\n<\/p>\n
Etymologically, the term \u2018animation\u2019 is derived from the Latin word\u00a0animatio<\/em>, from\u00a0animare<\/em>. Probably originating in the 16th<\/sup> century, \u2018animation\u2019 has two key meanings, one referring to movement and the other to bestowing life (Wells 2011). These meanings are central to how we think about animation: On the one hand, animation is about motion, about the illusion of things coming alive on screen. On the other, animation suggests the deeper idea of vitality\u2014the possibility of bestowing life itself. When set against robotics and AI, this second meaning becomes especially provocative: in what novelways do robotics and AI bring both images and machines to life?<\/p>\n As the field of robotics advances we are sure to see human-robot interactions proliferate, which explains the importance of researching robotics through multiple perspectives. My focus is on robotic artworks of recent decades, incorporating both visual and HRI design, and exploring the potentials of robotic artworks as practice-based research. What is it about art and design that make it a useful contribution to this field? Design has a central role to play in the development and incorporation of robots into daily life for it is designers who shape the interfaces between humans and machines. However, since there is no right or wrong in interactive artistic installations, I argue that robot-related artworks provide a unique opportunity for viewers to engage with robots in playful, creative and otherwise inaccessible ways that allow for innovation in the complex field of robotics use and historical-cultural representation.<\/p>\n Robots complicate the significance of tools. They are not simply instruments, but entities tied to autonomy and agency.[1]<\/a> A robot does not just work; it acts, such as Mechanical Woman Walking\u00a0<\/em>by Mark Galt (see Fig. 1). This action unsettles us \u2014 it appears somehow miraculous, somehow uncanny.[2]<\/a> Animation and robotics share this common ground: they both involve giving form and motion to something otherwise inanimate. And as animation increasingly moves from the screen into everyday interfaces, the leap into physical space feels like a natural, if disorienting, step (since unlike animation that exists on screen, robotics exist in the same physical space as the viewer\/human, thus raising confusing questions about the dichotomy of object\/subject, life\/death etc).<\/p>\n \n