• No results found

Engaging users with surrealist techniques

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2021

Share "Engaging users with surrealist techniques"

Copied!
61
0
0

Loading.... (view fulltext now)

Full text

(1)

Engaging users with

surrealist techniques

A Thesis Project by Marjo Tikkanen

(2)

Interaction Design Master Thesis Project by Marjo Tikkanen Malmö University

K3 School of Arts and Communication Supervisor: Anna Seravalli

Examiner: Per Linde

(3)

Why do we have

to be so uniform?

When I order a

grilled lobster in

a restaurant why

doesn’t anyone

bring me a cooked

telephone?”

- Salvador Dalí

(4)

Contents

Abstract 6

1. Introduction 7

2. Methods 9

2.1. Research through design 9

2.2. Experiments 9

3. Research questions & contributions 12

3.1. Research questions 12

3.2. Contributions 12

3.2.1. Library as a platform for experimentation 13

4. Background 14

4.1. Qualities of user engagement 14 4.2. Surrealist techniques and playfulness 16

4.2.1. The techniques 16

4.2.1. Playfulness and creativity 17 4.3. Related work: Interaction design methods for engaging users to create 18

4.3.1. Design games 18

4.3.2. Future workshops 19

4.3.3. Cultural probes 19

4.3.4. Bodystorming 20

4.4. Points of convergence and divergence between surrealist techniques and existing methods 20

4.4.1. Design games 20

4.4.2. Future workshops 21

4.4.3. Cultural probes 21

4.4.4. Bodystorming 22

4.5. Conclusion of theoretical background 22

5. Process 23

5.1. Pilot experiments 23

5.1.1. The experiments 25

5.1.2. Results of the pilot experiments 26 5.2. First open workshop 28

5.2.1. The experiments 29

5.2.2 Results of the first open workshop 34 5.3. Experiment: opposite photos 35

(5)

5.3.1. The experiment 35 5.3.2. Results of opposite photos 35 5.4. Evaluating the progress: Qualities for user engagement 37 5.5. Second open workshop 38

5.5.1. The experiments 38

5.5.2. Results of the second open workshop 45 5.6. Evaluation with the library 47

6. Discussion 49

6.1. The qualities for user engagement and the techniques 49 6.2. Considerations on methods 50 6.3. Future work 51 7. Conclusions 52 Bibliography 54 Appendix A 57 Appendix B 59

(6)

Abstract

Building on current methods used in the field of interaction design, this thesis aims to explore how surrealist art techniques could be applied to the fuzzy front end of a design process. This is done to inspire and expand the current range of user engagement methods. The premise is that all people are creative, but they might need tools and techniques to express themselves. This creative potential could be harnessed more in design processes. The techniques conceived by surrealist artists could serve as generative tools that empower users to create, discuss, be playful and reduce their self-censorship in expression.

The process conducted follows a research through design approach, as the aim is to explore the application of methods rather than solve a specific problem. Within the process a literature review, expert interviews, workshops and experiments are conducted. The experimentation with surrealist techniques takes place mostly in the context of Malmö City Library, imagining future uses and

scenarios for the library with users. The outcome is a knowledge contribution to the field of interaction design, comprising of qualities for user engagement defined in the process and techniques that seem to have potential as user engagement methods.

(7)

1. Introduction

Interaction design derives from HCI but gets influences from the artistic tradition (Ehn, 1993; Holmer et al., 2015). This research started with an interest in surrealist art techniques, and aimed to point out that the artistic and creative potential of non-designers could be harnessed more. Even though user-centric methods have been attempting to shift the traditional roles, I argue that the designer is still commonly expected to be the main creative resource. The basis of the research is the notion that all people are creative, they just might need to be given tools and techniques to express, as they often are not engaged in creative activities in their everyday lives (Sanders & Stappers, 2014). The creativity could be sparked through a playful approach by surrealist techniques. The techniques could serve as generative tools that empower users to express creative ideas they otherwise might not produce. This could produce most value when applied to the earliest phase of a development process, called "the fuzzy front end". According to Sanders & Stappers (2014) “the earlier in the design development the co-creation occurs, the greater and broader the likely impact. — Practicing co-co-creation in the fuzzy front end will most likely produce the largest benefit in terms of societal value” (p. 28).

This thesis aims to answer these research questions: How might surrealist techniques help foster

user's creativity and get rid of self-censorship? How might surrealist art techniques be applied to the fuzzy front end of design?

The methodological interest lies in surrealist techniques, many of which are introduced in the book Surrelist games by Gooding and Brotchie (1991). Surrealist techniques were chosen as the topic because they seem to offer necessary ambiguity for co-creation (Sanders & Stappers, 2014), while having rules and framing that is essential for creativity to happen (Koestler, 1964; Löwgren & Stolterman, 2016). The techniques were made to produce a creative process free of conscious control, and celebrate chance and accident in creation. The surrealist techniques include exercises for writing, drawing, sculpture, collage and speaking or acting out. The majority of the techniques are collaborative, and all of them foster creation breaking from convention. (Gooding & Brotchie, 1991)

Many of the surrealist techniques are called games (Gooding & Brotchie, 1991), and the playful nature of these activities is a key quality. Surrealism aimed to break norms and be rebellious against the state governed by common sense, but did this through playfulness. Humans are by nature playful beings (Huizinga, 1980; Sicart, 2014). This research suggests that the playful nature of many surrealist methods might facilitate creativity, and help participants be more expressive by lowering the

threshold of artistic creation. The qualities of creativity and playfulness in the surrealist techniques are discussed in this thesis in relation to play and game theory, and also other interaction design techniques for engaging users.

(8)

The answers to the research questions are sought by exploring surrealist art techniques in a

interaction design process in the context of libraries, and imagining the future scenarios with library users. In the process of exploring the application of surrealist techniques, this research found what I call "qualities for user engagement". These are conditions that seem to produce a rich experience to participants as well as interesting outcomes.

The aim is to question the current state of methods and suggest new techniques in a research through design process (Zimmerman, Stolterman & Forlizzi, 2010; Zimmerman, Forlizzi & Evenson, 2007). The approach of research through design was chose, because this project is rather about exploration than solving a problem. To reach an outcome, a sequential series of designerly activities is carried out in order to explore the chosen design space and generate insights. The input from using surrealist techniques is evaluated with a professional in the field of libraries. This is to assess if that these techniques can provide useful input in the fuzzy front end of a design process. On top of the more designerly activities, a literature review and expert interviews were carried out to further understand the topics at hand.

The outcome is a knowledge contribution to the field of interaction design, comprising of qualities for user engagement defined in the process and techniques that seem to have potential as user engagement methods. The design knowledge created in the process is a methodological exploration that could be inspirational to other designers and design researchers working with methods that engage users. This thesis talks back to user-centred design methodology, reflects on the widely approved methods and aims to inspire new approaches in the future. This is “actionable knowledge that can be appropriated by designers” (Löwgren, Svarrer Larsen & Hobye, 2013, p. 81), which means to be generative to other practitioners.

The first part of this document explains the methods chosen to explore the defined design space. The next part discusses the framing and reframing of research questions, and the contributions to the field of interaction design. The following chapter entails a literature review on these topics: user engagement, play theory, surrealist techniques, current interaction design methods for engaging users and points of converge and divergence between them and surrealist techniques. The chapter that follows goes through the design process conducted in the research. The process encompasses workshops and experiments, an evaluation of their results, as well as the qualities for user

engagement that were identified. The last chapters discuss the knowledge contribution made and close with conclusions drawn form the process.

(9)

2. Methods

The aim of this research is to find inspiration in surrealist techniques to harness participant’s

creativity in a playful way for interaction design practice. The chosen design space is thus explored to find insights, not to form comprehensive answers. In this chapter I introduce the chosen approach of research through design and the methods of designerly activities carried out in the process.

On top of the more designerly activities done, a literature review on key concepts and some expert interviews were conducted. An expert on organising participation was interviewed via e-mail, and the main contact person in Malmö City Library was interviewed both face-to-face and through e-mail. The expert interviews brought insight and evaluation to the experiments conducted.

2.1. Research through design

As this project is rather about exploration, than solving a specific problem, the approach taken is that of research through design. Research through design has become a well-recognised research approach in the field, as it offers researchers the flexibility to work with complex situations and use designerly activities to define problems, agendas and solutions (Zimmerman, Stolterman & Forlizzi, 2010; Zimmerman, Forlizzi & Evenson, 2007; Gaver, 2012). This sort of openness is necessary, as design problems are often considered to be ‘wicked problems’ that are complex, don’t have distinct boundaries and the success of solutions is hard or impossible to measure (Rittel & Webber, 1973). It has thus been suggested, that “we need to think in terms of perspectives rather than research questions, and provisional takeaways rather than results” (Löwgren, Svarrer Larsen & Hobye, 2013, p. 98). In the case of this research, the application of surrealist methods into the fuzzy front end of design is a situation that is explored through designerly activities to reveal characteristics, qualities and insights. These outcomes can then be appropriated in later research.

2.2. Experiments

Workshops are organised sessions, where participants, often non-designers, engage in creative activities, usually centred around specific problem or scenario. The aim is to understand the participant’s experience and come up with insights. (Martin & Hanington, 2012)

The main activity to explore the chosen design space is workshops. Workshops are a fruitful way to approach the topic, because creation more often happens when people come together in social context (Sanders & Stappers, 2014). In this case the workshops are carried out with library users in order to test the techniques on imagining future library uses. This is done to observe, inquire and record the participant’s experience with the techniques, and to later evaluate the material created. The experience is assessed with qualities that were defined in the literature review and discovered in the

(10)

process. The results suggest that the chosen techniques could expand the current range of methods that are used to enagage users in creation in the fuzzy front end of design.

The open workshops are the main activity, but on top of that another design experiment was conducted with subjects communicating through text messages. The different surrealist techniques tested with users are explained in more detail in the Process chapter (5).

(11)

Surrealist techniques for engaging users in

an interaction design process

PILOT EXPERIMENTS

Desktop

research

Insights

SECOND OPEN WORKSHOP

FIRST OPEN WORKSHOP

Qualities for user engagement

Conclusions

OPPOSITE PHOTOS

EXPERIMENT

Insights

Rephrasing the

research question

Insights

Evaluation with

the library

(12)

3. Research questions & contributions

The process carried out in this research (Figure 2.1.) refocused along the way as characteristics of user engagement were recognised. Thus, the research question and focus were formulated again. In this part I explain how the process focus shifted along the way. This chapter also discusses contributions that derived from the research question to the field, and the contribution that came out from the experience of using the library as a platform.

3.1. Research questions

This research started with these research questions: How might surrealist techniques help foster user's creativity and get rid of self-censorship? How might surrealist art techniques be applied to an interaction design process? As is common in research through design, the questions were rephrased and focus shifted in the process according to insights found (Krogh, Markussen & Bang, 2015). The process consists of two open workshops and some other experiments. In between the two experiments qualities of user engagement were defined and the focus decided on the fuzzy front end of a design process (Sanders & Stappers, 2014), as it was found this is the point in a design process where the techniques experimented with can be of most value. The final research questions explored are: How

might surrealist techniques help foster user's creativity and get rid of self-censorship? How might surrealist art techniques be applied to the fuzzy front end of design?

3.2. Contributions

The qualities defined in the process: creativity, social engagement, surprise and avoiding self-censorship provide some answers to the research questions. The experiments suggest there to be potential in some of the techniques explored. They foster creativity, playfulness and social

enagagement while encouraging the participants to create without too much self-censorship. Also, the time and amount of exercises done plays a role, as participants seemed to get more active and creative after doing one or two exercises. This is a contribution to the range of methods that are currently used and widely accepted in the field of interaction design as ways of engaging users to create. The surrealist techniques might offer ways of expanding that range.

The work can also be of inspiration to participatory design methods, as many of them aim to invite participants to create. However, the scope of this project was not to take on a participatory design process as that would require more time and access to stakeholders than was available at the time of this reseach.

(13)

3.2.1. Library as a platform for experimentation

The Malmö City Library was chosen as context and topic for practical reasons: it is an open place used by a diverse group of people for different purposes, there was a space that was available for use and creative experimentation is welcomed there. The contact person at the library was open to my exploration of ideas for future libraries and hearing what kinds of outcomes arise. I believed users of the library might have lots of opinions about what could be done in the future, so I saw it to be a fruitful space for the research. The library provided a space for workshops, some practical help with inviting people through posters and setting the space and the access to a range of people from very different groups.

In this research there was no formal mandate from the library. It was used as a space for

experimentation, and this research suggests the library can serve well as a platform for exploration. Had there been a more formulated problem to be solved, the results might be different. The workshops activated a variety of people to engage and also sparked conversations with curious people who came in, but didn't contribute. This experience of using a public library as a platform, as a design lab, is another contribution to interaction design field, that often struggles with having access to user groups and spaces for experimentation.

(14)

4. Background

This chapter discusses the main topics of the research: qualities of user engagement, currently used methods for user engagement, surrealism and the relations to play and game theory. Widely accepted user engagement methods are compared to the surrealist techniques to illustrate how the current range of methods can be broadened. These topics define the design space explored in the research. In this research the definition of participation is a broad one, that expands from participatory design to user engagement in a traditional interaction design process. The focus is on engaging the users to create in the fuzzy front end of design (Sanders & Stappers, 2014), but the results of this research might as well be inspirational to the participatory design field. The fuzzy front end was chosen as the focus, as the techniques experimented with showed potential to produce inspirational material that is especially useful for this part of the design process. Engaging users in fuzzy front end “will most likely produce the largest benefit in terms of societal value” (Sanders & Stappers, 2014, p. 28). Designers have developed many methods for organising participation in design processes. The participants themselves have varying reasons for participation (Huybrechts, 2014), and they can be attracted to participate in many ways. In this section I will discuss what qualities make participation interesting and empowering for the participant and facilitates creative output.

An expert interview conducted with Luna Maurer of Moniker Studio¹, an Amsterdam-based

creative agency that works with participatory art and design, provided some insights on organising participation. Moniker Studio’s projects are always about co-creation or other ways of involving people in the creative process in different contexts, such as music videos, public art and research. They don’t clearly distinguish themselves whether a certain project is art or design, but it’s always in some way concerned with the act of participation. Obviously in design processes the participation or user engagement happens in a different context, as the participant might be a stakeholder with more interest in what is being created. In Moniker’s case the projects often fall under participatory art rather than a design process, but their take on the experience of participation can be of inspiration to organising participation in design processes too.

4.1. Qualities of user engagement

A key aspect in user engagement for Moniker Studio is the rules and framing. Having rules and boundaries makes people become more creative within those rules, and sets a kind of a game in motion. Rules organise the situation and make the people’s expression become a collective adventure rather than a single voice (Huybrechts, 2014). Often Maurer sees people creating something that

(15)

bends the boundaries of the rules, or even hack them, and this creates interesting results. If you give people the chance to make anything, you end up with total cacophony or nothing at all. On the other hand, also too much complexity will kill the participation. (Maurer, 2017; Blöink & Schmitt, 2017) In Moniker projects, the user engagement always has to have a point to the participant. Otherwise they will not participate, or not care about their contribution. There has to be a reward, often instant gratification, and you need to be able to see your contribution. (Maurer, 2017; Blöink & Schmitt, 2017) The kind of user engagement that is of focus in this project, is one that invites users to get creative and gives them tools and techniques to do so. To explain what I mean with creativity, I use Koestler’s definition (1964), where he states that something is not created from nothing. Creation doesn’t appear from thin air, but is an act where already existing things or ideas are selected and combined or shuffled in a new way. Previously hidden similarities or connections are revealed. When this is done with very familiar things, the new creation can be even more impressive, as it is unexpected (Koestler, 1964). Löwgren & Stolterman (2016) state that creativity can not happen when everything is possible, but requires limitations. Sanders and Stappers (2014) define creativity as "the ability of seeing or making new, appropriate things" (p. 300), appropriate being something that respects the context or its boundaries.

Sanders & Stappers (2014) state that more creation occurs in collaboration than alone. Thus, social engagement that fosters discussion, free idea generation and building on each other’s ideas is advantageous for user engagement methods that aim to foster creativity.

People who are not used to expressing themselves with creative or brainstorming techniques can feel a level of self-censorship in creation. Self-censorship is “the conscious choice to withhold or the unconscious inhibition of one's creative ideas” (Williams, 2002, p. 496). The key to avoid this is to reduce criticism or negative feedback, encourage unconventional ideas (Williams, 2002) and design activities that have varying levels of ambiguity and aesthetic to foster different types of participants and lower the threshold (Sanders & Stappers, 2014).

The notion of ownership is an important aspect in order for the participation to make sense. The feeling of ownership makes participants feel connection to the project and the outcomes of it. Often in design processes the aim is to create shared ownership rather than individual one. This is because individual ownership can lead to participants seeing their contribution as their property and argue for it defensively against other people’s ideas (Sanoff, 2000). The shared ownership of things created can expand from users to the researcher, to the discipline itself as it becomes knowledge that is shared (Huybrechts, 2014).

(16)

4.2. Surrealist techniques and playfulness

“… boundaries have been assigned even to experience. It revolves in a cage from which release is becoming increasingly difficult. It too depends upon immediate utility and is guarded by common sense. (…) Could not dream as well be applied to the solution of life’s fundamental problems?” (Bréton, 1924, p. 1).

This excerpt from The Surrealist Manifesto by André Bréton describes the foundation of the surrealist movement - the surrealists questioned the status quo of relying on logic and common sense. Instead, the surrealists got their inspiration from randomness, chance, dreams and subconscious. The

movement began in the 1920s, founded by Bréton and Max Ernst, followed by artist like Salvador Dalí, Luis Buñuel, Man Ray, Joan Miró, Marcel Duchamp and many more.

The surrealist techniques were chosen as a topic for exploration because they can provide the necessary ambiguity for co-creation to occur (Sanders & Stappers, 2014) while also having rules to frame the situation, as creativity happens within limitation (Koestler, 1964; Löwgren & Stolterman, 2016). Furthermore, the surrealist techniques are playful explorations that can offer an enjoyable experience for the participants. This section discusses some of the surrealist techniques used in this research, and relates them to game and play theory.

4.2.1. The techniques

“Playful procedures and systematic stratagems provided keys to unlock the door to the unconscious and to release the visual and verbal poetry of collective creativity.” (Gooding & Brotchie, 1991, p. 10) Within the surrealist movement, a collection of techniques emerged. These techniques were coined to liberate the subconscious to express, to embrace randomness in collective creation.

The most famous os the surrealist techniques is called Exquisite Corpse, where the participants pass a piece of paper around, writing a word and folding it so the next person does not know what the previous word written was - only that they have to write a verb, noun or adjective in order to keep the sentence tact. In the end, the full sentence is revealed. Some techniques that use similar mechanics of writing and folding in turns are: questions and answers, definitions, conditions and opposites. The same mechanic is also used as a drawing exercise. Then, the drawing is finished so that some lines or shapes extend over the fold and the next person can continue drawing from them. (Gooding & Brotchie, 1991)

These techniques that use the mechanic of combining two or more different expressions into one can be related to creativity according to Koestler (1964): two (or more) apparently unconnected ideas are

(17)

combined, and the connections are explored as new concepts. This is fruitful method, as often new ideas emerge from the intersections.

Many of the techniques require participation from several people, and have likely been of inspiration for many existing design and art methods. The techniques can be seen to provide the necessary ambiguity for creation (Sanders & Stappers, 2014), but also frame the situation with rules and activities to be conducted.

Some more visual surrealist techniques are automatic drawing (drawing without lifting the pen or stopping it), collage, coulage (automatic or involuntary sculpture made by pouring molten material into cold water), photomontage, triptography (double exposure of images), to name a few. The techniques hold different levels of surrealism and accident in them. The specific techniques deployed in this research are described in more detail in the process section (chapter 5).

4.2.1. Playfulness and creativity

The techniques are also described as “playful procedures” (Gooding & Brotchie, 1991), and many borrow ideas from children’s games. Gooding and Brotchie also state that the activities fall under Caillois’ definitions of games (1961): they stand separated from everyday life, they have their own time and space, the outcomes are surprising and uncertain, they have rules, they are not ruled by economic or material interest and there’s a level of fantasy involved. (Gooding & Brotchie, 1991) The idea of "the magic circle" in game theory as a play space that is circumscribed on its own as separate from social norms (Huizinga, 1980) applies to the surrealist techniques, as they aim to break norms and convention.

The interest in these techniques is further grounded by Huizinga (1980), as he states that play is an important part of human culture. Sicart (2014) says play is a way of being in the world, and we engage in different kinds of play constantly. By using play, which is an inherent quality in humans, the surrealist techniques aim to break norms and convention. Bataille states that surrealism is in its essential “rage against the existing state of things” (cited in Gooding & Brotchie, 1991, p. 136), but this rage is expressed through playfulness.

“Play is possible when freedom is limited rather than expanded. It is not the opposite of work, nor the opposite of depression. Play is deliberately working with the materials we encounter.” (Bogost, 2016, p. 139)

Salen & Zimmerman (2003) state that play is a ”free movement in a more rigid structure” (p. 300). Limitations are also essential for creativity: “When everything is possible and nothing is given, creativity has no friction, nothing to work with, nothing to build on” (Löwgren & Stolterman, 2016, p. 27). The limited freedom, or the rigid structure, the something to work with, is what the surrealist

(18)

techniques are. They limit, for example the expression to activity (example: automatic drawing) or making only one part of the collaborative expression (exquisite corpse), or give you prompts to continue (definitions, conditionals). As creativity requires some limits, so does play. Sicart (2014) states we appropriate the world and express ourselves through play. Play happens within rules, even though in many ways it is the opposite of rules, it is about finding all the possibilities of freedom there are within the rules (Bogost, 2016).

To conclude, creativity and playfulness have many commonalities, as both are about free activity within limitations, encountering unexpected results inside those limitations. The surrealist

techniques, as playful procedures, offer the limitation that fosters both play and creativity, and aim to produce unexpected results.

4.3. Related work: Interaction design methods for engaging users to create

“A good set of generative tools provides ambiguity to non-designers in order to evoke and provoke thoughts and feelings that they do not commonly talk about” (Brandt, Binder & Sanders, 2013, p. 159). Interaction design has attempted to create different approaches over the years to foster different types of input. Although different ethnographic methods are commonly used (Spinuzzi, 2005), also more creative methods have been introduced to be used in addition to ethnography (Brandt, Binder & Sanders, 2013; Sanders & Stappers, 2014).

In this chapter I discuss methods that are used for engaging users to imagine and create. Often designers set up what are generally called workshops, with creative exercises (Martin & Hanington, 2012), but the actual activities carried out can vary from drawing, storytelling, collage, enacting, to many different things, that are not rigidly defined methods. The methods discussed in this chapter are widely accepted and somewhat formalised in design research.

4.3.1. Design games

Design games (Brandt, 2006; Brandt & Messeter, 2004; Johansson & Linde, 2005) have emerged because formatting a workshop as a game helps organise the participation (Huybrechts, 2014), and it can be a good way to learn from each other in the design process. There are various types of design games, and usually they are not competitive, as in that the aim is to win, but exploratory. Participants play to explore different design situations and uses, and the situation is framed by a set of rules, game pieces and turn-taking (Brandt, 2006).

Design games can also be described as serious games, as their purpose is other than mere entertainment, and they often are not concerned with offering a “rich experience”, like more traditionally successful games (Susi, Johannesson & Backlund, 2007).

(19)

One key aspect games is playfulness. Huizinga (1980) coined the term magic circle to represent the invisible circumscription that happens when people agree to play a game. The magic circle means that different social norms apply during the game. This is one of the reasons why games are a fruitful approach to participation: people are freer in their expression and opinion, if it’s a part of a game as opposed to a regular social situation. Because a game happens in a magic circle, also the hierarchies are downplayed. This might help communication and idea generation (Brandt & Messeter, 2004).

Brandt & Messeter (2004) describe four different design games in their paper: the User Game, the Landscape Game, the Technology Game and the Scenario Game. None of the games are competitive, but exploratory. These games use collective storytelling and negotiation between players as key mechanics, and all involve props like legos, boards, pictures, cards and video clips. The game props make the dialogue tangible and create shared understanding. It’s also mentioned, that following the game rules in a rigorous way is not necessary, but rather facilitate discussion and exploration that comes naturally to the players. (Brandt & Messeter, 2004)

4.3.2. Future workshops

Future workshops were introduced in the 1970s as a technique to engage people for change. The technique is quite simple and easy to set up. In the first part, the participants form critiques on the present situation or topic of exploration and list them. After that the critiques are turned to their positive opposites and created into utopian perspectives, not concerned with realism. In the last part a plan of possible actions is made to move towards the utopian scenarios from the present state. (Brandt et al., 2013)

The key part of the technique is changing the perspective from the critique to the opposite. This requires ability to envision utopian states, as well as state critiques, and some authors have added more tools to the technique to further facilitate these activities (Brandt et al., 2013). For example, adding objects to talk around, prototypes or provotypes (Boer, Donovan & Buur, 2013) to guide dialogue and facilitate exploring together can be helpful.

4.3.3. Cultural probes

Cultural probes are design interventions that aim to produce inspirational material for the designer by giving users different materials for self-recording, such as cameras, recorders, maps or cards. The inspirational material is knowledge that can not be rationalised or made scientific. They are said to downgrade the social roles of researcher and researched. (Gaver, Dunne & Pacenti, 1999; Gaver et al., 2004) Cultural probes have also been used to reach groups that are difficult to engage, and with people suffering from medical conditions, where more traditional ethnographic methods could be harmful. (Hemmings et al., 2002).

(20)

Hemmings et al. (2002) state that through cultural probes the researchers are able get material that is creative, intimate and often very personal. The cultural probes create “a more impressionistic account of their beliefs and desires, their aesthetic preferences and cultural concerns” (Gaver, 1999, p. 25). The probes are seen to be empowering for the participants to engage, communicate and create (Hemmings et al., 2002).

The key to rich participation in cultural probes in empowering the user to express. People get the freedom to communicate their thoughts, dreams and everyday lives without worrying whether their answers are the right ones or even useful. This sort of inspirational material is useful for design practice, because designers are used to constructive thinking and working with ill-defined problems (Cross, 2006).

4.3.4. Bodystorming

Bodystorming is often seen as prototyping in context. It is a method where users act out scenarios of use as a performance, intending to bring the prototype or idea to a context of real life and see what kind of uses occur. The location should be identical or similar to the real use. The strength of this method is that it can quite quickly produce ideas and insights to point out qualities. (Schleicher, Jones & Kachur, 2010; Oulasvirta, Kurvinen & Kankainen, 2003)

The aspects that make bodystorming insightful as a design tool are the fact that it is social, and that it uses objects in a context. To bring the object into a social situation with verbal and non-verbal communication happening creates shared understanding. Using an object in a context is important, as we are not able to perceive an object’s use until we interact with it physically. This prevents designers from overthinking before actually testing. (Schleicher, Jones & Kachur, 2010)

4.4. Points of convergence and divergence between surrealist techniques and

existing methods

To bring together the user engagement methods discussed earlier, and characteristics of surrealist techniques, this chapter reflects on the points of convergence and divergence between the two. This is to illustrate how the surrealist methods could be inspirational to user engagement and how they could expand the current range of methods.

4.4.1. Design games

Design games are experiments that are framed by game mechanics, often described as playful collaborative explorations. They usually fall under Caillois’ definitions of games (1961). This is a point of convergence with surrealist techniques. However, design games can often be described as serious

(21)

games, as they are not designed to be played for entertainment, or to offer a “rich experience” for the players (Susi, Johannesson & Backlund, 2007).

The games described earlier in the chapter have many things in common with the surrealist techniques explored in this research. Both foster collaborative expression of ideas and combining them to come up with new ones. Both have rules that frame and drive the situation, but rigorous following of the rules is not necessary if bending them might result to more interesting outcomes. The layer that the surrealist techniques have on top of these things, is the fostering randomness and chance in creation. As surrealism is about letting go and embracing the randomness, I believe more surprising outcomes might occur. The notion of surprise also fosters playfulness, that makes the process pleasurable for players (Bogost, 2016), and might offer more of a “rich experience” than serious games usually do (Susi, Johannesson & Backlund, 2007).

4.4.2. Future workshops

The future workshop borrows the mechanic of opposites (Gooding & Brotchie, 1991), which is an exercises where 3 players need to write an opposite of the sentence the previous player wrote, not seeing the previous ones (Figure 5.5.). The exercise is continued until the paper is full, and revealed to see how far the the sentence came from the start.

Coming up with an opposite of sentence or a scenario, that is in no way binary is a creative exercise that can result into unexpected outcomes, like in the surrealist technique invites (Figure 4). In the context of a future workshop the scenario is more rigid, and after talking about critiques on the current situation it would require a big creative leap to come up with more creative opposites. The mechanic of continuously rotating between two opposites brings unexpected outcomes, as the idea of “an opposite” can be interpreted in multiple ways.

4.4.3. Cultural probes

Cultural probes are meant for gathering inspirational input (Gaver, Dunne & Pacenti, 1999; Gaver et al., 2004), and can be related back to surrealist techniques, as they also provide creative material through offering freedom of expression. Surrealist techniques embrace randomness, chance and free association, so they aim to empower the creator to express freely - much like cultural probes.

What makes surrealist techniques different from cultural probes is the social level, as many of them are collaborative, and that they foster creative outputs rather than mere self-recording. The social interaction that takes place in a playful setting can provide a more generative situation, as the participants discuss and build upon each other’s ideas.

(22)

4.4.4. Bodystorming

Like the surrealist techniques, bodystorming also aims to liberate the participant to create scenarios and act, not thinking too much (Schleicher, Jones & Kachur, 2010). Also the social aspect, creating together and building on each other’s ideas is a point of convergence. In the case of this research, much of the experimentation happened in context, physically within the library, which is important for bodystorming, as "people can more quickly and with less effort build a mental model of the surrounding, directly observable environment" (Oulasvirta, Kurvinen & Kankainen, 2003, p. 126). Bodystorming can offer contextual insight and ideas for new uses. However, as a method it can be used in different ways in the process. If applied to the fuzzy front end, bodystorming can help identify problems in use scenarios and ideate in the context (Oulasvirta, Kurvinen & Kankainen, 2003). The point of diverge is that surrealist techniques offer inspirational material and aim to open up to very creative ideas in the fuzzy front end, bodystorming offers more contextual ideas. Both can be beneficial as design methods, depending on the aim of the research at hand.

4.5. Conclusion of theoretical background

There is an existing variety of widely accepted methods to engage users to create in the field of interaction design. The methods foster different kinds of participation and idea generation, and each of the methods can be deployed in the fuzzy front end of a design process. However, the range of methods could be expanded.

This research suggests new methods that derive from the surrealist art movement. The surrealist techniques provide ambiguity for creation to happen, but also frame the situation with rules to follow. Furthermore, they are playful procedures that facilitate social engagement as participants create together. The creativity, playfulness, ownership and social engagement found in one is a fruitful method for user engagement to provide interesting results in a design process, which is something current methods are not combining as they are. The techniques chosen to be explored in this project are ones that seem to contain the characteristics found in the literature research: social engagement, rules, collaborative creativity, avoiding self-censorship and ownership.

(23)

5. Process

The research questions explored are: How might surrealist techniques help foster user's creativity and get rid of self-censorship? How might surrealist art techniques be applied to an interaction design process? As mentioned, all humans are by nature creative, but might need tools designed to bring out the creativity in them (Sanders & Stapper, 2014). This research aimed to explore tools to harness this creativity in a design process. Along the process, some characteristics what I call "qualities of user engagement" were identified as key qualities to foster in engaging users: creativity, social engagement, surprise and avoiding self-censorship. Making a situation with these qualities makes for a rich

experience for participants and invites creative results. It was identified that the techniques explored offer inspirational input in the process and thus are of value in the earliest phase of a design process, often called the fuzzy front end (Sanders & Stappers, 2014). The research questions were newly fomulated during the process to finally be: How might surrealist techniques help foster user's

creativity and get rid of self-censorship? How might surrealist art techniques be applied to the fuzzy front end of design?

In research through design, experiments and workshops are essential to identify the qualities, problems and solutions at hand (Zimmerman, Stolterman & Forlizzi, 2010; Zimmerman, Forlizzi & Evenson, 2007). The first pilot experiments were done with classmates, but further workshops and experiments were carried out mainly with non-designers. This is because designers are used to expressing themselves visually and are very self-aware about communicating ideas through different means. In order to get more valid results the participants should be non-designers.

In this chapter I discuss the experiments and workshops carried out in the process, evaluate the results and explain how I moved from one design effort to another. The process was conducted in the context of a library, more specifically in the Malmö City Library, which is the main library in town. The topic explored was that of future libraries. The library was chosen as a platform mostly for pratical reasons: it offered a space used by diverse user groups and creative explorations are welcomed in their spaces. The workshops conducted in the library were evaluated in terms of the experience created for the participants, and the work created by the participants.

5.1. Pilot experiments

The first experiments were carried out in an informal setting with classmates. The experiments were conducted during the course of two days with 7 different participants, designers, within the age range of 25-40. This was to tentatively find out how the surrealist methods could free the participants from self-awareness and self-censorship. This was the first attempt to see if applying a method that promotes freedom of expression from the unconscious could be help spark more creativity.

(24)

Surrealist techniques for engaging users in

an interaction design process

PILOT EXPERIMENTS

Desktop

research

Insights

SECOND OPEN WORKSHOP

FIRST OPEN WORKSHOP

Qualities for user engagement

Conclusions

OPPOSITE PHOTOS

EXPERIMENT

Insights

Rephrasing the

research question

Insights

Evaluation with

the library

(25)

The techniques tried out were mostly collaborative ones, where each participant makes a part of a collaborative expression. This type of exercise was seen to have potential as a social and creative activity. The only exercise done alone is automatic drawing, that is an interesting activity to try out for creativity and as a different take on sketching.

5.1.1. The experiments

The techniques tried out:

Exercise No of people Instruction Rule/ mechanic Automatic drawing (Figure 5.2.)

1 The participant draws a picture on paper for a set amount of time (tested with 5 minutes) without lifting the pen from the paper or stopping. Not lifting the pen or stopping it. Exquisite corpse, drawing (Figure 5.3.)

2 or more A paper is divided into sections, and each participants draws on the first section. They draw some shapes for the next participant to continue over the fold. The paper is folded and handed so the next person only sees the parts that cross the fold. This is repeated until all sections are drawn, then the full drawings are revealed.

Continuing each other's unkown drawings. Folding & passing. Exquisite corpse, writing (Figure 5.4.)

2 or more A paper is divided into five sections, each instructing to write either a noun, adjective or verb. Participants start by writing a word, folding and passing it onto the next person. This is repeated until all sections are written then the sentences are revealed.

Continuing each other's unknown sentences. Folding & passing.

(26)

Exercise No of people Instruction Rule/ mechanic Opposites (Figure 5.5.)

3 or more The first person writes a sentence, and hands it over to the next person, who proceeds to write the opposite of the sentence. She then folds the paper to conceal the original sentence, and hands it over to the next. That person can see what the previous one wrote, not the original sentence, and writes the opposite of that sentence. This is repeated until the paper runs out, then the chain is revealed. Writing the opposite of a sentece. Folding & passing. Definitions (Figure 5.6.)

2 or more The first person writes a question that starts "What is..", folds the paper and hands it over. The next one writes an answer withthout seeing the question. This is repeated as many times as participants wish.

Writing questions & answers. Folding & passing. Conditionals (Figure 5.7.)

2 or more The first person writes a sentence that starts "If..", folds the paper and hands it over. The next continues the sentence with "then..." without seeing the first part. This is repeated as many times as participants wish.

Writing half a sentence. Folding & passing.

5.1.2. Results of the pilot experiments

The goal of the experiments was to find out if these techniques drawing could free the participants from too much self-awareness and self-censorship in their expression. That happened to some extent. Some participants talked about how they wanted to plan the drawing and got self-conscious when it didn’t turn out as nice as they wanted. One participant said “I’m a really bad drawer but the rule of not raising the pen hides it. I felt freer, not intimidated. I think the rule freed me from censorship. Normally I wouldn’t like to draw, I’d rather talk.” One person who said they were worried about how the drawing will turn out to be, said that towards the end they stopped thinking of what they were doing and just wanted to fill their part of the paper.

Several participants mentioned the exercises got easier the more of them they did, and got excited about doing more. The first one felt like a warm up, and after a couple you really get into the mood of not thinking, but doing. In the writing exercises I could see the more exercises the participants do, the

(27)

Figure 5.3. Exquisite corpse drawing. Figure 5.2. Automatic drawing.

Figure 5.5. Opposites. Figure 5.4. Exquisite corpse writing.

(28)

Figure 5.6. Definitions. Figure 5.7. Conditionals.

less time they spend thinking about what they will write. This suggests time plays a role in brushing off self-awareness. A longer time or more exercises seems to create more interesting results.

All participants admitted to breaking the set rules to some extent. I did not ask for an explanation, but they wanted to tell me it was accidental. Some mentioned they got worried I might notice and could tell they broke the rules. In conclusion, people seem quite wary about breaking the rule.

Insights

- Time and amount of the exercises plays a role - the more you do, the more you get liberated in creating

- Having rules or limitations makes the threshold to create something lower

5.2. First open workshop

The first open workshop was held in Malmö City library 4.4.2017 between hours 16-19, with three different activities to try out. The participants were friends and acquaintances invited, people who had seen a poster in the library and people who happened to wander in. The pilot experiments suggested that people get more creative over time after engaging in several activities, so I prepared three different exercises for participants to do. All of them have simple but somewhat rigid rules to

(29)

be followed, as the pilot experiments, and qualities identified in the literature review suggested that people do get creative within the limitations of rules rather than openness.

Within 3 hours, there were 17 visitors who engaged in the activities, in age range of roughly 11-35. More participants were female than male. Most visitors who came in engaged in all three activities. All the activities were carried out with the theme of envisioning a library of the future. The aim was to bring the techniques to the context of gathering ideas for a design process, and see what kind of inspirational material is produced. Materials used were mostly markers of different colours, blank paper and paper templates (Figure 5.8.) with dashed lines for folding, and timers. Materials were cheap but designed to be easily used, to ensure understanding how they are to be used but empower participants to use them as they wish (Sanders & Stappers, 2014).

5.2.1. The experiments Exercise No of people Instruction Rule/ mechanic Automatic drawing (Figure 5.9.)

1 The participant draws a picture on paper for 5 minutes without lifting the pen from the paper or stopping. Not lifting the pen or stopping it. Exquisite corpse, drawing (Figure 5.10.)

2 or more The template is divided into 3 sections. Each participants make a drawing on the first section. They draw some shapes for the next participant to continue over the fold. The paper is folded and handed so the next person only sees the parts that cross the fold. This is repeated until all sections are drawn, then the full drawings are revealed.

Continuing each other's unkown drawings. Folding & passing. Exquisite corpse, writing (Figure 5.11.)

2 or more The template is divided into five sections, each instructing to write either a noun,

adjective or verb. Participants start by writing a word, folding and passing it onto the next person. This is repeated until all sections are written then the sentences are revealed.

Continuing each other's unknown sentences. Folding & passing.

(30)
(31)

Figure 5.9. Automatic drawing

Figure 5.11. Exquisite corpse writing. Figure 5.10. Exquisite corpse drawing.

(32)

Figure 5.12. Participants focused on collaborative drawing exercises.

Figure 5.14. Automatic drawing and the timer. Figure 5.13. Revealing the drawings.

(33)

Quotes

» “Oh I’m not thinking anymore, just drawing!”

» “Let’s do it fast! Just write!”

» “You gave me so many lines, what am I supposed to do with them?”

» “I am not good at drawing, but it didn’t matter.”

» “The drawings turned out looking great, even though I thought my part was really bad”

» “This so bad” “Don’t worry, mine is too. We’ll be shit together.”

Themes from the work

- Technology: robots, drones, brain scans, eye readers, pads, digital things (as opposed to physical books)

- Nature: trees, beach, mountain

- Arts & entertainment: games, trampolines, music, movies, interactive art

- Knowledge: new languages, feeding information to brain, writing

Observations

- Participants got engaged and stayed quite long to do the activities

- Participants engaged with strangers, laughed and talked about their ideas and how to they are combined

- People have two approaches: some decide first what they will make, others start doing and just see what comes out. More people use the first approach, but people get more spontaneous after they do a couple exercises, and when they are making together

- The exquisite-corpse drawing exercise was the one that got people talking about their ideas most. In the end, when the drawings are revealed, people start explaining what they drew, see connections between the sections and the drawings become generative to new ideas.

- Some people have interest, but don’t participate. One person came in, asked many questions about what the workshop is about, and about how does one learn to be creative and come up with ideas, but did not participate.

(34)

5.2.2 Results of the first open workshop

Every exercise managed to engage people. The collaborative ones were mentioned to be more fun and have less pressure since the creation is shared. The the collaborative drawing one seemed to be the most successful, as it got people talking about the topic the most. It was also the most generative, as people had ideas while drawing, but also new ones got formed when they revealed the whole drawing and saw connections between their sections. The surprise moment of revealing the drawing was a delightful moment that produced laughter, conversation and ideas. This is the fun factor in play, when something surprising is produced through the playfulness, it creates enjoyment (Bogost, 2016). Exquisite corpse writing exercise seemed to be enjoyable, but generated the least interesting and generative ideas. This is probably due to the fact that when one can only write a word, there isn’t much reflection or ideation happening, people tend to write the first thing that comes to their mind. This could be iterated further. The atmosphere in general was relaxed, and nobody was being critical of their own or other participant’s creations, but rather generative in coming up with ideas from each other's strangest creations. This is key in reducing self-censorship in idea generation (Williams, 2002). The only exercise done alone, the automatic drawing, produced some interesting ideas. However, from observing the people, I can mostly assume that the participants first thought of an idea and used the technique to visualise it. So, the technique itself did not play a big role in the idea creation, but provided tools to make it visual. This can also be useful, as it does lower the threshold of drawing something, but is not so generative.

Some of the drawings have very concrete ideas on future libraries. One person drew a book that is a contact lens that one puts in the eye, another a person connected in tubes that flood in the knowledge, another a set of robots that help find books (see figure 5.23. for summary of ideas). Generating

concrete ideas from these is not hard, but some of the more abstract creations are more challenging to formalise into ideas or insights. From these results it seems the techniques could provide material that is inspirational, thus useful for the fuzzy front end of design (Sanders & Stappers, 2014).

Insights

- Shared creation makes shared ownership and is generative: when the participants have 3 different ideas in one piece, they then try to connect and combine them

- The moment of revealing the final piece is when the magic happens: people are delighted to see their contribution being a part of the whole, like to see what the others did and try to make sense of the whole

- Sharing the creation lowers self-censorship: the collaborative drawing makes people more spontaneous and creative. “Sharing the shittiness”

(35)

- Knowledge nowadays seems to mean technology, robots and artificial intelligence.

These insights encouraged to move forward with collaborative exercises, and the surprise moment of revealing the final piece. The themes that have emerged can be used to frame further experiments to find more specific ideas within them.

5.3. Experiment: opposite photos

The surrealists used some of the techniques, like Exquisite corpse, in both written and drawing format. I wanted to experiment with changing the medium, in a bit more modern scenario. I chose the techniques of opposites, where the participants are supposed to write the opposite of the sentence the previous person wrote - however they interpret the opposite to be (Figure 4). This experiment was based on the pilot experiments insights, and was done in parallel with the first open workshop. The aim of this exercise was to explore the shared creation and surprising moment of reveal in a different medium and context. The exercise was a tentative test for this, like the pilot experiments were conducted as tentative tests of some of the techniques. If found successful, this could have been iterated to a full workshop.

5.3.1. The experiment

I chose the medium of photos and text messaging to do this, because it is modern and familiar to everyone, and probably has less of a threshold on creation. Myself and two friends took turns to take a photo and send it to the next one, who was then supposed to take a photo of the opposite of that photo and send it to the third player. In the end the full thread was revealed to all to see the opposites. We played this for 3 days, taking photos whenever we had the time and inspiration to do so.

5.3.2. Results of opposite photos

The social situation of text messaging images is a completely different as the one that is created by sitting around the same table. This is probably due to the fact that the participants are not so immersed in the game when it happens over the course of several days, and from a distance. The magic circle (Huizinga, 1980) is not so intact.

This experiment didn’t produce such interesting outcomes or situations. The final thread of photos (Figure 5.15) was not as interesting as the writing, as it came out more abstract. Also, the immediacy of the writing exercise creates the exciting moment of reveal right after you finished, but the photo thread did not produce that. Also, I believe when quickly taking pictures with your mobile phone there is less of an ownership of the creation, as it is a quite mundane activity in our lives.

(36)
(37)

The positive thing about the medium is that it’s easy and fast, and there is a low threshold of artistic skill or creativity. One of the participants said she started to look at her surroundings differently and took photos that she would never would have taken in normal life. In this way creativity was sparked, in finding new things in everyday situations.

Insights

- A mobile phone photo is a creation that does not create as much sense of ownership as a drawing does

- The moment of reveal was not as surprising and magical as in the exercises that happen in the moment with the people who did the creation

- The medium of the phone and taking pictures might make people look at their surroundings in a new way

These insights suggest that continuing with more social engagement in the setting and manual tools will provide more interesting results. Further iterations of changing the medium was dropped at this point of the process due to time and resource limitations.

5.4. Evaluating the progress: Qualities for user engagement

When planning the second open workshop, I took a step back to evaluate the progress made so far. The insights gathered from the previous experiments and literature review suggested that certain conditions provide more interesting results in the engagement, and provide a rich experience for the participants. I call these “qualities for user engagement”, that are the focus points and aspired conditions of the following experiment.

These qualities serve as an aim and lense to evaluate how successful the techniques are. However, the relevance to design process should also be evaluated on top of these. This research aims to find out what kind of experience these techniques provide to the user, but also how they might be beneficial to the fuzzy front end of a design process. When evaluating the techniques, it is important to also look at the material created and assess how it could be insightful in a design process.

1. Creativity

The activities need to foster creativity. As mentioned earlier, creativity happens within limitations (Löwgren & Stolterman, 2016), thus the activities should be designed with a balance in limitation and freedom of expression.

2. Social engagement

(38)

3. Surprise moment

The surprise moment of revealing the collaborative expression creates conversation and generates new ideas.

4. Avoiding self-censorship

This has been a main component in the research since the beginning, but still important. In the research so far the results suggest that sharing the creation lowers self-censorship in people, as the final outcome will be somewhat random and silly anyway - this also invites creativity.

5.5. Second open workshop

The second open workshop was held in Malmö City library 3.5.2017 between hours 16-19, with four different exercises to try out. Two of the exercises were iterations of one done before, two completely new. Three of the exercises were collaborative, done with 2-3 people at the same time, one was done alone. The social aspect is important, but from previous experience I wanted to have an exercise to do alone since some people wander in alone and might still want to contribute. After doing one alone they might be pursued to try a collaborative one, after starting to get creative. The exercise done alone does not actually qualify for the qualities for user engagement, but I felt it was important to have something that could be done alone to serve the purposes of warming up and encouraging curious people to also join the collaborative exercises.

Within 3 hours, there were 15 visitors who engaged in the activities, in age range of roughly 15-35. More participants were female than male. Some participants were acquaintances invited by the author, some happened to be in the library and got interested. Most visitors who came in engaged in more than one activity. All the activities were carried out with the theme of envisioning a library of the future. The aim was to further experiment with surrealist techniques. The conditions for user engagement were the starting point to design the workshop, and the workshop was observed through these conditions. Also, the content of the ideas and artwork produced was evaluated.

5.5.1. The experiments

In the second workshop there were four exercises, two of which were iterations of previous ones and two were completely new.

(39)

Iterated exercise

No of

people Instruction & iteration

Rule/ mechanic

Automatic drawing (Figure 5.17.)

1 The participant gets a paper with a picture prompt, a timer and picks a marker. The task is to draw for five minutes without lifting the pen from the paper or stopping it.

This activity is an iteration from the previous workshop, as the participants do not draw on blank paper, but have a choice between three prompts: a reading person, a hand and a stack of books. This activity is not collaborative, but works as a warm up and invites people who arrive alone into the situation, so they might be persuaded to try the collaborative ones also. It can also be seen as a warm up exercise, to get into the creative mood. Drawing without lifting the pen or stopping it for 5 minutes. Exquisite corpse drawing (Figure 5.18.)

2 or more The templates are divided into 3 sections, and have a topic. Each participants starts on the first section, draws a picture, connectin some lines on the next section. The paper is folded and passed to the next person so that he/she doesn’t see the drawing, only the lines to be used. This is done until all sections are complete.

This activity is an iteration from the previous workshop. This time the templates have a defined topic, to see if the final drawing is more coherent this was and produces more concrete ideas. The topics were chosen from the theme that arose in the previous workshop: Technology & library, nature & library, library & games, futuristic library and knowledge. Continuing each other's drawings. Folding & passing. Iterated exercises:

(40)

New exercises:

Quotes

» “I didn’t know what to do first, but just started drawing and this came out”

» “I think the whole city should be a library”

Exercise No of people Instruction Rule/ mechanic Parallel stories (Figure 5.9.)

2 A paper is divided into two sections. The participants start writing a story that starts “When I walked into the library…” and when they encounter a dot on the line, they need to draw a card with a word they need to incorporate into the story. The paper is folded and exchanged with the other person to finish each others stories, again drawing cards when encountering a dot on the line. This activity was chosen because the exquisite corpse writing -exercise in the previous workshop seemed to be too limiting. Continuing each other's unknown stories. Drawing cards & incorporating random words in stories. Folding & passing. Utopia & dystopia (Figure 5.10.)

3 or more This activity is done with 3 people. On the first line of the template the participants write a critique on the current state of the library. Then they hand the paper onto the next person, who writes a utopian version of the situation. Then they fold, so only the utopian one is seen, and hand it over to the next participants, who then writes a dystopian version of the utopian scenario. Then they fold so only the dystopian one is seen, and hand it over. The utopian and dystopian opposites are written 5 times.

Imagining opposite scenarios. Folding & passing.

(41)

Figure 5.16. Templates designed for the second workshop. Top: exquisite corpse, utopia & dystopia. Bottom: automatic drawing, parallel stories.

(42)

» “This was the hardest 5 minutes of my life”

» “I got ideas from not being able to lift the pen. Otherwise I wouldn’t have thought of this!”

» “I was done at 4 minutes, but the extra time I had left forced me to come up with more ideas”

» “It’s such an exciting moment to see the full drawing!”

» “I thought it was difficult at first, but all these art activities got easier after I did more. I wasn’t thinking about making something, just making.”

» “After a couple rounds of utopia and dystopia it escalates so much from what it was! It’s really funny how it went from something mundane to the destruction of mankind.”

Themes from the work

- Technology: robots, brain scans, virtual reality, artificial intelligence, wifi everywhere, surveillance, using personal information

- Nature: trees, park, nature and technology intertwined

- Games, music, dancing

- Knowledge: feeding information to brain, knowledge through interaction, social knowledge between people, science, maths, smell knowledge, music as knowledge, fake news, alternatives to physical books

Observations

- Participants got engaged and stayed quite long to do the activities

- Participants engaged with strangers, laughed and talked about their ideas and how to they are combined (Figure 5.21.)

- Many groups took a long time to go through the activity after they did it, carefully looking what each person drew or wrote, and talking about what they were thinking when they did it

- A couple people said they are not good at drawing and it’s a little uncomfortable for them, but their drawing was quite generative in ideas

- Some participants didn’t seem to know what exactly utopia and dystopia mean, so the brief is important

(43)

Figure 5.17. Automatic drawing.

Figure 5.19. Parallel stories.

Figure 5.18. Exquisite corpse.

(44)

Figure 5.22. Participants continuing each other's drawings. Figure 5.21. Participants discussing their collaborative drawings.

References

Related documents

The EU exports of waste abroad have negative environmental and public health consequences in the countries of destination, while resources for the circular economy.. domestically

46 Konkreta exempel skulle kunna vara främjandeinsatser för affärsänglar/affärsängelnätverk, skapa arenor där aktörer från utbuds- och efterfrågesidan kan mötas eller

Exakt hur dessa verksamheter har uppstått studeras inte i detalj, men nyetableringar kan exempelvis vara ett resultat av avknoppningar från större företag inklusive

The increasing availability of data and attention to services has increased the understanding of the contribution of services to innovation and productivity in

Av tabellen framgår att det behövs utförlig information om de projekt som genomförs vid instituten. Då Tillväxtanalys ska föreslå en metod som kan visa hur institutens verksamhet

Generella styrmedel kan ha varit mindre verksamma än man har trott De generella styrmedlen, till skillnad från de specifika styrmedlen, har kommit att användas i större

Närmare 90 procent av de statliga medlen (intäkter och utgifter) för näringslivets klimatomställning går till generella styrmedel, det vill säga styrmedel som påverkar

Den förbättrade tillgängligheten berör framför allt boende i områden med en mycket hög eller hög tillgänglighet till tätorter, men även antalet personer med längre än