A quick set of notes from my tutorial with Map Ward…

I showed the films in the last post to Matt…

The main thing to come out of it, and the problem with the film is that I need to establish a feedback system whereby i can measure and map the responses and shifts in perceptions as a result of these robot performances. Matt talked about something Tobie Kerridge said which I found really interesting; critical design can only be critical if there is a feedback system, and we know whether or not the design has created a discourse. By showing a film or sticking stuff in an exhibition this can’t necessarily be done, however going to a science lab in order to question, probe and establish discourse this starts to work.

I also need  to understand that these feedbacks can be quite abstract, and I hadn’t quite understood this, but with the Toaster blowing the electricity, and Pete Graver’s reaction, he was a feedback system for me; his reaction was actually very meaningful to the process. This brought up a socio-technical reading; where Pete was representational of a societal group that (though already existed) was made obvious with this object, perhaps. It means that in the object I make, they have to be aware of these different groups, and how different societal groups have different perceptions, so shifting a perception/question of one person isn’t the same as another. That sounds obvious now, but maybe these objects need to be tailor-made to each context, and use interviewing to understand this; maybe I should interview Pete Graver about his concerns, and a health and safety officer etc.

To-do list

I need to make these into performances; I need to know the contexts where they are; the groups of people I am talking/performing to, and map peoples perceptions in order to understand if the robots work.

I need a whole load of experiments, more than electricity.

Talk to more people, what they thing will happen in a situation, presented with an image/drawing say…?