In Windows and Mirrors: Interaction Design, Digital Art, and the Myth of Transparency, Jay David Bolter and Diane Gromala argue that, contrary to Donald Norman’s famous dictum, we do not always want our computers to be invisible "information appliances." They say that a computer does not feel like a toaster or a vacuum cleaner; it feels like a medium that is now taking its place beside other media like printing, film, radio, and television. The computer as medium creates new forms and genres for artists and designers; Bolter and Gromala want to show what digital art has to offer to Web designers, education technologists, graphic artists, interface designers, HCI experts, and, for that matter, anyone interested in the cultural implications of the digital revolution.

In the early 1990s, the World Wide Web began to shift from purely verbal representation to an experience for the user in which form and content were thoroughly integrated. Designers brought their skills and sensibilities to the Web, as well as a belief that a message was communicated through interplay of words and images. Bolter and Gromala argue that invisibility or transparency is only half the story; the goal of digital design is to establish a rhythm between transparency--made possible by mastery of techniques--and reflection--as the medium itself helps us understand our experience of it.

The book examines recent works of digital art from the Art Gallery at SIGGRAPH 2000. These works, and their inclusion in an important computer conference, show that digital art is relevant to technologists. In fact, digital art can be considered the purest form of experimental design; the examples in this book show that design need not deliver information and then erase itself from our consciousness but can engage us in an interactive experience of form and content.

It’a Window of Sorts...
First, this book in not a novel.

Second, some reviewers miss the subtle points raised in this text. Perhaps if unaware of the theoretical bases to the discussion--and it should be mentioned that the theoretical bases that inform it are acknowledged at the outset, but pointedly left aside in favour of praxis--one might, in fact, not grasp the message in this text.

For example, it is rather beside the point that the discussion surrounds various installments at SIGGRAPH 2000--this should not be taken as an indication of an out-dated approach, as, again, some less sophisticated readers might be prone to do. In fact, what the authors discuss are the more generic (as in genre) questions digital art and design prompt, not to mention those raised by the historical and social imperatives "embedded" in a media-saturated culture like ours.

The use of metaphors like windows and mirrors might be a bit too cute and/ or convenient, and the writing itself tends toward the over-simple and somewhat plodding (to the extent that some readers might wonder why, just because a writer states his and her preference for a non-theoretical text, it must then use a prose style targeted toward a highschool level). This is, of course, in spite of the writers’ apparent desire to appeal to as wide an audience as possible.

So, yes, the book is easy to read, and while this shouldn’t take away from its overall impact, I think it can. IN other words, by writing for a wider, less theoretical audience, the authors sort of irk those who don’t grasp the bigger issues this book reflects, even while they exclude those looking for something more outwardly sophisticated and capable of sustaining a place in the discourse from which both Bolter and Gromala come.

All in all, however, Bolter and Gromala have brought us an interesting and thought provoking discussion that contextualizes digital design within the larger realm of the computer and its future as both a visible and an invisible medium of human (ironic, get it?) expression.

It’s a window of sorts and will tell you so many times
First, this book in not a novel.

Second, some reviewers miss the subtle points raised in this text. Perhaps if unfamiliar with the theoretical bases to the discussion--and it should be mentioned that the theory informing this discussion is acknowledged at the outset, but pointedly left aside in favour of practice--one might, in fact, not grasp the extent of the points raised here.

For example, it is rather beside the point that the discussion surrounds various installments at SIGGRAPH 2000--this should not be taken as an indication of an out-dated approach, as, again, some readers might be apt to think. In fact, what the authors discuss are the more generic (as in genre) questions and that digital art and design prompt, not to mention those raised by the historical and social imperatives "embedded" in a media-saturated culture like ours.

The use of metaphors like windows and mirrors might be a bit too cute and/ or convenient, and the writing itself tends toward the over-simple and somewhat plodding (to the extent that some readers might wonder whether, a writer declaring a preference for a non-theoretical text is an excuse for a prose style targeted toward highschoolers). This is, of course, in spite of the writers’ apparent desire to appeal to as wide an audience as possible.

So, yes, the book is easy to read, and while this shouldn’t take away from its overall impact, I think it can. IN other words, by writing for a wider, less theoretically-inclined audience, the authors may irk those who fail to grasp the bigger issues this book reflects. This, they do even while excluding (potentially) those looking for something more outwardly sophisticated and capable of sustaining a place in the discourse from which Bolter and Gromala both come.

All in all, however, Bolter and Gromala have brought us an interesting and thought provoking discussion that contextualizes digital design within the larger realm of the computer and its future as both a visible and an invisible medium of human (ironic, get it?) expression.

Grudge-holding slew of insults
This novel details the art exhibits at a particularly old digital media exhibition. They were nifty, but a photo album would be a far better medium in which to exhibit them then this ... this set of rants agaist the "structuralists" and any semblence of order and architecture present in the digital media community.

They think that, as designers, it is their duty to ward off any notion of logical arrangment and order from design, when in fact, this is a hazardous approach and a pitiful design aesthetic.