The History of the Interface in Interactive Art

Söke Dinkla uses examples from Myron Krueger, Jeffrey Shaw, David Rokeby, Lynn Hershman,Grahame Weinbren, and Ken Feindold to help establish her six categories of interactivity.

The Six categories of interactivity are:
Power and Play
Participation Vs. Interaction
Proximity and Manipulation
Strategies of Seduction
Nonlinear Narration
Remembering, Forgetting, and Reconstructing

“This may seem complicated, because Interactive uses the same technology it comments upon, meaning, there is a certain lack of distance. The situation of Interactive Art is therefore comparable with Video Art, which had to gain certain independence from the language of television.”

This quote speaks about how art needs to have a separation from the technology that helps create it. In relation to video art and television, video art needed to have some type of distance from television. Television has a long history of soap operas to cartoons; this might not be wanted in a piece of video art.
Any new media form of art work has a struggle to separate itself from the history attached to technology or iconography it uses. No matter what type of art you are doing you have to be away of the implication a certain object might have to your piece. Personally I created a found object piece from a book. Books have iconography but also a lot of meaning that can be implied to the piece that some might not want. An artist must be aware of what implication things can have on their piece, they can either play on the idea of them, or do something to distract away from those meanings.
Each form of art also struggles to separate itself from the technology that creates it. The photograph was supposed to be representing the truth; photographers often manipulate a photograph to display something that is no longer the truth. Artist can comment on the technology they use by pointing out the flaws.