Response to “The Art of Interactive Design”

I believe that I had a clear definition of interactivity prior to reading this excerpt, however, Crawford forced me to think about where I draw the line between interaction, which he views as an actual two-way “conversation” between two things, and with passive participation and engagement.

I do agree with Crawford on all his points, especially as he goes through examples to make his points clear. I especially agree on his point that interactivity can be defined as a spectrum, with many products and activities being much more interactive than others. For example, actors subtly changing their performing habits show-to-show based on the audience’s reactions would be an interactive experience for the audience and actor but would not be nearly as interactive as a conversation between two friends.

I also enjoyed his discussion of the difference between graphic design, user interface design and  interactivity design. Because I am very interested in these fields, I found his insights into the differences between the three and these roles’ evolution and future to be very interesting as I try to learn about these fields.

Leave a Reply