The Art of Interactive Design

After reading Crawford’s text about what is defined to be truly ‘interactive’, I realized that my first assignment on writing a blog post about posters  was in fact inappropriate in the context of interactivity. I understood the definition of ‘interactivity’ as a form of flow; in order for something or someone to be considered interactive, there must be a flow, whether that be a series of conversations one after the other, or actions. (Or metaphorically speaking, a tennis ball that goes back and forth between players in the court) I also began to appreciate all kinds of designs I took for granted in my everyday life such as the water bottles, tables, windows, blinders and everything that I could ever think of for facilitating my life. I also felt that the definition of ‘interactive’ seemed highly specific. Before reading this, I regarded anything that reacted to my thought, actions or emotions as interactive, but realized that a truly successful interactive design requires the optimum balance of everything, from graphic design to interface design, thinking, listening, reading and speaking. 

The Design of Everyday Things 

This reminded me of my past experience I had in another IM class called Temporary Expert with Professor Marina Zurkow; whenever I tried to explain how my project would work and how I expect people would be engaging with my project, she always used to remind me how we, as designers, should not never assume the participants will do what is expected of them. Reading this emphasized this once more, that anything I believe is easy enough is in fact never easy enough to the others.

Also, regarding Human-Centered Design, I couldn’t help but to think about the gap the fast developing technology creates between people. Although they say high technology is designed around the idea of Human-Centered Design, who really is the ‘Human’ in ‘Human-Centered Design’? How does the fast growing design accommodate elderlies for example?