The common theme in all three of this week’s articles the discussion of experiencing objects online through media versus seeing and experiencing them in person. The main distinction between experiencing an object being present at the museum and viewing an object online is that sense of wonder and resonance – that sense of transcendence and insight you experience when you truly analyze something on a deeper level and learn to appreciate it.
Personally, I don’t frequent museums often, unless the exhibit features something I am already interested in, or something that piques my interest. But how is this interest generated, on a large scale, for the big audience? And what is the role and impact of the Internet? The approach that I think is very smart and effective is the Met’s idea to reveal the upcoming Charles Le Brun collection exhibit in a playful and curious manner by emphasizing the process of taking the paintings to restoration, instead of posting direct pictures of the objects themselves. This strategy really reminds me of the concept of “Gamification” I learned about in my Management class (I’m not permitted to upload the actual article I read for class, but here is another one available online that describes it pretty well). The approach basically holds that in order to be successful in retaining their customers and attracting new ones, brands should “game-ify” their products, meaning they need to have a certain aspect that catches their users’ attention, and keeps them interested, coming back, and wanting more. Brands and companies thus develop clever marketing and promotional campaigns and create ways for consumers to engage with their new products before they even come out.
I think in dealing with the online environment and presentation, museums can learn a lot by looking at how other industries are dealing with “the possibilities of the Net” in order to achieve their goals. But, in making strategic decisions, the most important thing for each museum to consider is its “value proposition” (another business concept, which I think really fits here) – in other words – what is the mission that the museum is trying to accomplish? what impact does it want to have on society with what it has to offer?
The Met’s strategy will obviously not work for all museums, not to mention for all exhibits. The Brooklyn Museum, as discussed in Anan’s article, for example, found that creating games and public engagement platforms online did not end up generating the “global reach” they were aiming for. Instead, they re-assesed their role, goals, and possibilities and used the technology to maximize their engagement with the current visitors, which turned out to be a more effective use of the technology.
As the director of the Brooklyn Museum reflected on their approach “It exemplified a means of enhancing the local, physical experience of art and of the museum’s collection, as opposed to a way of taking the museum to the wider world”.
In the end, I guess my point is that the question of whether or not to the Internet as a tool for creating digital collections, or promoting upcoming exhibits, or creating deep conversations – is a subjective one, that each institution should answer by considering its role and mission within our global society: “Digital “is not the holy grail…It’s a layer.”
Thanks for sharing the concept of “gamification”- I can definitely see it in a lot of tech products we have/ are obsessed with now. A large part of why museums have been slower to adapt to the application and use of technology (unlike other industries) probably stems from the fact that they view themselves as a cultural/ educational institution. And of course there is the whole argument about not being “bought” by technology and selling yourself to commercial forces. While I agree that selling out is a quick way to lose respect from others, I feel that artists and art institutions should still confront the reality that they are businessmen and marketers of their craft, and harness the tools needed to ensure their success.
I think its interesting that as technology progresses, we are inevitably forced to come to terms with the idea that physical objects aren’t all that important. Science and technology museums do not necessarily show physical objects. For example, most visitors probably would not want to see a complicated machine as an object in a museum. Rather, technology in the museum can supplement the object, or concept in a way that truly increases community engagement. Eliminating the boundary of the museum allows wider community engagement through the internet.