Comments on: Chapter 1: Principles of Participation

By: Glory

Glory — Wed, 04 Jan 2012 20:21:44 +0000

Glory…

[...]Chapter 1: Principles of Participation – The Participatory Museum[...]…

By: langlang33

langlang33 — Sat, 10 Sep 2011 06:31:22 +0000

You actually make it seem so easy with your presentation but I discover this matter to be really some thing which I think I would never understand. It seems too complex and extremely broad for me. I am looking forward for your next post, I’ll try to obtain the hang of it!

By: Nicole A

Nicole A — Sun, 31 Jul 2011 22:25:37 +0000

@Marissa: Marissa i completely agree with your point of view on how museums are always assumed to be correct; clearly, and it has been proven time and time again, museums are not always correct and are a view point on how the world at that time can be viewed and from who's stand point. An example would be Germany during World War II, Hitler not only had billions of books burned and destroyed but he also only showed in museums at the time what he deemed to be a pure view on history. Story's of Jews and the trials they have been through were not portrayed only hatred and stories on how bad they were could be seen. Modern museums still have a prejudice on what they can and cannot show on display. Certain artifacts cannot be shown as they are offensive to differing cultures, also many artifacts are being shipped out to their original countries as they were 'stolen' and need to be returned to their original owners. This limits museums and gives way to my point about how digital museums can be a good thing in the display of items that can not be there 'in person'. Eventually (if they haven't already been made) 3D holographs can be made to show artifacts that may be too fragile to have on display or that are no longer in possession. Also video links to people around the world could be used to show artifacts in their home country which can link into other information that we may not have in our country. Videos and digital logs of people discussing their views on World Wars and battles they were in will be useful as many of the surviving members of the war are dying out. I believe that digital history can be so useful for the future, we just have to keep an eye on the repercussions of our actions and how they may effect our environment.

By: Erin

Erin — Sun, 31 Jul 2011 20:11:29 +0000

@Amanda: I find it very interesting to learn that the British Museum has such an interactive website. This is only surprising because having recently visited here, It was interesting to find that there was almost no digital (or non digital) interaction within the exhibitions at all. Having checked out many of the biggest Museums in the UK, I found this to be somewhat of a trend. Perhaps they feel that their exhibitions and artifacts stand up on their own without digital aids? Either way, it seems that British museums were extremely conservative with their digital approaches as opposed to Museums I attended in continental Europe. At first I thought British museums to be anti-progress, but having looked at the British Museum’s website now (http://www.britishmuseum.org/) I can see that digitisation is in progress. I appreciate the use of technology to give those who can’t visit the museum the experience of viewing and learning about the exhibitions. Shouldn’t this be the most important aspect of digital history? Allowing greater access to those all over the world?

By: Amanda

Amanda — Sat, 30 Jul 2011 01:58:02 +0000

@Isobel: I agree with you, I like traditional museums too. I also like history-oriented websites, such as the BBC website's history section with its interactive reconstruction of an ancient British chariot, which was more interesting than reading about how said chariots were made in a book. There is also place for a participatory section because computers make saving photographs easier, so people are more likely to save their old photographs instead of throwing them away like in the past.

By: Amanda

Amanda — Fri, 29 Jul 2011 23:54:04 +0000

On the subject of Wikipedia, not all articles are rubbish and not trustworthy. I came across an example where a professor got his students to write Wikipedia articles for a project. Naturally, those articles would have been accurate if the students who wrote them wanted to pass the project.

On the flipside, someone once edited the plot section for the Twilight book New Moon’s Wikipedia page to say “WHINY BULLSHIT WHINY BULLSHIT WHINY BULLSHIT WHINY BULLSHIT WHINY BULLSHIT WHINY BULLSHIT”. Obviously this was not going to be very helpful to someone who actually wanted to know about New Moon’s plot, although it was pretty funny. Cases of blatant bias like that are probably very rare though.

By: Erin

Erin — Fri, 29 Jul 2011 22:07:25 +0000

@Barbara: I was thinking along the same Wavelength as you, Barbara, Kete, while a fantastic format and very useful, is not necessarily going to tell us about the aspects of a community we want to learn about. Firstly, it is still new, the fact that most of our third-year History class hasn't heard of the project shows that most of the population still doesn't know of its existence. Some groups or people who have valuable information and memories which belong on Kete don't have access to computers or knowledge on computers to be able to upload their information to it, and, as you have said above, some aspects of Maori culture are sacred and protected. Kete is something that will become more and more useful as it grows and once the community knows more about it. Perhaps after some real-life workshops with people in the community who otherwise would not have heard of or been able to use Kete it will be a more all-round useful source. I say lets spread the word and get people to use this site like they do Facebook!

By: Erin

Erin — Fri, 29 Jul 2011 21:57:10 +0000

Hi, I have found reading this chapter very enlightening and interesting!
But I would just like to ask, do you not think that reading static text or looking at images is participation and interaction? These acts, I believe, are the basis of interaction, something that most visitors to a Museum will take part in (ie. reading given information, looking at an artifact). I have always seen digital approaches within exhibitions in Museums to be almost a way of drawing those less willing to participate in to reading/viewing, like a facade of digital excitement which leads to the same principles of Museum interaction that have been around from the start. Does anyone have any views on this point, or examples where this is not the case?

By: John

John — Fri, 29 Jul 2011 01:08:03 +0000

Barbara I completely agree, while I understand that people can feel spiritually connected to plants and natural objects, I don’t agree that people can claim ‘total spiritual ownership’ over the natural world.

I believe the main issue with museums is TRUST. Museums have to be prepared to build long, strong relationships with cultural groups whose items are being displayed. Museums cannot expect to have one ‘universal way’ to deal with these groups either; every group is different and unique and so needs to be treated as such. I believe that if the group feels as though they are being acknowledged and honoured enough within the process, these ‘cultural barriers’ will slowly fall. I saw this with a Waikato tribe; an author approached the tribe and wanted to write a book on their ancestors. She attended many Marae hui and gatherings and built a strong relationship with the tribe. The book is called ‘Bravo New Zealand’ for those interested and the author still keeps in touch with the tribe. I believe that the relationships that museums share with the various cultural groups who’s items they claim to be honouring is the most important issue. From there, then participatory methods can then be woven around those relationships; otherwise if there is no respect being given to the many cultural groups, there is no point in participatory methods in my belief.

By: Barbara

Barbara — Thu, 28 Jul 2011 22:41:05 +0000

Isobel, you’ve expressed my views exactly. It isn’t a matter of either/or, but to take the best that the digital world has to offer and combine with traditional sources.