New York Times Article Review

The museum review of the International Civil Rights Center and Museum, written by Edward Rothstein in the arts section of the February first edition of the New York Times, I found particularly interesting. One of the things that I found most interesting was that the museum being reviewed was located in the old F.W. Woolworth Co. building in Greensboro North Carolina, where the famous first sit-in at the lunch counter took place. According to the article the famous lunch counter is still in its original location in the museum along with the original seats at the counter. The only thing that is missing from the counter is an eight foot section of the counter which resides in the Smithsonian Institute. The article gives a brief history of the segregation policies and practices that took place at Woolworth stores and the movement and events the first sit-in at the Greensboro Woolworth counter touched off, along with some background information about how the museum came to be and who the major people responsible for the museum coming to be are. The author then goes into a review and critique of the way the museum is set up and the different sections represented in the museum such as the “Hall of Shame” where photographs of lynching are hung and other objects showing the violence of the civil rights era and the “Hall of Courage” where the “path” that the four men who participated in the first sit-in at the Woolworth lunch counter walked. This “path” is lined with images of Martin Luther King Jr., Sojourner Truth and Gandhi along with other important figures in the Civil Rights movement.

Although I have not been to the museum personally, I found the author’s critiques of the museum helpful. One examples of this is when Rothstein makes the observation that one of the weaknesses of the museum is that it tries to make the events or sentiments greater and more intense when “the are powerful enough to speak on their own” (C5). The author supports his point by making the statement that visitors will almost feel a sense of relief when they enter the theater after they walk through the Hall of Shame because they are no longer required to look on the images of civil rights era violence. I think this statement makes a good point in that it shows that people do not need to be shown a large amount of images of a particular violent event or an event where the lack of humanity is particularly prevalent in order for the emotion that the exhibit’s designers are trying to convey to the visitor. However, there are exceptions to this idea such as in the Holocaust museum in Washington D.C. where the idea is to convey the all-consuming despair the victims felt.

I think Rothstein’s article helped me visualize what the museum that he was writing about in his article looked like and how the exhibits were set up a great deal. Before I started reading the various museum and exhibition review articles in the New York Times, the thought that you could review and critique a museum or a museum exhibit was something that I had never really given much thought. However, when I read Rothstein’s article, the article gave me a better understanding of how you can critique a museum or a museum’s exhibits. The article was interesting and I found it to be very informative. In addition to this, I plan on making a habit of reading museum and museum exhibit reviews because of the information and ideas they contain and because I find them interesting.

Works Cited

Rothstein, Edward. “Four Men, A Counter And Soon, Revolution.” New York Times 1 Feb. 2000, natl. ed.: C1+.

Architecture and the Museum Experience

In my opinion, architecture can “determine” how different individuals experience the materials and exhibits that are housed in a museum. I think that it is possible for a persons visit to a museum and what they get out of that visit to be influenced by the architecture of the museum, however I do not think the architecture of museum always has an influence in “determining” what an individual experiences when they view museum materials or exhibits. There are several examples of this idea that I have experienced in my own personal trips to museums.

One experience where the architecture of the museum did not in someway “determine” my experience of the museum materials was at the Lava Butte National Park Interpretive Center, which is located in the Lava Butte National Park about 15 minutes south of Bend, Oregon. Granted, the interpretive center of a National Park is considered to be a museum in the sense that it is a large in size and has many exhibits, however it is still a museum. The physical building of the interpretive center was quite plain. The visitor enters through the gift shop and signs in then can proceeded either to a theater where speakers can make presentations or to a large square room that holds all the exhibits and displays. The simple architecture of the museum, in my opinion, did determine what my experience with the museum materials was going to be like. This was mainly due to the fact that I did not pay much attention to the architecture because it was so plain and simple, and therefore, I could focus all of my attention on the exhibits inside the museum.

There are also times when the architecture of a museum has influenced how I viewed the exhibits within the museum or how I experienced the exhibits within the museum. I experienced the influence that museums architecture can have in determining how a person views the objects of the museum when I visited the Experience Music Project, better known as EMP in Seattle Washington. The building that EMP is housed in is itself is quite large and imposing. It is ornate and designed in a very stylized manner. When I view pictures of the building that EMP is in, I am immediately struck about how “modern” it looks and how the design and layout of the building is very much a testament to what popular culture determines as being “cool,” “hip,” or “in style”. The architecture of the building that EMP is housed in determined how I viewed the objects it held within it, in that before even entering the museum I already had a belief that the objects inside were important because they were housed in this amazing building. I perceived the physical building of EMP as being incredible and an amazing example of modern architecture. My ideas about the building being incredible and an amazing example of modern architecture transferred over to my preconceived opinions of the objects that the building held within it. I thought that the objects inside must be of extreme importance to the development of music and the pop culture that goes along with music because they were being held in a building like the one that EMP is in. Simply by being housed in the building that EMP is in, the objects in the museum took on more importance to me than they might have if they had been housed elsewhere.

While I do think that architecture can have an influence on how individuals view museum materials and the exhibits within the museum, I do not think that this is the case all the time. People tend to be more influenced by “grander” forms of architecture, such as architecture that is large in presence and grand in appearance. In addition to this, architecture has a greater effect on some people than it does others. Some people might see EMP as a hideous building, whose design and layout does not fit into the neighborhood where it is located. While others view EMP as an excellent example of modern architecture and as an achievement in design and construction. I think that the impact that the architecture of a museum has on someone is very individualized and the not everyone is going to be affected by the architecture, if they are affected at all, in the same way.

Essay #4 Response

In my personal experience the aspect of a museum, aside from the content, that struck me as particularly effective happened when I visited Experience Music Project (more commonly known as EMP) with my aunt and uncle in 2004 (check date). I had a vague idea that overall my visit to EMP had been a very effective museum trip, however it was not until recently when I looked up “About Experience Music Project” on the EMP website did I see how truly effective EMP had been in meeting its goals.

Here is what EMP says it is trying to accomplish with its museum.

“Experience Music Project (EMP) is dedicated to the exploration of creativity and innovation in popular music. By blending interpretative, interactive exhibitions with cutting-edge technology, EMP captures and reflects the essence of rock 'n' roll, its roots in jazz, soul, gospel, country and the blues, as well as rock's influence on hip-hop, punk and other recent genres. Visitors can view rare artifacts and memorabilia and experience the creative process by listening to musicians tell their own stories” (Experience Music Project | Science Fiction Museum).

Weil states in the chapter “Organization-wide Quality” from his book Making Museums Matter, that the effectiveness of a museum should be measured based upon how well they meet their purpose (Weil, 18-19). Based on my visit to EMP they met their purpose very well. The “cutting-edge technology” they are talking about was the most effective part of EMP in my mind. What they are referring to when they talk about “cutting-edge technology” is this little computer that you carry around with you as you walk through the museum. It has head phones plugged in to it and comes with a barcode scanner. As you walk through the museum the visitor will notice that many of the exhibits have bar codes to scan. When these bar codes are scanned the computer recognizes what exhibit you are viewing and then plays audio with additional information relating to the exhibit. Also by scanning the barcode links to more information about the exhibit are sent to you in an email, which extends your museum experience beyond the time you spend in the physical museum.

I thought EMP did and excellent job of using technology to stimulate interests and show the “…essence of rock ‘n’ role, its roots in jazz, soul, gospel, country and the blues, as well as rock's influence on hip-hop, punk and other recent genres” ((Experience Music Project | Science Fiction Museum). The use of these hand held computers that held thousands of hours of additional information, made the museum exhibit more individual in the sense that people who visited the museum could in effect control what exhibits had more information and choose what exhibits received more attention.

When I got home, I opened my email and sure enough there were over a hundred links in an email message from EMP. All the links were sorted together under the various labels of the exhibits, and even the time when I scanned the barcode of the exhibit was listed.

I have always been interested in music and my visit to EMP taught me so much more about music then I ever imagined it would. I gained a new appreciation for where the music of my generation developed from and because of this I would say that EMP achieved its purpose quite well and was therefore an effective museum.

Works Cited:

- Experience Music Project | Science Fiction Museum. "Empsfm.org - ABOUT EMP|SFM - About EMP|SFM." Empsfm.org - ABOUT EMP|SFM - About EMP|SFM. Experience Music Project | Science Fiction Museum, 2010. Web. 1 Mar. 2010. .

- Weil, Spencer E. “Organization-wide Quality: A Theory of Museums and Immodest Proposal.” Making Museums Work. Washington D.C.: Smithsonian Institution Press, 2002. 3-23. Print.

Below is a link to the EMP|SFM website. I found out when I visited the site that EMP had expanded and added on a science fiction museum.

http://www.empsfm.org/

The Contextual Approach in Museums

When I think about the contextual approach to understanding that developed in museums, a few things come to mind. In my opinion, I think what is meant by a contextual approach is to view a single object in a museum as a single part of a much larger picture and to try and understand how that single object fits into the bigger picture and the role it plays in that picture. I also think that what is meant by the contextual approach, specifically in museums is that when you are viewing an object you try and view it as it was viewed during the time period that it came from. By viewing an object like this it is easier for the viewer to see how the perception of the importance of the object and what part of the bigger picture the object played. In addition to this, I also think that the contextual approach means grouping objects together based on the broader activity they were used for the environment they were used in, rather than just grouping objects that are the same type as other objects together. An example of the contextual approach that I have personally experience was at the High Desert Museum in Bend, Oregon. I viewed an exhibit that was about Native Americans who were taken off their land and forced to go to American boarding schools so they would become more Americanized. In the display were pictures of Native American’s in dormitories dressed in slacks and sweaters, there was a band uniform from one of the schools. In addition to this, there was a pennant from the school along with textbooks for various classes such as English, math and history. All of these objects would seem somewhat different form each other if I were to have viewed them individually but because they were grouped together, the display allowed me to see the bigger picture of what life at these boarding schools for various Native Americans was like.

I think the contextual approach differs from other approaches because it has the viewer look at a grouping of objects that are different form each other but yet they are all related to each other because they were all part of the same big picture. For example, a butter churn and a quilt don’t seem to be very similar. However if you view these objects from a contextual approach you can see that the objects relate to each other because they were used everyday in the frontier days to name a specific time period. I also think that the contextual approach is different from other approaches because it combines the small specific details such as what the object is with the bigger picture ideas such as when was the object used, what other objects were used along with it, and what is the common tasks that relates the two objects.

In my opinion, I think the contextual approach is likely to found at museums today, especially natural history museums, history museums and anthropological type museums. This is mainly because the contextual approach works the best in these types of museums. I think we see some contextual approach in art museum displays but not nearly to the extent that you see it used in natural history, history or anthropological museums. I also think that the contextual approach is very likely to be successful in museums because it helps people see the broad picture of how the objects relate to each other. The contextual approach in display design also provides the viewer with a snap shot of sorts, showing them various items that at first glance may not seem to be related to each other but when you look more closely at the context in which they were used you can see how the objects relate to each other. In addition to this I think the contextual approach will be successful in museums today because people generally want to see the whole picture, such as what all was involved in a certain activity such as daily life on the frontier or how people did certain activities such as mining for gold during the gold rush.

Hurray for followers!

I have followers! Yay I'm excited :-)

My Way of "Seeing" the High Desert Museum

The environment of a museum can have many different effects on how an individual views an exhibit or a particular object. How I personally view an object or an exhibit in a museum may be quite different from how someone one else would “see” the object or exhibit. The fact that the individual is viewing the object in a museum instead of in an environment outside the museum setting can also have an effect on how an individual views the object. I saw these ideas in action this summer when my family and I visited the High Desert Museum in Bend Oregon while we were vacationing near by. The museum had many different types of exhibits traditional indoor exhibits and some outdoor exhibits. Also the museum had “living history” exhibits in which there were actors who portrayed a character that lived in the area at the time period that was being discussed. One of the traveling exhibits we saw when we were there was an exhibit of quilts that were made before, during and after the civil war, which were used to express the makers political opinion or to encourage support for a particular cause. My father, younger brother and younger sister were busy looking at the life size stage coach in the lobby, but my mother and I wandered into the room to take the quilts in. How my mother viewed the quilts was quite different from how I viewed the quilts, in my opinion the reason for this difference is because my mother is a quilter. She noticed right away that most of the quilts were all hand sewn which meant that some woman or in some cases a group of women spent a long time sewing together the quilt blocks, piecing together the quilt and then finally quilting it. How my mother “saw” the quilts was based on the amount of time it took to make the quilt because she is a quilter and knows how much work goes into making one. However, how I “saw” the different quilts was based on the political opinions the quilt makers were showing in their quilts. I thought about the political opinions that were being shown and compared them to my knowledge of the political opinions of the time because I am a history major.

When I viewed the various quilts I remember thinking to myself “These quilts must be pretty special to be in this museum”. However I realize now that if I were to see these quilts in the window of an antique store I would not have given them a second glance. I would have simply written them off as being something that someone found in their grandmothers attack and they did not have space for them anymore. The simple fact that I viewed these quilts in a museum instead of outside the museum in a store or at someone’s home changed my idea of how important and valuable the quilts were. I saw many other interesting things during my visit to the High Desert Museum, the experience I had in the quilt exhibit was just one example. I saw many different objects in different ways than the other members of my family did. In addition to this, I believe that if I would have seen some of the objects outside of a museum it would have never crossed my mind that they had some historical value or warranted being in a museum. I think this is because I have been taught that items that are in a museum must be of some importance or value otherwise they would not be in museum. In the short time that we have been in our class and the little we have learned about museums I have come to realize that my thoughts that just because an object is in a museum it must be of some importance could be wrong. I see now due to the fact that the object I am viewing is in a museum I usually tend to see the object as more important or valuable than it really might be.

Below is a link to the High Desert Museum’s website if you are interested in viewing pictures of some of the exhibits online.

http://www.highdesertmuseum.org/

Essay #1 response

While Spiral Jetty is an interesting piece of artwork, I personally, do not think that its presence in the Great Salt Lake is enough to classify The Great Salt Lake as a museum. There are several reasons for my opinion. The first reason is that if you look at the What is a Museum? page on the American Association of Museums, you can see that Spiral Jetty does not meet the requirement of being somewhat educational in nature. One could make the argument that many art museums are not educational in nature in the traditional sense however the displays in the museum will at least have the title of the piece, who created it and what medium was used. These museums also educate people about the world of art in general. Another reason for my opinion is that Spiral Jetty is only one single piece of artwork in the Great Salt Lake. When I think of museums I see them as having more than one piece of art work in their collection. In addition to this, another reason behind my thinking is that the Great Salt Lake does not have one full time director who is in charge of overseeing exhibits of the Great Salt Lake. Having a full time director is one of the criteria that a museum must meet to be considered a museum by the American Association of Museums. Another reason for my thinking that Spiral Jetty does not qualify the Great Salt Lake as a museum is that Spiral Jetty was underwater for decades. In my line of thinking, for a place to qualify as a museum it needs to have most of its exhibits on display. In the case of Spiral Jetty this was not possible because it spent a few decades under water. It is because of all these reasons I do not think Spiral Jetty qualifies the Great Salt Lake as a museum.