The ‘did you feel it’ symposium was held in the Designhuis in Eindhoven on the 16th of September. Several speakers from various disciplines joined with artists and students from the Dutch Art Institute (DAI) in order to express their thoughts and concerns regarding the link, or lack thereof, between digital interfaces and affection. The day was divided into three blocks, each consisting of a pairing of a keynote lecture and an artist presentation, which succeeded in keeping the flow diverse and animated.

The day opened with Mercedes Bunz (lector at the University of Westminster, and researcher in digital media), who presented on the alienating effect of technology in the contemporary world. The interface, the code and the various other aspects of emerging digital technology are becoming ever more sophisticated. As such, Bunz argues, technology can be seen as an alien force that acts upon us and affects our lives. We cannot predict what will be the next technological development or how it will influence us.

Bunz unfolded her claim by mentioning the phenomenon of anthropomorphisation of technology or some of its constituents. Taking into consideration the logos and the mascots of the most prominent digitally-based companies in the world, the speaker showed that there is a tendency to use an animal and human-like icons as representatives of the specific brand. Internet sensations such as Twitter, Mozilla Firefox, Linux and GitHub all use (cute) animal images to appeal to the public, arguably to make the complex technology and the back-end side of it appear less scary and alien. What is more, there is a noticeable amount of objects and animals with human characteristics in digital media. Reddit’s alien mascot is perhaps the best example. It is quite clearly non-human, a being that has a distinctive digital ontology, characterised by the antennae on its head. However, it has a lot of human physical features, and, in fact, it is used to represent the individuals in the reddit communities.

These numerous simplified and minimalist designs and interfaces have an ambivalent effect on the user. On the one hand, a simple and intuitive interface allows the user to navigate easily and to achieve a desired goal without the need to fully understand how the technology behind it functions. On the other hand, this dumbed-down and child-like treatment of the user suggests a sort of (new?) patronising relationship between the human and the machine. There seems to be an infantilization of the Internet, Bunz suggests, and it is perceivable at every step. Important historical events (such as the sealing of Magna Carta) find themselves overly simply summarised and enacted in ever more frequent Google doodles. They are playful stories, and seem aimed at children. However, the information behind them is often overly complex for children. By presenting more complex information as simple childlike doodles, Google both facilitates comprehension of that information (empowerment), but at the same time, it patronises the online user. The result is ambivalent, or rather “diffracted,” observes Bunz. This specific phenomenon produces two radically different conditions: on the one hand, that of emancipation, and on the other, that of infantilisation.

Bunz ends her talk with an invitation to consider the latter happenings. Should we accept this? Should we revolt against being treated as immature and dull in relation to technology? And where does art fit in all this? Is it also affected by infantilisation and emancipation? Bunz’s final remark is nevertheless relatively positive. Technology is so diverse and intricate, and it makes us look at art differently. Art does not seem to have any problem on the internet. In fact, it unfolds into many creative directions and manages to take up different shapes and forms.