Note from the Section Editor Michelle DiMeo The history of medicine discipline in the twenty-first century does not—and should not—look the same as it did in the past. Technological advances have changed the way we read, teach, research, and interact with each other. New opportunities in the digital humanities and related "alt-ac" jobs provide viable alternatives to tenure-track historian positions, just as these traditional academic appointments increasingly encourage the integration of new methods inside (or even outside) the classroom. The products that emerge from these initiatives are rarely monographs, but instead may take the form of an online resource, interactive exhibition, digital tool, or other type of nonbook media. After a two-year hiatus, the BHM is relaunching its Digital Media and Humanities section as the Digital Humanities and Public History section. Published twice per year, this section will review these important new resources in our field, applying the same level of critical assessment expected of our Book Reviews section. Reviewers will consider what the intended goals are and how the chosen format helped the creator achieve these. They may also reflect on how the project engaged with existing debates in the history of medicine, asked us to think differently about something, or communicated a challenging topic in a new way. Overall, our reviewers will consider how these sources could benefit readers of the BHM. Historians will learn about new digital methodologies with the potential to enhance their research and discover online resources that could be incorporated in their classrooms. Curators and public historians may find inspiration for their next engaging visitor experience, while library and digital humanities professionals may find ideas for interpreting their collections and building strategic collaborations across repositories. While we will aim to be timely, using similar criteria as that employed in our Book Reviews section, our academic journal publication timeline may result in some reviews being published after the physical exhibition has closed. Conscious of this, we prioritize reviews of physical exhibitions that have a lasting online presence that may be accessed by readers everywhere. That said, we have found that reviews of innovative physical exhibits and ephemeral experiences—even those that are geographically restricted or have recently closed—are still helpful for collections and public history professionals. They may not be able to physically travel to these spaces, but reading a critical appraisal of their colleagues' ideas can stimulate their own creativity concerning a future project. [End Page 125] If you would like to nominate a work in the digital humanities or public history for review, or if you would be interested in serving as a reviewer, we encourage you to contact our series editor, Michelle DiMeo, or our managing editor, Carolyn McLaughlin. Both can be reached at bhm@jhmi.edu. Michelle DiMeo Science History Institute, Philadelphia Copyright © 2020 Johns Hopkins University Press
Read full abstract