Never been to the British Museum?

[LONDONER]

Never had the opportunity? Never had enough money to make the trip? Well now you can see the whole museum from the comfort of your own home:

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/2015/...l-virtual/

[Emiliano]

Thanks for posting that. Its something I'd like to check out because I've never been and I am interested in the collection. But I also really found the article itself really interesting. So excuse me while I nerd out for a minute.

The museum I work for was also photographed by google and there is a virtual tour of it available as well. And it started some interesting discussions at my job about the role of museums in general, the accessibility of spaces, and the role of the object vs the image.

In the article it opens with the 1774 quote from the then director of the British Museum, Matthew Maty, saying that that he disapproved of the people of "mean and low degree" that he saw visiting the museum. But then the article close with the present day head of Digital Media and Publishing, Chris Michaels, quoting the founding principal of the museum: "The British Museum was founded on the principle to tell the story of the whole world to the people of the world."

Those conflicting quotes are really interesting to me because they point to a problem a lot of museums face in general. What really is the role of a museum? Who is the desired audience? And how accessible are museums actually? Museums certainly speak of themselves as being accessible places, belonging to the people, all people, with a role to educate and reach the public - but in practice are they actually that way?

It was a big controversy last year when Michelle Obama spoke at the opening of the new Whitney building in Manhattan and brought up how lower income and minority people often don't feel comfortable in museums and cultural institutions, much less a sense of ownership of, or participation in, the narratives they tell. Mostly it was a controversy to people on the outside of the museum world, and the media seems to jump anytime an Obama brings up race. But to people in the museum world, especially the museum education side of it - this is a known, obvious thing. Many museums struggle to bring in diverse audiences. Its something they take very, very seriously as well - at least in NYC.

People with special needs also often feel uncomfortable in museum settings. Something about a museum requests that we are quiet and serious as walk through the spaces. Thats not possible for everyone. The museum I work for generally opens early 3-4 times a year specifically for children and adults with special needs. I've had it expressed to me on multiple occasions how grateful people are to participate in an event like that, because it takes the stigma and judgement they often feel in public out of the equation.

I think that opening up a museum space online, rips open doors to all kinds of people. They can comfortably look at these objects and the spaces online and hopefully eventually be drawn to visit the actually place. Online its also not an issue of wheel chair accessibility.

I also love from that article about how people can create 3D printings of the objects in the collection, or that people anytime can look over the Admonitions Scroll which they said was only able to be on public display for short periods of time due to its fragility. I think thats awesome to be able to have a relationship with a museum's collection like that, to have access to rare, ancient, and delicate things like that.

So in those ways, I really like the idea of digitizing museums. But what is lost when you take the museum out of the museum experience? Does the space of the museum - the design, the architecture, does that impact the objects displayed in it? Does the narrative told by the exhibit designer, or the curator, carry through? Are we less likely to recognize that a narrative is being told? Is the art in the object or the image? What is going to make the digitized museum more closely resemble a physical museum experience vs just googling images? Does this sort of thing empower or dis-empower what a museum is?

I think the most important question a museum should ask itself if it participates in this, is how to use the digital museum to supplement, enrich, and grow the physical one, not replace it.

But overall, I think this is really awesome. So thanks again for sharing it.

[LONDONER]

Thank you Emiliano. You have to remember that that original quote was made over 200 years ago when the attitude to education was very different to the attitude of today. If you ever get to London you will find that the vast majority of museums are not only free of charge (except for special exhibitions) but that special facilities are made for the disabled and those of special needs. Some of the museums like the Science Museum has lots of "hands on" exhibits and I believe is the most visited museum in London regulalry attended by school groups. So, museums are to inform and educate and in the UK at least, they do that extremely well.

Speaking of "hands on" I must tell you of something comic that happened to me in New York a few years ago. I was visting The Cloisters and wanted to get a little closer to a painting and leaned forward and placed my hand on an old oak chest. Immediately a guard rushed over to admonish me, I shouldn't touch anything. I have a few pieces of antique furniture and I know that the patina of wood is only achieved over hundreds of years by people transferring the oil on their hands to the wood. In this instance the guard was in the need of educating.

[Emiliano]

I'm glad to hear what you're telling me about the museums in London. Especially that they are free. I think thats a big obstacle in NYC, some of the big famous ones here are really expensive. But there are programs for longer income people to sign up for that will give them free access to museums.

I like most of the museums in NYC, in terms of the work they do, but I want to see them improve and continue to expand their outreach. And again, I think having these digital tours are a good way of doing that - like reaching out to a non typical museum going audience. I guess I'm also just a little worried about the future of places like museums and libraries. I like the object, I like the space, I like the architecture. I don't want a society that moves too far away from the value of those things.

I've never been to the Cloisters, but Ive also experienced being yelled out for getting too close to something. I like museums where you can touch, I think theres a lot of value in engaging different senses - we focus on the visual a little too much sometimes. But I can understand the flip side too.

I really would like to visit London sometime. Of course the British Museum is world famous, but I've also heard really good things about your Transport Museum too.

[Insertnamehere]

Well, I'm over 10k Km from London, so let's go with a no.

[LONDONER]

Well, I'm over 10k Km from London, so let's go with a no.

Why, are you not interested?

[Insertnamehere]

Why, are you not interested?

Your opening title asked if we had ever been to the museum. I gave my answer and the reason for it.

[LONDONER]

Your opening title asked if we had ever been to the museum. I gave my answer and the reason for it.

10 klms.is not sufficient reason unless you are incapacitated some way.

[Insertnamehere]

10 klms.is not sufficient reason unless you are incapacitated some way.

10k Km, sir, not 10 :biggrin:. Read my initial post again.

To be more exact, I'm almost 11700 Km away.

Now, if I ever get the chance to visit ye old England, I most certainly be visiting the museum, amongst other things.