Page 765 - Revista1

companion that includes all of the papers delivered at the Are the Digital Humanities So White?, or, Thinking the

conference, some of which were delivered in Spanish. Some Histories of Race and Computation,” Debates in the Digi-

of the translations in this published volume are more elo- tal Humanities. Ed. Matthew K. Gold. Minneapolis: Uni-

quent than others, and some are more theoretically ground- versity of Minnesota Press, 2012; and Nakamura, Lisa and

ed. All, however, offer important perspectives on the state Peter Chow-White (eds.) Race After the Internet. New York:

of digital literatures in Hispanic Studies from both creators Routledge, 2012).

and critics, accomplished and emerging. There is a diverse Despite this omission, the editors did an exceptional job

geographical range of authors and artists from Spain and representing a variety of hybridities. Unsurprisingly, Hensel-

Latin America, including Brazil. As the evidence in this vol- er’s and Castillo’s introduction to the volume is a well-orga-

ume shows, digital literature is global and post-national in nized, well-articulated explanation of their project includ-

nature but there are still movements that are primarily as- ing discerning commentaries on the commonalities and

sociated with a particular geography or another, e.g. the differences among the articles in the volume. Also of great

Latin American McOndo movement and the Nocilla Gen- import to the field is their discussion of Hispanic Studies

eration, also known as Afterpop and “Generación Mutante” within the trajectory of the digital humanities. While it is

(Mutant Generation), in Spain. This volume gives great- difficult for me to do justice to the complexities of the arti-

er attention to the latter. Male and female voices are in- cles in the volume in just a few sentences, I will nonetheless

cluded as critical and artistic voices, however the scale leans offer highlights of each hoping to entice the reader to read

more toward the male voice than a true balance. Is this be- the articles in their entirety.

cause there truly are more male writers or does the volume In the first of three sections in the volume, “Creative

unwittingly repeat the traditionally male-dominant para- Code Switching,” five creative writers share their experienc-

digm? Luis Martín-Estudillo and Stephanie A. Mueller in- es and interpretations of how the digital age is affecting not

sightfully note in the volume’s afterword that “when at its only the experience of writing, but also our experience of

best, innovation does not preclude respect and use of tra- reading and our definition of what literature is. In “The Bi-

dition, and at the same time it can point out many of its cephalous Writer: The Commingling of the Creative Writer

dark spots. But it also does not guarantee that the inequal- and the Critic in a Single Body,” Catalán critic, professor,

ities and perverse dynamics that have been reproduced for and writer of Spain’s Nocilla Generation, Jorge Carrión, re-

centuries will be erased with the stroke of a computer key” sponds to columns in the press by authors Javier Marías and

(297). Similarly, I would add that race is not addressed any- Juan Marsé. Carrión develops his argument as to why all

where in the volume, a significant oversight given the pio- writers are (or should be) critics—or self-critics—as well as

neering digital humanities work on race by Lisa Nakamura, writers. The article is a thought-provoking, reflective piece

Tara McPherson, and others (see McPherson, Tara, “Why on the relationship between literature and theory, and lit-

764 765
Revist a de alces XXI Número 1 , 2013