Evoking gesture in interactive art

ABSTRACT

In this paper, we describe an interactive artwork that uses large body gestures as its primary interactive mode. The artist intends the work to provoke active reflection in the audience by way of gesture and content. The technology is not the focus, rather the aim is to provoke memory, to elicit feelings of connective human experiences in a required-to-participate audience. We find the work provokes a diverse and contradictory set of responses. The methods used to understand this include qualitative methods common to evaluating interactive art works, as well as in-depth discussions with the artist herself. This paper is relevant to the Human--Centered Computing track because in all stages of the design of the work--as well as the evaluation--the focus is on the human aspect; the computing is designed to enable all-too-human responses.

References

1. Barthes, R., 1977, Image-Music-Text. Noonday, New York.
2. Berleant, A., 1991, Art and engagement. Temple University Press, Philadelphia.
3. Darken, R. P. and Sibert, J. L., 1996. Wayfinding strategies and behaviours in large virtual worlds. in Proceedings of the CHI'96 Conference on Human factors in computing systems: common ground, ACM Press, Vancouver, Canada, 142--149.
4. Flemmert Jensen, A., 2002. Time for Playful Learning? -- A cross-cultural study of parental values and attitudes towards children's time for play, Lego learning institute, Denmark.
5. Gaver, B., 2007, Cultural commentators: Non-native interpretations as resources for polyphonic assessment. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 65. 292--305.
6. Gaver, B., Dunne, T. and Pacenti, E., 1999, Cultural probes. Interactions, 6 (1). 21--29.
7. Gaver, B., Sengers, P., Kerridge, T., Kaye, J. and Bowers, J., 2007. Enhancing ubiquitous computing with user interpretation: Field testing the home health horoscope. in Proceedings of Human Factors in Computing Systems -- CHI 2007, ACM Press, San Jose, CA, 537--546.
8. Haaslahti, H. and Heikkilä, S., 2007. Space of two categories, interactive installation with shadow projection. in Proceedings of the 15th international conference on Multimedia, ACM Press, Augsburg, Germany, 373--374.
9. Hornecker, E. and Stifter, M., 2006. Learning from interactive museum installations about interaction design for public settings. in Kjeldskov, J. and Paay, J. eds. Proceedings of OzCHI 2006: design: activities, artefacts and environments, CHISIG, Sydney, Australia, 135--142.
10. Hughes, J. A., King, V., Rodden, T. and Andersen, H., 1994. Moving out from the control room: ethnography in system design. in Furuta, R. and Neuwirth, C. eds. Proceedings of the ACM 1994 Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work -- CSCW'94, ACM Press, Chapel Hill, NC, 429--439.
11. Jordan, B., 1996. Ethnographic workplace studies and computer supported cooperative work. in Shapiro, D., Tauber, M.J. and Traunmuller, R. eds. The Design of Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Groupware Systems, Elsevier, Amsterdam, 17--42.
12. Kaye, J. J., Boehner, K., Laaksolahti, J. and Ståhl, A., 2007. Evaluating experience-focused HCI. in Proceedings of the CHI 2007 Conference, Extended Abstracts, ACM Press, San Jose, CA.
13. Levinas, E., 2005. Meaning and sense. in Cahoone, L. E. ed. From Modernism to Postmodernism: An Anthology, Blackwell, London, 521--539.
14. Milgram, P. and Kishino, F., 1994, A taxonomy of mixed reality visual displays. IEICE Transactions on Information Systems, E77-D (12). 1321--1329.
15. Morrison, A., Mitchell, P., and Brereton, M., 2007. The lens of ludic engagement: Evaluating participation in interactive art installations. in Proceedings of the 15th international conference on Multimedia, ACM Press, Augsburg, Germany, 509--512.
16. Norman, D., 2004, Emotional Design: Why we love (or Hate) Everyday Things. Basic Books, New York.
17. Seitz, J. A., 2000, The bodily basis of thought. New Ideas in Psychology: An International Journal of Innovative Theory in Psychology, 18 (1). 23--40.
18. Sengers, P. and Gaver, B., 2006. Staying open to interpretation: Engaging multiple meanings in design and evaluation. in Proceedings of the Conference on Designing Interactive Systems: DIS 2006, ACM Press, University Park, PA, 99--108.
19. Sha, X. W., 2002, Resistance is futile: gesture and agency in the field of responsive media. Configurations, 10 (3). 439--472.
20. Sontag, S., 1990. Spiritual style in the films of Robert Bresson. in Against Interpretation, Doubleday, Toronto, 177--195.
21. van Beers, R. J., Wolpert, D. M. and Haggard, P., 2002, When feeling is more important than seeing in sensorimotor adaptation. Current Biology, 12 (10). 834--83

Index Terms

• Applied computing

  • Arts and humanities

    • Fine arts

    • Performing arts