Information Technology Reference
In-Depth Information
4
Collaboration, Constraints,
and Engagement
for the nonspecialist, the idea of a dramatic model may seem to have
more to do with content—interesting situations and colorful characters,
for instance—than with structure. As a structuralist, I have been assailed
by both theatre and computer people for taking what they perceive as a
rather bloodless approach. Structure is not always well understood, and
even when it is, its uses are seen to be analytical rather than productive.
When we see a good fi lm or go to a good play, we are moved by things that
seem to transcend structuralism—a beautiful image, dialogue and action
that speak deeply and genuinely about life. There seems to be a contradic-
tion here—if it's all so structured, how does it get to seem so lifelike? Surely
there is more to it than structure, more to it than a computer could be pro-
grammed to create. People sometimes criticize my approach by countering
that a computer program can never be smart or sensitive enough to make a
beautiful work of art. Yet artists use computational tools to do so, and those
in turn are enabled by the artistry of designers and programmers.
These observations point to the artistry that is essential in every beau-
tiful made thing. Artistry transcends and saturates the process. We do not
know what it is that gives a person the ability to conceive of or create
magnifi cence in art. Structure is not a wholly suffi cient explanation for
beauty. Human-computer interaction, like other art forms, requires art-
istry that can only be contributed by human imagination. Artistry is de-
ployed within the constraints of the medium, the tools, and the formal and
structural characteristics of the kind of thing that one is trying to create.
109
