Interactivity and interactive art
The main concern of this chapter is trying to answer these questions: how can define the interactivity in art and what is the possible interactions between the viewer/participant and artwork? They could be a start point to understand different aspects of interactive situations and environments.
It is correct that the process of interaction is often tactile and the user actually physically touches the work and experiences its responses, but interactivity is not just about approaching an artwork. In some cases, the interface not only feels material but also provides physical haptic feedback.
The interaction between viewer and artwork has been one of the most important things throughout the history of all art forms. Every branch of arts has described it in its own conventions. But in the general view as Dixon noted: “All art is an interaction between the viewer and the artwork, and thus all artworks are interactive …show more content…
If one is observing a painting of Pollock without any interaction with it, that would not mean she/he does not enjoy the aesthetic part of the artwork. I prefer to describe the importance of an interactive environment after discussing the possible definition of this word. Stern in his book cited an interactive situation let participant have moving-thinking-feeling. In fact, the act of moving-thinking-feeling is Embodiment. It is body’s potential to vary, it is the body’s relations to the outside. An interactive environment through the Body creates the final situation. I can assume that in the Stern’s perspective, the Body works as a function and like an interface. But the question is how can be linked our functions to artwork, which is Body of the participant, to the primary
The main concern of this chapter is trying to answer these questions: how can define the interactivity in art and what is the possible interactions between the viewer/participant and artwork? They could be a start point to understand different aspects of interactive situations and environments.
It is correct that the process of interaction is often tactile and the user actually physically touches the work and experiences its responses, but interactivity is not just about approaching an artwork. In some cases, the interface not only feels material but also provides physical haptic feedback.
The interaction between viewer and artwork has been one of the most important things throughout the history of all art forms. Every branch of arts has described it in its own conventions. But in the general view as Dixon noted: “All art is an interaction between the viewer and the artwork, and thus all artworks are interactive …show more content…
If one is observing a painting of Pollock without any interaction with it, that would not mean she/he does not enjoy the aesthetic part of the artwork. I prefer to describe the importance of an interactive environment after discussing the possible definition of this word. Stern in his book cited an interactive situation let participant have moving-thinking-feeling. In fact, the act of moving-thinking-feeling is Embodiment. It is body’s potential to vary, it is the body’s relations to the outside. An interactive environment through the Body creates the final situation. I can assume that in the Stern’s perspective, the Body works as a function and like an interface. But the question is how can be linked our functions to artwork, which is Body of the participant, to the primary