Reading Reflection: Week 9

Physical Computing’s Greatest Hits (and misses)

Tigoe delves into a range of ‘physical computing’ projects in his article, “Physical Computing’s Greatest Hits (and misses).” I found this piece to be particularly beneficial, treating it as a brainstorming session for ideas on my final project. Exploring the diverse examples of projects was not only interesting but also provided inspiration for potential directions in my own work. One particularly noteworthy aspect of Tigoe’s perspective is his emphasis on the intrinsic beauty of recurring themes in physical computing. Rather than viewing the repetition of certain ideas as a deterrent, Tigoe encourages a nuanced perspective. He suggests that newcomers should recognize the vast potential for injecting individuality and creativity into these themes. What resonates with me is Tigoe’s assertion that repetition need not be perceived as a limiting factor. Instead, he reframes it as an open invitation to innovate — an opportunity to build upon existing concepts, introduce new elements and refine established ones. This perspective fosters a dynamic and progressive approach to physical computing projects, emphasizing the continuous evolution and enrichment of the field through creative contributions.

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

In “Making Interactive Art: Set the Stage, Then Shut Up and Listen” interactive art, is described as, is nothing short of orchestrating a living conversation. It’s not just a canvas where an artist dumps their thoughts; it’s a dynamic exchange where both creator and audience actively contribute. What struck me the most in this article is the call to resist the temptation to over explain. It’s an invitation for artists to step back after crafting the initial experience and allowing people the space to unravel its layers on their own. I used to think that you had to know how to interpret a piece of art to fully enjoy it. But over time, I’ve come to realize that not knowing is sometimes better than knowing. There’s no one right way to perceive an experience, and by trying to dictate it to the audience, you limit their perspective. This approach to interactive art feels really freeing. It’s all about breaking away from a fixed narrative and embracing the unpredictable beauty of individual interpretations. It’s not about telling people what the art means; it’s about co-creating an experience that’s as diverse and dynamic as the people engaging with it.

Leave a Reply