Literary theories from the radically deconstructive to the deeply historicist have long interrupted our reading experiences, but they have done so within the bounds of close-reading liturgies. Digital humanities violates this consummate exhortation of the practice of Literature. It is the new heresy.

Never before has it been so fashionable to be against numerical thinking.

Avoiding technology may sound like a noble feat of asceticism, but it's neither possible nor desirable. Technologies are part of us.

To be “disappeared”—a perverse if starkly accurate use of the passive voice—is not just to be kidnapped or killed. It is to be removed from the political world in such a way that no public memory or imagination is allowed.

The real problem, as everybody knows, is not that the internet is ruining writing. It’s writing. There’s just too much of it.

Data is hard won, theoretically complicated, and wrapped up with questions of value, questions that Leon Wieseltier claims Nate Silver and all his "intimidating" fellow data journalists fear. But that's just not true.