In theory, the digitisation of archives holds numerous benefits surrounding the central promise of Digital Humanities: accessibility. Making knowledge universally accessible has the potential to develop research across disciplines and enhance education of the past. However, dangers are persistent and are entrenched in the problems of colonisation which increasingly plague the Digital Humanities.
This colonialism lies most prominently in the presumption that the digitisation of ‘subaltern’ archives automatically transcends issues of discrimination along lines of race, class, gender, sexuality, ability, nation, and religion. In reality, this assumption is a problematic aspect of shallow decolonisation, part of the attempt of postcolonial societies to create a narrative of inclusion and resolution. In other words, diversity does not equal de-colonisation.
The unrestricted tool of the digitisation of archives follows in the deep footsteps of colonial atrocities. The materials collected, or taken, from indigenous communities leads to artifacts being repurposed for uses and audiences not originally intended as part of a narrative which attempts to convince the world of disconnection from colonial pasts, an issue especially problematic in the United Kingdom where connection to the atrocities of empire are shrouded in ambiguity. Through the process of digitisation, archivists choose what to accept, accession, describe, catalogue, and document; this can be especially problematic when outsiders compile and interpret materials of indigenous communities. Pushed into the perspective of the Global North, the nature of the material is skewed and exclusionary.
With this in mind, digitisation must respect the cultural protocols and traditions of the multitude of cultures across the globe. In reference to both the content and the way in which the content is presented; when catalogued by outsiders, materials are threatened with being removed from their context, pushed beyond traditions of access, and end up reflecting the heritage of those who collected the material rather than those from whom it originated.
The benefits of the digitisation of archives have the potential to build connections between the past and the present regardless of location and can be vital to the development and enhancement of research and education. However, in the interest of both ethics and avoiding the persistence of false representation, the cultural protocols, and traditions of a diverse array of communities must be adhered to, a process which requires the involvement of community members. The Mukurtu archive provides an exceptional example of a platform which empowers communities to manage, share, narrate and exchange the heritage of people previously swept into generalisations, with their heritage often presented in disrespectful contexts to unintended audiences.
Digital Humanities has accessibility at its core and there is a potential for brilliance through the process of archival digitisation. Unfortunately, this potential is threatened by the persistent issues of exclusion, assumptions, and the problematic dominant-subordinate binaries of Eurocentric studies. This is slowly being overcome by projects which acknowledge these issues of colonialism and respect the traditions of indigenous communities, but there is long way to go as funding remains targeted and corrupt and archives remain presumptuous and ambivalent.
Digital Humanities 