The loss of a much loved friend (in South Kensington)

[iL Dottore]

I was in London these past 5 days for a long weekend and returned, after many years absence, to the Science Museum in Kensington. I was absolutely appalled at the devastation that the trendy, PC and "with it" curators have done to it.

 

It was like a very tacky and tasteless "funfair" (lots of simulator rides at ??4/sprog/go, "interactive" banalities...) with loads of opportunities to get kids to relieve their parents of hard earned cash in the "souvenir" shops (and very little science there as well...).

 

There wasn't much science and most of what was there was antique - the aviation gallery had not been updated (at a rough guess) since the 1970s (the latest aircraft to be featured was a 747-100 in cross section), the rail transport section had disappeared (yes, I know the collection has gone to York - but surely some of those excellent models could be kept in London?). Even the Welcome history of medicine sections (floors 4 and 5 - and not clearly signposted or easily accessible) doesn't seem to have been updated since the 1980s (at least that didn't condescend to you...)

 

Science Museum? - think "Science For Dummies" grossly simplified many times over.

 

When I was a sprog, the musueum was full of great models and imposing real exhibits (locos, beam engines, even a replica coal mine section in the basement), much of which worked at a press of a button. And was I, at age 10 with no knowledge of mechanics, engineering, aerodynamics (or whatever) intimidated by these displays that didn't condescend to sprogs of my age? Like hell I was - it just fired me up to learn more.

 

In comparison, the modernisation of the Natural History Museum has been quite well done with very little - if any - dumbing down (can we thank Sir David A for keeping intelligent interest in Nature alive?).

 

Needless to say, there's not much point in going back to Science Museum (even the "special" exhibition on Dan Dare and the 50s - 70s was sparse and dumbed down....)

 

 

F

[gordon s]

I have to agree with everything you have said. I found myself in London a couple of years back with a few hours to kill whilst my passport was processed, so took myself off to the Science Museum, which was one of my favourite haunts as a child. Of course, just thinking about it, it was probably 40-50 years ago that I was last there, so it's not surprising it had changed. Revisiting places from my childhood has often been a pleasurable experience with memories flooding back, but sadly this was a major disappointment.

 

Gone were all the cases of locomotives with the buttons to make them work. I could spent hours in that hall alone, with the railway stock and car collection. Add the motorcycles and the coal mine in the basement and it really was a fantastic place to spend a day. I found myself even wondering if I was in the same place.

 

I completely agree with you summation Il Dottore. It's almost as though the whole thing has been dumbed down to suit today's society. I'm sure those who go now without having seen it as it was will still find it an interesting place, but for me it was a pale shadow of what it was. Perhaps it's just an age thing with childhood memories being shattered....

[Fenman]

Related (and I'll get to the point by the end!) I think something interesting has happened in the world of museums and galleries: frightened that they were too "elitist", public funding has been made dependent on increasing the volumes of people travelling through ("subsidy per head" is one of the key measures). This has encouraged the National Gallery and the British Museum, for example, to focus on bringing in high volumes of traffic, especially for block-buster exhibitions but with a spillover into the rest of the collections.

 

The result is that it is impossible to spend any time in silent contemplation of a great work of art -- instead, you are surrounded by a pushing scrum, each person holding a "speaking guide" to their ear from which a tinny, hissy noise is emitted. Most of those visitors spend much more time looking at the label than engaging with the art or object (though I think that may always have been the case). But Quality of experience has been utterly sacrificed to Quantity.

 

The trouble is, there's a difficult balance to be struck -- why should the public's taxes be used to pay for the pleasures of the very few?

 

So museums and galleries have been driven down a path of numbers above everything, which they imagine can only be delivered if they "dumb down" -- a bit like tv and the ratings wars. If you want numbers, you have to appeal to the lowest common denominator, and the majority of parents desperate to shut their kids up will respond better to an adventure playground than to a traditional museum where they have to work to engage the kids. So goes the theory, anyway.

 

A recent visit to Locomotion in Shildon was a revelation -- the main hall is like museums used to be, vastly more pleasurable than the NRM. Simple displays of objects, each intelligently labelled, clearly lit, in a quiet, clean, simple, inviting space. It may have helped to have had a little more contextual information, but I doubt many "ordinary" visitors would have been interested. Locomotion felt, to me, like the best museums used to be: places that inspired you to find out more, and left you with a sense of wonder.

 

Paul

[iL Dottore]

The trouble is, there's a difficult balance to be struck -- why should the public's taxes be used to pay for the pleasures of the very few?

Paul

But is having intelligent and challenging displays and exhibits catering just for the few? I don't believe so - I agree that some things were (and are) more pretentious than others (e.g. much of so-called modern "art"), but surely we are guilty of perpetuating an "us and them" mentality if we pigeonhole people (e.g. working class men aren't interested in art, middle class boys aren't interested in how the docks work[ed])?

 

In response to the "recieved wisdom" you quote (If you want numbers, you have to appeal to the lowest common denominator, and the majority of parents desperate to shut their kids up will respond better to an adventure playground than to a traditional museum where they have to work to engage the kids) recollections of my days as a grubby little schoolboy include busy "not-dumbed-down" museums - some days (especially weekends during the summer hols) the Science Museum and the Natural History Museum were cram-packed with parents and kiddies.

 

As you say: like the best museums used to be: places that inspired you to find out more, and left you with a sense of wonder Can we get them back?

 

F

[Barry Ten]

I too have been disappointed in the gradual trend of making museums more - for want of a better term - kid-friendly. The Science Museum used to be great - I visited it at regular intervals right through the seventies and eighties, and I think it was part of what inspired me to become a scientist. I can't imagine I'd have the same reaction now. The National Museum of Wales also used to be much better, with its brilliant dioramas and walk-through colliery exhibits - all now swept away and replaced by the inevitable crowd-friendly dinosaurs and push-button interactive drivel.

 

I've also visited science museums in many parts of the world and they're all the same now; it's like they're part of the same dumbed-down franchise.

 

Grrr.

[S.A.C Martin]

I have to ask - because on my last visit to the science museum, it was not on display for various reasons - where is the Original Rocket being displayed currently? Is she still about to visit in London?

[Chris116]

Sounds like the Science Museum has led where others are now following. The London Transport Museum in Covent Garden used to be wonderful but when it reopened after a costly facelift most of the Trams had gone and everything was geared to 7 year olds having fun and playing with gadgits. I noted that the reduction in the number of large exhibits seemed to match the increase in size of the shop!

 

Chris

[Fenman]

But is having intelligent and challenging displays and exhibits catering just for the few? I don't believe so - I agree that some things were (and are) more pretentious than others (e.g. much of so-called modern "art"), but surely we are guilty of perpetuating an "us and them" mentality if we pigeonhole people (e.g. working class men aren't interested in art, middle class boys aren't interested in how the docks work[ed])?

 

In response to the "recieved wisdom" you quote (If you want numbers, you have to appeal to the lowest common denominator, and the majority of parents desperate to shut their kids up will respond better to an adventure playground than to a traditional museum where they have to work to engage the kids) recollections of my days as a grubby little schoolboy include busy "not-dumbed-down" museums - some days (especially weekends during the summer hols) the Science Museum and the Natural History Museum were cram-packed with parents and kiddies.

 

As you say: like the best museums used to be: places that inspired you to find out more, and left you with a sense of wonder Can we get them back?

 

F

Sloppy phrasing on my part if you took me to mean, from my post, that "working class men aren't interested in art...".

 

I was trying to do a couple of things:

1) to tease out the dilemma that popularising things can sometimes destroy them -- whether it's Stonehenge overrun by coach parties eating burgers or a Picasso that's overwhelmed by sheer volumes of shoving people (of whatever class).

2) to highlight the public policy that's driving some institutions to prioritise volumes of visitors over quality of experience;

3) to point out that lots of these institutions have decided that "dumbing down" and turning displays into playgrounds is the easiest way to get volumes in. Hence my parallel with tv companies, who believe showing reality shows and ersatz competitions is the way to get loads of viewers -- and, lo, they seem to be right, that stupid dumb content attracts far more viewers than intelligent, challenging content.

 

I want museums and galleries to have a philosophy that doesn't assume their visitors have the attention span of a fruit-fly. Current thinking appears to be that only lots of clashing colours, strange shapes and irritating noises will engage people (the refurbished London Transport Museum is one of the worst examples of this I have ever experienced -- the journey at the start, in the lift, is one of the most unpleasant experiences I have ever had in a museum). I think there should be room for different types of museums that appeal to different groups. But the trend is for all public-funded museums to dumb-down.

 

I don't think I criticised modern art. In fact, I can stare for hours at a Rothko painting, but in my view the problem is not that much of the most recent art is pretentious but that it is not pretentious enough. A lot of it is a dumb, one-line joke with no subtlety or depth. A recent chair of the Institute of Contemporary Art summarised it well by describing most of it as "craftless tat". But I guess that's a whole different discussion.

 

Paul

[Robert]

I want museums and galleries to have a philosophy that doesn't assume their visitors have the attention span of a fruit-fly.

 

I am going to stick my head above the parapet here!

 

I agree with pretty much everything that has been said - however, I suspect many of the museums are responding to demand in the Internet age.

 

Last year, I took my six year old to the Technik Museum in Speyer - it is pretty much how Museums used to be when I was a kid. As Fenman said - a large room, with many intelligently labelled exhibits. We spent the best part of the day there, and the little guy was content to look, touch the occasional exhibit where allowed and to listen to experiences and stories from his grandparents and myself.

 

I assumed this was the same with most kids - that was until I took the kids of a relation (same age). Attention span of a fruit-fly was about right. We were only there for about ten minutes before everything was declared "boring". I was completely amazed - they were more absorbed by the gift shop than the museum!

[Guest Max Stafford]

In relation to contemporary 'shock art' a' la Turner prize material, I have to concur that it is largely a pile of Jackson Pollocks...!

 

That said, I do like a Warhol!

 

Dave.

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

Unfortunately the decision that has been taken is that national museums have to compete with amusement arcades, shopping malls, theme parks, rather than serve an educative purpose. The private, armed forces and univ. museums are the places to go now.

 

 

[iL Dottore]

I want museums and galleries to have a philosophy that doesn't assume their visitors have the attention span of a fruit-fly.

I agree totally!

 

I don't think I criticised modern art. In fact, I can stare for hours at a Rothko painting, but in my view the problem is not that much of the most recent art is pretentious but that it is not pretentious enough. A lot of it is a dumb, one-line joke with no subtlety or depth. A recent chair of the Institute of Contemporary Art summarised it well by describing most of it as "craftless tat". But I guess that's a whole different discussion. Paul

Oh yes indeed, very much another discussion and one that - I suspect - will result in many "strongly held views"

 

I think there should be room for different types of museums that appeal to different groups. Paul

Indeed, but can't that be done under one roof? Didn't museums use to have a "kiddie's corner" (or similar) for the younger visitors?(who often wanted to go to see the "grown-up" exhibits)

 

F

[Chameleon]

I suppose it is indicative of the science museum, seeing as it is part of it but I have noticed a certain "dumbing down" of the NRM. There used to be very interesting and factual info on the exhibits, there still is to some extent but there are an awful lot of "This is an express loco, it has big wheels so it went very fast!" type stuff. There is also a lot more kiddy stuff to play too.

On a related note, I think it was a travesty what they did to the Timothy Hackworth museum in Shildon when it got incorporated into locomotion. His house was a very nice representation of how it was in his time with victorian style rooms and an interesting history of the works upstairs.

Now it has been completely gutted and is full of "interactive" crap. See if you can fit the train shaped blocks into the train shaped holes type stuff.

[BoD]

Current thinking appears to be that only lots of clashing colours, strange shapes and irritating noises will engage people

OT but connected, I watched football focus for the first time in a while and they used exactly the same sort of techniques in some of their reports. I found it totally offputting and so turned off, but, how many nowadays need that sort of thing to keep their attention. Perhaps we are turning into a nation of fruit flies.

[John_Hughes]

On a related topic, a friend of mine (the former Chief Librarian at the National Library of Wales no less) commented to me a few days ago that it was impossible to go to a 'proper' lecture these days, as everyone feels the need to make them into PowerPoint presentations. It seems that a lot of people nowadays find it hard to listen to anything that lasts for more than about two minutes.

[BoD]

impossible to go to a 'proper' lecture these days, as everyone feels the need to make them into PowerPoint presentations

 

Totally OT now (sorry) but this is quite amusing

 

http://www.youtube.c...h?v=Rp8dugDbf4w

[LH&JC]

Hopefully the NRM can be bold enough not to dumb itself down but I can't help but feel that the NRM will end up like that after it's proposed redevelopment. Less exhibits and more rubbish.

[pete_mcfarlane]

The nail in the coffin (as far as I was concerned) was when they replaced the model stationary engines with a bookshop. About the only positive change that has been made in the last 20 years is hanging the unused Black Arrow space launcher from the ceiling of the space gallery.

 

Rocket was still there last time I went. Right at the back (where the trains used to be) is a new Gallery with a random selection of important scientific artefacts, including Rocket, a V2, Puffing Billy, and Apollo command module and the Short SC1. The sectioned Mini was there as well - another fond childhood memory. In fact it's rather like the NRM - nice if you know what you are looking at already, but not very educational if you don't.

 

Manchester Museum of Science and Industry is much better if you want a proper museum. So long as you stay out of the textile gallery - the section on the link between cotton and slaves tries to make out the the slaves were directly captured by Europeans, rather than by their fellow Africans and then sold on. Presumably the reality isn't considered PC, but people will read it and assume it's true because it's in a museum.

 

Annd don't get me started on the animatronic dinosaurs I saw in the Natural History Museum a few years back. Apparently the only way the kids of today can understand Dinosaurs is through imitation ones that jerk around like industrial robots.

[slow8dirty]

Unfortunately the decision that has been taken is that national museums have to compete with amusement arcades, shopping malls, theme parks, rather than serve an educative purpose. The private, armed forces and univ. museums are the places to go now.

Yup, used to go to the fleet air arm museum loads of times as a child, loved it, sense of wonder etc. Returned there last year and it was just as good as ever. Taken on new interactive displays but used sensibly without dumbing down. I enjoyed it and the relations' tribe of kids we took with us loved it too, some who i thought would have no interest at all. Good to see somewhere getting it right still. plug mode off now Ps if you have a family member with an MOD id card take them, you'll get people in at an unbelievable discount.

[cunningduck]

I personally found the warehouse part of the NRM fascinating, and much preferred it to main halls, but even in the main halls, I appreciated the ability to look at an engine (i.e. being able to walk underneath one of them) because then I could work out what parts were for myself, it was the parts without the descriptions that I liked more. I agree with the general sentiment that museums are better without the hands on interactive rubbish!

[Neil]

My favourite museum of the moment has to be the National Slate Museum in Llanberis. There are bits and pieces to read as you trundle round (they aren't at all intrusive) but the main look of the place is that on Friday the last shift put their tools down and on Monday the doors were opened to the public. There's a fantastic sense of connection to the past that results. There's a small gift shop and a cafe, but they don't impinge on the museum space; try it when you're in the area.