Hi Jake (and Ed) and others,
The Intel Museum is one of my favorite 'small' exhibit spaces
that does a lot (in terms of information and conveying complex
information in an understandable way) in a relatively short time
period. Two things stand out about Intel and the Museum for me:
One is that there was an exhibit about microprocessors which
seemed to be a type of table-top-like flip-grid where one can
explore how microprocessors are used and their various types.
This was my first encounter with the notion of embedded micro-
processors and computing, which was an 'ahah!' moment in
terms of better understanding the industry and how ubiquitous
yet also invisible computing can and has become- in that one
may not even know there are computer chips in, say, a Barbie
doll, a streetlight, or espresso machine (for domestic examples).
The second innovation in this museum, besides a quick study
of Intel and the evolution of their microprocessor line (and, it
seemed there may have been other chips included in this
exhibit, not sure) -- was that Intel also sold jewelry of their
defunct chips, as aesthetic artifacts -- which to me is a sign
of genius in the cultural importance of computing, of the (Intel)
chipset as an icon that is recognizable, yet when seen up-
close, it is mysterious as it looks different than on a mother-
board. It is hoped Intel someday revives this practice and
they have been very receptive to my inquiries, which also
indicates to me their commitment to sharing their works.
Sad to say, some small museums are not like this in terms
of this type of innovative presentation and representation
of information (the exhibit but also the artifacts) and, in a
sense, the Intel Museum has a lot to teach others, IMHO.
The Computer History Museum, while I have not seen the
physical exhibits, has its website online and while I enjoy
this documentation, the 'interpretation' of these artifacts in
the much larger context of electrification and cultural change
to me awaits investigation. For example, to examine what
computing may be, may require an interdisciplinary approach
which is less about the museum than a warehouse and a
series of ever-changing stagesets in which, like dioramas,
vantages of computing in everyday life and its transformation
are explored. There is something about the interdisciplinary
aspect of computers that is missing in isolating them as
independent objects, for in a networked world they ceased
to be autonomous, it would seem, and became internetworked
in a vast assemblage of connections, from space probes with
live video feeds to underseas exploration of the first life on
Earth, to telerobotic surgery and e-commerce. Thus, it is this
aspect of 'infrastructure' which to me cannot and will not be
defined by one exhibit in one place, moreso as an invention
of collaborative efforts, bringing these various aspects into
one place (networked) to explore the facets of this jewel.
For instance, in a sense it is like Alvin Toffler's vacation-
spending exercises, when traveling to go visit companies
and industries and tour their facilities to learn about what
they are doing and how they are doing it, to get the 'big
picture' view of the artifact or its contextual relationship
with other production systems, and its place within it. So
too, while the San Jose Tech Museum (I don't believe it
is the Intel Museum but I could be wrong) has a working
or semi-automated silicon processing facility within the
museum itself, separated from the real-world bunny-suit
semiconductor industry where the chips are made. This
gives a sense to the importance of the size of the platters,
their dimensions, how dozens of microchips can then be
manufactured on these, and how each batch has some
percentage that have flaws even in the most controlled
of conditions, as the levels of precision needed for the
design and manufacturing of things deemed 'micro' are
extraordinarily complex to build and yet, the outcome
is this computer universe, these computing devices,
and one (a computer one uses now) is not separated
nor should it be, from this process, and to understand
this connection is to better understand computing. And
while this silicon machine may already be outdated, it
is speculated that these huge machines and such will
be lost to history, unless industrial archaeologists and
museum professionals take on the present-day artifacts,
including the technical manuals and even chlildren's
books about the first computers (circa 1940s) that are
being burned as waste by libraries today, to make room
for books by Oprah and Britney Spears autobiographies
donated to libraries and the Library of Congress. (Not
a slam of the former, but yes, of the latter).
IF instead, like the Tofflers vacations, companies were
to include their tours in 'interpretive contexts' and to
help teach and convey learning in such tours of their
facilities and technologies, in conjunction with museums,
then whole worlds and realms of information and a new
understandability or comprehension may be available,
as with the interdisciplinary aspect of the fine arts and
natural history museums teaming up with science and
technology and history museums and private collections
and galleries to give a larger, more whole sense of the
present day, which is more complex than any one curator
or their vision of a subject, IMO. designers, curators, and
artists, in addition to architects, businesses, organizations,
and others can make this happen. And the Intel Museum
and others offer glimpses of how this could be done. It is
an idea, not a formula, it is a question of how to relate
to this culture, in the present moment. There is a book
by David McCaully (i forget the title and his name is
not spelled right, he is an architectural picture-book/
story writer) which was of 'future artifacts', it had things
like UPC codes found buried as artifacts from the present
that some archaeologist of the future finds, so too with
streetlights and other memorabilia. It is this aspect that
someday, surely, just like Roman and Greek artifacts,
a long-lost computer mouse, of even the most mundane
type (say, a Microsoft Mouse, one many many people
have) may be found and become a museum's treasure
as the rest have been lost, and it is now 200 years old.
This is to consider both questions of hardware and also
software (as information archaeologists and those in
library sciences seem to be doing with archiving data
that is electronic, especially the rapidly losing battle to
keep the record of software programming in existence)
-- in relation to the historical past. Any museum that is
represented on this list, it is proposed, will be dealing
in one way or another with the new electromagnetic
science, technology, and culture in their exhibitions,
either through interpretation or exhibiting or learning
about the artifacts they hold. And it is for this reason
that those issues surrounding the history of computing
tie in with other initiatives, and many lead back to the
record of electrification and electromagnetic culture.
In any case, a big THANKs for your work which has
been very inspiring to me someone who experienced
information in a way that helped me learn more about
a mysterious and very complex subject, which also has
driven so much of culture- by making it accessible to me.
Brian
bc microsite http://www.electronetwork.org/bc/
~e-list http://www.electronetwork.org/list/
=========================================================
Important Subscriber Information:
The Museum-L FAQ file is located at http://www.finalchapter.com/museum-l-faq/ . You may obtain detailed information about the listserv commands by sending a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "help" (without the quotes).
If you decide to leave Museum-L, please send a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "Signoff Museum-L" (without the quotes).
|
