Reading Response #2: Artful Design Chapter 2: “Designing Expressive Toys”

Alanna Sun

October 3, 2021

CS 476A, Stanford University

Reading Response: Design to Lower Inhibition

This week’s reading dives into the growth of technology and the corresponding innovations made possible by the invention of the smartphone. I found the progression of the apps covered by this chapter really interesting, as the creation of Ocarina felt like a natural evolution from Sonic Lighter, given Sonic Lighter’s exploration of play through form and function, using defamiliarization to enhance the user’s experience. I thought the globe visualization feature added a really nice touch, giving a greater metaphorical meaning to the existence of the lighter app by connecting people through the simple act of play. I was glad to see that this feature was carried over to Ocarina as well. Especially with the helix-like visualization of the music generated by users across the world, Ocarina leaves us with a unique, deeper experience--just as the reading describes--of feeling like we are parts of a greater whole that are both separate yet connected. 

I actually downloaded Ocarina the other day to try it out, and had a great time just making random noises, experimenting with the vibrato, eventually learning to navigate my way around the instrument (or maybe I should say toy). Because Ocarina has a lower barrier-to-entry as an iPhone app, and does not have established standards of skill level, I found myself more willing to indulge in playing around without feeling bad that nothing sounded good. Unlike conventional instruments like a piano or guitar, I didn’t feel a pressure to be able to play in any way in particular. This brings me to this reading’s design principle that really spoke to me--Principle 2.7: Design to Lower Inhibition. Reframing musical instruments and tools as toys allows us to reclaim the inherent playfulness that comes with creating art. Just like I am T-Pain makes singing feel less serious and allows for one’s self-consciousness to take a backseat, Ocarina’s design helped lighten my mentality around music-making, lowering the stakes and dispelling the usual pressure that comes with creating things that can be evaluated as good or bad.

On a separate note, the discussion around viewing technology as a threat to existing means of music-making prompted me to reflect on my relationship with music, productivity, creativity, and play. In particular, it reminded me of last week’s reading, tying into the idea of means vs. ends; do I see creating as a process I engage in in order to yield a result that I deem “productive,” which in essence, is a means to an end--or do I see creativity as an exploration of the self that seeks to meet no goal in particular. Increasingly, I find myself engaging in something creative for the sake of the product that ultimately comes out of the process. From writing to designing, being “creative” has become a required part of the process of producing rather than creating as an experience in and of itself. For instance, with design thinking in common HCI classes at Stanford, it feels strange that there are set procedures for brainstorming and prototyping, where creativity is only given space, or sometimes even demanded, at the “appropriate” times. It makes me question if the pressure to be productive (often defined as creating something “useful”) has divorced play from creating, transforming creating into a performative act.