Mukerji argues the advances that digital media and technology has had on humans since it has further been developed. He talks about how we as humans have had to adapt to a new norm of technology and how it has affected us as a society.

I think it is important to address how he starts out with his argument. Because we have talked about this so much as a class; being classical text and how we have stemmed away from this. At one point we were use to a book and it being the norm of our society. For information, or pleasure or whatever our intent was a book was a very relevant thing at one time. Those times are long gone though however. But we would not have been able to transition to digital revolution had we not been engaged with classical text. What this did for humans back then was provide them with knowledge and promise of radical transition.

Following that another important aspect of this article is identity. The way we know identify is far different from how it used to be. We are now part of a culture that is involved with technologies in a digital sense. The Internet, and what we use on that are a part of our everyday life. It is how we are viewed in a sense, and holds more to use then a classical text ever could. We are attached to technology because the digital age has trapped us as humans.

Lastly as far as points that stand out, something that I have never really thought about when it comes to digital humanities is imagery and space. In some way or form everything is trapped in these so-called memory boxes for us. That creates this image around what we do with ourselves and how we conduct our own experiences in the digital age. I think a great example Mukerji uses for this is the idea of Facebook. It is something we have designed on our own that has its own memory of our post, and ideas, which leads to our humanistic ways being viewed, through a digital focus.

Two aspect of the reading that I found confusing are why Grau talks about Versailles as an environment. I just did not understand that whole section and see how it related to the article itself, or digital humanities. I also had trouble grasping the idea of what Churches and Christianity role in this was. Classical text started out as a main point for religious purpose. So I feel like it does not have much to do with digital humanism then it does with classical text.

My question is in today’s society do we think of digital technology, and advancements as something that can control our lives, in a sense where it is taken over? I think personally it is viewed as something to help our lives and enhance it.