We've been doing some thinking about museums.

Striking, isn't it?

But, er, what is it?  And why is it there*?

We want to start doing some information design work with museums and galleries.  It seems that there's vast amounts of potential for writing and designing material that communicates clearly.  After all, the whole idea of museums is to give people an engaging way of learning. And if you want to help people learn, you need information design. 

But I suspect this is one of those dangerous areas to go tripping through:

Should museums be more about artefects or interpretation? 

Are they about the objects in the cases or the interpretation through context?  I mean, go to the V&A (good cafe as well - run by Benugo, so you'll get a decent sandwich) and look...

Lots of gorgeous objects - but why are they there?  What do they do?  Who made them?  Why?

The things in the cases are beautiful in their own right, but with the right information visitors can appreciate them much more fully.  With the historical, cultural and societal framework they came from, there's a lot more potential to learn and understand - and appreciate them - as more than just beautiful objects.

So which is more important?  Neither.  Both.  It's all about context - a C16 silver candlestick will have enough intrinsic beauty to captivate visitors, but they'd learn a lot more if they knew about how C16 candles were made, who made them, what sort of people had expensive silver candlesticks... you get the idea.  More esoteric exhibits (take a look at Bletchley Park) get most of their meaning from interpretation and context.

So, if anyone at Bletchley fancies some free work on an interpretation leaflet, do get in touch...

* It's a dress made from (I think) parachute silk - hence the cords running from the case to hold it up.  It's item No. 4 on the V&A website here