In grad school we did a number of studies on using alternate input devices for the puposes of interactive art. In this example I gave the user the ability to control the writing through the use of their voice.

Human performance

The primary input device which provides a means of interaction between the software and person is through the use of a microphone. The quality of microphone is not of critical importance but the sensitivity will have an effect on the results displayed on the screen. A high sensitivity will allow for a greater range of expression for a greater number of people. As well the microphone would ideally not be visible, allowing participants greater natural participation without the interference of so mechanical device.

The action required by the participant is simply talking in various emotional states. The topic of conversation would be about the pending (now complete) decision to invade Iraq and whether or not Iraq truly poses a threat to world security. The microphone will pick up the conversation and display the result on the screen.

Visual feedback

As the participants talk about the suggested topic they get feedback from a projection of a person writing a single Chinese character "sword". The more intense their discussions the more intense the writing on the screen. If a participant talks very loudly and quietly the responding action on the screen will be equally animated. If a participant talks very quietly the word may never be fully written. It is hoped that people will observe a corollation between the words they say and how they say it with what is projected on screen.

Metaphor

Words Are Weapons

I was inspired by both the recent movie "Hero" and recent world events surrounding the impending invasion of Iraq. The language surrounding the discussion of this impending action were doused in metaphor: Nation As Person and War as Business were a couple of the most aparent. But as many who follow politics realise, the words you say in this political arena are sometimes an element of war itself.

From George Lakoff:

Words Are Weapons

-- 1) She used some sharp words.

-- 2) That was pretty cutting language.

-- 3) It was a barrage of insults.

-- 4) He was bombarded by insults.

-- 5) He hurled insults at her.

Note: the degree of interaction with CONDUIT is also unknown.Question: what is "she has a sharp tongue?"

Note: Cases 3-5 are conduit (Ideas are projectiles stuff), interacting with HARM IS PHYSICAL INJURY Case 1-2 is just (Emotional) HARM IS PHYSICAL INJURY But why words?

Writing movie (5meg.)

---

Categorized: Work and Working , Projects

Tagged: , Projects

---