BEMIDBAR AND A MEDITATION ON THE COMING REVOLUTION IN TORAH STUDY: AN EXCURSUS INTO THE VISUAL DISPLAY OF INFORMATION
Save
Copy
Add to Collection
Export to Google Docs
ShareAnd you thought the census in Bemidbar was boring! In this class we explore the Torah's way of conveying statistical information. What is the role of text and narrative and how does it differ from the visual display of quantitative information? We explore this theme, going back to a little history of "the graph" citing William Playfair (the graph's inventor) and the history of infographics and pictograms. In this text is a story: the story of how we communicate stories; what stories do for us and to us. Torah, the textual and the oral, shies from the visual display of information (because it wasn't invented when the Torah arose) because of its deepest goal: to create relationships and to shape lives. That happens with text, narrative, conversation and argument. Enjoy!
The video of this class can be found here:
(א) וַיְדַבֵּ֨ר יְהוָ֧ה אֶל־מֹשֶׁ֛ה בְּמִדְבַּ֥ר סִינַ֖י בְּאֹ֣הֶל מוֹעֵ֑ד בְּאֶחָד֩ לַחֹ֨דֶשׁ הַשֵּׁנִ֜י בַּשָּׁנָ֣ה הַשֵּׁנִ֗ית לְצֵאתָ֛ם מֵאֶ֥רֶץ מִצְרַ֖יִם לֵאמֹֽר׃ (ב) שְׂא֗וּ אֶת־רֹאשׁ֙ כָּל־עֲדַ֣ת בְּנֵֽי־יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל לְמִשְׁפְּחֹתָ֖ם לְבֵ֣ית אֲבֹתָ֑ם בְּמִסְפַּ֣ר שֵׁמ֔וֹת כָּל־זָכָ֖ר לְגֻלְגְּלֹתָֽם׃ (ג) מִבֶּ֨ן עֶשְׂרִ֤ים שָׁנָה֙ וָמַ֔עְלָה כָּל־יֹצֵ֥א צָבָ֖א בְּיִשְׂרָאֵ֑ל תִּפְקְד֥וּ אֹתָ֛ם לְצִבְאֹתָ֖ם אַתָּ֥ה וְאַהֲרֹֽן׃ (ד) וְאִתְּכֶ֣ם יִהְי֔וּ אִ֥ישׁ אִ֖ישׁ לַמַּטֶּ֑ה אִ֛ישׁ רֹ֥אשׁ לְבֵית־אֲבֹתָ֖יו הֽוּא׃ (ה) וְאֵ֙לֶּה֙ שְׁמ֣וֹת הָֽאֲנָשִׁ֔ים אֲשֶׁ֥ר יַֽעַמְד֖וּ אִתְּכֶ֑ם לִרְאוּבֵ֕ן אֱלִיצ֖וּר בֶּן־שְׁדֵיאֽוּר׃
(1) On the first day of the second month, in the second year following the exodus from the land of Egypt, the LORD spoke to Moses in the wilderness of Sinai, in the Tent of Meeting, saying: (2) Take a census of the whole Israelite community by the clans of its ancestral houses, listing the names, every male, head by head. (3) You and Aaron shall record them by their groups, from the age of twenty years up, all those in Israel who are able to bear arms. (4) Associated with you shall be a man from each tribe, each one the head of his ancestral house. (5) These are the names of the men who shall assist you: From Reuben, Elizur son of Shedeur.
(כ) וַיִּהְי֤וּ בְנֵֽי־רְאוּבֵן֙ בְּכֹ֣ר יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל תּוֹלְדֹתָ֥ם לְמִשְׁפְּחֹתָ֖ם לְבֵ֣ית אֲבֹתָ֑ם בְּמִסְפַּ֤ר שֵׁמוֹת֙ לְגֻלְגְּלֹתָ֔ם כָּל־זָכָ֗ר מִבֶּ֨ן עֶשְׂרִ֤ים שָׁנָה֙ וָמַ֔עְלָה כֹּ֖ל יֹצֵ֥א צָבָֽא׃ (כא) פְּקֻדֵיהֶ֖ם לְמַטֵּ֣ה רְאוּבֵ֑ן שִׁשָּׁ֧ה וְאַרְבָּעִ֛ים אֶ֖לֶף וַחֲמֵ֥שׁ מֵאֽוֹת׃ (פ) (כב) לִבְנֵ֣י שִׁמְע֔וֹן תּוֹלְדֹתָ֥ם לְמִשְׁפְּחֹתָ֖ם לְבֵ֣ית אֲבֹתָ֑ם פְּקֻדָ֗יו בְּמִסְפַּ֤ר שֵׁמוֹת֙ לְגֻלְגְּלֹתָ֔ם כָּל־זָכָ֗ר מִבֶּ֨ן עֶשְׂרִ֤ים שָׁנָה֙ וָמַ֔עְלָה כֹּ֖ל יֹצֵ֥א צָבָֽא׃ (כג) פְּקֻדֵיהֶ֖ם לְמַטֵּ֣ה שִׁמְע֑וֹן תִּשְׁעָ֧ה וַחֲמִשִּׁ֛ים אֶ֖לֶף וּשְׁלֹ֥שׁ מֵאֽוֹת׃ (פ) (כד) לִבְנֵ֣י גָ֔ד תּוֹלְדֹתָ֥ם לְמִשְׁפְּחֹתָ֖ם לְבֵ֣ית אֲבֹתָ֑ם בְּמִסְפַּ֣ר שֵׁמ֗וֹת מִבֶּ֨ן עֶשְׂרִ֤ים שָׁנָה֙ וָמַ֔עְלָה כֹּ֖ל יֹצֵ֥א צָבָֽא׃ (כה) פְּקֻדֵיהֶ֖ם לְמַטֵּ֣ה גָ֑ד חֲמִשָּׁ֤ה וְאַרְבָּעִים֙ אֶ֔לֶף וְשֵׁ֥שׁ מֵא֖וֹת וַחֲמִשִּֽׁים׃ (פ) (כו) לִבְנֵ֣י יְהוּדָ֔ה תּוֹלְדֹתָ֥ם לְמִשְׁפְּחֹתָ֖ם לְבֵ֣ית אֲבֹתָ֑ם בְּמִסְפַּ֣ר שֵׁמֹ֗ת מִבֶּ֨ן עֶשְׂרִ֤ים שָׁנָה֙ וָמַ֔עְלָה כֹּ֖ל יֹצֵ֥א צָבָֽא׃ (כז) פְּקֻדֵיהֶ֖ם לְמַטֵּ֣ה יְהוּדָ֑ה אַרְבָּעָ֧ה וְשִׁבְעִ֛ים אֶ֖לֶף וְשֵׁ֥שׁ מֵאֽוֹת׃ (פ) (כח) לִבְנֵ֣י יִשָּׂשכָ֔ר תּוֹלְדֹתָ֥ם לְמִשְׁפְּחֹתָ֖ם לְבֵ֣ית אֲבֹתָ֑ם בְּמִסְפַּ֣ר שֵׁמֹ֗ת מִבֶּ֨ן עֶשְׂרִ֤ים שָׁנָה֙ וָמַ֔עְלָה כֹּ֖ל יֹצֵ֥א צָבָֽא׃ (כט) פְּקֻדֵיהֶ֖ם לְמַטֵּ֣ה יִשָּׂשכָ֑ר אַרְבָּעָ֧ה וַחֲמִשִּׁ֛ים אֶ֖לֶף וְאַרְבַּ֥ע מֵאֽוֹת׃ (פ) (ל) לִבְנֵ֣י זְבוּלֻ֔ן תּוֹלְדֹתָ֥ם לְמִשְׁפְּחֹתָ֖ם לְבֵ֣ית אֲבֹתָ֑ם בְּמִסְפַּ֣ר שֵׁמֹ֗ת מִבֶּ֨ן עֶשְׂרִ֤ים שָׁנָה֙ וָמַ֔עְלָה כֹּ֖ל יֹצֵ֥א צָבָֽא׃ (לא) פְּקֻדֵיהֶ֖ם לְמַטֵּ֣ה זְבוּלֻ֑ן שִׁבְעָ֧ה וַחֲמִשִּׁ֛ים אֶ֖לֶף וְאַרְבַּ֥ע מֵאֽוֹת׃ (פ) (לב) לִבְנֵ֤י יוֹסֵף֙ לִבְנֵ֣י אֶפְרַ֔יִם תּוֹלְדֹתָ֥ם לְמִשְׁפְּחֹתָ֖ם לְבֵ֣ית אֲבֹתָ֑ם בְּמִסְפַּ֣ר שֵׁמֹ֗ת מִבֶּ֨ן עֶשְׂרִ֤ים שָׁנָה֙ וָמַ֔עְלָה כֹּ֖ל יֹצֵ֥א צָבָֽא׃ (לג) פְּקֻדֵיהֶ֖ם לְמַטֵּ֣ה אֶפְרָ֑יִם אַרְבָּעִ֥ים אֶ֖לֶף וַחֲמֵ֥שׁ מֵאֽוֹת׃ (פ) (לד) לִבְנֵ֣י מְנַשֶּׁ֔ה תּוֹלְדֹתָ֥ם לְמִשְׁפְּחֹתָ֖ם לְבֵ֣ית אֲבֹתָ֑ם בְּמִסְפַּ֣ר שֵׁמ֗וֹת מִבֶּ֨ן עֶשְׂרִ֤ים שָׁנָה֙ וָמַ֔עְלָה כֹּ֖ל יֹצֵ֥א צָבָֽא׃ (לה) פְּקֻדֵיהֶ֖ם לְמַטֵּ֣ה מְנַשֶּׁ֑ה שְׁנַ֧יִם וּשְׁלֹשִׁ֛ים אֶ֖לֶף וּמָאתָֽיִם׃ (פ) (לו) לִבְנֵ֣י בִנְיָמִ֔ן תּוֹלְדֹתָ֥ם לְמִשְׁפְּחֹתָ֖ם לְבֵ֣ית אֲבֹתָ֑ם בְּמִסְפַּ֣ר שֵׁמֹ֗ת מִבֶּ֨ן עֶשְׂרִ֤ים שָׁנָה֙ וָמַ֔עְלָה כֹּ֖ל יֹצֵ֥א צָבָֽא׃ (לז) פְּקֻדֵיהֶ֖ם לְמַטֵּ֣ה בִנְיָמִ֑ן חֲמִשָּׁ֧ה וּשְׁלֹשִׁ֛ים אֶ֖לֶף וְאַרְבַּ֥ע מֵאֽוֹת׃ (פ) (לח) לִבְנֵ֣י דָ֔ן תּוֹלְדֹתָ֥ם לְמִשְׁפְּחֹתָ֖ם לְבֵ֣ית אֲבֹתָ֑ם בְּמִסְפַּ֣ר שֵׁמֹ֗ת מִבֶּ֨ן עֶשְׂרִ֤ים שָׁנָה֙ וָמַ֔עְלָה כֹּ֖ל יֹצֵ֥א צָבָֽא׃ (לט) פְּקֻדֵיהֶ֖ם לְמַטֵּ֣ה דָ֑ן שְׁנַ֧יִם וְשִׁשִּׁ֛ים אֶ֖לֶף וּשְׁבַ֥ע מֵאֽוֹת׃ (פ) (מ) לִבְנֵ֣י אָשֵׁ֔ר תּוֹלְדֹתָ֥ם לְמִשְׁפְּחֹתָ֖ם לְבֵ֣ית אֲבֹתָ֑ם בְּמִסְפַּ֣ר שֵׁמֹ֗ת מִבֶּ֨ן עֶשְׂרִ֤ים שָׁנָה֙ וָמַ֔עְלָה כֹּ֖ל יֹצֵ֥א צָבָֽא׃ (מא) פְּקֻדֵיהֶ֖ם לְמַטֵּ֣ה אָשֵׁ֑ר אֶחָ֧ד וְאַרְבָּעִ֛ים אֶ֖לֶף וַחֲמֵ֥שׁ מֵאֽוֹת׃ (פ) (מב) בְּנֵ֣י נַפְתָּלִ֔י תּוֹלְדֹתָ֥ם לְמִשְׁפְּחֹתָ֖ם לְבֵ֣ית אֲבֹתָ֑ם בְּמִסְפַּ֣ר שֵׁמֹ֗ת מִבֶּ֨ן עֶשְׂרִ֤ים שָׁנָה֙ וָמַ֔עְלָה כֹּ֖ל יֹצֵ֥א צָבָֽא׃ (מג) פְּקֻדֵיהֶ֖ם לְמַטֵּ֣ה נַפְתָּלִ֑י שְׁלֹשָׁ֧ה וַחֲמִשִּׁ֛ים אֶ֖לֶף וְאַרְבַּ֥ע מֵאֽוֹת׃ (פ) (מד) אֵ֣לֶּה הַפְּקֻדִ֡ים אֲשֶׁר֩ פָּקַ֨ד מֹשֶׁ֤ה וְאַהֲרֹן֙ וּנְשִׂיאֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל שְׁנֵ֥ים עָשָׂ֖ר אִ֑ישׁ אִישׁ־אֶחָ֥ד לְבֵית־אֲבֹתָ֖יו הָיֽוּ׃ (מה) וַיִּֽהְי֛וּ כָּל־פְּקוּדֵ֥י בְנֵֽי־יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל לְבֵ֣ית אֲבֹתָ֑ם מִבֶּ֨ן עֶשְׂרִ֤ים שָׁנָה֙ וָמַ֔עְלָה כָּל־יֹצֵ֥א צָבָ֖א בְּיִשְׂרָאֵֽל׃ (מו) וַיִּֽהְיוּ֙ כָּל־הַפְּקֻדִ֔ים שֵׁשׁ־מֵא֥וֹת אֶ֖לֶף וּשְׁלֹ֣שֶׁת אֲלָפִ֑ים וַחֲמֵ֥שׁ מֵא֖וֹת וַחֲמִשִּֽׁים׃
(20) They totaled as follows: The descendants of Reuben, Israel’s first-born, the registration of the clans of their ancestral house, as listed by name, head by head, all males aged twenty years and over, all who were able to bear arms— (21) those enrolled from the tribe of Reuben: 46,500. (22) Of the descendants of Simeon, the registration of the clans of their ancestral house, their enrollment as listed by name, head by head, all males aged twenty years and over, all who were able to bear arms— (23) those enrolled from the tribe of Simeon: 59,300. (24) Of the descendants of Gad, the registration of the clans of their ancestral house, as listed by name, aged twenty years and over, all who were able to bear arms— (25) those enrolled from the tribe of Gad: 45,650. (26) Of the descendants of Judah, the registration of the clans of their ancestral house, as listed by name, aged twenty years and over, all who were able to bear arms— (27) those enrolled from the tribe of Judah: 74,600. (28) Of the descendants of Issachar, the registration of the clans of their ancestral house, as listed by name, aged twenty years and over, all who were able to bear arms— (29) those enrolled from the tribe of Issachar: 54,400. (30) Of the descendants of Zebulun, the registration of the clans of their ancestral house, as listed by name, aged twenty years and over, all who were able to bear arms— (31) those enrolled from the tribe of Zebulun: 57,400. (32) Of the descendants of Joseph: Of the descendants of Ephraim, the registration of the clans of their ancestral house, as listed by name, aged twenty years and over, all who were able to bear arms— (33) those enrolled from the tribe of Ephraim: 40,500. (34) Of the descendants of Manasseh, the registration of the clans of their ancestral house, as listed by name, aged twenty years and over, all who were able to bear arms— (35) those enrolled from the tribe of Manasseh: 32,200. (36) Of the descendants of Benjamin, the registration of the clans of their ancestral house, as listed by name, aged twenty years and over, all who were able to bear arms— (37) those enrolled from the tribe of Benjamin: 35,400. (38) Of the descendants of Dan, the registration of the clans of their ancestral house, as listed by name, aged twenty years and over, all who were able to bear arms— (39) those enrolled from the tribe of Dan: 62,700. (40) Of the descendants of Asher, the registration of the clans of their ancestral house, as listed by name, aged twenty years and over, all who were able to bear arms— (41) those enrolled from the tribe of Asher: 41,500. (42) [Of] the descendants of Naphtali, the registration of the clans of their ancestral house as listed by name, aged twenty years and over, all who were able to bear arms— (43) those enrolled from the tribe of Naphtali: 53,400. (44) Those are the enrollments recorded by Moses and Aaron and by the chieftains of Israel, who were twelve in number, one man to each ancestral house. (45) All the Israelites, aged twenty years and over, enrolled by ancestral houses, all those in Israel who were able to bear arms— (46) all who were enrolled came to 603,550.
The Tabular Representation of this Information:
|
Reuben |
46,500 |
שבט ראובן |
|
Shimon |
59,300 |
שבט שמעון |
|
Gad |
45,650 |
שבט גד |
|
Yehuda |
74,600 |
שבט יהודה |
|
Yissachar |
54,400 |
שבט יששכר |
|
Zevulun |
57,400 |
שבט זבולון |
|
Ephraim |
40,500 |
שבט אפרים |
|
Menashe |
32,200 |
שבט מנשה |
|
Binyamin |
35,400 |
שבט בנימין |
|
Dan |
62,700 |
שבט דן |
|
Asher |
41,500 |
שבט אשר |
|
Naphtali |
53,400 |
שבט נפתלי |
|
Total |
603,550 |
סך הכול |
A Graphical Illustration of this Information
OR THIS FROM REM:
What is the idea here?
Well, why doesn't the Torah use visual display of quantitative information?
Because it didn't exist.
When did visual display of quantitative information develop?
-The use of abstract, non-representational pictures to show numbers is a surprisingly recent invention, perhaps becasue of the diversity of skills required - the visual-artistic, empirical-statistical, and mathematical. It was not until 1750-1800 that statistical graphics - length and area to show quantity, time-series, scatterplots, and multivariate displays - were invented, long after such triumphs of mathematical ingenuity as logarithms, Cartesian coordinates, the calculus, and the basics of probability theory. The remarkable William Playfair (1759-1823) developed or improved upon nearly all the fundamental graphical designs, seeking to replace conventional tables of numbers with the systematic visual representations of his "linear arithmetic." (Edwart Tufte, The Visual Display of Quantitative Information.)
Well, why doesn't the Torah use visual display of quantitative information?
Because it didn't exist.
When did visual display of quantitative information develop?
-The use of abstract, non-representational pictures to show numbers is a surprisingly recent invention, perhaps becasue of the diversity of skills required - the visual-artistic, empirical-statistical, and mathematical. It was not until 1750-1800 that statistical graphics - length and area to show quantity, time-series, scatterplots, and multivariate displays - were invented, long after such triumphs of mathematical ingenuity as logarithms, Cartesian coordinates, the calculus, and the basics of probability theory. The remarkable William Playfair (1759-1823) developed or improved upon nearly all the fundamental graphical designs, seeking to replace conventional tables of numbers with the systematic visual representations of his "linear arithmetic." (Edwart Tufte, The Visual Display of Quantitative Information.)
Who was William Playfair, and why should we care?
A video interlude...
A video interlude...
Ok, the Bible presents all of this information in a textual way. It's not until the 18th century that we get visual depiction. The tools were there...why didn't people use them? What happened? How does thinking about quantitative information change?
Readers were accustomed to persuasion by rhetorical means, and illustration in serious writing was viewed with suspicion. It would have been unthinkable to introduce pictorial material to bolster an argument where tabular presentation would have been seen as sufficient and certainly more accurate.
complex technical skills and disdain for convention; improvidence, brashness.
Comment: We would have to explore what was taking place in the 18th century in terms of the history of knowledge and science and imagine the conflict and "revolution" that was taking place. We take it for granted, but people didn't think in these terms. Today you can't go two centimeters without graphs and visual representation of quantitative information....
complex technical skills and disdain for convention; improvidence, brashness.
Comment: We would have to explore what was taking place in the 18th century in terms of the history of knowledge and science and imagine the conflict and "revolution" that was taking place. We take it for granted, but people didn't think in these terms. Today you can't go two centimeters without graphs and visual representation of quantitative information....
So what does this have to do with the Torah, and Torah study?
Everything. It's literally (and figuratively) a revolution in the way we encounter the texts.
Exhibit A:
Everything. It's literally (and figuratively) a revolution in the way we encounter the texts.
Exhibit A:
Liz Shayne:
1. How does this kind of work – making visualizations and thinking about networked Jewish text – enhance the traditional experience of studying Jewish texts in a Jewish environment?
2. How can an academic researcher make use of these visualizations and to what degree does she need to become an expert in network theory to do so?
...
Going in order, the first question really asks whether this kind of work has value within the traditional classroom. Given that the teaching of Jewish texts often focuses on the micro level and dwells on one topic for a very long time, this kind of visualization work seems like an important counterpoint to that kind of study. If students, as part of their explorations of Jewish texts, are learning how to trace a legal ruling from its source in the Bible to the modern day responsa on the topic, turning that unbroken line of tradition into a network that they can see could be really interesting. Rather than thinking linearly, they can look at specific ideas as clusters. And, starting with one of those groups, students could begin to think in terms of idea clusters – what groups of legal decisions come from verses that are right next door to one another.
None of this is new information and all of it could, in theory, be taught without the aid of images at all. But the images make it much easier to to think in a networked way.
The goal of teaching students about Jewish texts is only partially to familiarize them with the narratives they hear in synagogue and the laws that structure their lives. The other, more difficult job is to create a bond between the student and the text(s). And we do that by making the books tangible and meaningful, but we can also do that by making the text network tangible (metaphorically speaking). If we create emotional connections through interacting with texts and those connections have a profound influence on what we learn and how,2 we should be able to build on those connections through even less traditional forms of interaction. Such as making a graph.
So why is this kind of work useful in the classroom? Because it provides another way of accessing meaningful texts, one that can help students make connections they could not otherwise see and connect with the text in a way that deepens their appreciation for it.
Yes, this approach might make understanding a particular section of Jewish law a bit easier. But I’m much more interested in the way that it reshapes our relationship with all the texts as a whole. Not exactly what we can see, but how it changes the way that we look.
COMMENT:
Shades of Playfair? Disdain for convention? Brashness?
The philosophical question: When we favor of visual information, do we lose orality? Does visual information build relationship? Does it build community?
And now the punchline:
Liz Shayne:
And here’s where I think we start to see the value in making visualizations and knowing network theory. This kind of research is useful for destroying the linear thinking that narrative naturally invites. Database thinking (see Manovich in Language of New Media and Hayles in How We Think) has similar results in theory, but is comparatively useless to us as human beings in practice. We can’t read databases. We have tools that can, but what we end up reading or, realistically, seeing is the visual representation of the connections that are not apparent when traversing the work. Visualization breaks narrative. And sometimes, that’s what we want.
(Do we really? - or do we won't narrative and new tools of understanding?)
We want to break out of a narrative approach to, for example, the corpus of Jewish texts as a way of rethinking the legal, cultural and social influences that the texts have on one another.
COMMENT:
So, in moving from "text" to "visual representation" are we "breaking narrative"?
Or are we creating something else? When we "break out" of a "narrative approach" are we leaving the the textual tradition in shards, or building something else?
Will the pressure to stimulate visually, require an equal and opposite pressure to stimulate through audio? Through narrative? Through music, chant, storytelling, discussion, argument, interaction, and conversation?
SYNTHESIS:
The visual presentation of information is a new tool (new as in 250 years!) and through technology, it is renewing constantly at a rate of change beyond our comprehension. There will be as many new ways to see the Torah as there are people who create them. Will the text and the encounter with the text hold its power? Will narrative and speaking the text remain the main access points into the text, or will they be relegated to archaic and sentimental experiences?
Will Torah reading, (in person Torah study?!) remain or will it become a "craft" like "18th Century Cooking" or "Needlepoint"?
What will our plethora of visual technology do for the future of Torah? Judaism? Jewish peoplehood?
1. How does this kind of work – making visualizations and thinking about networked Jewish text – enhance the traditional experience of studying Jewish texts in a Jewish environment?
2. How can an academic researcher make use of these visualizations and to what degree does she need to become an expert in network theory to do so?
...
Going in order, the first question really asks whether this kind of work has value within the traditional classroom. Given that the teaching of Jewish texts often focuses on the micro level and dwells on one topic for a very long time, this kind of visualization work seems like an important counterpoint to that kind of study. If students, as part of their explorations of Jewish texts, are learning how to trace a legal ruling from its source in the Bible to the modern day responsa on the topic, turning that unbroken line of tradition into a network that they can see could be really interesting. Rather than thinking linearly, they can look at specific ideas as clusters. And, starting with one of those groups, students could begin to think in terms of idea clusters – what groups of legal decisions come from verses that are right next door to one another.
None of this is new information and all of it could, in theory, be taught without the aid of images at all. But the images make it much easier to to think in a networked way.
The goal of teaching students about Jewish texts is only partially to familiarize them with the narratives they hear in synagogue and the laws that structure their lives. The other, more difficult job is to create a bond between the student and the text(s). And we do that by making the books tangible and meaningful, but we can also do that by making the text network tangible (metaphorically speaking). If we create emotional connections through interacting with texts and those connections have a profound influence on what we learn and how,2 we should be able to build on those connections through even less traditional forms of interaction. Such as making a graph.
So why is this kind of work useful in the classroom? Because it provides another way of accessing meaningful texts, one that can help students make connections they could not otherwise see and connect with the text in a way that deepens their appreciation for it.
Yes, this approach might make understanding a particular section of Jewish law a bit easier. But I’m much more interested in the way that it reshapes our relationship with all the texts as a whole. Not exactly what we can see, but how it changes the way that we look.
COMMENT:
Shades of Playfair? Disdain for convention? Brashness?
The philosophical question: When we favor of visual information, do we lose orality? Does visual information build relationship? Does it build community?
And now the punchline:
Liz Shayne:
And here’s where I think we start to see the value in making visualizations and knowing network theory. This kind of research is useful for destroying the linear thinking that narrative naturally invites. Database thinking (see Manovich in Language of New Media and Hayles in How We Think) has similar results in theory, but is comparatively useless to us as human beings in practice. We can’t read databases. We have tools that can, but what we end up reading or, realistically, seeing is the visual representation of the connections that are not apparent when traversing the work. Visualization breaks narrative. And sometimes, that’s what we want.
(Do we really? - or do we won't narrative and new tools of understanding?)
We want to break out of a narrative approach to, for example, the corpus of Jewish texts as a way of rethinking the legal, cultural and social influences that the texts have on one another.
COMMENT:
So, in moving from "text" to "visual representation" are we "breaking narrative"?
Or are we creating something else? When we "break out" of a "narrative approach" are we leaving the the textual tradition in shards, or building something else?
Will the pressure to stimulate visually, require an equal and opposite pressure to stimulate through audio? Through narrative? Through music, chant, storytelling, discussion, argument, interaction, and conversation?
SYNTHESIS:
The visual presentation of information is a new tool (new as in 250 years!) and through technology, it is renewing constantly at a rate of change beyond our comprehension. There will be as many new ways to see the Torah as there are people who create them. Will the text and the encounter with the text hold its power? Will narrative and speaking the text remain the main access points into the text, or will they be relegated to archaic and sentimental experiences?
Will Torah reading, (in person Torah study?!) remain or will it become a "craft" like "18th Century Cooking" or "Needlepoint"?
What will our plethora of visual technology do for the future of Torah? Judaism? Jewish peoplehood?