Today, while attending a SIGCHI session, I learned of the term “diegetic prototype”, originally coined by David A. Kirby. It’s a concept with which I am very familiar, but I hadn’t actually known there was a name for it.
The basic idea is the “working example” of a future technology that you see in a science fiction movie. Some notable examples: the force field in Forbidden Plant, the Star Trek transporter, the robots in Star Wars, the flying skateboard in Back to the Future, the gestural interface in Minority Report and the interactive holographic displays in the recent Iron Man movies.
More than mere fictional constructs, these are aspirational objects meant to inspire audiences, a sort of stake in the cultural ground. They hold out the possibility, however remote, of a brighter and more exciting future here in the real world.
I am amazed that it has taken me so long to learn that there is a name for this method of approaching the future, since I have essentially structured my life around it. Since childhood I have generally thought in terms of imagining some exciting possibility for the future, prototyping it first in my mind as an attainable fantasy, and then going about the task of prototyping some version of it in reality.
I think one question that can be teased out here is the one of “how real is real enough?” From the point of view of Hollywood, it is sufficient that audiences see Tony Stark playing with his holographic display up on the big screen. But to me, diegetic prototyping is just a good first step toward making things happen in the real world.
It’s entertaining how this blog post connects with all three of Arthur C. Clarke’s three laws.
I just came across this blog while searching for a definition for the term, diegetic prototype. I came across this term when you showed us the World Builder video. I really like your prompt about “how real is real enough?”- the reason why I decided to post a reply. It is a thought-provoking question. I guess the answer to this would keep changing as we materialize our speculations, and then will we be satisfied with the outcome or will we speculate even more into the future and into further realities? Maybe the quest will stop only when the room for imagination stops.