In this essay, I argue that neglect in literacy studies of the early twentieth-century office as a site of women’s literate labor has been reinforced by two commonplaces about clerical work: first, that clerical work was routinized and deskilled after the turn of the century (and, consequently, became “women’s work”), and second, that the labor of writing was split into the “head” work of male executives and the “hand” work of female clerical workers. Focusing on the figure of the early twentieth-century female stenographer, I identify some of the problems with these two commonplaces and urge literacy scholars to recover the labor of clerical workers in their histories. The essay concludes with a brief discussion of the diary of a stenographer named Irene Chapin, who lived and worked in Western Massachusetts in the late 1920s.

ABSTRACTThis article argues the digital tools and search environments that increasingly support historical scholarship in rhetoric and composition have material and epistemological implications for how we discover, access, and make sense of the past. In light of these changes, I suggest that more explicit reflection and discipline-specific conversation around the uses and shaping effects of these technologies is needed. Tracing my own digitally enabled search for information about an early-twentieth-century advice writer named Frances Maule, I describe how mass digitization has shifted conditions of findability. I conclude by outlining a heuristic for critical reflection—a “principle of proximity”—and urging rhetoric and composition historians to take a more active role in shaping the emerging landscape of digital research.