4. What meaning has the interactivity for the project? What shall the Interaction produce, cause?

As usual in my pieces, the objects that the passers-by encourntered where autonomous (the mobile lines moved according to the movements of the passers-by, but also according to their own 'will'). So it tended to pull interactivity towards intersubjectivity, thus challenging the subject inside the passer-by, asking "what do you want?".

5. What strategies and methods are applied to catch attention and stimulate participation in the interaction?

Surprise and obstruction were very important : as soon as someone entered the active space (that was not especially shown, it was just a portion of the sidewalk), a moving and dynamic line appeared in front of him/her, and a circle was drawn around him/her. This induced surprise and usually people stopped walking. Then by moving they noticed that the lines and circle were following them, and also acting on their own. A kind of game was put in place. This game-like dynamic was very stimulating, especially for children.

6. Are there intended limits for the interaction possibilities and contributions?

Of course, by definition. The limits define the piece. The lines had there own agenda, so people could not do what they wanted with them. This gave some kind of psychology to the lines. There were like characters.

(Antoine Schmitt)