Although I haven’t read any of Ed Folsom’s other works and I believe he has contributed significantly to other scholarly discussions, I can’t help but wonder if he, like the theorist Lev Manovich who influenced him, is still adamant about his assertion of the autonomy of databases or if he would prefer to rethink his contradictory metaphorical claims.
Databases, according to Folsom, are a never-ending process of mediation and remediation (p. 1610) that “[thrive] on revision, addition, and supplementation” (p. 1611) and encompass all the mysterious digital activities for which we occasionally lack explanations. However, I’m curious about what determines the revised, added, and supplemented components that are included in the mediation and remediation processes in the first place, as well as what factors affect the structural decisions made to carry out those processes. I wonder if Folsom has ever thought that those decisions may have been influenced by narrative elements. It is significant that Folsom asserts that the hermeneutical enterprise accesses databases to “create” meaning (p. 1612). Does he consider what tools work together in that calculated creation process? (180) [TO-05]
[Manovich, 2002; Folsom, 2007]
I agree with what you are saying here. It isn’t clear how Folsom is adding to his databases. I found myself asking “How much of Walt Whitman’s work is necessary to add to a database. What narratives need to be told in order to justify an addition (much like the article that was written about it)?”