For Journal #2: During historicizes the term “humanities” in order to arrive at a suitable definition. By discussing what the humanities were, he attempts to describe what the contemporary field (or set of disciplines, or objects of study, etc.) is. For this post, think about how you would describe the humanities to someone outside this area (how this field is different from, say, the social sciences or natural or physical sciences) AND think about the part of During’s article that best helps you do this. Feel free to discuss parts of the article that muddy things for you, too. Which ideas might benefit from a little ventilation in class discussion?

Response: 

After having read Simon During article, there was a lot of information to unpack and understand. The humanities world as During describes it, can be thought of as a loosely linked group of practices, interests, moods, purposes, and values inside and outside of the university system. In more recent time these areas of the humanities are no longer being seen as separate specialized disciplines but rather as one established group or “meta-discipline”. The area of the humanities can potentially focus on anything at all such as, texts, actions, performances, natural forces, individuals, animals, artworks, and social structures. Also, the humanities while encompassing not just one particular area or object of study also do not have just one purpose. Dependent on the area of the humanities being examined the purpose to inform or educate may evolve or change. Another defining aspect that During points out is that unlike the sciences, the humanities routinely produce knowledge that is not testable and not bound to rules. In science results may be taken as the truth, but the humanities produce knowledge as interpretations. This is important in what we know now as the modern humanities. The humanities also were formed and broke away from just being referred to as liberal arts. This wasn’t done to ignore the past on which this group of disciplines was created but to expand on what could be included into this area of study. Durings section of the article on telling the story of the humanities helped solidify these ideas and the definition of what they actually are. I really liked the quote of “The humanities exist as an archive which continually throws up “monuments”- works worthy of commentary- but no less continually demotes them.” I think this would be an interesting area of the paper to discuss, to find out exactly what is meant by this quote.