CC: [log in to unmask]
In-reply-to: <[log in to unmask]> (message from Pioneer Joel on Mon, 2 Dec 1996 19:01:24 -0700)
Subject: Re: virtual reality in a museum setting (fwd)
Whew! I missed the earlier parts of this thread (having wisely turned off the museum-l mail since I haven't had time to read it much lately) but it sounds like an interesting one.
I was recently put in the position of giving a lecture at a training course for Japanese curators ("gakugeiin"=rough equivalent of a curator) here at the Tokyo University Museum - this year's theme was "the digital museum." I would like to throw out a couple of things that I said and see what this crowd thinks.
Too many museums (and individuals) get caught up in competing to have and use the newest and best equipment/technology. We should be trying to incorporate these things in ways that make our existing jobs easier to do (number one priority) and then looking for ways to do exciting new things after that. (Of course, I include reaching the public through exhibitions, etc., one of the existing jobs). This means that you really need to decide what you are trying to accomplish before you start buying equipment and putting a lot of hours in on new projects, and be sure that what you are doing is worth the effort.
(I have been looking at digitizing projects over here, QTVR and all kinds of fancy stuff in museums, and I have seen a lot of money going into these things while basic curation and even basic computer activity like collections management and registration sometimes go by the wayside.)
In a nutshell, I said this high-tech stuff just provides tools. We already know the job. Use the tools to get the job done as best you can. That*s all.
Some of these folks are scared of being left behind, stranded using incompatible, obsolete equipment that shuts them out of the picture from some real (or imagined?) cutting-edge global museum scene. I guess they think they will lose their audience and their funding. I personally think that if it*s a museum with something worth saying (and worth seeing), with a real mission and purpose, that will be enough to keep it going even if it isn*t using the latest and the hottest gadgets. Let them add on and improve as time and money permit.
It really seems like automation happens without a plan far too frequently everywhere, and the emphasis on all of these wonderful visitor entertainment devices (I hate to open the "edutainment" can of worms, but...) can drain already depleted resources away from more essential tasks. Yeah, it*s the old question of what is serving what - collections serving to keep the museum open, or the museum serving to keep the collections. From my own particular Western viewpoint, at least.
What do you 3-D VR whizzes think? Is it too "retro" to sit here and issue warnings about putting the cart before the horse at this point? I hope there are always "pioneers" out there opening up new frontiers, but I also hope some folks stay behind and keep civilization going.
Tim Campbell
Visiting Researcher
Tokyo University Museum
P.S.
My personal thoughts as far as the Internet and VR go: somebody said (I saw it in the paper, and I am paraphrasing): "Just because you see a travelogue on a tropical island on TV doesn*t mean you feel like you don*t need to go yourself!" Yes, this is a great way to provide access to those otherwise unable to visit a museum, but truthfully it just isn*t as good as seeing real stuff. It never will be. Computer images can be changed and manipulated more easily than actual objects (this is what makes them a useful tool!), and are removed from reality and context - as opposed (we hope) to the experience of seeing actual objects on display. There is at least a generational loss with a computer image, as when a videotape is copied to another videotape: these images are at best a duplicate record vs. an original record. At worst they are like the wooden nickels you are warned not to take: you might think you have the real thing, but the value (artistic or informational) isn*t ther!
!
e.
|
