Have app designers, back-end architects, and big data enthusiasts created the space, the interval required for their users to become collaborators? Is the new tool really solving x problem, where x will mean "no more business as usual?" Or are technologists too busy disrupting each other's actual businesses to recognize the emotional destruction left in their upgraded wake?
There is a Yoruba saying: when the elephants fight, it is the grass that suffers.
Technology is known for the art of disruption in the wider world. It is celebrated among the initiated, and invested. For people with allegiances beyond code, who have little concern for a clean UX or frictionless processing, this disruption is just plain disruptive. It's a mighty inconvenience; it is tactless, without guile, and seemingly pointless. It feels fake, looks like a money grubbing endeavor. Most importantly, it requires the user to strip themselves of their sense of self in order to find a way to become a user in this new environment, system, process, window, color scheme…
The problem with disruption is one of story.
In this talk, I'll ask us to think of ways to hear the story telling itself between the spaces of the teams, investigation, preparation, scoring, application, performance, recitation and reiteration. This is made by art, not artificially driven, disruptive change. It is interval, pause, negative space,
, no-thingness which defines information and generates data. You cannot say I am dancing until I have stopped moving. Then you check against your data sets about movement and determine that I have danced. You tell a story with past information to arrive at a co-created now.
Can artful disruption generate pleasured collaborators?