imagination’; that is to say, we must build a structure aligned with development strategy. Consequently, the humanities has undergone an ‘infrastructure turn’ over the past ten years and launched a new physical place: a laboratory. The emergence of labs in the humanities has been crucial for “redefining the role of the humanities” and “re-configuration of the humanities offered by computational technologies”; however, the proliferation and the fragmentation of labs have led to a state of emergency when it becomes urgent to investigate their significance, objectives, and impact.  

The goal of the presentation is to analyze three aspects of the humanities labs: its impetus, implementation, and impact. The first part aims to trace a history of the humanities labs, covering the impulse and the mechanism of their creation. This section includes also mapping out laboratories in the humanities established all over the world. The second part presents the complex landscape of the laboratories in the humanities, launched in various ways as a physical research lab, a makerspace, a virtual network, a community project, etc. The last part examines the features of laboratories that significantly reconfigure the humanities seen as an innovative, digital technology-based field, hands-on experimental research, situated practice, engaged in community affairs, and collaborating with local companies.

Free access to my new article “Data, Collaboration, Laboratory”

My new article Data, Collaboration, Laboratory: Bringing Concepts from Science into Humanities Practice has just been published in “English Studies” (2017, Doi: 10.1080/0013838X.2017.1332022).

You can receive one of 50 free eprints! Everyone who clicks on the link below will be taken to the full article. Feel free to share it with colleagues and friends, giving them free access to the article.


Humanities researchers have been looking for new tools and strategies to overcome what has been called, in recent years, a “crisis” in the humanities. These efforts maintain that it is possible to change the widespread view that humanities fields are arcane or irrelevant by changing conceptual frames in ways that show the humanities to be useful, accessible and actionable. Specifically, researchers have been claiming for the humanities frames and concepts from the sciences, such as the humanities “labs” that signal (in both name and design) quantifiability, verifiability and functionality. This tactic of borrowing categories from the sciences is part of a larger tactical turn that we may call “the scientification of the humanities”. The new field of the digital humanities, in particular, is a central site for this turn. With a focus on digital humanities practices, this article aims to describe the tactical meanings, in the humanities, of the borrowed concepts data, collaboration and laboratory, all of which strategically frame the humanities as a practical, innovative and profitable field. Ultimately, I show that the trajectory of scientification in the humanities follows a path from concepts to transformation.

Humanistyka: Pracownia, Centrum czy Laboratorium?

Właśnie ukazał się długo wyczekiwany numer “Tekstów Drugich” (1/2017) pod hasłem “Nowa Humanistyka”, a w nich mój artykuł pt. Humanistyka: Pracownia, Centrum czy Laboratorium?

Zapowiedź numeru:
Nowy numer o nowej humanistyce, a w nim: Kil, Małczyński i Wolska piszą o „laboratoryzacji” humanistyki, Nycz o głównych nurtach nowej humanistyki na świecie, Czapliński o najważniejszych propozycjach badawczych w humanistyce ostatniej dekady, Skrendo o naukowym statusie badań humanistycznych, Łebkowska o autorefleksyjności współczesnej humanistyki, Koziołek o nowej propozycji humanistyki literaturoznawczej, Domańska o sprawiedliwości epistemicznej w humanistyce zaangażowanej, Rewers o koncepcji ‘kulturynatury’, Pawlicka o transformacji strukturalnej humanistyki, a do Nowej Humanistyki krytycznie odnosi się Bielik-Robson. Ponadto: Sendyka o humanistyce forensycznej wrażliwości, Kobielska o problemie zaangażowania w kulturoznawczych badaniach nad pamięcią, Dauksza o realizmie afektywnym, Kuziak o polityczności polskiej humanistyki, Tabaszewska o literaturoznawstwie służebnym, a Cieński o nowej humanistyce i problemie ciągłości tradycji. W numerze również: Momro o epistemologii anachronizmu, Sugiera o praktykach kontrfaktualnych, Żychliński o przemianach współczesnych fikcji literackich, Żylińska o istnieniu obrazów „po człowieku”, Shallcross o praktykach hybrydowego zespolenia cytatu z jego materialnym nośnikiem, Rejniak-Majewska o roli tytułów w sztuce abstrakcyjnej, Antonik o społecznym życiu literatury, Neuger o problemach z przekładem tego, co lokalne w poezji, Rakowski o nowy polach poznawczych w antropologii oraz Barcz na temat nowej pamięci o powodzi. Ponadto artykuły o humanistyce cyfrowej: Szczęsna pisze o humanistyce wobec rozwoju technologii cyfrowych, a Maryl odpowiada na pytanie, kim są polscy humaniści cyfrowi. Publikujemy także: tłumaczenia – Segal o piśmienności kulturowej oraz Morettiego o specyfice pracy we współczesnym laboratorium literackim, rozmowę z Joanną Rajkowską na temat projektu Samobójczynie oraz recenzje, w tym – Góreckiego o Encyklopedii gender.

Poniżej zamieszczam streszczenie mojego artykułu:

Wzrost popularyzacji laboratoriów humanistycznych zmusza do zastanowienia się nad źródłem, znaczeniem i konsekwencją transformacji strukturalnej humanistyki. Założeniem szkicu jest zanaalizowanie relacji pomiędzy miejscem prowadzenia badań a zmianami funkcjonalnymi i metodologicznymi. Tezą artykułu jest stwierdzenie, że każdorazowa zmiana miejsca w historii humanistyki jest strategią instytucjonalną, podejmowaną w odpowiedzi na aktualne w danym czasie wyzwania. Celem jest zatem prześledzenie sytuacji i czynników, które doprowadziły do ukonstytuowania się laboratoriów humanistycznych. Omówione są następujące zjawiska: korporacjonizm uniwersytetu, kryzys humanistyki, unaukowienie humanistyki oraz rozwój humanistyki cyfrowej. Po przeglądzie warunków zewnętrznych, analizie i porównaniu poddane zostają trzy miejsca humanistyki: pracownia, centrum oraz laboratorium. Twierdzi się, że zmiana miejsca oznacza budowanie nowych struktur i nowych porządków władzy. Stąd tworzenie laboratoriów uważa się za część zwrotu taktycznego w humanistyce. [U. Pawlicka, Humanistyka: Pracownia, Centrum czy Laboratorium? “Teksty Drugie” 1 (2017)]

Zapraszam do lektury!