What Are the Public Humanities? No, Really, What Are They?

Abstract

Virtually all scholars in the humanities agree that the public humanities are important, but consensus frays when it comes to discussing the degree of institutional investment in the public humanities, methods of public humanities engagement, and even the definition of what counts as the public humanities. To that end, Jeremy Browne (of BYU's Office of Digital Humanities) and I created a survey whose data we compiled from dozens of institutions in the international Consortium of Humanities Centers and Institutes. What emerges are a series of perspectives, at once diverse and overlapping, about such issues as the definition and perceived impact of the public humanities, both within and outside universities.

Finding Etheridge Knight

“…A significant part of community-engaged learning is the aspect of public humanities or humanities work that has outreach and benefit to the broader local community rather than just academia or those inside an institution, such as a university. Although the public humanities are broadly classified in academia, there is agreement that there is a need for institutions to share humanities research and projects widely with others outside of scholars on the subject, making sure that what is presented is relevant and of interest in the public sphere (Wickman, 2016).…”

“…Public humanities projects take on different forms but have the commonality of actively engaging with the humanities and seeking to reach out to a broader audience for the public good (Wickman, 2016). Although the public benefit is often seen through a financial lens, Gibbs (2016) insists that public humanities "cannot, and should not, be contained by the economistic assumptions" (p. 3).…”

Humanities at the centre: Insights from building a public humanities program

“…No, Really, What Are They?” reveals an odd emptiness at the heart of the field as he attempts to define what kinds of work humanities centres are actually doing under the public humanities umbrella. While members had no problem discussing the field in the abstract, Wickman found that it was surprisingly difficult to pin down what the public humanities are in reality; as he puts it, the field appears to be easy to discuss in terms of “ideals,” “archetypes” and “moral imperatives” (Wickman, 2016: 7) but less so in terms of what those ideals actually look like in the world. There appears to be an “absent centre” (Wickman, 2016: 7) underneath the broad outlines of the field, even for experts.…”

“…While members had no problem discussing the field in the abstract, Wickman found that it was surprisingly difficult to pin down what the public humanities are in reality; as he puts it, the field appears to be easy to discuss in terms of “ideals,” “archetypes” and “moral imperatives” (Wickman, 2016: 7) but less so in terms of what those ideals actually look like in the world. There appears to be an “absent centre” (Wickman, 2016: 7) underneath the broad outlines of the field, even for experts. While Wickman doesn’t speculate on the cause of this problem, my experience with the PRF students suggests that it may be the decentring of the humanities within the study and practice of public humanities that produces this disorienting effect.…”

“…These “new public humanists” are less interested in disciplinary boundaries and knowledge transfer and more invested in transforming what the production of knowledge looks like (Ellison, 2013: 289). By the time Wickman surveyed leaders of humanities centres in 2016, there was near-complete consensus that public humanities work must involve “active engagement rather than simple transmission of information” (Wickman, 2016: 7) and that publics need to be “engaged,” rather than “addressed as passive receptacles of university learning” (Wickman, 2016: 8). These efforts to redefine the field are motivated in part by a desire to upend the standard hierarchy between academia and the world outside it; the public ought to be able to be co-creators of knowledge, not just grateful recipients of it.…”