Just as the writer writes in “ WHAT EXACTLY IS INTERACTIVITY?”: ” I’m concerned with interactivity that has some blood in its veins.” I agree with this opinion. In my mind, I think the interactivity is the relationship between two actors, just like a communication, both of two sides can have a specific reflection from each other.
To explain my idea better, I have found two examples to prove.
The first one called “RE:PLACES”, which is a robot that can turn the trash into pieces of art by using the 3D printing technology. This a paragraph of how the robot work and what it looks like.
“Resembling a three-legged planetary landing module, the apparatus, using a branched funnel system, transports differently colored granules made from plastic waste. The material is heated up and then compressed in a cylindrical extruder inside the robot, after which it’s finally squeezed out at the bottom as a viscous colored substance. The hot material bulges and twists until it cools down and solidifies into its final shape. In a creative process lasting several minutes, the 1.70-meter-high robot excretes the plastic objects and then deposits them around the exhibition space.”
Following the Arduino program, the robot becomes a sculptor then begins to work.
I think this work fits the definition that I agree. As when it is transferred instructions by investigators, it can turn out to a changeable and specific result. And this result (the shape of the sculpture ) isn’t controlled by investigators, it more seems like a masterwork that made by the robot itself. Also, this is a signal the robot gives to people around it. This is an interactivity. Meanwhile, this robot and its action is dynamic, and have the changeability. Just like a communication (usually, you don’t know what people will talk about next) And we cannot also predict the shape of the sculpture unless you program it. The robot just talks to you by making sculptures. So, this is the point that inspires me.
This is the photo and website about the robot: https://www.creativeapplications.net/arduino-2/replaces-liebl-and-schmid-pfahler/
And the second one this the euler’s disk. This is a typical interactive toy. But, in my opinion, this hasn’t get the level I think about the activity. You just give the disk a force and it begins to move for a really really long time. During the period, you don’t have any communication and you always think about same questions:”When will it ends? Why it never stop?” And the disk gives out no signals, only to move endlessly. So, this invitation is not interactive as the first one.
Here is a photo of the disk:
file references:
https://www.creativeapplications.net/arduino-2/replaces-liebl-and-schmid-pfahler/
https://www.google.com/search?q=%E6%AC%A7%E6%8B%89%E7%9B%98&rlz=1C9BKJA_en__1023__1023&oq=%E6%AC%A7%E6%8B%89%E7%9B%98&aqs=chrome..69i57.6677j0j7&hl=zh-CN&sourceid=chrome-mobile&ie=UTF-8
WHAT EXACTLY IS INTERACTIVITY?