Reading Reflection – Week 3

Crawford argues that big ideas are elusive and hard to capture in a sentence-long definition, and I agree. However, he then proceeds to do this and limit what can be considered interactive. He argues that books, movies, and performance art are not interactive, but I beg to differ. Consider a choose-your-own-adventure movie or book; is this not regarded as interactive? One could argue that Crawford’s book was published in the early 2000s, so he might not have heard of such media. Yet those interactive forms, specifically books, were famous in the 90s.

Another example that he fails to consider is stand-up comedy. The comic interacts with the audience, listening, thinking, and speaking, all of which Crawford states are part of an interactive piece. Add to that, many of the jokes in a set come from the ability of the comic to improvise based on the audience, further proving the point that performance art is interactive. Putting that aside, I agree with him that interactivity relies on good listening, thinking, and speaking. This could be applied to p5 by implementing real-time feedback mechanisms that respond to user input—for example, having the sketch change based on whether the mouse is pressed.

Leave a Reply