Imagine a continuum of experiences, where “ordinary” experiences are at one end and “spectacles” are at another. For the sake of explanation, I have dropped a few exhibitions and events that I have personally experienced into just such a continuum. (Forgive the crude diagram below.)
According to my diagram, a live performance of Cirque du Soleil La Nouba is nearest to spectacle. From just about any seat in the theater, you feel like a part of the show. The music, the light, and the visually stunning performances of the actors are wholly unique and undeniably unforgettable.
U2 3D is also a very powerful experience, using design elements such as a wide-format screen, well-directed camera angles, the absence of light and groundbreaking 3-D effects to transport viewers to a concert in South America. U2 3D and La Nouba rank highest in spectacular design, most likely due to the nature of those types of experiences.
Dinosphere and the Tower of Terror – with the use of sound and light, take visitors back to the Cretaceous Period or into the Twilight Zone - have stronger spectacle design qualities than the U505 exhibition at the Museum of Science & Industry. In U505, the exhibition design first appears to build up to a grand finale, only to end in a disappointingly dull display of a giant artifact. (Where are the lights and sounds, I say? They totally could have gotten away with this here.)
Most museum exhibits in the world are more like the Dior exhibition I saw at the Indianapolis Museum of Art. I remember it fairly well, thanks to the discussion I was having with coworkers in the gallery – but I couldn’t tell you what the dresses looked like. I was too focused on the (yawn) unexceptional method of display. Imagine if it would have been designed to look like a runway… like you were in the front row of at the fashion show. But instead it looked like you were standing in a pale museum gallery staring at manequins. Which you were.
Now, admittedly, the continuum of experiences could vary from person to person. But something tells me that experiences like U2 3D and Dinosphere will always fall closer to the specatacular end of the scale, versus Dior.
The purpose of my research is to figure out what it is that can help ordinary exhibits, in design terms, become exceptional… I mean, SPECTACULAR!
2 comments:
I thought U505 "reveal" was awesome. It actually sent shivers down my back - you walk around a corner and are suddenly face to "face" with this huge artifact. While the rest does not play out as well (and is cheapened a bit by the photo op) that moment when you walk around the corner and are like holy sh*t there it is, was a very real few seconds there for me where I wasn't in a museum for a second, but instead in a "moment" of spectacle.
Its amazing what light can do. Your example of the Dior show at the IMA reminded me of the Anglophilia show at The Met (which I know I have talked about to death but it was awesome!). Both shows were textile/costume shows, and both had impressive collections items. What made Anglophilia more spectacular (IMO) was the staging. The lighting was amazing, the exhibitry was beautiful, and there was a humor in the juxtaposition of modern costume with traditional British settings. I wish I had bought the catalogue!
And while I agree with Joe that the reveal for the UBoat is good, that moment doesnt hold. Because of this, the rest of the display is even more disappointing. Great reveals are wonderful, but they need to either culminate the experience and leave you high, or they need to set you up for something amazing.
And yes, the photo op is really distracting - which would be another great debate, concerning the new retail experience that is museum-going.
Post a Comment