Virtual worlds are becoming a major topic when it comes to participating on a local or global scale. There are many programs that are being developed to navigate through ancient architectural civilizations and even in the present, traveling around urban cities. These programs enable people to explore a vast amount of information, as well as pilot through artificial realms to meet people and view objects.
I am currently on a team to redefine how we experience New York City during the day versus the night. This involves a lot of data collection and understanding how these spaces feel in the daylight environment versus the night environment from a lighting stand point. One popular web program that has taken the first steps to this experiential experience is Second Life. They advertise this space as a place to connect, to shop, to work, to explore, to be different and free yourself and mind, and be who you want to be. This is definitely taking this idea of the iPhone as your museum guide to a much different and extreme limit, but this is a potential program that will be developed by many museums in the coming years and the beginning of this investigation have already begun.
The New York Hall of Science has partnered with the Greater Southern Tier BOCES SciCentr program on a project to engage an ethnically and economically diverse group of young people in creating a Virtual Hall of Science (VHOS). This entails designing, building and staffing the virtual science center while working and interacting with science and education professionals throughout the process. VHOS is seen as a long term program that will encourage students to develop and plan the future of their museum as they see fit. This program will further enhance the already strong connects NYSCI has with its community and student science education program.
In either case, the idea of a virtual world that enables people to experience a museum or, for that matter, many different cities from the comfort of their homes is a great start to spark interest, but the fact of the matter is that this will never change how we truly experience something that is tangible.
Posted in architecture, design, economics, experience, identity, knowledge, media, network, science, technology, trends, web
If Museums back in the 19th century were regarded as educational institutions with a great social role, then today they are considered as more of tourist attraction or money generating tool for the local government. Fast forward to today and take a look at a museum and its audience’s relationship. The museum’s “role of being educational had always been well established as a concept” (Hooper-Greenhill, Eilean. p.1) and because this relationship is changing in times of advanced technology and with changing culture, museum will also need to change its way of doing things.
The concept of education had been changing throughout the centuries, “they’re not limited to formal institutions but taken place throughout life” (Hooper-Greenhill, Eilean. p.2 ). The old concept of education are limited to specific times and places and with museum, it is limited to a certain location at the interior space. Yet, the museum should have the potential as a lifelong learning tool.
Most people would define visual display as the experience of a museum. Since each individual object in a museum cannot speak a story by itself, “An exhibition is a group of objects combined with words and images – are more complex still” (Hooper Greenhill, Eilean. p.3) and from Victoria Newhouse’s book “ placement can change the meaning of the artwork” (Newhouse, Victora. p.10) All objects have to be placed together in a museum, and depending on the visual arrangement, viewers have a 50/50 chance of perceiving the intended meaning, even after they perceived them, they might not agree with them. With different cultures, come different values, so interpretation does not come with a singular meaning but multiple when viewed by many different audiences.
“Museum have changed radically in style” Hooper Greenhill, Eilean. (p.6) – where formal museum galleries have changed and replaced by informal style where it communicates with visitors in a more lively and more physical interaction. That is because “learners need to interact in meaningful ways with new information before it can become part of their repertoire of knowledge,”( Hooper Greenhill, Eilean. p.7)
Museum are trying to incorporate audience and visitor’s info and research into their process of exhibition, and by looking at the internet like Wikipedia which incorporate user’s knowledge into their database and website. Wikipedia has become more successful in that respect. That is not to say that museums cannot do better. Museums have the advantage of showcasing an actual object, “Although paintings might have to fight for their life, they look better in a home than in a museum because they’re alive, you feel them…” (Newhouse, Victora. p.13) because of this factor, many museums had considered showing certain artwork without any separation between viewers and the object itself these days.
Posted in aesthetics, art, audience, collections, community, curator, economics, exhibition, identity, knowledge, society, trends
"Chile: Territory For Architecture" Exhibition at Pure Chile Gallery
“Chile: Territory for Architecture” is a temporary exhibition showed during the month of September in the Pure Chile Gallery in SOHO to celebrate Chilean Architecture. This small exhibition was curetted by Alberto Sato and presented a selection of works by 12 Chilean architects developed through all the Chilean territory from the northern desert to the South Pole. As Sato himself wrote, these architectural works represent “a new alliance between what is native and what is exotic; between the planetary dimension and the domestic dimension; between eternalness and ephemeralness; between fashion and the sense of cultural transcendence”.
The exhibition displayed important Chilean works such as: the Elemental Iquique by Alejandro Aravena, the Museo del Desierto de Atacama by Ramon Coz and others, the Edificio BIP Computers by Alberto Mozo and the “Termas Geotermicas” by German del Sol. Once you entered to the cozy gallery there was a beautiful image of the Chilean map (the same one on this blog) shining on the left wall of the room, I could notice it was backlit with three fluorescent tubes and it was the main character in this mini-exhibition. The exhibition based its show on digital media, displaying the works of architecture on three big screens located under the image of the Chilean map. Images of the different pieces of architecture, actual photos and renderings appeared in the screens; each of them showing a different project. It was a little bit annoying having to stand in there in front of these three screens waiting to see all of the 12 architectural works. The wall on the back was used to project some drawings of the works. White drawings projected on a black surface. The experience was very similar to the one with the screens; if there was an special work that I wanted to see I had to stand in there and wait for the other 11 works to show up.
It was a completely directed exhibition. It was impossible to create your own experience, to look at it in your own way. I understand the dimensions of the space were limiting but I was expecting to have a little bit more options to experience it. The lack of real objects was its biggest weakness. Me and my friends were expecting to see real drawings, sketches, actual models, real objects that could give us a better understanding of the process behind these 12 architectural works and create a stronger connection with them but it didn’t happen. Moreover the gallery looked more like a travel agency; it was full of catalogs promoting Chile and typical Chilean products for sell. The exhibition itself was so weak that I am still wondering, was this exhibition really about Chilean architecture or was it just an excuse to promote this gallery and tourism in Chile?
Ma. Antonia Villegas