Interaction Aesthetics Article

I realize that I’m supposed to get a lot out of this article, but I can’t get around the way the author speaks. It’s like he’s using $5 words when $0.10 words would work, and it makes me feel like the article was written to exclude people from reading it lightly. I mean, “utopian brouhaha”? The article has good information, but it’s almost hidden behind the language.


~ by sgibbons on March 3, 2008.

2 Responses to “Interaction Aesthetics Article”

  1. Haha, I agree! Unnecessary frilly language… 😛

  2. I will agree the man is in desperate need of a good editor(but aren’t we all?). He overuses esthetic, writes in the first person (is he the final say on the subject?) and inserts bits superfluous vocabulary(see above). Thus, making him sound like a pompous art critic ( Though I’m sure I would too if I had to write something on interactive art…). He is discussing a very difficult/dynamic concept, which requires a surgical specificity to address, warranting a bit of his word choice.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: