Week 3 Blog Post

This week’s readings were very interesting because they prompted a conversation about what it really means to have access to all of a museum’s pieces of art. I believe this article raises a few key points and concerns regarding the mass publication of artwork and embracing openness within the museum setting. Some such concerns are questions about whether the pieces will loose their significance when they are all available. Will the public still come to the museum to see it or will objects transition to be just digital information that is occasionally looked at? Are there ethical issues with presenting particular museum pieces online? Will this openness hinder or help museums in their relationships with the public?

 

I feel that it is important to consider the Smithsonian X 3D project to address many of these questions. The Smithsonian, as an institution, has international fame and draws people from around the world to come see their collections. By putting some of their pieces online, they have allowed people from around the world to view their pieces without necessarily being physically present. However, when I was working with Smithsonian X 3D, I felt encouraged to go see the objects in person. This desire to visit the Smithsonian in person was sparked by me wanting to see what differences there were between the pieces in person and the pieces online. I feel confident that many other people would have a similar thought process, or at least would be similarly intrigued by visiting the museum. I believe that this project could be difficult to work with while looking at particular pieces because of the cultural norms that the piece is associated with. However, I feel that in instances such as human remains and other objects, such as culturally significant masks, the museum could work to create alternative modes of expression. These expressions could range from descriptions about the object to recordings of voices from the culture that the piece is from. Overall, I believe that the museum should be using this technological turn to embrace a multivocal approach and expand the viewership of the museum.

2 thoughts on “Week 3 Blog Post”

  1. I really love the questions you brought up in your post, especially the one about the openness of data and its effects on the relationship between museums and the public. To be completely honest, sometimes I do get bored when I visit a museum. I would look and stare at paintings or ceramics and try to act like I’m thinking deeply about these art pieces like the elderly people next to me who look very interested and amazed at the objects, when in fact I’m thinking about what to eat after the museum trip. But now that so many museums are incorporating different technologies into their exhibitions, for the first time I feel the need to go to a museum, such as the Rain Room at LACMA or the Infinity Room at the Broad Museum. It seems to me that technology has bridged the gap between the technology-obsessed generation and the not-so-tech-savvy generation. Museums, at least to me, used to be for field trips, but now have become a “must-go” destinations for the younger people. And data has been an integral part of this rising trend. As a cultural institution, museums should be able to embrace all audiences and not just a small part of society. So, I also believe that technology actually helps museums with their relationship to the public.

  2. I think you bring up an interesting point about seeing an object online and having the urge to want to see it person. Though today we have more access to these objects and collections than we ever have had before, there still is this sense of detachment that comes with virtual objects and things that solely exist online. We essentially get to see every angle of these virtual objects, with 3D renderings, but it’s just not the same as seeing it in person. I don’t think the digital world can ever replace experiencing an object first hand.

Comments are closed.