#1: Making Interactive Art: Set the Stage, Then Shut Up and Listen

This blog post’s main message is to not “interpret your own work”. The author argues that interactive art does not require an explanation from the creator as this takes away from the interactive element of the art in the first place. It should be the audience’s decision and interpretation of your art that allows the ‘conversation’ to occur between them, you and the art.

Personally, I agree with this sentiment to some extent. I think a very important part of interactive art is its ability to be understood and performed by everyone without the need of too much interaction or explanation on the creator’s part, as its goal should be to allow its own interpretation to take place without interference. However, I also think that some art works may need some sort of introduction to them – not to interfere with the perspectives of the audience – but maybe as a form of introduction and aims. Although, if this could be done in a discrete way in which the creator is not involved, it would be ideal.

#2: Physical Computing’s Greatest Hits (and misses)

Looking at all the examples of physical computing in the author’s list made me super excited for the endless possibilities that computing opens into the world of interactive art. Most forms of work that were listed did seem the typical projects that most of us have seen before (either on the internet, art galleries etc.); however, I agree very much with the author when he says that although these projects have been done multiple times, people shouldn’t give up as they still “allow a lot of room for originality”. I felt this constructing many of my own projects for the class as they felt “unoriginal” sometimes but adding my own layer of creativity or perspective to them is what made the projects so personal and fun to make still.

Leave a Reply