The Expressive Space of IDS-as-Art

  • Noam Knoller
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 7648)

Abstract

Much of the research and development effort in the IDS community is guided by a design approach, according to which user desires, expectations and agency are central. This approach may place unnecessary limitations on the design space. I argue for the validity and significance of an alternative, expressive approach, which may be more appealing to artists, and offer some formal parameters of IDS-as-Art. These open up for authors the ability to explore the creation of vastly complex and dynamic storyworlds that highlight contingency and probability; and the possibility of manipulating agency as subject matter to implicate users, through userly performance, in the storyworld’s meaning. IDS can thus offer users an opportunity to reflect upon various aspects of their performance, including un- and subintentional aspects.

Keywords

art theory and criticism interactive digital storytelling interface studies agency 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Tanenbaum, J.: Imagining New Design Spaces for Interactive Digital Storytelling. In: Si, M., Thue, D., André, E., Lester, J.C., Tanenbaum, J., Zammitto, V. (eds.) ICIDS 2011. LNCS, vol. 7069, pp. 261–271. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Stern, A.: Embracing the Combinatorial Explosion: A Brief Prescription for Interactive Story R&D. In: Spierling, U., Szilas, N. (eds.) ICIDS 2008. LNCS, vol. 5334, pp. 1–5. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Knoller, N.: Agency and the Art of Interactive Digital Storytelling. In: Aylett, R., Lim, M.Y., Louchart, S., Petta, P., Riedl, M. (eds.) ICIDS 2010. LNCS, vol. 6432, pp. 264–267. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Mateas, M.: The Authoring Challenge in Interactive Storytelling. In: Aylett, R., Lim, M.Y., Louchart, S., Petta, P., Riedl, M. (eds.) ICIDS 2010. LNCS, vol. 6432, p. 1. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cassirer, E.: An Essay on Man. Yale University Press, New Haven (1945)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bordwell, D., Thompson, K.: Film Art - An Introduction. McGraw Hill, New York (1997)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Knoller, N.: InterFace portraits: communicative-expressive interaction with a character’s mind. In: Proceedings of the 1st ACM Workshop on Story Representation, Mechanism and Context, pp. 63–66. ACM, New York (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Elsaesser, T.: The mind-game film. In: Buckland, W. (ed.) Puzzle Films: Complex Storytelling in Contemporary Cinema. Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford (2008)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Simons, J.: Complex Narratives. New Review of Film and Television Studies 6, 111–126 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bordwell, D.: Film Futures. Substance 31, 88–104 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Bolter, J.D., Gromala, D.: Transparency and Reflectivity: Digital Art and the Aesthetics of Interface Design. In: Fishwick, L. (ed.) Aesthetic Computing, pp. 369–382. MIT Press, Cambridge (2006)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Stiles, K., Shanken, E.A.: Missing in Action: Agency and Meaning in Interactive Art. In: Lovejoy, M., Paul, C., Vesna, V. (eds.) Context Providers: Conditions of Meaning in Digital Art, pp. 31–54. Intellect Books, Bristol (2011)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Murray, J.H.: Hamlet on the Holodeck: the Future of Narrative in Cyberspace. Free Press, New York (1997)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Harrell, D.F., Zhu, J.: Agency Play: Dimensions of Agency for Interactive Narrative Design. In: AAAI 2008 Spring Symposium on Interactive Narrative Technologies II, Stanford, CA, pp. 156–162 (2009)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Murray, J.: Did It Make You Cry? Creating Dramatic Agency in Immersive Environments. In: Subsol, G. (ed.) VS 2005. LNCS, vol. 3805, pp. 83–94. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Mateas, M.: A Neo-Aristotelian Theory of Interactive Drama. In: Working Notes of the AI and Interactive Entertainment Symposium. AAAI Press, Menlo Park (2000)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Mateas, M., Stern, A.: Structuring Content in the Façade Interactive Drama Architecture. In: Young, R.M., Laird, J.E. (eds.) Artificial Intelligence and Interactive Digital Entertainment, pp. 93–98. AAAI Press, Menlo Park (2005)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Wardrip-Fruin, N., Mateas, M., Dow, S., Sali, S.: Agency Reconsidered. In: Breaking New Ground: Innovation in Games, Play, Practice and Theory, DiGRA 2009 (2009)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Laurel, B.: Computers as Theatre. Addison Wesley, Boston (1993)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Tanenbaum, J.: Being in the Story: Readerly Pleasure, Acting Theory, and Performing a Role. In: Si, M., Thue, D., André, E., Lester, J.C., Tanenbaum, J., Zammitto, V. (eds.) ICIDS 2011. LNCS, vol. 7069, pp. 55–66. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Tanenbaum, K., Tanenbaum, J.: Commitment to Meaning: A Reframing of Agency in Games. In: Digital Arts and Culture 2009, UC Irvine (2009)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Howell, P.: Schematically Disruptive Game Design. In: DiGRA 2011: Think Design Play. DiGRA (2011) Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Ben-Arie, U.: The Narrative-Communication Structure in Interactive Narrative Works. In: Iurgel, I.A., Zagalo, N., Petta, P. (eds.) ICIDS 2009. LNCS, vol. 5915, pp. 152–162. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Činčera, R.: Kinoautomat. Czechoslovakia (1967) Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Naimark, M.: Interactive Art - Maybe It’s a Bad Idea, www.naimark.net/writing/badidea.html
  26. 26.
    Dekel, A., Knoller, N., Ben-Arie, U., Lotan, M., Tal, M.: One Measure of Happiness - A Dynamically Updated Interactive Video Narrative Using Gestures. In: Rauterberg, M., et al. (eds.) INTERACT 2003, IOS Press & IFIP, Amsterdam (2003)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Zagalo, N., Torres, A., Branco, V.: Passive Interactivity, an Answer to Interactive Emotion. In: Harper, R., Rauterberg, M., Combetto, M. (eds.) ICEC 2006. LNCS, vol. 4161, pp. 43–52. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Tikka, P., Vuori, R., Kaipainen, M.: Narrative Logic of Enactive Cinema: Obsession. Digital Creativity 17, 205–212 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Noam Knoller
    • 1
  1. 1.Interface Studies Group, Amsterdam School for Cultural AnalysisUniversity of AmsterdamAmsterdamThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations