Digital humanities have tremendous potential for diversifying the digital cultural record, especially for the nineteenth century. This essay examines areas for growth, including representation, tools and methodologies, and data curation. Risam draws on her own scholarly contributions to demonstrate avenues for increased attention to race, data, and representation in Victorian Studies.

This article responds to the "Digital Humanities in/and Asian Stud ies" forum, situating it within broader genealogies of Asian digital humanities and arguing for a multilayered approach to understanding its histories, networks, and organizations. We offer two complementary trajectories: first, tracing the histori cal intersections of Asian studies and computing-from early initiatives such as the Munkwa Project and the China Biographical Database to the development of re gional collaborations and digital centers-and second, examining the institutional and organizational infrastructures that have shaped digital humanities communities across Asia. Moving beyond project and tool based analysis, we call for recogni tion of Asian digital humanities as a deeply interconnected, globally significant field that both challenges and extends EuroAmerican frameworks. Our relections high light the importance of historically informed, relational, and inclusive approaches to studying the evolving landscape of digital scholarship in and about Asia.

The Data-Sitters Club (https://datasittersclub.github.io/site/index.html) is a pedagogical resource consisting of “books” that explore themes and methods from digital humanities and computational text analysis in colloquial and accessible ways, using Ann M. Martin’s Baby-Sitters Club series as the corpus for analysis. In this article, the collective of six scholars who form the project’s core—and who were themselves fans of Martin’s books as teenagers and young adults—elaborate on the ways that the Data-Sitters Club’s composition, content, technical design, workflows, and writing processes push back against the competitive, individualistic tendencies in humanities research that foreclose new possibilities for thinking, working, and creating within the academy while also creating space for, and taking seriously, the importance of failure in iterative research practices. We present the project as one model for an alternative way of imagining scholarly communication that prioritizes the collaborative and therefore a relational, rhizomatic approach to academic life in place of a hierarchical one circumscribed by the practices of the university today. Following calls from critics such as Kathleen Fitzpatrick, Sandy Grande, and Bethany Nowviskie to commit to collectivity, reciprocity, and mutuality above competition and individualism, we put forward the Data-Sitters Club as an example of how scholarly practices might be reimagined through collaborative publishing.

How can we build new multilingual futures for academic journals in the age of electronic publishing? The answer may lie in the multilingual pasts of scholarly publishing. This essay explores the historical trajectories of journal editing to examine how the figure of the "editor" today has evolved in relation to the changing landscape of research since the inception of scholarly periodicals. It begins by exploring early multilingual practices of journals in the 17th and 18th centuries. The essay continues by exploring how multilingualism remained a mainstay of journals even with the boom in journals of the 19th century that emerged from research gaining a foothold in higher education institutions. It then considers how journals of the 20th and 21st centuries lost their way and foreclosed linguistic diversity in the increasing drive towards disciplinarity and the neoliberalization of higher education. The essay argues that another editorial workflow is possible, one that productively negotiates the tension between editor as gatekeeper of publishing and editor as steward of knowledge production. As such, it makes the case for a new approach to the work of journal editing better positioned to facilitate linguistic diversity and equity in scholarly communications.