The Big Bang
As I looked through out the halls of the Museum of Natural History, I seemed possessed by the kid in me. Dinosaur bones, space shows, and giant planets all clouded my head with fascination. In one exhibit lay a piece of the largest meteorite to hit the US, while in another room a display showed the figures of animals that lived during the Ice Age like the Willy Mammoths and Saber tooth Tigers. Another room was dimly lit as it displayed precious stones from around the world including emeralds and diamonds. The evolution of man was easily outlined in another gallery; it talked of DNA replication and detailed the major organs of the heart with such precision. However as I kept exploring, I kept thinking that the stuff displayed here should be interactive, viewers should be able to touch and feel the artifacts they see. The touching would help make the artifact what it once was, a regular piece that populated the Earth. So I posed the question should scientific galleries let the viewer employ their five senses when viewing works?
In the museum I caught a show in the Hayden planetarium about the Cosmos and its infinite bounds. It showed of the early sun and the early planets and of their journey to their present states. Robert Redford’s voice echoed through the dome as he described comets and the Milky Way. He journeyed out of the universe to show us our ultimate doom, as universes will eventually collide with each other to form an even greater entity. This was a model piece for the museum. It allowed to viewer to see and hear the stars and skies as done by others out in the sky and in the labs. It proved to be very interactive and thus allowed me to form my own thoughts on the matter from what I felt and heard.
The fourth floor brought back memories of the Magic School Bus and of old episodes of Arthur. It contained DINOSAURS. The Dino’s were divided between Saurischian and Ornithischian types. The Saurischain gallery presented the archetypal layout for the viewing of the fiercest dinosaur of its time, the T-Rex. The fossils of the giant beast were arranged so that they’d immediately catch the eye of the viewer, while the background helped promote the T-Rex centerpiece. The Ornithischian gallery on the other hand seemed more open and presented many different types of fossils including those of the Tricerotops and the Stegosaurus. The dino’s were a great site for the eyes, but their display left a lot for the imagination. Actually how sharp were its teeth? How tough were its bones? How sharp were its nails? All these questions popped into my mind when I saw the great T-Rex on display. But touching wasn’t allowed and rightfully so. Human curiosity is a wonderful thing but it can also lead to destruction, so interactivity wasn’t ideal in this case. Perhaps however a gallery or section where fossils could be touched or viewed up close might be the solution?
It is quite understandable why a Museum would block off its art and make it only viewable. But some art needs to be viewed differently. Some art needs two senses to be viewed properly or perhaps even all five, especially scientific art. So I do understand the predicament museums such as the American Museum of Natural History and the MET face when dealing with artifacts, but why not set aside non-significant pieces and make them interactive for the public. Are all the thousands of gems displayed in the Hall of Gems so valuable that only a few cannot be spared so they can serve as instruments for viewers to form their own opinions of such gems. Why can’t one touch the tooth of a T-Rex to get an idea of whether his/her kitchen knife is sharper? One learns by experiencing life through the five senses. That should be the same way one explores art.
October 11th, 2007 at 12:42 am
Man, I also would like to touch every piece of art I see. Although I think that our five senses would help us tremendously in exploring things, I still sympathize with the museum people – if they were to let everyone appreciate their artworks with the five senses, they just would not last long. Perhaps museums should make cheap, yet close, replicas of the original work and allow the public to do anything they want with them, lol.
October 11th, 2007 at 8:10 am
siwen this sounds like a good business idea, why not pitch it to the museum?
October 11th, 2007 at 12:32 pm
I agree with you Syed and Siwen! Though I have never been to the Museum of Natural history is it absolutely on top of the list of the next museum I want to visit. In my opinion, “visitng a museum” does have such a negative conotation in many peoples’ eyes which is devestating – a museum should enrich our minds and spark imagination and ideas! You gave a beautiful impression of how the art and exhibits in this museum affected you. when you write about it, it’s almost like I am able to visit the museum in my head – can’t wait to check it out for myself!
October 11th, 2007 at 6:27 pm
I agree with Siwen. Artworks should be well preserved so that future generations have the chance to see them.
October 12th, 2007 at 12:25 am
I don’t know. Most art is meant to be seen, or in some cases heard. Why do you need to touch, much less taste or smell the piece? Plus, creating a replica is not the real thing. I feel you lose the true essence of the piece in a copy, so even touching a copy is not like touching the real thing.