Boats/Books,” Dave Parry (2010b) suggests, for example, that Web 2.0 should cause scholars to abandon the filter the print” model of peer review and opt instead for “publish a then filter” model endemic to blogging. Print publishing, he argues, responds “publish to the dearth of materials by weeding out poor contributions before publication. The web has an infinite capability for publishing, so filtering should occur with reTweets or posts on Facebook. The then filter” model definitely has its own limitations and “publish complications, but it also provides a new way to conceive of the relationship between William Blake, academia and the public. If scholars abandon the mimetic would “what William Blake think” model of Digital Blake scholarship and adopt the performative network model of Digital Blake I described above, a wider range of scholars, artists, academic and non-academic users could contribute to the collective act of defining William Blake. A project I co-edit with Jason Whittaker called responds to The Blake 2.0 Cloud Dave Parry’s call for a reinvigorated form of humanities scholarship. The Blake 2.0 is a collection of sites including A Blake 2.0 blog,” a playlist of Cloud “Zoamorphosis: podcasts called William Blake Channel,” an ethnographical study on the online “The reading habits of everyday people encountering Blake called the Digital Reading “Blake Project,” a Tumblr page showcasing Blake’s art, self-published books available on amazon.com, and accounts in Facebook, MySpace, and Twitter that disseminate content about the site along with daily quotes from Blake (Figure 4). Figure 4: Screenshot of the Blake 2.0 Cloud (Whittaker and Whitson 2010) computing is, according to Eric Knorr and Galen Gruman (2007), a group of servers available over the Internet,” which provide way to increase capacity or “virtual “a add capabilities on the fly without investing in new infrastructure, training new personnel, or licensing new software.” By multiplying the locations of servers and applications, cloud computing allows users and developers to functionality over “exploit the Internet, rather than delivering [or consuming] full-blown applications” (Knorr and Gruman, 2007). The online functionality of cloud computing makes collaboration more economically feasible and conceptually desirable, as it shifts the structure of a website
Boats/Books,” Dave Parry (2010b) suggests, for example, that Web 2.0 should cause scholars to abandon the filter the “publish print” model of peer review and opt instead for a “publish then filter” model endemic to blogging. Print publishing, he argues, responds to the dearth of materials by weeding out poor contributions before publication. The web has an infinite capability for publishing, so filtering should occur with reTweets or posts on Facebook. The “publish then filter” model definitely has its own limitations and complications, but it also provides a new way to conceive of the relationship between William Blake, academia and the public. If scholars abandon the mimetic “what would William Blake think” model of Digital Blake scholarship and adopt the performative network model of Digital Blake I described above, a wider range of scholars, artists, academic and non-academic users could contribute to the collective act of defining William Blake. A project I co-edit with Jason Whittaker called The Blake 2.0 Cloud responds to Dave Parry’s call for a reinvigorated form of humanities scholarship. The Blake 2.0 Cloud is a collection of sites including “Zoamorphosis: A Blake 2.0 blog,” a playlist of podcasts called “The William Blake Channel,” an ethnographical study on the online reading habits of everyday people encountering Blake called the “Blake Digital Reading Project,” a Tumblr page showcasing Blake’s art, self-published books available on amazon.com, and accounts in Facebook, MySpace, and Twitter that disseminate content about the site along with daily quotes from Blake (Figure 4). Figure 4: Screenshot of the Blake 2.0 Cloud (Whittaker and Whitson 2010) computing is, according to Eric Knorr and Galen Gruman (2007), a group of “virtual servers available over the Internet,” which provide “a way to increase capacity or add capabilities on the fly without investing in new infrastructure, training new personnel, or licensing new software.” By multiplying the locations of servers and applications, cloud computing allows users and developers to “exploit functionality over the Internet, rather than delivering [or consuming] full-blown applications” (Knorr and Gruman, 2007). The online functionality of cloud computing makes collaboration more economically feasible and conceptually desirable, as it shifts the structure of a website
digital_blake_2.0.docx