Reading 2 - Truc Le

On the discussion of building computer interfaces to be user-friendlier, Brenda Laurel argues that this job requires not just the ability to write codes. In “Computers as Theatres”, she mentions a knowledge that can aid programmers in creating more interactive interfaces – the combined knowledge of programming, psychology and theatrical art. Although there are people who question this idea, I find Laurel’s approach an uncommon and innovative one, as I have never associated theater with high-tech devices.

Laurel begins her book with the example of an unusual success of “Spacewar”, the first computer game that “represents action in which humans could participate.” The interface in Laurel’s idea is a shared context for action, which involves both humans and computers. On the other hand, the old “tit-for-tat” paradigm could cause a breakdown in communication and create misunderstandings. Laurel then bridges the gulf between psychology and theatre by pointing out that both disciplines study how humans communicate, solve problems, and have fun in order to understand and represent their behaviors. These fields connect to computer programming in the way that they aim to make their theatrical and virtual worlds as similar to reality as possible.

Spacewar

From Laurel’s point of view, the way the computer operates is like that of a theater, where actors, stagehands, playwrights, audience, etc. all engage in living in the world of the play. However, I imagine the ought-to-be computer’s activities are more like those at the Kresge auditorium when Ron Paul’s speech took place: The speaker got more and more energetic after endless rounds of applause. The audience loved him; they asked so many questions that should have exhausted him, but Ron Paul still patiently gave them feedbacks, which in turn motivated the audience more. If view that event as interactions between computer and users, I would say that the computer-user relationship has achieved a mutual understanding. Therefore, I agree with Laurel that the best result can only be achieved if there is involvement of both user and computer.

Nevertheless, there are objections to the theatrical approach in designing computers’ interfaces. One of these objections is that theater is a non-serious form of entertainment, which, in some developers’ view, trivializes serious applications. Also, theater’s productions are viewed as vague and emotional-emphasized while technological advanced applications require clear representations. The author protests against these concepts, as he believed that “seriousness in human-computer activities is a thresholdy thing.” My opinion is that users, most of the time, do not care about what the computer is processing in order to run their applications. Besides, this seriousness can limit human’s creativity in using computer’s applications and ultimately makes computer-related activities mundane and laboring tasks. I think that machines are created to aid humans in their daily and sometimes routine work. Therefore, it is essential that computers’ programmers prioritize users’ experience and try to simplify the complex tasks of operating computer’ applications.

On one hand, I agree that having a computer’s interface that can respond to human’s normal actions such as questions, body gestures, or interruptions between humans’ conversations, is great. On the other hand, I also believe that it is the designers’ responsibility to set up certain limits in the way that computers interact with people. It is scary to think of a future in which all computers can recognize and respond to all of humans’ activities. Who is going to control these machines if they understand human’s psychology so well? If there is an organization in charge of supervising them, how can we know it is not going to be taken over by these highly intelligent computers? There seems to be a paradox of technology in the way I view this matter: the more technological advanced the computer is, the harder it is to manage.

To sum up, I like Brenda Lauren’s effort of bridging the gap between two seemingly unrelated fields. I support her view of making computer’s interface more responsive to users’ need, as long as there are certain limits of how much responsive the computer should be.