Digital jewellery and family relationships

Jayne Wallace, Dan Jackson, Cas Ladha and Patrick Olivier

Culture Lab, Newcastle University

Andrew Monk and Mark Blythe

University of York

Peter Wright
Sheffield Hallam University

Ubiquitous computing technologies are defining an emerging cultural fabric that is becoming
interwoven into everyday life and giving form to ‘digital culture’, through which human
meaning and communication derives from the potentials of such technologies. As the
pervasive and ambient computing agendas move forward, the possible augmentation of both
physical space and the human body with small lightweight sensing and transmitting devices
opens up many possibilities for new forms of communication, social interaction, digital
experience and community involvement.

While many researchers point to a future in which social interaction, personal well being, and
sense of community are enhanced through such technology, others point to a vision that
raises concerns around power, privacy, control and personal liberty (McCullough 1996,
Cooper 1999). There is thus a need for improvements in theory, design methodologies and
practice to ensure that future developments are appropriately human-centred, so as to
enhance people’s quality of life rather than detract from it.

Researchers in human-computer interaction have begun to address these issues in a number

of ways. Norman (2004) and others have begun to address emotional design, Shneiderman
(2002) has argued for human needs analysis that is culturally and personally sensitive.
However, the practice of wearables development (i.e. technology worn on, in, or close to the
body) is predominantly technology-driven. Commercial proposals have in general been
superficial realisations of the potential for digital jewellery that have exploited the body as an
opportunistic site for pervasive technologies (Wallace & Press, 2004). The emphasis has
been one of technological advancement, in which behaviour, services and functions of more
conventional devices have been embedded in objects to be worn in pre-defined ways for pre-
defined purposes and activities (IBM 2000; Nokia 2000).

By placing a jewellery at the centre of our research programme we endeavour to address

notions of power, privacy and control through a recognition that the sense of making is
important; the sensitivities within craft are more than the physical sense of making; the
empathic and relational emotional sensibilities in craft practice enable it to be a significant
form of practice when designing and making objects that have the potential to operate in an
emotionally significant way for individuals. In our previous work we have identified parallels
and connections between craft practice and what we call the felt life of experience (McCarthy
& Wright 2004). This offers a new approach to understanding people’s relationship with
technology, exploring it as experience in terms of its emotional and sensual qualities. In all
contexts experience is a complex and obscure term and we contend that whilst we may not
be able to design an experience per se, we may design environments which offer the
potential for certain varieties of experience.

Intriguingly, elevating the notion of craft, within a digital culture, is a challenge to both the
process and context of craft itself (Press & Cusworth, 1998; McCullough, 1996). Indeed, craft
practitioners cannot presume that there is relevance for craft objects and craft processes in a
world where digital technologies and associated objects are increasingly prominent in public
and private lives. Craft practitioners need to communicate and assert the value of this
particular set of skills, approach and perspective. However, this craft-centred exploration of
the digital domain has the potential to provide insights into interaction design that could be of
value more generally. For example, by developing new ways of engaging designers with
users’ experiences (Wright & McCarthy 2005) and defining new goals and criteria for human-
centred design such as empathy and enchantment (Wallace & Press 2004; McCarthy, Wright,
Wallace & Dearden 2006).

Digital jewellery is, in part, a vehicle for exploring our broader objectives, the insights that the
practice of craft (jewellery design) can afford in a specific interaction context. Our previous
work on human experience (Wright, Blythe and McCarthy 2006; Wright, and McCarthy 2005;
Wright, McCarthy and Meekison 2003) has critiqued some approaches to user-centred design
for its over-emphasis on simplistic, and essentially static, categorisations of the individual
“user” and use context (e.g. designing for children, or schools, the elderly living at home, the
knowledge worker’s office, etc.). Our approach to experience-centred design emphasises a
more open, process-oriented view, where the accent is on the dynamics of change. Through
the design of digital jewellery we hope to explore aspects of family experience.

Process

A practice-centred methodology has been developed rooted in craft practice where the
research tests the appropriateness of contemporary jewellery as a creative strategy and
research tool in the further development of ubiquitous digital technologies. Key to this is the
formation of an interdisciplinary team of researchers, from art, design & craft, computing
science, and electronics.

Jewellery allows us to explore the, often intimate, spaces created by interpersonal

relationships and communications. The role of a contemporary jeweller is not to add an
aesthetic to a technology, but to force much bigger questions and issues; questioning
motivations, relevancies, and forms of digital objects and interaction. Crucially we consider
how jewellery can act to play a role within what we each consider personally meaningful for
us in our lives, in an emotional context, and how the expression of fragments of this can be
enriched through the integration of digital technologies.

Extending our previous work (Wallace (2006), Wallace, Dearden & Fisher (2005), Wallace
(2004), Wallace & Press (2004), Wallace (2003), Wallace & Press (2003) ) we focus on
criteria of personal emotional significance in the personal histories of individual participants.
This involves using shared stories and personal biographies as inspiration for highly personal
and emotionally based jewellery and digital interactions. Examples of pieces resulting from
this process are ‘Sometimes’ (figure 1) and ‘Blossom’ (figure 2)

Figure 1 ‘Sometimes’ (stills from video) Jayne Wallace

The form and digital potential of the neckpiece “Sometimes” (figure 1) refer to objects,
memories, human connections and experiences, which are described as meaningful by the
participant. The digital potential of the jewellery is to trigger a small number of silent filmic
image sequences, of personal significance to this particular wearer, on digital displays in the
near radius to the necklace. The digital potential is future focused, where these sequences
could occur on digital screens and displays in a personal or public environment. The digital
occurrences are not intended to be frequent; they will only happen rarely and in randomised
succession. The quietness of both the jewellery piece and these interactions mean that the
hustle and bustle of a location are not altered, only the imagery draws attention to the event,
indeed the ‘digital visit’ may be missed entirely or glimpsed as it fades.

The imagery will have a particular meaning for the wearer, but is not identifiable to others as
belonging to the wearer. The films of a white horse in marshland and a pastry cutter making
indentations in pastry are sufficiently ambiguous to open up interactions for other people who
see them. The necklace has an ambiguity of function, there are no buttons, no obvious ways
of controlling the digital aspects of the piece and in extension to this the necklace remains
visually dormant, using other digital devices and displays as vessels for the visual
interactions.

“Blossom” (figure 2) is a hand-worn piece, made from wood, glass, silver and vintage postage
stamps. The form and digital potential of the piece refer to the participant’s shared love of
nature, precious relationships with her Grandmothers, connections to family and family land in
Cyprus.

Figure 2 ‘Blossom’ Jayne Wallace

This piece is made to act essentially as a connection to human relationships and to a specific
place. The jewellery object, residing with the participant in London, is connected to a rain
sensor, planted on the participant’s family land in Cyprus. Inside the glass dome of the
jewellery piece the old Cypriot postage stamps are closed like the petals of a flower, attached
to a mechanism, waiting to receive a signal sent initially from the rain sensor. Once the rain
sensor has registered a predetermined quantity of rain in Cyprus, which may take months or
even years a signal is sent to the jewellery object and the mechanism is activated, slowly
opening the petals like a flower blossoming. The piece sustains the flower metaphor further
by blossoming only once.

The object acts as a memory trigger through its form and materials to past relationships
experienced by the participant and as a connection to a specific place as the events of nature
in one geographical location influence the internal physical form of the jewellery object in
another. The jewellery piece involves a passive interaction and an ambiguity of function. The
piece relates to time, and preciousness. It offers a way of viewing objects with digital
capabilities in an atypical way, one that echoes and values the fleeting quality of many of our
experiences and the lasting quality of many of our feelings for other people. It uses digital
technologies as a way to harness the ephemeral characteristics of a flower blossoming, rather
than for the more common uses of digital technologies of repeatability and immediacy.

Intergeneration project

We are currently engaged in a project that concentrates on the concept and design of shared
digital jewellery objects for two family members, from different generations. We are working
with a mother of 75 and her daughter of 45. Our methods and approach echo our past
research, again focusing on meaningful personal experiences from the participants’ lives.
Unlike past projects, however, we aim to make jewellery for two people, and to echo
fragments of personal emotional significance for both. The neckpieces (“Journeys between
ourselves” Figure 3) are made from porcelain, paper, felt, light sensors, motors, motes,
accelerometers and batteries.

Figure 3 ‘Journeys between ourselves’ Jayne Wallace (in collaboration with Dan Jackson, Cas Ladha,
Patrick Olivier, Andrew Monk, Peter Wright and Mark Blythe)
These images show the pieces almost completed.

The pieces are a response to shared images, stories and experiences from both participants
and centre largely on the role of specific books in their lives. Light sensors in each piece
detect a wearer touching and holding the porcelain form. The partnering piece then softly
trembles in response. We developed this haptic and tactile way of interacting with the
neckpieces with the hope of facilitating a gentle, human centred mode of communication. We
consider the resulting reflection and critical analysis of this dialogue as an important output of
this research endeavour. Our intention is not to dictate to our participants an intended
function, role, or context of “use”, but to explore our participants’ feelings about the pieces
and their significance in their lives and relationship.

References

Cooper, A. (1999) The inmates are running the asylum: Why high tech products drive us
crazy and how to restore the sanity. Sams Publishers.
IBM (2000) CNET article “IBM looks to jewellery, fashion for design cues”, Fried, I.
http://news.com.com/IBM+looks+to+jewelry,+fashion+for+design+cues/2100-1040_3-
243772.html

McCarthy, J, Wright, P, Wallace, J., Dearden, A. (2006) The experience of enchantment in

human-computer interaction. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing Journal, Vol. 10,
Number 6. pp. 369-378

McCarthy, J.C., Wright, P.C. (2004) Technology as experience. Cambridge, MA, MIT Press.

McCullough, M. (1996) The practiced digital hand, Cambridge, MA, MIT Press.

Nokia website (2000) http://www.nokia.co.uk/nokia/0,8764,70871,00.html, Nokia’s digital

jewellery products.
Norman, D. (2004) Emotional design: Why we love (or hate) everyday things. New York:
Basic Books.

Press, M., Cusworth, A. (1998) New lives in the making: The value of crafts education in the
information age, Crafts 2000: A future in the making, Crafts Council, April.

Shneiderman, B. (2002) Leonardo’s laptop. Cambridge, MA, MIT Press.

Wallace, J. Emotionally Charged (2006) Proceedings of Blue Skies and Singing Rings, AHRC
funded guest seminar, Royal College of Art, London.
Wallace, J, Dearden, A and Fisher, T. (2005) The Significant Other. Proceedings of Wearable
Futures - Hybrid Culture in the Design and Development of Soft Technology, University
of Wales, Newport.
Wallace, J. (2004) Jewellery, Technologies and Significance. Proceedings of
ChallengingCraft, International Conference, Gray’s School of Art, Aberdeen.
Wallace, J. and Press, M. (2004) ‘All this useless beauty’. The Design Journal Vol 7 Issue 2.
Wallace, J. (2003) A Practice Based Investigation into the Integration of Digital Technologies
within Contemporary Jewellery. Proceedings of HCI2003: Designing for Society, Bath.
British HCI Group.
Wallace, J. and Press, M. (2003) Craft knowledge for the digital age: How the jeweller can
contribute to designing wearable digital communication devices. Proceedings of Sixth
Asian Design Conference, Japan.
Wright, P., Blythe, M. and McCarthy, J. (2006). User experience and the idea of design in HCI
. In Gilroy, S.W., and Harrison, M.D. (Eds) Interactive Systems: Design, Specification
and Verification. New York: Springer. pp.1-14. ISBN –10 3-540-34145-5.
Wright, P.C. and McCarthy, J. (2005) The value of the novel in designing for experience. In
Pirhonen, A., Isomäki, H., Roast, C. and Saariluoma, P. (Eds.) Future Interaction
Design. Springer. pp. 9-30.
Wright, P.C., McCarthy, J.C., and Meekison, L. (2003) Making sense of experience. In M.
Blythe, A. Monk, C. Overbeeke and P.C. Wright. (Eds.), Funology: From Usability to
User Enjoyment, p.43-53. Dordrecht: Kluwer.