I like how Aaron reflects the film theory back to HCI. The similarities and dissimilarities between these two are really good insights to review HCI.
Another topic covered both in the reading and the question for in-class exercise might be “realism” and “formalism.” I am not sure if I understand them right. Concerning realism, cinema phtographically copy physical reality. As to formalism, cinema stylistically transfigures physical reality. Trying get back to HCI design, I think to copy physical reality might mean to copy the “experience” and “common sense” of users. For example, the icon design usually uses existing cognition of human beings to make users know what it refers to in a short time.
This is part of it. But the other part, “formalism”, is more tougher to me to understand and to clarify how it relates to HCI. I am trying to address it a little bit. For now, I think formalism to HCI is somehow like what Jeff claimed in class: shaping culture. Mainstream culture is reality. HCI design not only represents this reality, but shapes and develops something new to put back into the mainstream culture. In this way, the reality is transfigured. Also, the interface also communicates particular messages; the designer of the interface design experience, not only copy it.
I might be wrong on both of these. But it is really interesting to see how film theory could be used in HCI. I wonder how HCI designers define physical reality, but it must lead to the discussion of phenomenology. 😀