FINAL PROJECT | STEP1: Preparatory Research and Analysis
Project Research
1. Bloomlight
2. EYEBALLS CUBE
3. Guernica
Interpretation of ‘A Successful Interaction’
In my original definition of “interaction”, I was inspired by Chris Crawford and Tom Igoe to understand interaction as “mutual action or influence between two or more people or things”. But I was too obsessed with achieving “input” and “output” for both at the same time that I lost sight of the significance of “interaction” itself. In “Art, Interaction and Engagement”, Ernest Edmonds identifies four types of interactive artworks: “static”, “dynamic-passive”, “dynamic-interactive” and “dynamic-interactive (varying)”. In fact, in the “static” case, where the artwork does not change, there is no interaction between the two that can be observed by others, but the viewer may have a personal psychological or emotional reaction. If a project is fully interactive, with lots of “input” and “output” from both, but the resulting work is aesthetically unappealing and meaningless, then the interactive artwork has lost its meaning of existence. On the contrary, even if the changes brought by the interaction are small, if the small changes caused by this interactive behavior can bring a strong sense of interaction to the participants’ hearts and provoke thoughts, then it is still a successful artwork and interaction experience. I am not denying the advanced level of interaction – on the contrary, it is certainly something I am striving for in my learning process. It’s just that with my limited skills and time and energy, I should also focus part of my vision on how to give meaning to interaction.
The interactive nature transforms installation art from a situation of passively pleasing the audience to actively engaging the audience, which is undoubtedly a major advancement in the concept and mode of art creation. The interactive form brings a sense of humanity, coordination and inclusiveness to installation art, while adding a lot of macro and profound connotations and meanings to the works themselves.
I hope that my successful interactive installation will, through the interactive experience between the viewer and the installation, make the viewer think deeply about the previous interactive act. A key difference between this and ordinary art is the difference between “criticize” and “speculate”: a critical installation is a denial of a phenomenon or a point of view or an affirmation of another point of view, while a speculative installation is one in which the designers bring the viewer into the scene they have created without any subjective ideas.
In other words, underneath the apparent interaction between the viewer and the installation, there is a second layer of interaction logic.
→ Viewers are attracted to the installation
→ Viewers interact with the installation
→ Viewers think through the interaction