Archive for the ‘Social Media’ Category
Over the last 5 years museums have made it a priority to use social media to encourage communication and connection between museums and the public through twitter, facebook, etc. However, most institutions share only basic information like gallery hours, special events and new exhibitions. But there has also been a quiet increase in exhibitions fueled by social media participation; with content created or provided by the public. I won’t talk too much about Wafaa Bilal and his piece Domestic Tension, or Shawn Brixey’s Chimera Obscura, but there are many examples of artists using visitors to create art. And many museums accept and encourage visitors to submit family photos or stories. It’s more rare for museums to inquire research data from the public.
Currently, there are some data-based projects that visitors can participate in. Visitors can be a part of the content/research at the National Building Museum (I had never heard of this place before, maybe that makes me a bad museologist…maybe not). The NBM is looking for information from the public about their living spaces- homes in particular- to analyze data through time about our culture of living. This study has the potential to gather a substantial amount of data, although getting participants will probably be a challenging endeavor.
Personally, this kind of information is fascinating to me. And somewhat related to data presentation/infographics/learning is a recent article in the NYTimes that a colleague sent to me. Some folks are proposing that we are in a new era of thinking where we use data to think about the humanities.
Networks! Maps! More metadata!
I believe arts and humanities developments/theories could only become more solid when paired with statistical evidence. But maybe that’s the evaluator in me talking.
Kind of like tv on the radio?
The first thing that got me thinking more about online collections (besides searchable databases connected to museums) was a website from the BBC called A History of the World in 100 Objects. While I was browsing posts from The Attic I came across a link to this site, which I would have never found otherwise, seeing as I unfortunately don’t have daily exposure to the BBC (however, I do watch a decent amount of CBC living in Detroit, especially when it’s hockey season or Olympic season). I basically just wanted to share this because I thought it was beautiful. There is a culturally diverse variety of objects, which is much appreciated, and each day a different object is featured to help first-time visitors become familiar with the site. Visitors are also invited to submit their own meaningful objects and stories to the site; those personal stories are available to the public to view, and some of the objects are featured in mini-stories on a partnership radio program.
It’s true that there is nothing like being in the presence of a real object, but the high res images on this site are impressive. For example, every vein on the Arabian Bronze Hand (#45) is visible, and you can really understand what the interpretive paragraph is saying just by looking at the photo. Speaking of interpretation, the BBC did a nice job consulting not only curators but other professionals who might have a different take on certain objects. For example, both a curator and an orthopedic and hand surgeon wrote interpretation about the Arabian Bronze Hand; the surgeon was able to describe the structure of the hand as more of an anthropological study, rather than through an art history lens.
A little bit more on the meta/conceptual side of internet archives is this article about an encyclopedia of all the changes to the Wikipedia “Iraq War” entry. There are 12 volumes of changes, not just content. Some great archival qualities of the internet/Wikipedia-
- The internet can keep track of all changes better than most provenance records of the past (the history doesn’t go back too far for us to document, and all of this data is basically stored automatically)
- These tomes document not only “facts” (subjective depending on which writer or editor is making changes) but personal stories of people contributing information- that means a lot of metadata which, however, is probably not very well organized or interpreted.
I had never thought of recording all these changes, but obviously it’s important to know the source from where your information is coming, and it would be fascinating to see when changes were made based on events in real time. Another question I had was
- What does it mean that these are published on paper? Does it make them more accessible? Does it make the changes more “credible” or “official”?
A mixture of the last two sites is The Search for the Obvious. I’m part of an institution where “innovation” is almost a sacred word. I like that this site allows users to find objects that have changed their world, and maybe learn a little more about them. I didn’t know when Purell was invented, although I would disagree about its “life changing” qualities. I think I would like the site even more with some additions:
- instead of/in addition to the “Life without this” explanation, there was also a “Life before this” section that made the historical context of the innovation more perceptible.
- a section not only to talk about the benefits of the innovation, but also the downsides, i.e. pollution, war, other resulting problems, etc.
I can dig it.
Have you heard about the Museum of Science and Industry’s Month at the Museum project? They took thousands of applications for one participant to live at the museum for an entire month and document what he or she would do, see, hear, think, etc. And Kate brought home the bacon… or maybe she’s bringing the bacon to the museum.
I’m often surprised by how many people say things like, “It’s always been a dream of mine to sleepover/explore at night/party at the museum.” (And this could really be said about any museum you’ve ever been to) But when the DIA was open for 36 hours straight you bet I was there at 2 am looking at art and dancing to hip hop beats. There is an allure for people about going “behind the scenes” at the museum and seeing all the cool/amazing/secret/old stuff that very few people are allowed to see. I think this project is an opportunity for visitors to live vicariously through one “normal” person who will have this once-in-a-lifetime experience.
I’m excited to see how this will turn out. It’s not often that a museum will take such a big risk, which probably requires a decent amount of funding, on an individual not associated with (i.e. on the payroll at) the institution. Kate will be an ambassador for the museum to the world, but she also has to be funny, thoughtful and exciting, maybe even daring. (Check out Slover Linett’s recent post about taking risks)
And not only will Kate be representing the MSI to the public, she will be a representative for women in science, and more generally everyone in science. Educators/institutions/government groups have been pushing to increase the number of women in the STEM fields for decades. Kate is a young woman who enjoys science and will take part in helping bring an interest in science and technology to others. She could be a positive face for helping girls get excited about learning and doing science.
But, Kate does not have a science background (she has worked mostly in theater) which makes her a good candidate to reach out to the millions of individuals who think they don’t work with science. In fact, we all encounter science everyday, and science museums want to help visitors realize this in a fun and exciting way.
She moves in on October 20th! It’s still unclear as to what she will be doing exactly (interacting with curators, educators and visitors? exploring the collections? making video blog posts?) but here’s to hoping she will be sleeping behind a plexi case like a Duane Hanson piece on display.
