Milo! What kind of reality is this?

I am still thinking about augmented reality.  This is cool, but I am not sure what to make of it.

Here’s a hat tip to the artslearningblog in Dublin for the lead on this story.


3 responses to “Milo! What kind of reality is this?

  1. Just awesome!

  2. This is really cool!

    I wonder, though, about the comment in the BBC article that films and books are “rubbish” if they do not “involve me.” I wonder about this trend that nothing matters if it is not “me”-oriented. I am all for transactional experiences that invite participation (as opposed to passive spectatorship), but is it “total rubbish” to experience things as a spectator? To listen or experience something without necessarily contributing or controlling it?

    Also, I take issue with the idea that traditional books or films do not involve “me.” After all, my imagination creates the characters just as much as the writer does. I bring my experiences, emotions, biases, perceptions, etc. to all of my reading. It is not truly a “one way” form of communication. When watching a movie, I may look away to control what I have to see, etc. That is participation in my book.

    In my composition course, my students and I have been discussing how “listening” is an art that we all need to develop. Part of “listening” is letting yourself hear someone’s perspective all the way through without jump-starting to formulate a response or an inner argument.

    Which is all just to say that Milo is cool, but calling everything else “rubbish” strikes me as troubling.

    Does it have to be an either-or like this? It strikes me as fallacy.

    Good stuff! Really cool technology and really interesting article! As usual, thank you IL!

  3. PS: And now I am laughing at myself for saying “participation in my book.” Pun not on purpose, but I will claim it as “intended!” 😀

    This discussion also reminds me of some debates in my art history studies over transactionalism in art, and whether art had to invite audience involvements (Fluxus, anyone?) in order to truly be transactional. Some wondered whether art such as Abstract Expressionism attempted to force certain kinds of experiences.

    I always felt strongly that even the “participatory” arts often tried to control the experience in certain ways. Likewise, many of the “traditional” arts invited multiple interpretations and controversies. So it was not a simple matter of sorting them into “participatory” and “democratic” and “non-participatory” and “non-democratic.”

    Interesting things to think about, even though I still need more coffee!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s