Physical Computing 2- Tom Igoe
Well, I have started this journal later than the date above but it doesn't much matter because I wanted to critique the piece "Ob" that Betsy Seder and I completed this summer. The prototype was made in PhysComp last spring but over the summer we brought it to completion and exhibited it at an art gallery in New Zealand. First, here's the basic description of the piece . This documents the prototype and the New Zealand version did look a bit different but the graphic design isn't what wanted to talk about.
Having it in a public setting taught me a lot. First: the ITP community and the rest of the world are two very different audiences. People here know its supposed to "do" something. Not only don't others know that, but they really don't need it to do anything either. In other words, most people just stood there watching the ambient animation projected on the wall, which is the piece in its resting state, and seemed satisfied that the stool was supposed to do something. I found the general audience astoundingly uncurious. Ok, well that might be the weakness of the piece, and that is true, but what it taught me is that if you want to actually get strangers to do something, to move their bodies, it better be extremely clear and dramatic and that even then they will probably just want to watch.
Which leads me to wonder about interactivity as an element assumed to be good, and better than something that's not interactive. I just don't know if that's true. Sure its good for people to communicate, but there are so many subtle and complicated ways this happens around us all day, I wonder if its neccessarily a good thing to hit them over the head with it. People need to be motivated. (That's why games work; because you want to win.)
What I am questioning is the direct line of peep-to-thing-to-peep-to-thing approach. I am beginning to be more attracted to the idea of an interaction that might simply be observed, or one in which the user is an unwitting participant. These forms are usually considered of a lower order at school, and I understand that this is partly because it is 'easier' technically. But I don't think its easier conceptually or experiencially. Just try to get someone to stop and look at something if there isn't some geegaw flying around to grab their attention.
Ok, enough of this particular rant. Back to the Ob: it wasn't really robust enough and it didn't work fast and clearly enough to engage people. I think of it as a noble failure (sorry, Betsy!!)
and I look forward to many more.
Week 2:: September 12
Black Tuesday was yesterday. No class.
Nancy Dwyer Fall 2001
Week 1:: September 5 2001