On day two of our London trip, we had the wonderful opportunity to go to the famous Tower of London. I took time to enjoy the sights and sounds as well as the wonderful onsite exhibits. It wasn't long before my analytic side began to dissect the presentations before me. There we so many different kinds of exhibits that I began to sit back and watch the foot traffic. More than ten thousand people from all over the world go through this site each day this time of year. I was interested in evaluating which types of exhibits people were drawn to.
There were static exhibits, things such as the crown jewels, clothing, tapestries, weapons, and other artifacts. These exhibits garnered the most foot traffic. Certain objects received more attention but everyone dutifully filed past each exhibit.
Next were the interactive exhibits. These were things such as armored helmets that you placed your face into in order to view a battle scene from the eyes of a knight. Other exhibits featured weapons, including a simulated bow and arrow that you actually drew (or tried to anyways) and fired. These exhibits were also very popular. However, because they took time for each person to experience, many people simply did not wait around to experience it for themselves. This fact significantly lowered the number of people who viewed these exhibits.
Lastly, were the audio visual exhibits. These were projections and videos that brought several historic events to life. One animated a medieval tapestry that depicted the coronation of a king. Other videos showed the coronation of Queen Elizabeth II. These exhibits gained everyone's attention. Groups would stop, stand together, and silently view each presentation. While these exhibits caught everyone's attention, the viewers were inactive and passive while viewing.
All of this evidence made me consider what makes a successful exhibit. Is it one that gets the most attention or is it the one that captures the viewers imagination and draws them in? The answer is obvious, but given the above mentioned issues with interactive exhibits, how do we ensure that everyone gets in on the fun? The answer would be a combination of the group experience of audio visual presentations with the addition of the interactive experience. The execution of this would depend on the site and the subject matter. I always go back to the National Holocaust Museum in Washington D.C. as a site that gets this combination right. By simply giving the viewers a card with a profile of a real Holocaust victim, it makes every exhibit personal and interactive. You can look at a pile of shoes and get a sense of what you would have felt like if you were there. The subject matter of the Holocaust lends itself better to this sort of interactive experience better than a site like the Rosenbaum House, but there must be a way to adapt some of these ideas into any site.
These are all beginning thoughts on the proper administration and presentation of house museums, but after viewing all of these exhibits and others at the Museum of London, my mind is alight with ideas. This is a theme that I will return to several times throughout my research process. I plan to go to every museum that I can and evaluate each along these lines. On Friday we will have our first opportunity to research at the British Library. I have reserved some books about the foundations and operation of the National Trust. This research will be a bit less exciting to the casual reader but I am very excited to have this opportunity. Until next time.
There were static exhibits, things such as the crown jewels, clothing, tapestries, weapons, and other artifacts. These exhibits garnered the most foot traffic. Certain objects received more attention but everyone dutifully filed past each exhibit.
Next were the interactive exhibits. These were things such as armored helmets that you placed your face into in order to view a battle scene from the eyes of a knight. Other exhibits featured weapons, including a simulated bow and arrow that you actually drew (or tried to anyways) and fired. These exhibits were also very popular. However, because they took time for each person to experience, many people simply did not wait around to experience it for themselves. This fact significantly lowered the number of people who viewed these exhibits.
Lastly, were the audio visual exhibits. These were projections and videos that brought several historic events to life. One animated a medieval tapestry that depicted the coronation of a king. Other videos showed the coronation of Queen Elizabeth II. These exhibits gained everyone's attention. Groups would stop, stand together, and silently view each presentation. While these exhibits caught everyone's attention, the viewers were inactive and passive while viewing.
All of this evidence made me consider what makes a successful exhibit. Is it one that gets the most attention or is it the one that captures the viewers imagination and draws them in? The answer is obvious, but given the above mentioned issues with interactive exhibits, how do we ensure that everyone gets in on the fun? The answer would be a combination of the group experience of audio visual presentations with the addition of the interactive experience. The execution of this would depend on the site and the subject matter. I always go back to the National Holocaust Museum in Washington D.C. as a site that gets this combination right. By simply giving the viewers a card with a profile of a real Holocaust victim, it makes every exhibit personal and interactive. You can look at a pile of shoes and get a sense of what you would have felt like if you were there. The subject matter of the Holocaust lends itself better to this sort of interactive experience better than a site like the Rosenbaum House, but there must be a way to adapt some of these ideas into any site.
These are all beginning thoughts on the proper administration and presentation of house museums, but after viewing all of these exhibits and others at the Museum of London, my mind is alight with ideas. This is a theme that I will return to several times throughout my research process. I plan to go to every museum that I can and evaluate each along these lines. On Friday we will have our first opportunity to research at the British Library. I have reserved some books about the foundations and operation of the National Trust. This research will be a bit less exciting to the casual reader but I am very excited to have this opportunity. Until next time.
RSS Feed