Reflection 1: On “Physical Computing’s Greatest Hits (and Misses)”
This reading really challenged how I think about originality in my projects. It is easy to feel discouraged when you realize a project you are excited about has already been done thousands of times. This is something I have experienced in my past assignments too, where it often felt like I was just making a copy of something else. However, as Tigoe points out, these classics are repeated because they tap into fundamental human expressions like movement and gesture.
This made me rethink my own approach to class projects. I realized that a project does not have to be a world-first to be successful. The value lies in the twist you add, how you refine the design, change the interaction, or make it feel unique to your own creative voice. I feel like this is something we all do unintentionally because we each have different styles and tastes.
Reflection 2: Making Interactive Art
The second reading shifted my perspective on the role of the designer in interactive art. I used to think that as a creator, I needed to explain exactly what my project was supposed to do so that people would not get confused. However, Tigoe suggests the opposite: build the environment, provide the context, and then shut up.
The idea that the audience completes the work through their own actions is powerful, but I think it is situational. Some projects are meant to do exactly what the creator intended, and there is not really anything else for the user to add. While I agree with Tigoe’s take for certain artistic pieces, I do not think it is universally true for every single project. Sometimes a clear, guided experience is exactly what is needed.