Hello P. Comp!

After finally arriving at ITP, I now face a fundamental question: What is interactivity? When I think of the term outside of the realm of technology, I would define its essence as an exchange between two operators, whereby two independent entities mediate across the divide of self and other via the operations of communication. Would that presuppose that communication is the consequence of interaction? The Crawford chapters seem to emphasize the mechanics of spoken conversation as the holy trinity of interaction, 1. thinking 2. listening 3. speaking. Yes that’s SPOKEN conversation, because printed words on a page are a one way interaction. Beyond my lofty theoretical proposition for the meaning of interaction, I also tend to think of it in the language of broadcast media. The printed word is a one way broadcast, as well as a radio show, or a tv program. Twitter, however, seems like quite the opposite as a forum for the expression of ideas and speech to millions worldwide, a venue for infinite exchanges.

I was struck by Crawford’s breakdown of the difference between the interface and the interaction, characterizing the former as the instrument upon which two actors may exchange a series of inputs and outputs. I choose the word “instrument” carefully, and as a musician, I’ve developed an understanding of a musical instrument as an interface for non-verbal sound media production, however the instrument does not play the player. It is simply a medium for the sonic output. I’m excited to explore how sound can be transduced (transducted?) into electrical signal , and how developing a working knowledge of circuit building might inform the character of the interactions I go about in my design practice.