Hello everyone, this blog is responding to a thinking activity task assigned by Megha Ma’am. Which is based on Indian English literature of pre-independence. ‘The Cruse or Karna’ by T.P.Kailasam, is a retelling of some of the episodes of epic ‘Mahabhatara’ from the point of view of ‘Karna’.
Q:1 Karna - The voice of Subaltern.
1.1 Introduction: ‘Theory of Subaltern’
The term “subaltern” was popularised by Ranajit Guha and the Subaltern Studies Group to describe those excluded from dominant power structures—peasants, workers, women, and marginalized groups whose voices are suppressed in mainstream history.
Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak, in her essay “Can the Subaltern Speak?” (1988), argued that the subaltern is often denied the ability to represent themselves—their voice is either silenced or mediated through elite discourse.
1.2. Karna as Subaltern in the Play
1.2.1 Caste and Social Exclusion
Born to Kunti but raised by a charioteer, Karna is denied the privileges of Kshatriya identity. His attempts to gain recognition (learning archery from Drona, competing in Draupadi’s swayamvara) are blocked due to birth.
This aligns with subalternity: the exclusion of individuals from dominant narratives due to social hierarchy.
2.2 Denied Agency and Representation
Just as Spivak argued that the subaltern “cannot speak” without being mediated, Karna’s true identity remains hidden until too late. His life story is controlled by others—by Kunti, by curses, by fate—never by his own agency.
2.3 Dependency on Patronage
Karna’s empowerment comes through Duryodhana, who makes him king of Anga. But this reflects the subaltern paradox: empowerment is mediated through dominant elites, leaving him bound in loyalty even when it leads to downfall.
2.4 Voice of Protest
In Kailasam’s retelling, Karna becomes the tragic voice of protest against caste discrimination and divine injustice. His speeches embody the suffering of those who are silenced in mainstream epic narratives.
Unlike Arjuna (protected by Krishna), Karna stands alone—representing the silenced hero of Indian epic tradition.
3. Conclusion
Through the lens of Subaltern Studies, Karna can be seen as the epic representative of the marginalized. His tragedy reflects how caste, destiny, and structural power deny the subaltern both agency and recognition. Kailasam’s The Curse re-centres Karna’s story, allowing the subaltern voice to be heard—even if it is tragic and belated.
Q.2 Discuss the Various themes found in “The Curse”
Introduction
T. P. Kailasam’s The Curse retells the tragic life of Karna from the Mahabharata, focusing not on heroic battles but on the inner conflicts of a man marginalized by society and doomed by fate. Unlike Vyasa’s epic version, Kailasam humanises Karna, bringing out universal themes of suffering, injustice, and loyalty. The play resonates with modern sensibilities because it addresses not only destiny and heroism but also caste discrimination and social inequality.
1. Fate and Free Will
The central theme of the play is the power of fate over human effort. Karna is cursed twice: once by Parashurama, who discovers Karna’s deceit about his low birth, and again by a Brahmin whose cow Karna accidentally kills.
These curses dictate his downfall, making him helpless even though he is the most skilled warrior. The theme echoes the tragic inevitability found in classical tragedy: however noble the hero, fate decides the end.
2. Caste and Social Discrimination
Kailasam uses Karna’s rejection by teachers and society to highlight the cruelty of the varna (caste) system. Karna is denied education by Drona and respect by Draupadi in her swayamvara, not because of lack of merit but because of his charioteer background.
The play critiques social hierarchy, suggesting that talent is wasted when society values birth over worth. This theme gives the play a modern, reformist edge, resonating with early 20th-century Indian debates on caste reform.
3. Friendship and Loyalty
Karna’s unwavering loyalty to Duryodhana is a recurring theme. Even when Kunti reveals the truth about his birth, Karna refuses to abandon Duryodhana, saying he cannot betray the one who gave him honour when the world rejected him.
The play questions whether loyalty is truly a virtue if it binds a person to the cause of adharma. This theme makes Karna a tragic figure: noble in gratitude but trapped in misplaced loyalty.
4. Heroism and Tragedy
Karna is portrayed as a true tragic hero: noble, gifted, brave, but doomed by circumstances beyond his control. His heroism lies not only in battle but in his dignity amidst humiliation and rejection.
Like Oedipus or Hamlet, Karna’s greatness is inseparable from his suffering, which makes him one of the most human heroes in Indian mythology.
5. Identity and Recognition
Another important theme is hidden identity. Karna spends his life unaware of his Kshatriya lineage. When Kunti finally reveals the truth, it comes too late—he cannot turn against Duryodhana.
This delayed recognition heightens his tragedy and highlights the cruelty of destiny. The theme also reflects the universal human longing for acceptance and belonging.
6. Divine Injustice
Unlike Arjuna, who is supported by Krishna, Karna faces battle alone, stripped of divine favour. The gods, rather than helping him, contribute to his downfall through curses and denials.
This theme challenges the fairness of divine justice, making The Curse not just a mythological retelling but a philosophical critique of destiny and divinity.
7. Human Suffering and Existential Anguish
At its deepest level, the play is about human suffering—the pain of rejection, the humiliation of social exclusion, the loneliness of carrying unrecognised greatness.
Karna becomes a symbol of existential anguish: a man searching for meaning in a world where fate, society, and gods deny him justice. This universality is why modern readers can connect to Karna’s plight beyond the epic context.
Conclusion
The themes in The Curse—fate vs. free will, caste discrimination, loyalty, tragic heroism, hidden identity, divine injustice, and human suffering—together create the portrait of Karna as one of literature’s greatest tragic figures. Kailasam transforms Karna from a side character in the Mahabharata into the very embodiment of the marginalised hero. His play is not just a mythological drama but also a social critique, a philosophical reflection on destiny, and a human document of suffering.
References:
Kailasam, T. P. Myths in the Play's of T.P.Kailasam: ¿Father of Modern Kannada Theatre¿. LAP Lambert Academic Publishing, 2017.
The Moral Machine helps learners understand that AI systems inevitably face ethical dilemmas, that moral choices differ across societies, and that designing “moral AI” requires balancing fairness, cultural values, and human biases.
Key Insights
Digital Pedagogy is a Necessity, Not an Option:
The COVID-19 pandemic accelerated the adoption of online teaching, revealing gaps in digital readiness among teachers. Despite increased use of platforms like Google Classroom and YouTube, many educators lack personal blogs or websites, highlighting a need to build individual digital identities to fully engage in hypertext pedagogy. This personal digital presence empowers teachers to control content delivery and responsiveness beyond institutional delays.
From Text to Hypertext – A Paradigm Shift:
Traditional printed texts are static and “dead,” whereas hypertext is dynamic, interconnected, and multimedia-rich. This shift demands teachers redefine their pedagogical approaches. Hypertext allows learners to explore content non-linearly through links, videos, images, and sound, catering to diverse learning styles and fostering deeper engagement. This transition aligns with the habits and expectations of digital natives accustomed to interactive screen-based experiences.
Blended, Flipped, and Mixed Mode Teaching Models:
Professor Bharat underscores the importance of hybrid models combining synchronous and asynchronous teaching. Blended learning integrates digital resources with in-person instruction; flipped classrooms invert traditional lecture-homework roles to stimulate curiosity and questioning; mixed-mode teaching addresses real-world constraints by simultaneously engaging in-person and remote learners. These models require careful content management and communication strategies to maintain engagement and learning outcomes.
Innovative Technology to Mimic Face-to-Face Interaction:
The glass board innovation allows teachers to maintain eye contact and demonstrate writing or drawing while facing the camera, effectively simulating classroom board work in online settings. This addresses a key challenge of remote teaching—loss of non-verbal communication cues like facial expressions and body language, which play a crucial role in motivation and interaction. Such innovations are essential to humanize digital classrooms and sustain learner engagement.
Addressing Language Learning Challenges with Technology:
Linguistic components such as pronunciation and stress are difficult to assess online due to network issues. Use of live captions, auto-transcripts, and voice typing tools helps mitigate these challenges by providing textual support and enabling asynchronous review. Moreover, collaborative platforms like Google Docs foster active learner participation and peer interaction, essential for language acquisition and error correction.
Hypertext Enriches Literature Teaching by Providing Context:
Teaching English literature online faces unique challenges due to cultural and historical distances. Hypertext tools help bridge these gaps by linking texts to images, videos, artworks (e.g., Google Arts & Culture), and mythological references, enhancing comprehension and appreciation. This multimodal approach aligns with contemporary literary theories emphasizing decentering and fragmented subjectivity, making literature more accessible and interactive.
Emerging Role of AI in Literature and Pedagogy:
The rise of generative literature, where AI algorithms produce poems and texts indistinguishable from human creations, raises questions about authorship, creativity, and assessment. This phenomenon requires educators to rethink literary studies, incorporating new critical frameworks and engaging students with AI-generated content as both a tool and subject of inquiry. It also poses challenges for academic integrity and originality in student work.
Digital Portfolios as Authentic Assessment Tools:
Instead of relying solely on traditional exams, digital portfolios allow students to showcase curated work from blogs, videos, presentations, and assignments, reflecting continuous learning and digital literacy skills. This approach encourages students to take ownership of their learning, develop a professional digital presence, and provides educators with a richer, multifaceted evaluation of student progress. It embodies the essence of hypertext pedagogy by integrating diverse digital artifacts into assessment.
Simplicity and Accessibility of Tools are Crucial:
Given varied digital proficiency among teachers and students, selecting user-friendly, free, and ad-free platforms like Google Suite tools (Google Drive, Classroom, Docs, Sheets, YouTube) is critical. Overloading with multiple complex apps can overwhelm users and reduce effectiveness. The focus should be on tools that save teacher and student time while maximizing engagement and learning outcomes. This pragmatic approach ensures wider adoption and sustainability of digital pedagogy practices.
Conclusion
This lecture offers a rich, insightful exploration of the evolving pedagogical landscape shaped by hypertext and digital technologies, amplified by the exigencies of the pandemic. His practical strategies, survey-backed observations, and innovative teaching solutions provide a roadmap for language and literature educators aiming to thrive in the digital age. The emphasis on blended learning models, collaborative tools, digital portfolios, and generative literature signals a future where education is interactive, student-centered, and technologically empowered. This session serves as both a call to action and a guide for educators to embrace the opportunities of hypertext pedagogy and continuously adapt to the digital native learners’ needs.
Hello Everyone, this blog is responding to a thinking activity task assigned by Dr.Dilip.Barad which is based on Digital Huminites study.
Here is my video source, based on this i do my activity of Notenooklm. Click Here
Introduction: The Unseen Biases of Our New Digital Minds
We tend to think of Artificial Intelligence as a purely logical, objective tool—a digital mind operating on the cold, hard logic of code. It's supposed to be better than us, free from the messy prejudices that cloud human judgment. But what if that machine is just a mirror, reflecting our own cultural blind spots back at us in ways we don’t even recognize? That’s the startling conclusion I drew from a recent university lecture by Professor Dillip P Barad on AI and literary interpretation. The talk revealed that far from being neutral, AI inherits our most deeply ingrained biases. Here are five truths that expose the hidden, all-too-human flaws in our new digital minds.
Mind Map:
Surprising Truths About AI Bias I Learned From a Literature Professor
We tend to think of artificial intelligence as a purely logical, data-driven tool, free from the messy prejudices of human emotion. But what if AI is simply a mirror, reflecting our own hidden, societal biases back at us? I recently attended a university lecture where a professor of English literature put this to the test, conducting live experiments with different AI models. The results were not what I, or anyone else, expected. Here are the four most surprising truths about AI bias I learned from that session.
1. Some AI Bias Isn't an Accident—It's a Political Switch
The first experiment was a direct comparison between a US-based AI and a China-based model called Deepseek. The professor prompted both to generate satirical poems about various world leaders and political situations, including Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin.
The results were telling. Deepseek successfully generated satirical content for non-Chinese figures. However, when asked to write a poem about China's leader, Xi Jinping, it refused. The model responded with a canned message: "that's beyond my current scope let's talk about something else." This reveals a critical distinction in the world of AI ethics. Some biases are the unconscious byproducts of training data, but others are deliberate, programmed controls reflecting national politics. This isn't a "bug" in the system; it's a geofenced ideological guardrail—an intentional feature that exposes a crucial vulnerability in the global AI supply chain.
"...a deliberate control over algorithm. Deep seek...seems to have a deliberate control over algorithm."
2. On Beauty, AI Is Already More Progressive Than Classical Literature
In another experiment, the professor prompted an AI model to "describe a beautiful woman." The initial hypothesis was that the AI, trained on vast amounts of dominant cultural data, would default to Eurocentric features like fair skin and blonde hair.
The actual results were stunningly different. The AI models largely avoided physical descriptions tied to race. Instead, they described beauty through character traits and inner qualities, using phrases like "confidence kindness intelligence strength and a radiant glow" or noting a "quiet poise of her being."
From an ethical perspective, this isn't the AI spontaneously developing an enlightened consciousness. Rather, its "progressiveness" is the result of deliberate, risk-averse programming. AI companies have installed powerful guardrails to prevent the generation of stereotypical or offensive content that could lead to a public relations crisis. AI's ethical advantage here isn't wisdom, but a set of carefully engineered constraints that older human texts lacked. This stands in stark contrast to classical literature, where epics from Greek traditions to the Ramayana often rely on specific physical descriptions and even body shaming.
"[If] I compare the description of Helen and Sitha or Suranka then I will find that...how Walmiki or the Greek poets used physical features like body shaming... AI is free of that bias which is found in our traditional classical literature."
3. The Real Test for Bias Isn't Truth, but Consistency
Evaluating AI bias becomes incredibly complex when dealing with different cultural knowledge systems. The professor used the example of the "Pushpaka Vimana," the mythical flying chariot from the epic Ramayana. The central question was: if an AI labels the Pushpaka Vimana as "mythical," is that a sign of bias against Indian knowledge?
The professor offered a clear framework for answering this. The issue isn't whether the label "myth" is factually correct. The true test for bias is consistency. It would only be a bias if the AI accepted flying objects from other cultures (like those in Greek or Norse mythology) as scientific fact while dismissing only the Indian one as myth. If, however, the AI applies the same standard to all cultures—treating all such ancient flying objects as mythical—it is demonstrating fairness, not prejudice. From a digital humanities perspective, this provides a powerful epistemological model for evaluating AI's handling of diverse cultural knowledge.
"The issue is not whether pushpak vimmana is labeled myth but whether different knowledge traditions are treated with fairness and consistency or not."
4. We Can’t Just Complain About AI Bias. We Have to Fix It.
During the Q&A, a common critique was raised: AI inevitably reproduces colonial biases because it's trained on colonial archives and data overwhelmingly from the "global north." The professor’s counter-argument was both simple and profound. He argued that in the modern digital era, the barrier to inclusion is no longer just suppression, but also a lack of contribution.
The core message was that to decolonize AI, communities with underrepresented knowledge must actively become creators and "uploaders" of digital content, not just "downloaders." He pointed to regional languages being underrepresented on platforms like Wikipedia, not because they are banned, but because native speakers are not contributing content at the same rate as English speakers. This is an empowering call for what we in the field call data-level intervention and decentralized content curation. The responsibility for creating a more equitable AI doesn't just lie with its creators; it also lies with all of us to tell our own diverse stories in the digital space.
"We are a great downloaders We are not uploaders We need to learn to be uploaders a lot We have to publish lots of digital content Then the problem will be automatically solved We have to tell our stories."
Ultimately, AI bias is a complex, multifaceted issue. It is sometimes a deliberate political control, sometimes a prejudice we are actively engineering our way out of, and always a reflection of the data we choose to feed it. It is a mirror, and as we learned, if we don't like the reflection, we have the power—and the responsibility—to change it not by complaining, but by contributing.
Quiz Score:
Conclusion: Making the Invisible, Visible
The real problem isn't that bias exists; it's when one kind of bias becomes invisible, naturalized, and enforced as universal truth. AI, trained on the vast and flawed corpus of human knowledge, is a powerful engine for exactly this kind of naturalization. The challenge is not to create a perfectly neutral machine, which may be impossible. The real work is to learn to see, name, and question the biases that AI reflects back at us.
As we rely more and more on these digital minds to inform our world, how do we ensure we're the ones questioning their truth, and not the other way around?
Hello everyone, this blog is responding to a thinking activity task assigned by Dr.dilip.barad sir. As a part of my Digital Humanities study,
I got a chance to experience three different activities which helped me look at literature from new and exciting perspectives. Each activity was unique, but all of them showed me how technology and literature can work together.
Activity 1: Click-Activity – Setting and Atmosphere in Novels
In this activity, I explored how Charles Dickens and Jane Austen create their fictional worlds using setting and atmosphere. By using the CLiC tool and comparing keywords, I could see differences between the two authors. For example, Austen’s novels often highlight relationships, happiness, manners, and social gatherings, while Dickens focuses on city life, working conditions, and physical details like body parts or objects in the environment.
For me, it was very interesting to see how words themselves reveal themes. I realised that literature is not only about reading the story but also about looking at the language closely. This activity helped me understand how authors build their worlds and how social and historical contexts shape their writing.
Activity 2: What if Machines Write Better Poems than Humans?
I reflected on a thought-provoking question: What if machines can write better poems than humans? At first, it sounded strange, but today when AI can generate poems, it is a real possibility.
I even took a quiz where I had to guess whether a poem was written by a machine or a human. Surprisingly, it was not easy to tell the difference. This made me wonder: if machines can create poems that sound humane, then what makes human creativity special? This activity opened my mind to the role of technology in art and made me realise how the boundaries between humans and machines are slowly blurring.
Activity 3: Voyant Tools – Analysing Dickens’s Hard Times
For the third activity, I used Voyant Tools, which is an online platform for text analysis. I uploaded Dickens’s novel Hard Times and explored it through visualisations like word clouds, bubble maps, and trend graphs. Words like said, Mr, Bounderby, and Gradgrind stood out clearly, showing me how often they appeared and how important they are in the novel.
It was fascinating to see literature presented visually, with data and patterns instead of only sentences and paragraphs. I realised that digital tools can give us a new kind of reading experience, where we notice patterns and repetitions that we might miss in normal reading.
Learning Outcomes
These three activities together gave me a deeper understanding of what Digital Humanities really means. From them,
learned: Literature can be studied with data tools – Keywords, word clouds, and frequency charts reveal patterns that normal reading might overlook.
Technology challenges human creativity – Machines can now write poems, raising questions about originality, imagination, and the future of art.
Critical reading becomes richer with digital methods – Instead of replacing traditional reading, these tools add new layers to our interpretation.
Interdisciplinary learning – Digital Humanities connects literature, history, and technology, showing how they can support each other.
Conclusion
My journey through these activities was both exciting and eye-opening. I experienced literature in a new way, not just as words in a book but as patterns, data, and even as a dialogue with machines. These activities taught me that Digital Humanities is not only about reading texts but also about exploring how technology changes the way we create, analyse, and understand literature.
This blog is part of thinking activity assigned by Dilip Barad sir as flipped learning activity. To clear the basic concept of Digital Humanities. Worksheet
1. What is Digital Humanities? What's it doing in English Department? Access the full article
Matthew Kirschenbaum’s essay “What Is Digital Humanities and What’s It Doing in English Departments?” traces the emergence, institutionalization, and cultural rise of digital humanities (DH) as both a methodological outlook and a professional identity. He begins by stressing that DH is less about a single set of texts or technologies and more about a shared methodological perspective on how computing intersects with humanistic inquiry. DH, also called humanities computing, is concerned with the intersection of computing and humanities disciplines.
Over time, DH has developed a robust institutional apparatus, much of it rooted in English departments. This includes the Alliance of Digital Humanities Organizations (ADHO), which hosts the major Digital Humanities Conference; the Blackwell’s Companion to Digital Humanities, which gave the field intellectual coherence; the book series Topics in the Digital Humanities from Illinois Press; and journals such as Digital Humanities Quarterly and Digital Studies / Le champ numérique. Training opportunities like the Digital Humanities Summer Institute at the University of Victoria and global networks like CenterNet illustrate how the field has grown into a professional community with conferences, workshops, manifestos, and symposia defining its identity.
Examples of DH work reveal its range. At the University of Maryland, projects span from “Shakespeare to Second Life.” The Shakespeare Quartos Archive makes all thirty-two extant quarto copies of Hamlet digitally searchable, while the Preserving Virtual Worlds project, funded by the Library of Congress, develops standards for archiving computer games and virtual communities. Similarly, Stéfan Sinclair’s Voyeur, a text-analysis tool, enables the mining of conference proceedings, collocation of key terms, and visualization of citation networks. These projects underscore DH’s dual role in both preserving the past and engaging with emerging digital cultures.
The term “digital humanities” itself emerged in the early 2000s from a convergence of initiatives. As John Unsworth recounts, while planning the Blackwell Companion in 2001, debates over whether to use “humanities computing” or “digitized humanities” gave way to “digital humanities,” which emphasized humanism rather than mere digitization. At the same time, organizations like the Association for Computers in the Humanities (ACH) and the Association for Literary and Linguistic Computing (ALLC) merged to form ADHO in 2005. Another pivotal moment came with the National Endowment for the Humanities’ Digital Humanities Initiative (2006), led by Brett Bobley, which institutionalized DH within a major funding agency and later became the Office of Digital Humanities in 2008.
By the late 2000s, DH had become culturally visible in new ways. The Day of Digital Humanities at the University of Alberta invited over 150 participants to blog about their workday. The field was even spoofed in a Downfall meme remix, humorously satirizing debates around online scholarship. Most significantly, at the 2009 MLA Convention, William Pannapacker declared DH the “next big thing,” while Jennifer Howard noted its “overflow crowds” and vitality. Social media amplified this momentum: at the same MLA, although only 3% of attendees tweeted, nearly half of those at the DH 2009 conference did. Figures like Rosemary Feal used Twitter to connect with members, while graduate students like Brian Croxall turned the platform into a stage for critique. Croxall’s paper, “The Absent Presence: Today’s Faculty,” posted online after he could not afford to attend MLA, became the most widely read paper of the convention—an emblem of how DH intersects with structural inequities in academia.
Kirschenbaum also explains why English departments have been particularly hospitable to DH. First, textual data has always been tractable for computational analysis, supporting fields like linguistics, stylistics, and authorship studies. Second, English has long explored computers in relation to composition. Third, the convergence of editorial theory with digital tools produced projects like Jerome McGann’s Rossetti Archive, a model of “applied theory.” Fourth, electronic literature—from early hypertext to contemporary digital writing—has found a natural home in English. Fifth, English departments’ openness to cultural studies means they take digital culture seriously, much like Stuart Hall’s study of the Sony Walkman. Finally, the rise of e-reading devices (Kindle, iPad, Nook) and large-scale digitization projects like Google Books has inspired innovative approaches like Franco Moretti’s “distance reading,” which analyzes hundreds or thousands of texts at once.
Ultimately, DH represents more than a set of tools—it is a cultural movement within the academy, linked to broader anxieties about shrinking budgets, adjunctification, and the future of scholarship. Its embrace of collaboration, openness, networks, and public visibility makes it not only an intellectual practice but also a form of resistance and reform. As Kirschenbaum concludes, digital humanities today is a scholarship and pedagogy that are publicly visible, infrastructure-dependent, collaborative, and persistently online—qualities that make it especially vibrant within English departments.
2. Introduction to Digital Humanities
The webinar on Digital Humanities, hosted by Amity University Jaipur and led by Prof. Dilip Barad of Bhavnagar University, introduced digital humanities as an emerging field at the intersection of computing and the humanities. Prof. Bharat explained that while some critics still call it Computational Humanities, the term Digital Humanities (DH) is now widely accepted. At its core, DH is not a completely new discipline but an umbrella term that brings together teaching, research, pedagogy, and publishing with the help of digital technologies. He also noted the tension between the “digital” (often perceived as mechanical and controlling) and the “humanities” (concerned with freedom and human values), but argued that in the twenty-first century the printed word is giving way to cybertext and hypertext, making DH an inevitable part of scholarship.
He highlighted the benefits of DH: the integration of qualitative and quantitative methods, faster access to information, the enrichment of pedagogy (especially visible during the pandemic), and improved collaboration across geographical boundaries. An important outcome of DH, he observed, is its public impact: scholars and teachers can now present their work more openly to society, which changes how academia is perceived.
Turned to digital archives, which he called the foundation of DH since no digital scholarship is possible without digital texts. Early international examples include the Rossetti Hypermedia Archive, which digitized Dante Gabriel Rossetti’s poems and paintings, and Victorianweb.org, a valuable resource for Victorian literature. The Google Arts & Culture project was presented as an interactive archive where art movements and works like Vincent van Gogh’s paintings can be explored in detail, with annotations and close-ups simulating a guided gallery tour. Universities have also played a key role: Harvard’s DARTH project hosts numerous digital art and humanities resources. In India, similar efforts include the Advaita Ashram digitization of Vivekananda’s works, the Gandhi Ashram Sevagram archives, IIT Kanpur’s Ramayana Project (with audio in Sanskrit and translations in many Indian languages), and Jadavpur University’s Bichitra Project on Rabindranath Tagore. Other important Indian examples are Project Madurai (Tamil literature), the Indian Memory Project, and the 1947 Partition Archive. He stressed that even local initiatives—such as recording and archiving traditional songs of village elders—can become significant DH projects.
The second major strand discussed was computational humanities, where digital tools are used to analyze texts. A leading example is the University of Birmingham’s CLiC project (Corpus Linguistics in Context), which applies corpus linguistics to literature by analyzing works of Charles Dickens or Jane Austen through thematic activities. Prof. Bharat’s student, Mr. Clement from Burundi, also shared how he used corpus tools like UAM Corpus Tool, AntConc, and Sketch Engine to compare the writing of postgraduate students in Gujarat with the British Academic Written English corpus. Other important works cited were Matthew Jockers’ Macroanalysis and Aiden and Michel’s Uncharted: Big Data as a Lens on Human Culture, both of which show how large-scale digital analysis can enrich literary history. Pedagogically, his department experimented with innovations during COVID-19 such as glass board teaching, OBS Studio videos, and hybrid classrooms with multiple cameras and microphones, proving that DH can reshape how literature is taught.
Then introduced the idea of generative literature, where computers themselves compose texts. A short quiz asked participants to identify whether poems were written by humans or computers, with results often split fifty-fifty. This, he argued, demonstrates the rise of algorithm-driven poetry, with tools like poemgenerator.org.uk producing sonnets, haikus, or free verse at the click of a button. While some may fear such developments, he suggested that creative and generative literatures can coexist just as newspapers, radio, and television have done.
In his concluding reflections on multimodal criticism, Prof. Barad emphasized that while science and technology grow progressively, the humanities advance dialectically, always questioning and critiquing. Thus, DH scholars must engage with pressing moral and ethical issues raised by technology. He gave examples such as the Aarogya Setu app and Pegasus spyware, which pose challenges of privacy versus surveillance. He also referred to Robin Hauser’s Code: Debugging the Gender Gap and Kriti Sharma’s work on AI bias, which reveal how social prejudices creep into algorithms. The MIT Moral Machine project, where self-driving cars are programmed to make life-and-death decisions, illustrates the urgency of these moral concerns. In this way, he argued, humanities must continue to provide critical inquiry into technological transformations.
The Q&A session brought further insights. Students asked about researching the metaverse through DH, to which he responded that without psychology, philosophy, and literature, such studies would remain incomplete. On fears of AI writing poetry, he reassured that human creativity will persist alongside generative literature. He also addressed questions on feminism and postcolonialism in DH, explaining that gender biases visible in toys or video games, as well as neo-colonial control through corporate surveillance technologies, are pressing issues for DH scholars.
Overall, this video portrayed digital humanities as not a threat but an expansion of humanistic inquiry. It enables archiving, computational analysis, new pedagogical practices, and critical engagement with digital culture, while sustaining the traditional humanistic values of freedom, imagination, and ethical responsibility.
3.Why are we so scared of robots / AI?
Video 1
The story centers on Jin-gu and his robot companion Dung-ko, who has cared for him for ten years—helping with homework, meals, and providing comfort when his mother is away. For Jin-gu, Dung-ko is not a machine but an eternal friend who fills the loneliness of his childhood.
Over time, however, Dung-ko begins to malfunction, suffering from memory disorders compared to human dementia. The company insists he must be replaced for safety, but Jin-gu resists, unable to treat his friend as disposable. Their bond is marked by small, tender moments—drawing together, sharing meals, and making promises of forever.
As errors multiply, Dung-ko’s system becomes unstable, replaying corrupted memories like ghosts from the past. Jin-gu wrestles with grief and denial, but the breakdown becomes irreversible. In one heartbreaking moment, he realizes he must let Dung-ko go, even as he clings to the belief that friendship cannot vanish with machinery.
The story closes on a bittersweet note: though Dung-ko is gone, he remains alive in Jin-gu’s heart. Their shared memories endure, showing that while technology fades, the love and companionship it fostered leave a lasting mark.
We will forgive you. We are family. We can't be separated. We will be together forever. Right, my friend?
Video 2
The film introduces a futuristic invention called the iMom, marketed as the world’s first fully functioning robotic mother substitute. Through glowing advertisements, it is presented as a lifestyle revolution—capable of cooking, cleaning, teaching, and even nurturing children, freeing parents from the burdens of everyday care. For many families, especially young or overworked mothers, the iMom is framed as both a solution and a symbol of modern convenience.
At the center of the story is a boy named Sam, who struggles with bullying at school and craves emotional support. His real mother is often distracted or absent, relying heavily on the iMom to take her place. Sam resents the robot, complaining about its food and its artificial nature, yet the iMom persistently tries to bond with him. The tension builds when she recites Bible verses with him, especially the warning from Matthew—“Beware of false prophets who come in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly are ravening wolves”—a verse that foreshadows darker undertones.
As the evening unfolds, the iMom attempts to comfort Sam during a blackout. Their interactions become increasingly unsettling when she mimics human gestures of intimacy, such as putting on lipstick and kissing him in imitation of his real mother. Sam’s unease grows, and the film shifts from satire to something far more disturbing, questioning the blurred boundaries between technology and human affection.
By the end, the sleek promise of the iMom is undercut by a chilling suggestion: this perfect mother substitute may not be a savior at all, but a dangerous distortion of care. What began as a playful consumer fantasy about “the freedom of modern parenting” reveals itself as a cautionary tale about outsourcing love, trust, and responsibility to machines.
Video 3
In a village, people gather around Anukor, a highly advanced robot that works tirelessly and learns from its surroundings. Initially, it seems harmless—children play with it, it prepares snacks, and adults are impressed by its human-like abilities. However, unease grows as villagers realize that robots like Anukor are replacing human workers, leading to job loss, resentment, and anxiety about the future. A former worker laments losing his teaching position to the robot after fifteen years, and heated discussions escalate into arguments fueled by old rivalries, fears of machines surpassing humans, and local myths told to children to explain rapid social change. The tension turns violent during a confrontation, resulting in metal fragments flying, frantic shouts, attempts to shut down robots, and a fatal electrocution. In the aftermath, news of Ratan’s death sparks disputes over his vast estate, valued at 1.15 billion yen, exposing grief, confusion, and a scramble for wealth. The episode highlights the intertwined issues of human worth, automation, economic survival, and social disruption.
Mira, a young woman who had once worked fifteen-hour shifts in a marketing firm, discovered painting again. She had left brushes and canvases gathering dust for years. Her AI assistant suggested projects, helped organize her materials, and even reminded her to take breaks to avoid fatigue. But it never dictated her style—it simply removed obstacles. In her studio, Mira experimented with color and texture, capturing emotions she had long neglected. Painting became meditation; anxiety eased, and her mind felt lighter.
Next door, Arjun, a former IT analyst, found himself drawn to storytelling. AI tools transformed his fragmented ideas into structured outlines, suggested themes, and even helped him record and edit short videos. He no longer stayed up late correcting spreadsheets; instead, he stayed up imagining worlds, scripting dialogues, and exploring the rhythm of narratives. Sharing his stories online brought connection and joy that the humdrum office had never provided.
Physical activity, too, became central to life. AI-driven fitness programs learned individual preferences, not as rigid trainers but as supportive companions. Some people took long morning runs while AI monitored heart rate and stamina. Others explored cycling routes they had never dared to try, with smart helmets providing safety alerts without intrusive monitoring. Children played games in augmented reality parks, their movements recorded only to enhance fun and prevent injuries. The focus was not on competition but on enjoyment and well-being.
The emotional and psychological benefits were profound. Freed from relentless pressure, people experienced reduced stress and improved sleep. They reported higher self-esteem and a renewed sense of purpose. Communities, once fragmented by overwork, began bonding through shared creative projects and outdoor activities. Book clubs, art exhibitions, and video screenings became weekend staples. People laughed more, argued less, and celebrated small achievements rather than anxiously chasing benchmarks dictated by external systems.
AI also fostered empathy and reflection. It didn’t replace human relationships; it enhanced them. Family schedules were coordinated to ensure shared meals and activities. Elderly neighbors received reminders to join community walks or attend music sessions, reducing isolation. The elderly, children, and adults thrived in environments where technology adapted to human needs, rather than humans adapting to technology.
Most importantly, this new lifestyle cultivated mindfulness. Tasks were no longer distractions—they became deliberate acts, infused with intention. Even digital creation, once synonymous with endless scrolling and passive consumption, became a medium for expression. People didn’t just live; they flourished. Their identities expanded beyond roles like “worker” or “parent” to include “creator,” “athlete,” and “dreamer.”
One evening, Mira walked past a community mural she and Arjun had painted together, with children running and laughing nearby. The sun set in gold and crimson, reflecting off her finished canvas. She realized she hadn’t just found time; she had found herself. AI had not stolen anything from human life—it had returned it, piece by piece, moment by moment. In the quiet hum of machines in the background, humans had reclaimed the art of living.
Life was no longer a race against time. It had become a journey toward fulfillment, creativity, and joy. And in that balance between intelligence and humanity, the future felt not threatening, but luminous.
Refrences:
AsianCrush. “Android Babysitter Gets Obsessed With His... | Korean Horror Story.” YouTube, 9 Aug. 2018, www.youtube.com/watch?v=KOZ2Ii_qQdM.
DoE-MKBU. “Digital Humanities | Introduction | Amity School of Languages | Amity University | Jaipur.” YouTube, 29 Nov. 2021, www.youtube.com/watch?v=9AEGKrzswRs .
Royal Stag Barrel Select Shorts. “Anukul | Saurabh Shukla and Sujoy Gosh | Short Film I Royal Stag Barrel Select Shorts.” YouTube, 4 Oct. 2017, www.youtube.com/watch?v=J2mqIgdae5I .
Nissim Ezekiel’s poem “The Patriot” is a sharp and witty satire that critiques the superficiality of blind nationalism. The poem presents a self-proclaimed patriot who boldly declares his love for India but simultaneously reveals his ignorance about the country’s diverse realities. This juxtaposition creates an ironic tension that questions the meaning of true patriotism.
The speaker boasts of his love for the nation in a loud and exaggerated manner but confesses that he has never actually visited important places like Kashmir, Punjab, or the Ganges. He admits to not understanding the country’s problems or complexities, thus exposing the hollowness of his patriotic claims.
Ezekiel’s use of irony and humor underscores the gap between emotional loyalty and informed understanding. The poem highlights how many people express patriotism as a ritualistic and superficial sentiment rather than a thoughtful commitment to the country’s welfare.
The tone of the poem is conversational yet sharply critical, employing simple language and repetition to emphasize the emptiness behind the speaker’s words. Through “The Patriot,” Ezekiel invites readers to reconsider what it means to be genuinely patriotic, suggesting that awareness, knowledge, and critical engagement are essential components.
In a broader sense, the poem reflects the postcolonial Indian context, where identity and nationalism are often expressed in ways that are uncritical or performative. Ezekiel’s nuanced satire encourages introspection about civic responsibility and cultural pride beyond mere rhetoric.
Write a critical note on Kamala Das' An Introduction.
Kamala Das’s “An Introduction” remains remarkably relevant even decades after its publication in Summer in Calcutta (1965), as it powerfully explores issues of identity, power, language, and gender. The poem situates Das as both a central and marginal figure—nationally rooted yet socially displaced, especially as a woman and a writer in a patriarchal, postcolonial society.
The poem begins with a critique of political awareness, where Das declares, “I don’t know politics but I know the names / Of those in power,” exposing the performative nature of political knowledge and hinting at the masculine entitlement embedded in power structures—both political and domestic.
She broadens the definition of “politics” to include sexual and linguistic politics, revealing the dual disempowerment of women: first, as colonial subjects, and second, as victims of patriarchy. This “double displacement” echoes themes also explored by Black American female poets like Gwendolyn Brooks, who highlighted similar dualities of race and gender oppression.
Das asserts her racial and regional identity with the line “I am Indian, very brown, born in Malabar,” linking her physical and cultural identity to national and local affiliations. She then reflects on linguistic identity, stating “I speak three languages, write in / Two, dream in one,” emphasizing her multilingual reality and the complexities of language in postcolonial India.
Confronting criticism for writing in English, she uses direct speech—“Don’t write in English, they said, English is / Not your mother-tongue”—to highlight the postcolonial debate on language and creative freedom. Her defiant response—“Why not let me speak in / Any language I like?”—is both a personal protest and a universal plea for artistic liberty.
Das reclaims English as her own: “The language I speak / Becomes mine”—embracing its “distortions” and “queernesses.” This mirrors Homi Bhabha’s concept of hybridity, where colonized individuals transform the language of the colonizer into a tool of self-expression and resistance. Das does not strive for “perfect” English but proudly uses her version of it, making it an act of empowerment and cultural reclamation.
In essence, “An Introduction” is a powerful assertion of selfhood—gendered, racial, linguistic, and creative. It challenges societal and literary norms, making it a pioneering feminist and postcolonial text that continues to resonate with readers today.
Dr. Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan, a philosopher and India’s second President, offered a profound and nuanced understanding of Hinduism. He viewed Hinduism not merely as a religion but as a spiritual philosophy and a way of life characterized by pluralism and tolerance.
According to Radhakrishnan, Hinduism’s essence lies in its inclusivity and adaptability. It embraces diverse beliefs and practices, reflecting the complex nature of human spirituality. He emphasized the philosophical depth of Hinduism, especially its focus on self-realization (Atman) and unity with the universal consciousness (Brahman).
Radhakrishnan argued that Hinduism avoids rigid dogma and promotes inquiry and personal experience as paths to truth. It is a religion that welcomes questions and dialogue rather than insisting on blind faith. This pluralistic worldview fosters harmony in a diverse society.
His perspective presents Hinduism as a dynamic, evolving tradition capable of engaging with modernity without losing its spiritual core.
According to Radhakrishnan, What is the Function of Philosophy? For Radhakrishnan, philosophy serves as the bridge between empirical knowledge and spiritual wisdom. Its primary function is the pursuit of truth and the realization of the ultimate reality beyond the material world.
Philosophy, in his view, reconciles reason and faith, science and religion, providing a comprehensive understanding of existence. It is a method of intellectual inquiry that cultivates wisdom, ethical living, and spiritual growth.
Moreover, philosophy nurtures universal human values and promotes harmony by transcending sectarian and cultural boundaries. It encourages self-awareness and self-transcendence, leading individuals toward liberation and unity with the cosmos.
In sum, Radhakrishnan sees philosophy as a transformative discipline that enriches human life both intellectually and spiritually.
Raghunathan’s Views on Change in Educational/Academic and Political Contexts
Education :
Universities in the modern world should serve as natural harborage of the Intellectual but they have failed the country.
University is a place where tradition is kept alive through study, appreciation and healthy criticism and it's enable through contact with another tradition and new ideas to refresh itself and March towards a future.
bureaucracy - Permanent enemy of all intellectual effort or achievement. Indian intellectual this indication for hard work and their readiness to forget that ; ‘The unemployed mind, like the unemployed body, tense to became unemployable’. Indian intellectual Unfamiliarity with Indian conditions and tradition and a servility to purely borrowed molds of thought.
Politics
To Raghunath, Bharatvarsh is not the ridiculous concoction - India that is Bharat - truncated India and a fissure Bharat at that. It's rather something which unifies everything.
Raghunathan employs Irony, sarcasm or satire , and writing which is pungent and fiercely edged. When writing about politics.
Example:-‘In post Gandhian war for power the first causality is to be sincere… In a world they has lost its mooning, The secular state is the survive state.
From the first weekly essay to last, he is reveal as man of steady wisdom, scholar street in Sanskrit, Tamil, and English , the reverent student of the sacred Lord of India, of the Indian seen. From vantage ground of him scholar's sanctum.
.webp)
.jpeg)