This excellent example of Jacobean architecture can be found in the London Borough of Hounslow at Barnet. It is a grade II listed site and has been listed as an Ancient Site by English Heritage. It is owned and operated by the Borough of Hounslow. The first portion of the house was built in 1623. Alterations were made when the property was bought in 1670 by James Clitherow, a city merchant. He extended the house to the north giving it a third gable. The house remained in the Clitherow family until 1924 when it was sold to the Brentford Urban District Council.
The house lies at the entrance to Boston Gardens, a large and beautiful park. The house can be reached by the Piccadilly Line from London via the Boston Manor tube stop. The home is a mere two hundred yards away and is serviced by a bus line. This plum location, among row houses and an idyllic park, is the museums greatest asset after the home itself.
The house lies at the entrance to Boston Gardens, a large and beautiful park. The house can be reached by the Piccadilly Line from London via the Boston Manor tube stop. The home is a mere two hundred yards away and is serviced by a bus line. This plum location, among row houses and an idyllic park, is the museums greatest asset after the home itself.
The house underwent extensive renovation and was reopened in 1963. They even enjoyed a visit from the Queen Mother. The home is still in good condition, although further conservation efforts have been undertaken. The museum does a wonder job of informing the visitor about this work through informational signs and artifacts from the conservation efforts. The library is currently empty because the outer wall and roof had to be recently repaired. Pieces of the rotten wood are on display next to pictures of the work. I appreciated seeing this information and the museum’s transparency about the challenges of maintaining such an old structure. This was something that I also witnessed at Hampton Court and would have liked to have seen at John Soane’s Museum. There are cracks in the walls and some exposed places upstairs, but the museum shows it all and explains the battle that is being waged. I believe that this is a great way of gaining support and good will. It makes the visitor want to donate or buy something.
The museum unfortunately does not have any original furnishings. All of the originals were sold on the front lawn by the last private owner. There are reproductions and antique replacements which help to fill in the gaps. Since the architecture and fixtures are the focus, this does not detract from the site very much. The museum is low tech by every measure. There are no audio visual presentations, no computer screens, and no interactive experiences. The house is simply there. They have several print outs with information and a plethora of informational signs, however, these become tedious to read after the first room. The visitor could find themselves spending more time reading these signs than actually viewing the home and its architecture. This hurts the overall theme that the museum is trying to convey. They want to tell the story of this family who inhabited the house for all those years, but unless the visitor is very determined they will soon become bored. I witnessed several adults dutifully trying to read each plaque and card, but no children did. They skipped through the house in five to ten minutes and were ready to run out into the park in the back garden. The family’s story is compelling and deserves to be told in a more engaging way than by a fifteen year old guidebook and information plaques.
The museum unfortunately does not have any original furnishings. All of the originals were sold on the front lawn by the last private owner. There are reproductions and antique replacements which help to fill in the gaps. Since the architecture and fixtures are the focus, this does not detract from the site very much. The museum is low tech by every measure. There are no audio visual presentations, no computer screens, and no interactive experiences. The house is simply there. They have several print outs with information and a plethora of informational signs, however, these become tedious to read after the first room. The visitor could find themselves spending more time reading these signs than actually viewing the home and its architecture. This hurts the overall theme that the museum is trying to convey. They want to tell the story of this family who inhabited the house for all those years, but unless the visitor is very determined they will soon become bored. I witnessed several adults dutifully trying to read each plaque and card, but no children did. They skipped through the house in five to ten minutes and were ready to run out into the park in the back garden. The family’s story is compelling and deserves to be told in a more engaging way than by a fifteen year old guidebook and information plaques.
I was able to talk to three staff members, one of which was paid while the others were volunteers, about the attendance at the site. I was told that on a summer day with nice weather as many as eighty to ninety people might come through. The museum is only opened on the weekends and bank holiday Mondays. In effect that is only a potential of one hundred and eighty a week for most weeks. When I flipped through the visitor log, I found that only twelve people had been through in the last two weekends. That may not be accurate since many people do not sign these books, but it was alarming. However, it must be said that the museum is free to visit, so they are not dependent on admission fees.
This dependency on council money and donations may explain why there is little to no advertising for this site. There was one sign post at the tube stop pointing in the general direction of the site. I only found the house, which is obscured by trees and a fence, because of a simple banner hung on that fence. It was no more than you would see at a rural convenience store. This museum is at the very door of a great park with football pitches, outdoor gyms, bowling greens, gardens, and picnic areas. It could very well serve as an information center or gateway to this wonderful area. I could easily envision a marketing campaign focused on selling this area as a “day-out” trip for central Londoners. A thirty minute tube ride and two hundred yard walk away from North London to this paradise would not be a hard sell. Market days and special events could fill this old home with life and cash. They already open the dining room for renting, so why not for this? If people were drawn to the park and the area and paid a pound or more to walk through this grand old home, a great new revenue source could be created. Understandably, I was told that there was no money for such a marketing campaign. However, I cannot believe that such a small investment with the potential for such a large return has not at least been thought of.
This dependency on council money and donations may explain why there is little to no advertising for this site. There was one sign post at the tube stop pointing in the general direction of the site. I only found the house, which is obscured by trees and a fence, because of a simple banner hung on that fence. It was no more than you would see at a rural convenience store. This museum is at the very door of a great park with football pitches, outdoor gyms, bowling greens, gardens, and picnic areas. It could very well serve as an information center or gateway to this wonderful area. I could easily envision a marketing campaign focused on selling this area as a “day-out” trip for central Londoners. A thirty minute tube ride and two hundred yard walk away from North London to this paradise would not be a hard sell. Market days and special events could fill this old home with life and cash. They already open the dining room for renting, so why not for this? If people were drawn to the park and the area and paid a pound or more to walk through this grand old home, a great new revenue source could be created. Understandably, I was told that there was no money for such a marketing campaign. However, I cannot believe that such a small investment with the potential for such a large return has not at least been thought of.
There are so many similarities between the Rosenbaum House and Boston Manor. Both are local government owned. Both are based on architecture, but have a great family associated with the houses. Both are under marketed and underutilized. I could see the Rosenbaum House as the information or tourist center of Florence. It could be the place that draws in visitors but then directs them to the other jewels in the city. This will only work with some investment and some commitment and cooperation. Whatever the cost, I am convinced that this model could create a flow of revenue not only in admission fees but more importantly in sales taxes.