The way the author explains interactivity is quite interesting. What caught my attention was when the author talked about a falling tree branch in the woods, and how what happens next is a reaction, not a true interaction. The author was able to present a well-structured step-by-step approach to defining interactivity. He started by discussing communication and the roles of different actors, then went on to propose the idea of categorizing interactivity into two levels: low and high, and explained how to tell them apart.
Chris’s viewpoint on interactivity is really unique and got me thinking that we might need a new word to describe what He’s talking about, especially since the term “interactivity” has been used incorrectly so often. This also brings up the question of how we decide if a digital artwork or project is interactive or not. On the flip side, it seems like he is mostly focused on human interaction (communication) as the main type, comparing computer limitations to human communication and interactions which might be insufficient to create a strong argument. This might mean they’re missing out on considering other forms of interactivity that don’t involve humans.
Furthermore, the author gave good examples to differentiate between an interaction and a reaction. For instance, he spoke about a reader reading a book where they only react to what they read rather than “interact” with it. Even though I believe these examples are prevalent, they were essential in explaining the difference between both terms. However, if we refer back to the initial examples presented in the beginning of the paper, such as the image of a child playing on an “interactable” rug, it could indeed be considered a form of interaction if it provides distinct feedback to the child based on the specific actions they take.
In general, the author has made a compelling case and touched upon a subject that could be relevant to various contemporary buzzwords we employ nowadays. Take, for instance, the phrase “Immersive experience.” Lately, numerous businesses have adopted this term to describe their offerings as immersive, even when they fall far short of delivering a high-quality, enjoyable experience for the user.