How I define Interaction
Input and Output
Interaction is broad. Crawford defines it as “a cyclic process in which two actors alternately listen, think, and speak” metaphorically, and uses “input, process, and output” to replace the verbs “academically”. It is not clear to me still, while the words “input” and “output”, combined with the “input” and “output” examples when Christian introduced circuits during the first class of interaction lab, it came to me a specific thinking method of defining Interaction, which is to use input and output.
Process
Here I use the word “actor” from Crawford, and I agree with him that two actors are essential as the smallest unit of subjects for interaction. Actor A needs to give an output. Actor B inputs A’s output, and gives another output to A. Actor A receives the output from B again, and here comes the process/circle. I call it an interaction circle. Interaction, in my opinion, should be at least one full circle.
One more thing should be paid attention to in this interaction circle. As long as A provides an output, B should respond to this signal spontaneously without being affected by other outer factors. As Igoe writes, “Once you’ve made your initial statement by building the thing or the environment and designing its behaviors, shut up.” The initial statement is the output by A, and “shut up” means actors other than A and B should do nothing to interpret the interaction between A and B. That is to say, as far as I am concerned, any unit of interaction should only be sponsored by and between two actors. Just “set the stage, then shut up and listen”.
My Definition
Interaction, in my opinion, needs at least two actors, between whom is at least one full circle of actor A and actor B’s trading of input and output spontaneously. (One interaction circle) It’s still hard to conclude the idea of interaction in one short sentence. The sentence above is temporary and immature, only concluded by my personal understanding of the interaction and enhanced by the assigned research readings. I would like to see more interaction examples that can be proved by my own theory and also welcome interaction projects to challenge my idea, which is subject to modification of course.
Interaction circle in my mind
Two Interactive Project Example
Aligned: The light wave
As is introduced in the description, “the installation consisted of 15 drums triggering the waves of light traveling towards a 3m helium-filled sphere floating above the area”. The audience was invited to drum collectively and together create an audio-visual spectacle – of which intensity of was depended on the speed and intensity of the drumming. In this case, the audience is actor A, and the big light sphere in the center with multiple lighting tubes is actor B. Once actor A beats the drum (A’s output), Actor B inputs A’s output, and lights will go through the tubes towards the sphere which will generate fancy visual effects (B’s output after inputting A’s output). The audience is triggered to keep hitting the drum to see more visual and audio effects, which shows they are doing the interaction spontaneously. Here this interaction circle repeating over and over again. In this project, we can find two spontaneous actors and at least one trading of input and output, which is aligned with my definition of interaction.
How I understand Interaction with this project:
For me, this is a typical interactive project. Actor A, people can are invited to give output to the drum, and the tubes and sphere react to the input. People can automatically know that their hitting the drum can spark the visual and audio effects from the tubes and sphere. This is how interaction works in my opinion. What Actor A does triggers Actor B’s reaction and Actor A can automatically know how he/she/it can interact with actor B and what to expect in at least one interaction circle.
Not Aligned: The Cube
This is an amazing project. I personally love it a lot. While for me it’s more like an immersive visual art installation instead of an interactive project, though its title is under the Interaction category.
As described, “Broadgate asked for a creative solution to reflect the spirit & hive of activity in the square, by encouraging people to stop, look, listen & reflect. The cube is made up of digital LED screens, and static mirrored panels. The instructing text: ‘don’t just look, listen’ intrigued visitors to stop & interact.” The cube interacts with people by presenting fancy visual and audio effects when people pass by. This seems to be an interactive project, but if we check my definition step by step:
Two actors are as required: passengers and the cube. People give the output, the cube receives and outputs its fancy visual and audio effects. However, in the video, I didn’t see people seem to receive the output from the cube. They pass by quickly and didn’t notice the cube is reacting to their movements. In this sense, Actor A doesn’t input Actor B’s output, which is not a full circle of interaction in my definition. Thus I think for me The Cube is not an ideal interactive project, cuz the designer may fail to convey the message that the cube is not only a simple visual-audio art installation.
How I understand Interaction with this project:
The most important reason why I don’t think this is a typical interactive project is a lack of the last step of the interaction circle, which is actor A may not be able to input actor B’s output, meaning people may not notice the change they’ve brought to the cube, and they might not even notice the cube. If that happens, this interaction can be meaningless because Actor A didn’t know what to expect from B, and B is only acting by itself. The interaction is incomplete.
Reference
Crawford, Chris. “The Art of Interactive Design: A Euphonious and Illuminating Guide to Building Successful Software.” What Exactly Is Interactivity?, 1st ed., No Starch Press, 2002, pp. 1–5.
Igoe, Tom. “Making Interactive Art: Set the Stage, Then Shut Up and Listen.” 12 Aug. 2012, www.tigoe.com/blog/category/physicalcomputing/405.
“MANA – Global New Media Art Platform – Art / Design / Technology Cross-Industry Innovation.”The Cube, Rupert, 17 Dec. 2020, www.manamana.net/video/detail?id=1488597#!zh.
“MANA – Global New Media Art Platform – Art / Design / Technology Cross-Industry Innovation.” The Lightwave, penGenerator, 3 Mar. 2020, www.manamana.net/video/detail?id=70417#!zh.
Manovich, Lev. “The Language of New Media (Leonardo Books).” Principles of New Media, Revised ed., The MIT Press, 2002, pp. 27–48.