FAQ
Doors of Perception 2 (1994)
1 What is Doors of Perception ?
2 What was the second conference about?
3 Very cryptic. You sound like Prince, or whatever he's called now.
4 "Envision"?
5 I'm not sure I've quite got it yet
6 PLEASE GIVE ME AN EXAMPLE OF WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT
7 Wow. A laugh a minute.
8 Very trendy.
9 You're preaching again
10 Now remind me: what has this got to do with "Home"?
11 But of course! I'll buy a plaque for my front door that says "Chez Context"
12 Did many architects come?
13 Steady on there old boy.
14 Think of something cheerful.
15 Does "let's have a drink" lend itself to binary code?
1 What is Doors of Perception ?
Doors of Perception is an annual conference, and a programme of workshops, seminars and pilot projects, organised by the Netherlands Design Institute in Amsterdam.Doors seeks answers to the question: what are multimedia and global networks actually for? We generate scenarios about future applications of new technology and enhance the development of multimedia and online environments by bringing together previously unconnected knowledge and skills.
2 What was the second conference about?
"@Home"
3 Very cryptic. You sound like Prince, or whatever he's called now.
OK OK. Here's the formal answer. Interactivity confronts us all with a singular problem: how to think about it. The technical tasks of building a worldwide information infrastructure are hard, and expensive - but relatively easy to understand. But the question of content remains elusive. What's missing are ideas - and a conceptual framework in which to evaluate them. The spectacular potential of new communication networks has run up against a barrier: digital versions of existing human activities are proliferating - such as shopping, watching videos, or sex - but so far industry has failed to come up with exciting new applications for their technological marvel. The commercial rationale is clear - shopping is big business - but the ability to order car polish via television is hardly the stuff of which new civilisations are made. How, then, to envision entirely new activities for these infobahnen?
4 "Envision"?
The @Home Doors explored this question in the context of a conceptual filter: the idea of "home". Cutting-edge thinkers from the worlds of literature, philosophy, science, art, design and architecture, ethnology, business strategy, medicine and others considered two agendas: the impact of interactivity and information on the physical and mental spaces we call "home"; and whether the cultural and psychological resonance of the home can be a source of fresh thinking in new product development.
5 I'm not sure I've quite got it yet
The speakers' task was to explore the interplay between these cultural and technical domains. To explain the technological and market state-of-play - the technologies we can expect in our home in the medium term, and what they will do. Other speakers considered how best to put the qualities of "home" into technology.
6 I don't know quite how to put this: but PLEASE GIVE ME AN EXAMPLE OF WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT
Gosh, some people are so literal-minded. OK, here's our hitlist of hot topics from Doors 2: * the impact of computer-enhanced environments on our sense of place * the psychology of belonging (to a family, group, or community) * whether the Internet can nurture family or community relationships * the indirect forms of communication currently missing in telematic space * issues of privacy, and the breakdown between public and private realms * what we, as trainee telematic nomads, can learn from the way real nomads live * the implications on home of smart space, and virtuality in everyday objects * positive and negative scenarios for the future of "home entertainment" * the convergence of work and play, home and school
7 Wow. A laugh a minute.
Actually it was a big success. Three days solid of this stuff and still people listened. But we did decide at the end that in future we should change the format, not force feed people so much, and make the conference itself interactive.
8 Very trendy.
Passive consumption of entertainment is not an exciting prospect.And that goes for conferences too. There was a palpable hunger, certainly in conference at Doors 2, , for something more profound, more engaging, to come from these amazing systems. If you connect computer networks together, all you actually get is a bigger network - and a network, however global and technically impressive, doesn't mean anything by itself. Meaning is created by us ,when we interact and communicate together as people. So theme one of our conference was people and our communication, not about technologies and theirs.
9 You're preaching again
Oops. Sorry. But you have to remember that back then in 1994 we felt we were really onto to something new. The spectacular, compound growth of the Internet proved our point that what people wanted was direct connectivity with each other - not to be spoon-fed pap by digital means. The internet's directness and power to connect unleashed phenomenal energy and enthusiasm that the mutimedia industry could only drool at. For us the Internet environment was proof that what really excites people is a new way of communicating with other people - and not just one-to-one, as we can do now with the telephone, but one-to-many, and many-to many.
10 Now remind me: what has this got to do with "Home"?
Well (would you like a cup of cocoa while I explain this bit?) the quality of human to human communication is determined only partly by technology. Far more important than bits and bytes is the social and cultural context - all those tiny but important cues and prompts, in which communication takes place. This is a problem for the Internet in the long term, because this all-important context is definitely in short supply there in a text-only environment. There's even a buzzword - "context deprivation" - which experts use to explain dysfunctional communication. "Home" is in many ways the ultimate context.
11 But of course! I'll buy a plaque for my front door that says "Chez Context"
How did a philistine like you get onto this page? But I shall soldier on. We decided to focus on one particular context - the idea of "home" - as a good example of just how complex the design task of integrating technical and social systems really is."Home" is simultaneously a space, a place, an idea, an experience, a memory.It is both a material construction - a thing - and a powerful generator of meaning, at the same time. Depending on who you are, 'home' represents a market for information services; a laboratory to test the social study social consequences of a network culture; home is also a metaphor for certain mental states; and it is a value-laden symbol of privacy and intimacy. 'Home', in other words, is a complex and perplexing thing - exactly the messy kind of subject that will confront the interaction designer of tomorrow on a daily basis!
12 Did many architects come?
I'm glad you asked me that because no, they didn't, and we were pissed off about it - and with them. We spent a fortune mailing and advertising to architects all over Europe and I think 22 came out of an audience of 1100. They missed out on a rich discussion. The three-dimensional space of home, for example, can strongly influence communication between people. Designing this kind of space is by convention the domain of architects - so why should architects not get involved in the design of electronic "homes" as well? Well now we know: because they are narrow minded and ignorant and don't want to think about it.
13 Steady on there old boy.
Sorry: it's just that architects can bring a whole new dimension to this discussion and they're opting out.
14 Think of something cheerful.
Well we did feel rather inspired at the end of Doors 2. There were some very moving speeches about the home of the imagination and how it is crucial to the design of communication contexts. The power of home as an idea , as a memory, is tremendous: consider how relatively small amounts of home-ly information can trigger powerful mental responses: a grainy photograph; the smell of cooking; a few words whispered down the phone. For all of us, 'home' is a lifetime's accumulation of experiences and feelings, of mental and physical interactions, that does not lend itself to being described in binary code.
15 Does "let's have a drink" lend itself to binary code?
1000100010010
