This week’s museums were all about art for the first time. I was back home in Minnesota so I was able to hit up the 2 big art museums in Minneapolis; The Walker Art Center and Minneapolis Institute of Arts.

 

Walker Art Center

The Walker has always been, and continues to be, one of my favorite places. Growing up in St. Cloud doesn’t afford you a lot of cultural experiences and the Walker was a beacon of weird, new ideas within striking distance of my home. The building is situated near downtown Minneapolis and consists of 2 wings; the original Modernist brick building and a 2005 addition designed by Herzog & de Meuron. It’s also flanked by a large sculpture garden. It’s impossible to miss the angular structure jutting out from it’s rather flat surroundings and it makes me wonder if the bold expression of the newer wing will stand up to time.

Regardless of if the architecture ages well, the building is a good showcase for what the Walker is trying to do. It’s highly visible, contemporary and actually quite welcoming. There are a number of lounge areas throughout the building that encourage people to congregate and relax. There are also interactive kiosks that give you details about the collection, the building and the goal of The Walker.

 

 

The interior is a wandering puzzle of galleries, each with their own dimensions and theme. While the old wing is more traditionally white and boxy, the new wing has dramatic angles and multimedia spaces of various colors. I was delighted to see an entire gallery made up as an homage to the Wunderkammer with an assortment of almost-ironic articles that seemed to recognize the Museum of Jurassic Technology. As they entered this room, I overheard a young boy say “this is a real art museum” and a middle aged man decided “this is the best room.”

The collection is a mix of touring and permanent work. In light of our reading about the Pulitzer collection this week, it occurred to me that this can be a difficult curatorial balance to pull off. It feels almost antithetical to the museum to have a permanent collection and even odder that they have to rearrange and re-contextualize a finite amount of art to keep the gallery spaces feeling fresh. I’m sure there are great benefits to having a collection (like being able to draw upon it whenever you want to), but maybe they should auction off anything older than 20 years.

 

 

This feels like the perfect venue for computer generated and assisted art, not unlike work being made at ITP, but there was actually very little of that. I kept expecting to see an interactive gallery and more constructivist presentations being experimented with, but over-all this museum is pretty white-walls and hands off.

The website goes beyond the standard brochure-ware you normally see and attempts to be a general art news source. That seems like an interesting role to play, but it also adds a lot of noise to their home page for the casual visitor. Luckily the hours and events are conveniently placed in the upper left corner, so there isn’t much hunting one has to do for those.

 

 

Minneapolis Institute of Arts

The MIA was quite a different experience from the Walker, and perhaps they both benefit from that. It’s a much more traditional museum that feels like an Institution, complete with a giant neo-classical building. I’ve never visited the MIA before and I was surprised by the scale and tone considering it’s in Minneapolis.

When you enter the building, you walk into a 3 story rotunda with a Greek marble statue in the middle. On either side there are wings that are as wide as Parisian boulevards that have galleries appending them all the way down. These galleries feature mainly ancient art and artifacts with maps and cultural explanations—not what I was expecting in an art gallery. With that in mind, I was even more surprised to see that the end of the hallway turned into another large rotunda that led to a contemporary art collection. The juxtaposition was quite unusual.

 

 

The presentation was all very formally arranged on the walls and in free-standing cases. However, the museum itself felt up-to-speed. There were audio guides and some of the placards had QR codes on them. There was even a large screen that visualized tweets related to the show that it was a part of (regarding globalization). I thought that was an interesting bit of naval gazing.

Like the museum, the website feels large, dry and not wanting for verbosity. It overwhelms you with options until you finally just settle into one section and pretend the rest doesn’t exist. You can only take so much in.

Overall, I didn’t think the MIA was quite as interesting or dynamic as the Walker, but it was a good example of a museum in the systematic tradition. Maybe I’ve become accustomed to a different kind of experience, but I kept looking for something to catch my eye. Considering it’s vast scale, that happened too little for me to want to return the next time I’m in MN.

 

368 Manhattan

This week we visited 368 Manhattan Ave, an apartment in Brooklyn which is designed to reflect the living situations of 2012.

The first thing I noticed was that the building itself is very contemporaneous to the time period it portrays. It was built in 2008, just 4 years before our imagined inhabitants lived there. It’s made of brick and steel, with unadorned static surfaces which were just beginning to be designed by computers, but barely portray the array of shapes and reflexivity we expect today. It’s indicative of the time where Williamsburg was just starting to become the wealthy neighborhood that defined it in the late teens and early twenties. By today’s standards it was a modestly sized structure, and originally didn’t have the top 10 stories which make up the bulk of the building we see now.

The tour I took was booked online and we had the option of a 2D or 3D tour. I opted for the 3D tour, which was actually a complete reconstruction, because the original address isn’t equipped to handle transports. There were some obvious anachronisms, like a smart panel (circa 2018), but the effect was pretty much the same. We got to interact with a host of probable inhabitants and ask them about their life, which I thought was especially evocative. The avatars’ AI was abysmal at handling questions about modern tech, and we got a good laugh out of confusing it for a while.

In the early 21st century it was very common for a single person or family to reside in these apartments for years, or even decades on end. Because of this, all of the furniture and appliances were generally owned by the occupants and were often accompanied by personal objects and decorations. It wasn’t until the late 20′s and 30′s that apartments became associated with the roving class and operated as temporary residences.

368 Manhattan is around 550 square feet; pretty roomy for two people. But again, that’s 550 square feet of permanent space where most of the cooking, sleeping, bathing and entertaining was done. So it had to accommodate a range of uses that are now done in restaurants, BNBs, and venues.

In it’s day it was a clean and well maintained residence, but there are many things that we would find lacking. Firstly, there was very little by way of environmental calibration. That wouldn’t have been too bad in 2012, but later inhabitants had to suffer the environment with little more than “air conditioners.” There was also no holodeck. Brooklynites routinely visited their place of work or school physically, which required a daily commute using a car, subway or bike. It’s almost unimaginable that the location of the body was so integrated with communication at the time.

There’s a clear ancestry between our way of life and that of 2012, but it’s also become drastically different. So much of their daily routine was constrained by physical requirements, and perhaps that explains the premium that they clearly placed on spaciousness and mobility. Did they have it any harder then than we have it now? I’d say not. New York was in a time of prosperity and quality-of-life is relative… to your neighbors, not your ancestors.

This week I visited a couple of museums that represent the way people live in late 19th and early 20th century New York City. The first was the Tenement Museum which represents the living situation of some of the poorest immigrants who came to America. The second is the birthplace of Theodore Roosevelt; a brownstone in the flatiron district of New York, which could only be afforded by the most affluent families in America.

A commonality between these museum visits is that they were both guided tours, and the museum was itself the object of interest. They were both decorated in their respective period styles to reflect the living situation of their inhabitants. It immerses the visitor in a way of life that’s truly tangible and accessible. It’s easy to imagine running through the hallways as a kid or eating dinner with your family.

Tenement Museum

I took the “Hard Life” tour at the Tenement Museum, which was one of several options. On this tour we saw the reconstructed living quarters of 2 families. One was from the 1860s and the other from the 1920s which were both periods of economic depression in America. These apartments are the embodiment of  hardships that faced the poor and disenfranchised in a younger NYC. Basic quality-of-life considerations such as running water, lighting and ventilation were luxuries. Tenement neighborhoods were defined by their population density—by some measurements these were the densest living situations anywhere in the world.

The building itself was obviously very derelict, and we were led through the dark rooms observing how the structure had changed over time and how it contrasts with modern homes. We learned about the story of specific families that had lived in that building, which was an interesting way of weaving the personal side of the story into the narrative. The rooms were furnished with object that they would have used for their professions and also curated by living relatives. Visual handouts (e.g. photos and documents) were passed around and there was an audio recording of a woman describing her up-bringing in the building.

Beyond the house that we toured, the museum seemed pretty ideologically modern. There’s a learning center attached to the gift shop, so people can read up on related topics. Also attached is a theater that’s playing a documentary about the lower east side, so you can stay engaged as you wait for your tour. Overall, the experience seemed pretty well orchestrated.

The Tenement Museum didn’t let us take photos, but they have a selection of them available on Flickr.

 

Theodore Roosevelt Birthplace

The Teddy Roosevelt birthplace represented the opposite end of the spectrum from the Tenement Museum, although they captured a similar time frame. The house is situated next to Gramercy Park, which at the time was considered a wealthy suburb of New York City. I was a little disappointed to learn that the original house had been torn down and this was actually a reconstruction using parts of the identical building that had been next door, but the affect was basically the same.

The starkest difference with the tenement accommodations (and frankly, modern NYC living) is the sheer amount of space in this house. It housed a large family and 4 or 5 servants at any given time. But as luxurious as the space must have been, I can’t help but think that modernity has enhanced our lives so much more than money could have at the time. Even this wealthy estate didn’t have electricity and was heated with a coal burning fire, which must have had ill effects on the asthmatic young Roosevelt.

 

 

The home is currently run by the parks department and was ultimately just a good excuse to hear some stories about Teddy Roosevelt. I wasn’t quite as piqued by the actual building, partly because I knew it wasn’t the original, and partly because Teddy only lived there until he was 14, so it lacked his fingerprint. But it did serve as a good foil for the tenement museum and also my tiny 1 bedroom apartment. The tour guide repeatedly expressed his jealousy that this house was a wedding present to Teddy’s father.

 

This weekend we went to the New York Hall of Science (NYSCI) to see how they presented science in a museum context.

Building

The first thing you see as you approach the museum are the rockets from the US space program which are positioned on the grounds. These were originally displayed at the 1964 Worlds Fair, which took place on the same land that the museum now sits. The building itself is a hybrid between a funky Modernist cement structure (think a vertically extruded amoeba with black spots), and a more contemporary wing made of glass and steel. It’s a good home for a museum that bridges the gap between “old school” science (light, waves, gravity, etc.) and contemporary topics (network effects, the maker movement, computers, etc.). When you entered, the halls fork in a number of different ways without any directions. It asks to be explored, rather than “completed.”

 

Collection / Representation

The collection is obviously very sciencey, and also hands-on and playful. I recognized a lot of the ideas from our “Active Prolonged Engagement” reading. For example, many of the exhibits were designed to explore a specific phenomenon for an extended period. This was encouraged by adding seats to the exhibits, and also adding multiple “stations” to a single exhibit, so more than 1 people can use it at a time. There were a few corners of the museum that were specifically designed as a play area for kids to run around and stack things and interact. It was basically a big playground and the space was filled with a pretty positive energy. The museum staff was also very engaging. There were live demonstrations (in a cooking-show-like format) and one staffer started playing with us on the “ant-gravity” mirror.

Website

The website is clean and straight-forward. The front page has hours and contact information displayed in the top left corner, and upcoming events occupy the main column. This makes it extremely easy to find the basic info. Like many museums, it suffers from some anti-navigational language (e.g. “learn”, “explore”), but this seems to be pretty standard so I’ll stop mentioning it.

 

Demonstrating Emergent Properties

I’ve been interested in the idea of emergence for a while and I think it could really spark the imagination of kids. There are amazing examples of it in mathematics, nature, the organic growth of cities and also the structure of the internet. Unexpected and wonderful propertied are often the effect of large systems of individual actors, and it can arise with seemingly simple rule sets. In a museum context I’d present it as a particle simulation. The audience would have the ability to tweak the rules that each of the individual particles behaved by. Once those rules had been set, the simulation would be set in motion by introducing more and more particles to see how they interacted in larger and larger groups. It’s amazing how tiny tweaks at the particle level can lead to dramatically different behaviors on a macro level. It’s an interesting metaphor for our role as humans.

 

 

Building

The American Museum of Natural History is about as iconic a museum as you’re going to come across. It’s a giant classical structure with triumphant arches and marble stairways that are instantly recognizable. The main entrance is adorned by an unforgettable sculpture of Teddy Roosevelt riding a horse alongside two “savages.” The building itself is at once grand, imposing and timeless. It typifies the idea that a museum is an institution with eternal wisdom entombed within.

Collection

The AMNH has a vast collection of animals and artifacts that are generally presented in life-like tableaus. These may be the most memorable exhibits of the museum. While they seem a little out-dated at this point, they still have a beauty to them like a still-life oil painting might, rich with color and composition.  The museum also contains a sizable collection of human artifacts such as cooking vessels, clothing and instruments. But beyond the more traditional exhibits, it’s clear that there’s been an effort to revitalize the space with modern components such as touch screens, videos, etc. This is particularly true in the space and Earth exhibition spaces which are rife with interactive exhibits that aim to actively engage the user. See my previous post, Observing Interaction Technology, for more on that.

Website

The website is pretty comprehensive, but it’s also seriously ugly; when I saw the masthead for the first time I double checked that I was at the right URL. The front page does a pretty good job at drawing you into the current exhibitions, with a carousel of large images. Like many museums it leans a little heavily on anti-navigational lingo such as “explore,” but that’s mitigated by making links to almost every section of the website accessible from the nav-bar.

Audience

After hearing the demographic data of the average museum goers in the US, I was surprised by the diversity of the crowd at AMNH. There were clearly groups from all over the world, mostly comprised of younger couples or families with kids. I listened into the chatter occurring in front of the exhibitions, but I didn’t come to any over-arching conclusions. Generally the adults read the plaques and the children would just ask adults about what they were looking at. Often the chatter wasn’t about facts or learning per-se, but maybe a made up story about the animal or just a funny comment. Groups might linger in front of an exhibition from 10-30 seconds, and then move on. They “got” it.

Re-imagining an Exhibit

I really enjoyed the “Spectrum of Life” exhibit because of the array of diversity it captures, but also the visually pleasing arrangement. I think if I were going to re-imagine an exhibit, I’d start here and merge it with the family tree of dinosaur species that’s positioned in the back of the hall of dinosaurs. I’d attempt to show the evolution of species by positioning them in a 3-dimensional formation throughout a large hall. Each species would be oriented next to a species which is similar, but had evolved different characteristics for their environment. The watery species would descend, and the flying species would transition vertically into the space. The primitive species would be in the beginning of the hall and as you walk forward, they get more complex and specialized.

 

El Museo del Barrio

Building

El Museo del Barrio is housed on the ground floor of a multi-story brick building near Central Park. The building is currently shrouded by scaffolding, which made the museum a little hard to spot. The entrance and gift shop had a very modern feel with neon colors and hard angles giving it the veneer of a contemporary art museum. It evoked the rhythms, colors and vibrancy that’s often associated with latin and Caribbean cultures.

Collection

Considering the footprint of the entryway, giftshop and cafe, the collection was surprisingly modest. It was formatted like a standard white-wall collection that spanned various media, genres and countries. There didn’t seem to be a huge emphasis on creating a narrative or expressing a theme beyond the inherent regionalism. It was arranged in a meandering, patchwork style that flowed between various rooms.

Website

The website does a sufficient job of presenting the information I was looking for (mainly, how do I get there and what are your hours). It was otherwise unremarkable.

Additional Thoughts

Unfortunately the entryway was the most impressive aspect of El Museo del Barrio. After paying for tickets, we were directed to an unmarked double door that was closed—it wouldn’t have been obvious where to go otherwise. The collection was fairly small and disparate. There were many attendants in the space and one of them even engaged us to talk about the art, which I thought was kind of interesting.

 

Museum of the City of New York

Building

MCNY is housed in a classically styled building, which also flanks the upper east side of Central Park. The interior cleanly blends modern design with the civic architecture, and has a very balanced feel. Lots of white columns and glass. Each floor generally has an exhibit in either wing which are quite distinct from each other, both physically and thematically.

Collection

The exhibits are designed to highlight specific facets of New York City, conveyed through an array of media. One exhibit was devoted to the city’s role in global finance. Another displayed the living spaces of various NY peoples throughout time. The museum has a very pedagogical bent, the degree to which is sometimes overwhelming. The presentation seemed very thoughtful and information rich.

Website

Like El Museo del Barrio, the MCNY museum did a sufficient job at giving me directions and hours, but otherwise feels a little busy. It doesn’t do a great job at simply presenting the impressive collection and enjoyable space. One odd thing is that once you click on the “Public Programs” link, you’re directed to a shopping cart that doesn’t share the website’s navigation and doesn’t have a clear way back to the home page.

Overall Impressions

I enjoyed the Museum of the City of New York quite a bit, especially for its educational aspect. I left feeling that I wasn’t able to soak it all in, so I plan on returning in the future.