Physical Computing’s Greatest Hits (and misses):
The first category that popped up was a theremin-esque instrument and that’s exactly how I described my week 9 assignment with sound produced based on distance/motion. It’s interesting how motifs get repeated constantly in physical computing. Core functionalities repeat, but how you make it different and your own spin on the functionality makes physical computing worth pursuing. This blog brought up an important point about interactions that have meaning. Rather than simply mimicing a user’s actions or mapping one to one interactions, thinking about why certain interactions are valuable can fuel a physical computing project even more. For example, I really liked the accessibility examples provided like the one where a someone uses their wheelchair as a painting tool as opposed to their limbs.
Making Interactive Art: Set the Stage, Then Shut Up and Listen
Interactive art is a mix of design and art — your piece should invoke the right emotions without having the tell the users how to feel. Just like how a sign doesn’t need to say push or pull on a door — it should be intuitive (design principles). An interactive piece is a conversation, not a one-sided story where the artist tells the user how to feel or approach the piece. The piece can grow and evolve with feedback or reactions the users provide. By listening to their side of the conversion, you can learn a lot about how people behave with your piece and ways to change it. This brings me back to a previous reading response we had about interactivity as not just a response to users’ actions, but a tool for users to create with. By giving users a sense of agency, they’re able to creative the art with you. We as artists might feel inclined to spell out our intentions for audiences and explain how complex our projects are, but if a project is truly complex and thoughtful, it shouldn’t need explanation.