Week 9 – 2 readings

Physical Computing’s Greatest Hits (and misses)

It became clear to me after reading “Physical Computing’s Greatest Hits (and misses)” that old concepts in physical computing may be updated to create something fresh and innovative. The piece goes through a number of projects, such as interactive pads and musical instruments, to demonstrate how amazing inventions can result from reimagining old concepts in fresh ways. It’s a fun reminder that often the most innovative ideas are simply the greatest old ones with a little tweaking.

I was particularly drawn to three items, which caused me to reconsider my previous thoughts. I was first shown that you are not limited to traditional methods of creating music by experimenting with making music with movements, such as with theremin-like devices. This helped me to see how our creative expression can be altered by actual computers. Second, the combination of digital technology with real-world artifacts to create images made “Mechanical Pixels” quite fascinating. This innovative approach to digital pictures gives it a more vibrant, more engaging feeling. Last but not least, the section on “Multitouch Interfaces” got me to reflect on how we utilize technology. It brought to light that, despite its coolness, touchscreens fail to provide us with tactile feedback—a crucial feature. This got me thinking about how gadgets could be more user-friendly.

I have to reconsider my definition of innovation in physical computing after reading this paper. It demonstrated to me the value of updating classic concepts and the necessity of maintaining an open mind regarding our interactions with technology.

 

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

The book “Making Interactive Art: Set the Stage, Then Shut Up and Listen” changed my understanding of interactive art, highlighting the crucial function viewers play in deciphering and finally finishing the piece. The idea that interactive art should be a dialogue between the creator and the viewer, where the latter’s interaction brings the piece to fruition, is something this article helped me completely understand. This method suggested a more freeing perspective where art is accessible to individual interpretation and discovery, which contradicted my preconceived assumptions about the artist’s responsibility in influencing the audience’s interpretation.

The painting made me think about the fine line that artists have to walk when it comes to giving their work just the right amount of context. This thought piqued my interest in the ways in which artists might create experiences that are both approachable and captivating without being unduly prescriptive in how they direct audience participation. The essay made a significant point regarding the need for artists to carefully analyze their approach to audience engagement, even though it didn’t go into great detail about how to achieve this balance.

After thinking back on my own experiences as a participant and creator of interactive art, I realized that the article’s observations aligned with the more fruitful elements of previous endeavors. In many cases, giving the audience the latitude to explore and participate with the work at their own pace resulted in more significant and profound audience participation. This insight encourages a move toward more open-ended interaction that welcomes individual investigation and interpretation. It also challenges me to reevaluate how I communicate my work. All things considered, this discovery validates the article’s thesis.

The author’s perspective is objective and encourages a wide range of interpretations, even though it presents a definite opinion on the significance of audience participation in interactive art. The essay gives artists the freedom to explore different approaches to inviting audience interaction and response, without taking a prescriptive stand on what interactive art has to be.

“Making Interactive Art: Set the Stage, Then Shut Up and Listen” questioned my preconceptions about the directive role of the artist and provided me with a fresh perspective on interactive art, which will help me in my future endeavors. It brought to light the dynamic and cooperative relationship that exists between the artist, the piece of art, and the audience. This has inspired artists to create art that genuinely involves viewers as active participants in the creative process.

 

 

Leave a Reply