Comments on: Contextualizing networks with maps

By: Network Analysis | Sara Collini

Network Analysis | Sara Collini — Thu, 20 Aug 2015 23:48:19 +0000

[…] generated from topic modeling, creating powerful and useful visualizations. Scott Weingart’s insightful suggestion about contextualizing networks with textured base maps is even more involved. He proposes the use […]

By: Demystifying Networks Parts 1 & 2 by Scott Weingart : Digital Humanities Now

Demystifying Networks Parts 1 & 2 by Scott Weingart : Digital Humanities Now — Tue, 14 Feb 2012 16:25:44 +0000

[…] A bunch of my recent posts have mentioned networks. Elijah Meeks not-so-subtly hinted that it might be a good idea to discuss some of the basics of networks on this blog, and I’m happy to oblige. He already introduced network visualizations on his own blog, and did a fantastic job of it, so I’m going to try to stick to more of the conceptual issues here, gearing the discussion generally toward people with little-to-no background in networks or math, and specifically to digital humanists interested in applying network analysis to their own work. This will be part of an ongoing series, so if you have any requests, please feel free to mention them in the comments below (I’ve already been asked to discuss how social networks apply to fictional worlds, which is probably next on the list). […]

By: HGIS and Mapping History | #HIST5702x

HGIS and Mapping History | #HIST5702x — Sun, 12 Feb 2012 16:07:02 +0000

[…] to the commemoration of the War of 1812, I have come across two blog posts by Elijah Meeks and Scott Weingart that attempt to demystify network theory for the digital humanities and history. Weingart seeks […]

By: Scott Weingart

Scott Weingart — Tue, 22 Nov 2011 16:10:30 +0000

That’s unfortunate news, but I suppose not too surprising. It also might be invoking the anti-positivist movement in the humanities, under the assumption that any base map is trying to represent an objective reality. The way I sidestep this issue is pointing out that neither the union nor the intersection of all subjective experience is equivalent to objective reality. And it doesn’t matter. The union of all this data is still *really useful* for situating one or a small group of subjective experiences against the larger set.

Of course. There will be synchronized snapping.

By: Elijah Meeks

Elijah Meeks — Tue, 22 Nov 2011 15:55:06 +0000

Hey Scott, excellent post as always. While I haven’t tried to formally contextualize my maps (network or geographic–I much prefer “map” over “visualization”, which still sounds to me to be some kind of New Age self-help tool) using a standard basemap, I have noticed that whenever I’ve done something approaching that, I receive the biggest ho-hum response. It’s almost as if contextualizing a map makes it less exciting, abstract and/or sophisticated. I wonder if there is a subtle pressure to produce a unique flower that fundamentally only exists in the world of study you’re currently engaged in, as if reference or grounding in a larger world is instead seen as a sign of the derivative nature of the work, rather than its connection to a larger system.

Oh, and I hope you’ll join me for a Gephi/Sci2 knifefight complete with choreographed dance and rhythmic background music.