Through the years, the concept of “interactive art” has been
changing. According to Erkki Huhtamo, the one who wrote NeMe: Trouble at the
Interface 2.0, interactive art began as a means of allowing spectators to
connect to the artist through creations brought forth from incoming technology.
This was a way for the audience to actively participate not just in the
artistic realm, but (in a sense) the industrial realm as well.
changing. According to Erkki Huhtamo, the one who wrote NeMe: Trouble at the
Interface 2.0, interactive art began as a means of allowing spectators to
connect to the artist through creations brought forth from incoming technology.
This was a way for the audience to actively participate not just in the
artistic realm, but (in a sense) the industrial realm as well.
However, the definition of interactive art has been waning
through the years. It still revolves around communication between technology
and humanity, but now in a more passive way. What interested me was the part
about Ken Feingold’s “The Surprising Spiral” because he created it to
investigate the perception of media art. He wanted to show that new media art made
room for liberation, but it had constraints too. I thought that was a good way
to show interactive art in a more objective way rather than black and white.
through the years. It still revolves around communication between technology
and humanity, but now in a more passive way. What interested me was the part
about Ken Feingold’s “The Surprising Spiral” because he created it to
investigate the perception of media art. He wanted to show that new media art made
room for liberation, but it had constraints too. I thought that was a good way
to show interactive art in a more objective way rather than black and white.