Page 156 - Journal of Library Science in China, Vol.47, 2021

NIU Li, GAO Chenxiang, ZHANG Yufeng, YAN Shi, XU Yongjun & LI Anrunze / Discovering, reorganizing 155
and storytelling: paths and methods of archives research on the perspective of digital humanities

the research paths of traditional humanities, guiding scholars in related fields to rediscover and
[1]
reacquaint the multi-dimensional value of humanities research from different perspectives . In
2009, WANG Xiaoguang introduced the concept of “digital humanities” into the field of library,
archival & information science (LIS) in China, opening the way for Chinese scholars to seek
[2]
“integrating research of DH and LIS” . Since 2017, the academic community of LIS has ushered
[3]
in an “upsurge” of DH research .On January 10, 2019, the Theory Department of Guangming
Daily released the top 10 hot spots of Chinese humanities academics in 2018, and “Digital
[4]
Humanities Research from the Perspective of Big Data” ranks among them . Among the “Top 10
Academic Hot Spots in the Field of LIS in China in 2019” announced in January 2020, “Digital
Humanities from the Perspective of Library, Information and Archives Management” ranked
second . At present, research institutions such as Shanghai Library, Center of Digital Humanities
[5]
of Wuhan University, Research Center for Humanistic Beijing of Renmin University of China,
Research Center for Digital Humanities of Peking University and other research institutions are
working hard in the field of integration of DH and LIS. The academic research on LIS from the
perspective of DH has made some progress in both theory and practice.
In LIS field, archives have attracted widespread attention from DH scholars because of their
unique attributes such as authenticity and reliability. However, in the DH research on archives,
archival theories and methods have not intervened enough, and have not played their due guiding
value. The application mode of DH concepts and methods in the process of archival research is
not significantly different from that in the research of other types of literature, and the feedback
effect of this research practice on archival theories and methods is insufficient. DH research with
the characteristics of archival science still needs to be developed. So far, the evolution of various
elements and attributes within the archival science has provided the prerequisites for the in-depth
interactive research of DH and archival science. At the theoretical level, under the influence
of postmodernist philosophical thought, archivists began to emphasize the pluralistic values of
ordinary people and specific social groups in archival construction, and reflected on the gaps
in traditional archival research. At the practical level, comprehensive archives focus more on
archival development and utilization services, and the traditional roles of archival creators, owners
and managers have been reconstructed, providing necessary space for archival research from
DH perspective. At the same time, with the continuous advancement of digitization, dataization
and “single-track system” record management of collection archives, “data state” archives have
attracted more attention from scholars, and the accumulation of basic archival data provides
[6]
material conditions for DH research .
Based on the above backgrounds, domestic archival scholars have carried out speculative
research on DH and archival science, mainly manifested as reflective and critical discussions at
the macro level, estimating the opportunities and risks brought by DH to the discipline of archival
science. However, the research of paths and methods at the meso level is still in its infancy,
without clear research cases and results. This paper intends to discuss the paths, methods and