PofoliaShared via Pofolia

Globalisation Societies and Education· 2026Q1

Indianizing digital humanities: epistemic negotiations, institutional practices, and postcolonial contexts

Avishek Ray, Sunanda Kar

Short summary

Digital Humanities (DH) in India is shaped by unique archival inheritances, institutional improvisation, and multilingual practices, diverging from Euro-American histories and driven by a need to 'Indianize' due to scarce support and fragile infrastructure.

AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.

Key points

  • Indian DH is a relational formation, not an extension of Western 'humanities computing'.
  • Calls to 'Indianize' DH arise from scarce institutional support and fragile digital infrastructures.
  • The field is organizationally dispersed, requiring continuous efforts to establish academic legitimacy.
  • DH work in India connects to earlier traditions of digitisation and community archiving.

AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.

Abstract

This article examines Digital Humanities (DH) in India as a contested, unevenly institutionalised field whose trajectory cannot be explained through Euro-American histories of ‘humanities computing’. Instead, it conceptualises Indian DH as a relational formation shaped by archival inheritances, institutional improvisation, and multilingual epistemic practices. Based on interviews with practitioners across universities, research centres, and independent initiatives, the study shows how calls to ‘Indianize’ DH emerge from conditions of scarce institutional support, fragile digital infrastructures, and unstable disciplinary boundaries. The field appears organisationally dispersed – across electives, certificate courses, temporary centres, and short modules – requiring continual efforts to assert academic legitimacy. Yet DH work also extends earlier traditions of digitisation, community archiving, and public documentation that predate formal disciplinary consolidation. Placed within postcolonial debates on technocratic rationality, datafication, and knowledge politics, these findings reveal persistent frictions between imported conceptual frameworks and vernacular intellectual traditions. The article concludes that ‘Indianizing’ DH entails acknowledging these negotiations and the heterogeneous, improvised pathways through which the field continues to take shape.

The authors' abstract, as published at the source. Globalisation Societies and Education, 2026 · DOI ↗

TakeawaysPremium
Ask the paperFree account

Continue with a free account

Ask the paper: 3 free questions a day about this paper; save it, get its citation, new summaries every day for your field. Takeaways are Premium.

Continue free on the web

Sign in with Google or Apple; no card needed. You come back to this paper.

On your phone:

Field: Literature and Literary Theory

Literature and Literary TheoryArts and Humanities