I just finished reading the Design Quarterly “HATS” by Richard Saul Wurman. Amongst other things, he elegantly describes the juxtaposition of information to reveal new information. “The creative organization of information creates new information” he elaborates:
“The hats never change, but hanging them in different patterns or with different rules or on different racks can affect what we learn about them”.
This got me thinking about permanence and flexibility in information design. I think Wurman’s description makes an excellent case for the value of interactive visualization. A visualization with an interface that is static or permanent is locked in a single configuration denying the other potential meanings from coming to the surface. The hats are in effect glued to the rack. Whereas a flexible interface allows for rapid reconfiguration and unlocking of additional meanings.
I interpret a static interface for information design such as a poster as an authoritative conclusion. It is authoritative because the manipulating of the hats was taken care of by the expert and the expert has distilled the findings into a static image. On the opposite side, I see the dynamic interface as an invitation to explore and produce new meaning. It is an invitation to move the hats.
I don’t think either of these approaches is universally better than the other when it comes to communicating with intent. What interests me is how successful each method is in engaging the viewer/user. I think engagement presupposes all learning and I suspect that meaningful interactivity increases the chances of engagement. This belief spawned my pre-thesis statement:
How does the assertion and relinquishing of authorial control over message and experience in visualization influence participation and experience for the audience?
My response to this question in my pre-thesis is that when the user has a stake in the creative process the experience is more meaningful. Which leads me to the question, if the most distilled information design is not necessarily the most engaging, are there more effective means of communicating information?