I visited the Museum of Anthropology today, for the second time, after visiting it the previous week in class. Even though Anthropology is my minor, I have never even been inside the museum because I made the assumption that it was not going to be interesting or at all intriguing. After visiting the museum and analyzing its displays and objects my opinion of the museum has not changed much, but the museum has a great deal of potential. The museum has all of the objects and most of the hardware to become a first class exhibit, it just need a lot of reworking and redesigning.When I first walked into the exhibit area I noticed how empty it was, I next noticed the gigantic pair of horse statutes, and I then was able to deduce the overall flow of the exhibit. The exhibit is basically a large square with display cases inserted in the walls, and the most obvious place to start observing the displays is to start with the display closest to the entrance. The architecture of the room is pretty nice, with shiny, patterned wood floors, wooden display cases, and windows. Once I started to actually look inside the display cases what met my eyes was a jumble of confused and unrelated topics. It was like the designer of the exhibit designed each display case as separate, small exhibits, because the display cases did not relate to one another and there was no cohesion to the exhibit at large. I was also pretty disappointed with the way in which some photography was displayed. These three large, and really the most interesting, photographs were shoved into a back corner that was not at all lit and there were also no labels on the photographs. They could have been pictures of the curator’s kids for all I know. Although there were so many poor qualities to this exhibit, I do believe that the exhibit has potential. I thought the 3-dimensional cubes were an outstanding way to display objects and I also thought the color posters were very eye catching and intriguing. The Museum of Anthropology exhibit looks like it was put together by students, haphazardly, and not updated for many years. The exhibit needs a serious modernization, facelift, and also needs to be more cohesive and it has the potential to do so.
The museum of Anthropology has a lot of materials, objects, and information. The exhibit, may, in fact, have too much information. The subject matter of the display cases are: the evolution of humans, hominid fossils, the evolution of stone tools, Clovis points, the Cascade Indians, the Marmes archeological site, Inuit toys, the Aka foragers, the people of the Lower Snake River, and a cordage collection. There was a fair amount of stone objects, diagrams, and models. The display cases that I thought were the best were the ones that had 3-dimensional appeal and interesting artistic work like the evolution of stone tools, Inuit toys, and cordage collection displays. The displays that I thought were the worst were those that were incomplete and dated like the Aka foragers and Clovis points displays. The best display was the people of the Lower Snake River display; it had texture, excitement, and cohesion. This was the only display where I actually wanted to read the text associated with the objects.
The WSU Museum of Anthropology has the right objects, the right location, but does not have the right design or use of space. In order for the museum and exhibit to be more effective it needs to appeal to those visitors who do not have a background in Anthropology. The curators should appeal more to the visitors by introducing more interactivity and also attracting the eye with visuals. The museum needs more photography, more replicas, and new labels. Once the displays are more cohesive the museum will start to look less like an 8th grade science fair and more like an academic museum at a prestigious university. Right now the exhibit is 2-dimensional, drab, and downright boring. But I do not believe the field of anthropology is boring, so the museum that tries to define the study of anthropology should be exciting, intriguing, and adventurous.
I would tend to agree that the WSU Anthropology Museum should be more fun. The WSU Department of Anthropology has investigated some of the important archeological sites in the northwest, involving inhabitants that were here almost 10,000 years ago. I know that some of the artifacts are in other museums but I would think that our museum would have some access to them or replicas. The stories of the digs are interesting as well, with WSU characters being students and faculty that were responsible for retrieving the objects. I’m sure there are pictures and videos of the digs that could fill the museum. Also there is the character Grover Krantz that had a life long search for Bigfoot that I’ve seen displays of that stirs the imagination. Native American exhibits with more than arrow heads could add interest and a bit of color to the displays.
ReplyDeleteI agree with all of your observations especially in the lack of focus in this museum. I think the limited staff there is so involved with the computer stuff, and the unseen stored collection that the display portion is a low priority, and it shows. Like the Entomology Museum, the Botanical Herbarium, and the Mycological Herbarium setting aside the budget, space, and time to do public displays isn’t the primary goal of a research facility. It just happens that the Anthropology Museum was given a display site that makes it seem that something more needs to be done. I have been to gatherings there in the past where a lady named Joy did a better job with the Museum part and it was done with more thought and care.