The book review summarising Johnson’s Interface Culture main points and outlining th arguments used to support them. Furthermore, it discusses the main sections of the book and describes how, in my opinion they contribute to the overall argument presented in the text. In the following, there is a short outline of the content:

Content:

• 1. Initial summary
• 2. Main discussion of the book
• 3. Identification of weaknesses and strengths
• 4. Personal reaction to the book

The gothic cathedrals made the infinity imaginable for the mediaeval people. The present modern interface represents the same as described in Steven Johnson’s Interface Culture.
Steven Johnson writes in his book Interface Culture how far the cultural change is progressed by the interaction with the computer, which is comparable with the rise of the Gutenberg’s letterpress or the fall of the church as well. Johnson’s Interface Culture considers the design and development of computer interfaces and their user friendliness since the 60ies. In Interface Culture there is a new cultural term stamped by Johnson. In regard to this, his basic massage based on the fact that technology and culture are not controversial but interoperable: “The central topic of this book – the fusion of art and technology that we call interface design.” [Johnson, page 6].
He compares the technological progress of the digital age with the greatest inventions of the past centuries, because all social revolutions and radical cultural changes are always accompanied by the same technological pioneering spirit as well as its failures.
Therefore Johnson takes a step forward and joins the “object-world of technology” and the “world of culture” together, because “they have been united all along” [Johnson, page 1] such as the first cave painters, who were both artists and engineers, or the term technoculture. Defining an interface for a Human-Computer Interaction without any cultural aspects is not imaginable in Johnson’s Interface Culture. In his Interface Culture there is no dividing or contrast between engineers and artists.

Johnson’s first section “Bitmapping” is based on Doug Engelbart’s product demonstration of 1968. Engelbart visualised for the first time the information-space and represented consequently the basic concept of the present graphical user interface (GUI). He divided the screen into a two-dimensional grid of pixels and each of these pixels could be displayed with black or white. This fundamental idea enables to provide data with spatial attributes for translating “all digital information into a visual language” [Johnson, page 13] and to use a graphical interface instead of a command line. Engelbart used already a mouse to dispose information on the screen (analogue to the present icons on the desktop). Johnson emphasises the importance of Engelbart’s presentation with the cultural analogy to Luther’s 95 theses in Wittenberg [Johnson, page 11].
With regard to the two-dimensional space, Johnson in addition requires a multi-dimensional environment to handle the rising flood of information caused by the grow of “global networks of information” [Johnson, page18]. His requirement based on the fact that a modern society “is increasingly shaped by events in cyberspace” [Johnson, page 19], such as the navigation through virtual market places.
In respect of Johnson’s basic message, he thinks that the new cultural significance of interface design bases on “preexisting [cultural] traditions” [Johnson, page 19] such as art or architecture. Under this aspect, the interplay of previous and future forms plays a major role for the creative process of interface designer and emphasises increasingly the symbiosis of art and technology. Interface designers are cultural representatives, who establish “the fusion of art and technology”, because such an “innovative region of the modern world reveals itself to us only through the anonymous middlemen of interface design” [Johnson, page 19].

The further development of graphical interfaces is stamped by metaphors, which is discussed in section “Desktop” by Johnson. In regard to Engelbart’s invention, it was difficult for interface designers to create an information-space on the screen with an illusion of depth in the 70’s. Therefore Alan Kay extended Engelbart’s spatial environment to the desktop metaphor¹.
It is based on the idea to regard the screen as a desk with piece of papers, which represents projects on the desk.
The illusion of depth was implemented by overlapping windows and Apple released Kay’s initial desktop metaphor with the Macintosh in 1984. The modern interface was born and “had become a medium”, which is “no longer lifeless” [Johnson, page 50].
In context of interoperability between culture and technology, the interface was “now an autonomous entity” and so “a work of culture as much as technology” [Johnson, page 50], since an organised information-space implies “personal value” and a “type of community” [Johnson, page 62]. In addition, Johnson praised the modern interface as the possibility to map the endless information-space on the monitor in the same manner as the gothic cathedrals symbolised the infinity for the mediaeval people [Johnson, page 42].
But he also criticises that the present interface design is confined on the desktop metaphor and it is not enhanced in a multidimensional environment metaphor with convivial gatherings (“social interfaces” [Johnson, page 67]).

The section “Windows” turns the attention to the details of the windows-metaphor and why it “rarely work in the service of spatial memory” [Johnson, page 78]. Based on the human way of thinking, Johnson focuses on the fact that information is textually organised by “terms of categories” [Johnson, page 78] and not spatially. In regard of this, Johnson argues that Windows-based file systems are not qualified for “spatial memory”, because it works only if objects remain in one places [Johnson, page 77]. Johnson asserts that windows involve “textual limitations” [Johnson, page 79] and their real benefit comprise only the replacement of command-driven modes.
In respect of cultural analogies, Johnson accompanies the discussion of windows with a social and historical perception by associating the modern digital world with the philosophical as well as postmodernism mindsets of Turkle or Descartes. Johnson complains in “Links” that the associative and synthetic possibility to navigate with a hypertext link has apparently taken a back seat for the “splintered universe of channel surfing” [Johnson, page 111]. He associates today’s hypertext links with Victorian novels of Dickens “narrative links”, which “stitched together the torn fabric of industrial society” [Johnson, page 116]. But Johnson recognises that hypertext links provide simply the method of bookmarking of singular web sites (“like snapshots” [Johnson, page 122] ). In addition, the present links have both no possibility to track the process that leads users to those sites and no facility to store such thought processes in a repository “analog of the way the brain works” [Johnson, page 119]. Therefore Johnson praises Vannevar Bush’s concept of his Memex microfilm machine, which was developed in the forties, and already realised such methods to build and to store trails of information.

In section “Text” Johnson focuses on the importance of text in the current interface design. Based on the adverse reaction to the command line (“the DOS complex“ [Johnson, page 150]) the role of textual interface design is increasingly displaced by the graphical interface. Johnson argues that its potential is not fully tapped and however he makes clear that “modern interface uses text in many different ways“ [Johnson, page 151]. He refers to the Apple’s V-Twin software, which is based on the pattern-matching technology and makes it possible to detect statically linguistic or textual patterns in a text. In respect of this technology, Apple’s V-Twin organises the results of a certain pattern request in a disk icon which is called “View”². Apple’s view concept creates a semantic interface and makes it possible to organise files or data by their meaning.

In the section “Agents” Johnson turns his attention to the details of intelligent agents. He denominates agents as “personalities”, which have individual characteristics, or a “physical appearance” [Johnson, page 176]. They can have mimic human properties or can be only traveling agents to dispatch certain tasks such as to obtain the lowest priced tickets. What agents have in common is that they are only “delegates” or “representatives” [Johnson, page 180] which are based on the concept of “indirect manipulation”³ [Johnson, page 179].
With reference to these aspects, Johnson discusses if agents shall be able to fulfil no more than wishes (“pull media” [Johnson, page 189]) or actually anticipate desires (“push media”⁴ [Johnson, page 189]) as well as their dangers.
In regard to this, Johnson warns of agents with too much authority to “make decisions on our behalf” [Johnson, page180], because the graphic-interface is based on the idea to make user smarter and not machines [Johnson, page 180]. He criticises the characteristics of such “push” media which fulfil requirements before their arise. He comments snidely that such agents are only “an excuse for poor interface design” [Johnson, page 191] and they cannot differentiate subjective preferences:

„You might be a huge Dickens fan, but that doesn’t make you a lover of Victorian serial novels written by men ” [Johnson, page 193].

In the context of dangers of agents, Johnson quoted Mary Shelly’s book Frankenstein or Lanier’s published “The Trouble with Agents”. With these critical literature, he emphasises the significance of this issue. Johnson fears that agents embody only marketing requirements and do not really fulfil individual needs. Based on this fact, he argues for “better ways to pull” [Johnson, page 191] information.

The gothic cathedrals made the infinity imaginable for the mediaeval people. The present modern interface represents the same and makes the endless information-space accessible. Such or similar other analogies play a major role in Johnson’s Interface Culture. His argumentation is based on the combination of “technical explanation, historical narratives and cultural analogies” [Johnson, page 9] to literature and art, which emphasises his idea of interface design and convince mostly. The intention of an analogy is to point out the content of one thing by showing its resemblances to another.
A weakness of Johnson’s argumentation in Interface Culture is that sometimes his used analogies or arguments do not fully convey his points of view. They confuse rather than illuminate his main position. For instance, in the section “Links” he uses the analogy between Dicken’s narrative links and hypertext links. Johnson seems to be a Dicken literate, because he draws out that in Dicken’s novels the reunion of a “dispersed family” [Johnson, page 113] across “different social groups” [Johnson, page 114] and economical contrast play a major role in conjunction with the Industrial Revolution. Based on this argument Johnson uses the following analogy between Dicken’s narrative links and the modern hypertext links:

„Where Dicken’s narrative links stitched together the torn fabric of industrial society, today’s hyptertext links attempt the same with information” [Johnson, page 116].

But this analogy does not point out anything and has no similarities, because familiy affairs have always a common root in comparison to information. Whereas connected information can be associated from different sources with another and can possibly contain common dependencies. This analogy feels forced and is inappropriate.

An another weakness of Interface culture is its alternating argumentation. On the one hand Johnson requires a new visual language which should be described by a multi-dimensional environment with social elements. And on the other hand he criticises software like “The Palace” or video games such as “Quake”, which comply with his requirements. He complains about the characteristics of ”The Palace” and “Quake”. Johnson draws out that the social possibilities and in particular the conversations within “The Palace” comprises only a kind “of graffiti, and graffiti of the worst kind” [Johnson, page 69] and games like “Quake” focuses only on the virtual space, which “doesn’t frame the conversation” [Johnson, page 73]. But it is necessary to keep in mind, that he criticises only certain environment characteristics, which are affected by the user, and not the interface design itself.
The reader is torn between “extraordinary” [Johnson, page 66] software creation and “some massive back-lot set with a dozen tourists and passersby improvising lines awkwardly under the floodlights” [Johnson, page 70]. Johnson is not in line with his requirement to a multi-dimensional environment.

But Johnson’s diction is a strength of Interface Culture. With his provocative and critical style he follows the narrow path of technical explanations, historical narratives, and cultural analogies. He uses a lot of stylistic elements like analogies and metaphors to emphasise his point of view. For instance the analogy of gothic cathedrals and the modern interfaces, which represent the infinity, emphasis the togetherness of culture and technology:

“On the most elemental level, I see it as a book of connections, a book of links – one in which desktop metaphors cohabit with Gothic cathedrals, and hypertext links rub shoulders with Victorian novels” [Johnson, page 8].

Thus, he balances successfully between his technical descriptions and cultural analogies, because such a figurative language is intended for both computer literates and man of letters. In particular he acts his provocative style out in the section “Agents” with his vision of how Firefly’s social agents could acquit oneself of the mass-media indoctrination:

“If Firefly’s social agents come to dominate a large swath of popular taste, we can expect the basic rhythmus and shapes of cultural production to change dramatically, becoming increasingly volatile, increasingly hard to predict. We will migrate from the stultifying but stable system of mass media to the more anarchic realm of cultural feedback loops. That change is bound to be an exciting one, and perhaps even more democratic than the current system of mass-media indoctrination” [Johnson, page 199].

In regard to this quotation, his vision of social agents comprises the possibility to produce a more democratic culture which is independent of corporations’ decisions such as the predetermined “mainstream music world” [Johnson, page 201] of record executives. Johnson goes on step ahead and suggests that “the Firefly model does away with the old Manichean opposition between mass culture and subculturerldquo; [Johnson, page 201].
With such provocative statements Johnson animates to start a new critical discussion about interface design in the context of cultural aspects. Thus, Johnson’s Interface Culture could be enriched with new elements such as a metaphor of hand gestures or advanced interface solutions to convey nonverbal signals (tactile interface).

Johnson’s Interface Culture is a visionary book about the change of communication behaviour caused by computer and internet. It contains three main statements in the context of interface design:

• Technology and culture interact interoperable.
• Metaphors are the fundamental elements in the interface design. In particular the multi-dimensional environment in the future.
• In the context of cultural aspects a new kind of critical discussion has to be started about the modern interface elements.

Based on these facts Johnson discusses essentially in his sections the present main elements of interface: the desktop, windows, links, text, and intelligent agents. Johnson accompanies these present elements of interface design with cultural analogies such as the Dickens’ novel, the invention of the phonograph and Gothic architecture. With such analogies he emphasises impressively the interoperability of technology and culture as well as their future possibilities. Johnson’s Interface Culture accomplishes the assignment of modern interface design in consideration of technological and cultural aspects. It is impressive how well Johnson is informed about the development of the interface design. In addition, he is a Dickens literate who is preferentially quoted by Johnson in the context of interoperability of technology and culture.

Johnson’s opinion is right, that the interface design is a crucial stimulation for culture, because a modern society “is increasingly shaped by events in cyberspace” [Johnson, page 19] and a new interfaces will base on “preexisting [cultural] traditions” [Johnson, page 19] in the future. With regard to these aspects, he establishes effectually a basis to associate E. T. A. Hoffman’s “The Sandman”, Victorian novels of Charles Dickens or gothic cathedrals with graphical user interfaces.
Johnson takes the reader over and over by his hand and makes a time travel with him. In respect of this, he always refers to novels in the nineteenths century, which reflects the industrial revolution. Thus, he tries to make some parallels for example between the hypertext medium, which accompanies the information revolution, with “Dicken’s narrative links” [Johnson, page 116 ] in the context of the industrial revolution. In addition, his cognition that hypertext links are only “element of style” [Johnson, page 130] and such chronological parallels accentuate this book. Even if sometimes his cultural analogies do not fully support his points.

Johnson’s Interface Culture is an inspiring book, because he impressively explains on the one hand the consequences of the interface on social life and on the other hand the importance of metaphors in the field interface design. Based on the these facts, the reader begins to recognise that in the field of interface design nothing is enhanced since the 60ies. Therefore Johnson’s requirement to a new kind of critical discussion about modern interface is justified.
He pragmatically and well informed presents his examples, associated with the history of the graphical interface as well as in conjunction with literature or movies. For instance the mechanical woman in E. T. A. Hoffman’s “The Sandman” is manifested parallel to Ridley Scott”s film “Blade Runner” [Johnson, page 187] in the context of agents’ discussion. The reader is surprised by these associatives and furthermore they emphasise Johnson’s central topic .
Johnson’s Interface Culture is one of those special books which based not upon theories. For his Interface Culture he uses sophisticated concepts such as Engelbart’s bitmapping, Alan Kay’s further development to the desktop metaphor and finally the perfection by Apple’s Macintosh. Such anecdotes advance the comprehension of interface design.

As described in Johnson’s preface the book is directed to computer users and novices. Based on this fact, it is one of its strengths that Johnson does not use any detailed technical explanations, but he speaks generally about concepts. But its strength is simultaneously a weakness, because of the reader, who wants to know more about interface techniques in detail. In regard to this, Johnson’s Interface Culture contains no information if the current computer technology really has the sufficient material to implement a new visual language or if new technologies are required. Johnson does not clarify the technical background of the mentioned concepts. In fact, he explains that it was never his intention. But it is necessary to consolidate his Interface Culture in a technical way. Thus, Johnson’s book is only the basis for a new interface design and could be expanded with a tangible user interface or a tactile interface.
Now it is necessary to discuss about the sufficient technologies in detail in order to realise his Interface Culture. In retrospect with Johnson and in common with the present media development, it is true, that the entire medial culture was and is an Interface Culture. Only the interface enables to integrate the fragmented world of information.

Download article: