Robotic Feral Public Authoring
"The street finds its own use for things. It's all in the mix.? ? William Gibson
In her Robotic Feral Public Authoring project, Natalie Jeremijenko developed hacks for remote control devices and robot dog toys to transform them into robotic devices equipped with sensors that gather information about toxins in the environment and relay that information back to project participants for mapping. Through workshops involving community members who help build the bots, Feral Robots project has held multiple trials from Ireland to New York City.
From the creator's web site:
"The feral dog pack event is designed as an opportunity to enable public discourse and open-ended interpretation of the evidence at hand, and an opportunity to coordinate diverse interpretations. The display of the empirical evidence on the local pollutant is intended to enable and change typical lay-expert communication patterns, by raising the standards of evidence, or at least changing who produces this evidence."
http://www.nyu.edu/projects/xdesign/presentation.html
The Feral Robots project sniffs out the span between logic and unreason, the rational and emotional. Designed to encourage participants to reinterpret their environments, the project takes an entertainment based toy and shifts the intended usage to a purpose driven tool with entertaining attributes.
However, as interesting as the results have been, the project has not been accepted as research in the empirical world of robotics and engineering. The publicity and exposure has remained largely under the heading of art and culture.
What we design and plan for does not always remain in the realm of control after we release it for use. In addition to examining the results of the Feral Robots project, the toy manufacturers of the original dogs certainly did not market their product for this kind of alteration.
Was the Feral Robots project successful? How do you measure the success of a project that is intended to perform in the liminal space between rational and emotional?
How do we as designers plan for a potential shift in the reception of our work? Or do we?
Additional Resources:
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C07E6DA163AF935A15755C0A9659C8B63
http://triennial.cooperhewitt.org/index.php?id=47
http://socialtapestries.net/feralrobots/
http://www.goodmagazine.com/section/Portraits/mad_scientist
In her Robotic Feral Public Authoring project, Natalie Jeremijenko developed hacks for remote control devices and robot dog toys to transform them into robotic devices equipped with sensors that gather information about toxins in the environment and relay that information back to project participants for mapping. Through workshops involving community members who help build the bots, Feral Robots project has held multiple trials from Ireland to New York City.
From the creator's web site:
"The feral dog pack event is designed as an opportunity to enable public discourse and open-ended interpretation of the evidence at hand, and an opportunity to coordinate diverse interpretations. The display of the empirical evidence on the local pollutant is intended to enable and change typical lay-expert communication patterns, by raising the standards of evidence, or at least changing who produces this evidence."
http://www.nyu.edu/projects/xdesign/presentation.html
The Feral Robots project sniffs out the span between logic and unreason, the rational and emotional. Designed to encourage participants to reinterpret their environments, the project takes an entertainment based toy and shifts the intended usage to a purpose driven tool with entertaining attributes.
However, as interesting as the results have been, the project has not been accepted as research in the empirical world of robotics and engineering. The publicity and exposure has remained largely under the heading of art and culture.
What we design and plan for does not always remain in the realm of control after we release it for use. In addition to examining the results of the Feral Robots project, the toy manufacturers of the original dogs certainly did not market their product for this kind of alteration.
Was the Feral Robots project successful? How do you measure the success of a project that is intended to perform in the liminal space between rational and emotional?
How do we as designers plan for a potential shift in the reception of our work? Or do we?
Additional Resources:
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C07E6DA163AF935A15755C0A9659C8B63
http://triennial.cooperhewitt.org/index.php?id=47
http://socialtapestries.net/feralrobots/
http://www.goodmagazine.com/section/Portraits/mad_scientist
Success can be measure from several different angle in this project. You can look from a design aspect, an environmental aspect, market aspect, or even a community aspect. I personally feel as if the Feral Robots project reached success in all the aspects to a certain extent. The concept does indeed bring a people of the area together and raises the awareness about issues that needed to be address, such as pollutants in different regions, but in parts such as the process to create these high tech dogs could be under scrutiny. For instants the original maker of the dogs might feel as if they need to step in and seek compensation from any profits made from the effort because they hold the patent or legal right to the plans of the dog. But other than that the Feral Robots project has reached many areas of accomplishment. This success could be measured on the appeal and the response felt by the members of the design team and member of the public. If the public?s opinion matches the designers and the goals are reached in the process then this equals a victory on both ends of the spectrum.
Designers for the most part have a hard time with their work being not received well or the actual meaning not being interrupted correct, but this all depends on the type of project we are working. For example if a artist created a piece of work from a dramatic experience and wants to convey a specific emotion, it will be hard for them to allow other things to stand in for what might also work with their premise.
Posted by LeChastin Mason on February 21, 2008 at 11:21 PM EST #
The Feral Robots project has been successful on many different levels. Although it is not always easy to rate the success of such a design project, there are many key ideas and suggestions that Natalie Jeremijenko has surfaced through the exploration of robot dogs as toxin detectors. Ms. Jeremijenko has been able to reach out to the younger generation, and gravitate them away from their usual beliefs of the use of toys and give them a totally different perspective. She has transformed what used to be an ordinary toy (a dog robot) and allowed children to see the toy as a tool. They are given a first hand experience to see how toys can have a positive impact on the environment, as well as how they themselves can help. Not only has she influenced the younger generation to get involved in protecting our future, but entire communities as well. Across the country community members are coming together to use these robots to detect toxins that may be in areas where we live. It is providing immediate results for people, making it easier for them to understand the need to take measures to begin to take better care of our environment. Thus, giving them the motivation to want to help. Ms. Jeremijenko states, ?Robotic toys embody a particular view of learning and entertainment. Are we equipping our children to address the technological future, or are we simply training them to push buttons in predetermined, pre-scripted interactions?? I couldn?t agree more with Ms. Jeremijenko?s statement as she makes the point that instead of having children just play with already developed toys, she is giving them the opportunity to create the toy- as well as having it be useful in the protection of our environment.
In this design example, success is measured in many different ways. For example, the response of the public- younger and older generations, environmentalists, scientists, and marketers has to all be considered. Also in this specific example, it is easier to measure the success, as this design has been accepted on universal level- having an impact on people of all ages, sex, and geographic location. It has been seen internationally-, which as a designer is not always easy to achieve. With the help of the initial producer of the robot dog along with Ms. Jeremijenko Feral Robot, I believe monumental success may be achieved. On both designers? parts initial success was achieved, however, that success would only be enhanced with the combination and collaboration of the designers. By combining two great ideas and designs, not only will we be helping to protect our environment, but engaging the younger generation to get involved, as well as bringing together communities. Since the public has already responded to this idea and design positively, it is important to act on that response and transform this idea into a successful product.
Posted by Becca Hora on February 25, 2008 at 07:29 PM EST #
The Feral Dog Project was very successful in that it set out to accomplish a certain goal (modifying a robotic toy dog to have a more scientific purpose) and met that goal. It may not have a market value, but that is not the only (or best) measure of success. Natalie Jeremijenko successfully modified the robot to detect environmental toxins. She did not adhere rigidly to the adage "form follows function", but rather went one step further and incorporated emotion into her design. Not only does the dog successfully "sniff out" toxins, but it takes on a form that people can relate to, the beloved family pet. The design is meant to be interactive, and therefore is more successful than if she had chosen some meaningless form. I think it is important to incorporate humanity and art into science, not polarize them.
As designers, it is impossible to anticipate every possible reception of our work. The world is vast and every person thinks differently. We just have to accept that once our work is out there, we have surrendered it to the public and it is theirs to interpret. It would be very arrogant to force our value system on everyone and expect the world to accept our intention as the only possible interpretation. We should think of design more like we think of science. A scientist learns by standing on the shoulders of his/her predecessors. What he/she discovers in a lifetime is just added to the pool of knowledge; a scientist would never patent a discovery and not allow anyone to study it further.
I think it is very admirable that Ms. Jeremijenko used an existing object for the Feral Dog Project and modified it to serve her purpose. She was able to work within a certain constraint (the existing toy dog) and still achieve her goal. Anyone can build from the ground up, but being forced to work within a certain pre-determined value system requires dexterity. It demonstrates the extent of her creativity that she even had the idea, looking at a robotic toy dog, to turn it into a detector of environmental toxins. It is great that she is inspiring kids to challenge their environment and think of new interpretations of the objects around them.
Posted by Kyler McClure on February 26, 2008 at 05:49 PM EST #
When determining whether something is successful or not, it?s important to know what the designer, creator, inventor was trying to accomplish. In this situation, Natalie Jeremijenko basically wants to grab her audiences? attention with a robot that can detect pollutants. She wants this invention to strike up public conversations and interpreted on numerous levels. With that said, the Feral Robots project was definitely successful. She has gotten the attention of multiple areas of discipline; scientific disciplines think its art, art disciplines say it?s science, and the majority of the average consumers think it?s an awesome toy! When I think of robots, I automatically think about machines. In my mind it is normal for a machine to detect toxins but they also have humanlike qualities. I assume the level of its success depends on how humanly- like and/or technologically advance the robot can perform.
It would be difficult to plan for a potential shift because absolutely everything could influence the reception of our work. It?s similar to fads in fashion. Bellbottom jeans were popular in the 70?s, went away, and then came
back in the 90?s. They are no longer popular now, but who?s to say they won?t come back again. The potential shifts in our reception of work could be similarly influenced.
Posted by Camille E. Jackson on February 28, 2008 at 11:30 AM EST #
I do believe that the Feral Robots Project was very successful. Natalie Jeremijenko managed to built these dog robots that can help with many environment hazards all over the world. by including this 'sniffing device', Jeremijenko has taken a simple children's toy and made it with a bigger purpose. Not just for fun but for safety and innovations. Not just the fact that the Feral Robots Project is a success in itself it has opened many doors for continuous research on devices similar to this to help out the environment its another great success of the project.
The success of this project can be measure mostly by the response of the people. The community and those who would be buying the product is more important. Followed by the people that can feed off this project and ideas to make their own research successful. Even though it has not yet been accepted by the research in robotics and engineering, it will be a success to the economical and environmental aspect.
It is very hard for Designers to plan for a reception of our work because each designer has their own ideas. Each person has opinions of their likes and dislikes. Especially relating to architecture what somebody might think its a beautiful building others might think its horrible. Unless I have specific limitations to a project to follow somebody's guideline, you cannot expect a potential shift. I, personally, don't really think about a shift on the reception of my work. Its hard to design something if you want to pertain it to yourself. If you start designing with 'potential' shifts in mind that would be impossible.
Posted by Rocio Lluch on February 28, 2008 at 05:55 PM EST #
The Feral Robots project was very successful in all that the designer set out to accomplish. Natalie Jeremijenko intended the project "as an opportunity to enable public discourse and open-ended interpretation of the evidence at hand," and that's exactly what resulted. All over the Western world, ranging from Ireland to New York, the project has been tested, debated, and evaluated. It has grabbed the attention of high schools, univeristies, and even engineers in robotics, and though these experts in robotics have not yet accepted this research as empirical evidence, Jeremijenko did not aim for their acceptance specifically, but debate among the entire public.
The success of a project intended for the liminal space between rational and emotional is measured by how well the project addresses both elements and blends them for the understanding of the whole. The Feral Robotic Dogs projects was successful in connecting with the emotional and rational levels by taking a robotic toy for entertainment and modifying it as a researching device to inform about toxins in the environment. How a person understands and interprets a project emotionally and rationally determines how successful that design is in connecting with the world.
Designers can rarely plan for a potential shift in how their work will be received. They can design a planned intention for the project, but how the public chooses to view it is always unforeseen. We as designers, can only remain open-minded to multiple perspectives and receptions and realize that a design will often affect people on many different levels.
Posted by Eileen McDonough on February 28, 2008 at 05:59 PM EST #
I believe The Feral Robotic Dog project was very successful. Natalie Jeremijenko accomplished what she set out to do and challenged a current engineering practice by focusing on current social conditions. The robotic dogs seek out sources of environmental toxins using a range of electronic sensors while taking on a familiar, human feel. Using technology that was readily available and building off of that adds to the product effectiveness, only minimal equipment had to be added or modified to finish the Dog. The function of the robots mimics the function of the animal it represents, dogs perform the same processes and the robots are also being used in packs, this also makes it more emotional and relatable to people in the emotional aspect. I think we can measure the success of a project such as this by the reaction and responses of the people, the function and rationality will be there but I feel it is the emotional side that must be accepted for the project as a whole to be a success.
I don?t think that as designers we plan for a potential shift in the reception of our work, we work with an intention of how our ideas may be reacted to, but can never fully judge the public acceptance of them. Our work is our own, a part of us, we cannot modify that to accompany for how people may receive it.
Posted by Erika Jolleys on February 28, 2008 at 10:58 PM EST #
I think that the Design Life Now website (http://triennial.cooperhewitt.org/index.php?id=47) is a clear indicator of the success Natalie Jeremijenko has and will achieve. It states that these dogs have a social agenda. They are meant to be "an inexpensive way to get a sophisticated robotics platform into the hands of kids" and to "imagine toys and technologies with a different purpose." By using a product familiar to kids she is able to gain their initial interest and then direct it towards a practical and relevant concern. Like she says, it puts learning and entertainment together in one package.
The feral dog project isn't yet recognized by robotics and engineering but that does not determine whether or not it is successful. I'm sure it will seem more successful when/if that happens, but Natalie has definitely done something right if her product is being used internationally.
As designers, it is hard to plan for shifts in the reception of our work since we have a specific goal in mind from the beginning, but it is a possibility and, as these articles show, isn't uncommon. Planning for a shift in our work is difficult and there is no specific way to do so because we don't know in which direction the shift will be. However, I know that we should prepare ourselves for this possibility so that we are not totally taken aback if it does indeed happen.
Posted by Maggie Kirsch on February 29, 2008 at 11:31 AM EST #
The success can be measured in many ways. As a designer, understanding the needs of real world, and creating new use of technologies into designs or inventions are the key ideas of success. Therefore, I believe Natalie Jeremijenko?s Feral Dog project was very successful. By Natalie choosing very near and friendly object, ?robot dog toys?, we can assume that Natalie thinks protecting environment is everyday matter for everyone on the earth. If Natalie just designed a random fancy device for the same function, then it would not appeal to the normal people. They may assume this equipment is for the professionals only. Designer?s intension was to get audience?s attention by putting in entertaining factor. Natalie was successful to combine multiple functions into the design and to figure out new use of technologies. Natalie achieved to connect rational and emotional space by following her own intention.
I think it would be hard to plan for the reception of our work. Everyone on the earth have different ideas, and each designers have their own intentions and own ways to finding solution. Designer must be able to accept others critiques, but also be able to follow own intention. Without self-confidence it would be impossible to design any object that is different from others. Design is making ourselves feel good and getting paid for what you enjoy doing.
Posted by Seunghuan Ji on February 29, 2008 at 01:29 PM EST #
As an architecture student, one of my concerns is the psychological effect that my designs will have on the people that inhabit those spaces. I really want to make people feel x, y, and z while in this space, but do I actually achieve those effects? A similar thought applies to environmental scientists. How do we connect to the public on such a level that they are moved to act on current environmental issues? With all of the important scientific research that has been done in recent years, the result is that the public is barely reaching the cusp of environmental awareness. As well, media attempts such as 'an inconvenient truth' have obviously failed. They may move us to an extent, but how many of us have seriously altered the way we live because of the movie?
This is why Jeremijenko's work is so brilliant. Scientifically, she may not have the most influential work, but she's able to connect to people in a way that actually matters. She's targeting the future by specifically influencing kids at an early age. They're very impressionable, and her feral robots project is able to communicate to them that their playgrounds are actually toxic waste repositories. To communicate that might just have such an effect that the next generation may be moved to action. Regardless of what the scientic community says, her work may not be 'valid' but it's one of the few programs that may actually have some real success.
Posted by Ryan Kilby on February 29, 2008 at 02:30 PM EST #
I do believe the Feral Robots project was successful. Since the creator, Natalie Jeremijenko, stated that the event was designed to ?enable public discourse? and ?coordinate diverse interpretations?, I think this project accomplished its task. The project has been the subject of discourse by many different fields from engineering, biology, and art, and has been implemented from Florida to the Netherlands, and Arizona to Ireland. Since public authoring seems to be one of the main problems this design wished to solve, I think it is successful in doing just that. By involving kids in action, I believe this project will have a greater impact than most other static scientific studies. Also, the way the project exploits the markets of scale to make its robots from less costly and environmentally friendlier sources is very appropriate and beautiful. This project therefore, is successful on two major levels, the overall public reaction intent was satisfied, and the Feral Robots themselves are designed in a way that is essential to the message being conveyed.
Even though the findings from the project were not accepted by the majority of the scientific community, I still find it worth the effort. I think it would have been very hard for Jeremijenko to anticipate the reception of her work because of its complex nature. In ?Natalie Jeremijenko: The WorldChanging Interview? Emily Gertz writes, ?Natalie Jeremijenko?s work merges engineering, biology and art to explore socio-political hot spots along the fault line where design meets information meets society.? With all these different and complex angles and aspects of this project, I think it would be nearly impossible for the designer to anticipate every reaction. I think what matters most is that Jeremijenko anticipated the public reaction, that it would encourage discourse among people about the environments thus satisfying one of its main objectives.
http://www.worldchanging.com/archives/001450.html
Posted by Jillian Jones on March 04, 2008 at 10:02 PM EST #