DH 510 - Class 2
What the hell have I gotten myself into?
Sorry for the late update. I think I got bitchslapped this week by things.
Week Two: Literature, Zotero, and the Art of Staying Sane
This week’s class started by setting the rhythm for how things will run. Instead of word-for-word transcripts, our shared class notes are meant to capture the spirit of discussion—something that future readers (including ourselves a few months down the road) can actually make sense of. That mindset—thinking forward, not just writing for the present—feels like a small but important shift into “grad school mode.”
What We Covered
The agenda was packed:
A discussion of the literature review assignment and what it really means to “do a lit review” at this level.
Our first evaluative critique on Budak’s Playing Pacifism.
A deep dive into Zotero for citation management (bless Zotero).
And, to keep us honest, we wrapped up with a review activity that we’ll revisit later in the semester, once we’ve all learned more about what DH projects actually look like.
The Literature Review (a.k.a. The Mountain Ahead)
Our first major assignment is a literature review proposal: 5–7 pages, 10 annotated sources, and a clear research question. It’s only worth 5% of the final grade, but it sets up the much larger review (40 sources!) later on. The whole thing is peer-reviewed first in small groups before going to the instructor, which means accountability is baked in.
What stood out most in our discussion was the reminder that a literature review isn’t just a glorified annotated bibliography. It’s not about listing sources; it’s about making an argument and situating your own voice in the field. In DH, that’s especially tricky because the field is so broad and multidisciplinary. The hardest part isn’t always finding sources—it’s deciding what not to include. Scope is everything.
I walked away both intimidated and oddly excited. It feels like this is where my research ideas will start to take shape.
EC1: Budak’s Playing Pacifism
We also held our first Evaluative Critique (EC1), looking at Budak’s thesis on pacifism in video games. Everyone agreed it was approachable and well-written, but the critiques were sharp:
The “personal assessment” method for choosing games felt too curated.
Excluding violence from the discussion seemed unrealistic when morality still lingered in the background.
The MDA framework (mechanics, dynamics, aesthetics) was underused.
Dividing “player-driven” vs. “developer-driven” pacifism felt too rigid.
Queer theory showed up at the very end, disconnected from the main argument.
Emotional responses were touched on, but without a clear framework.
It was a reminder of what we’ll need to do in our own reviews: not just summarize, but interrogate structure, method, and argument.
Zotero & Personal Management Goals
The second half of class was hands-on with Zotero. If you’ve ever tried to format a bibliography at 2 a.m., Zotero feels like a gift. We set up our shared group library (“DH 510 Fall 2025”) and personal sub-collections. The flexibility is great—references can live in multiple collections without duplicating or disappearing, and you can tag everything for easy searching later. Add the browser connector, and you can scoop up citations straight from Google Scholar or library databases.
Alongside Zotero, we set personal management goals. This part was less technical but just as important: building routines, setting boundaries, and finding ways to manage commitments, distractions, and burnout before they happen. There’s even a self-assessment system in Canvas where we’ll check in regularly about things like procrastination, energy levels, or whether we’re actually sleeping enough. It felt surprisingly grounding to have “sanity” officially part of the curriculum.
Looking Ahead
Next week, Dr. Altman will be away, and Jeff Rockwell will step in, along with Doris Wagner from the library to walk us through graduate resources. We’ve got a 10-page reading from Digital_Humanities (Burdick et al.) lined up, plus more critiques and early prep for the grant assignment.
AI came up again too—specifically in the context of lit reviews. If we use AI to help with organizing or planning, we need to disclose it, but we’re not allowed to use AI to actually generate text. It’s a fine balance, but I like the transparency it demands.
First Reflections
This week felt like the program really began. Between literature reviews, Zotero, and critiques, I’m starting to see how all the pieces fit together: big-picture theory, project management, and the technical skills to actually do the work.
It’s a lot—but it feels doable, especially with the structures in place for accountability and collaboration. And honestly? Having “self-care” listed next to “Zotero setup” on the agenda might be the most DH thing yet.