Museum 'Experience' - or Theme Park ?

Crapgame recently sent me a pm about museums which prompted me to make this post.

Firstly, I'll come clean - I love museums, always have done, and I'm fortunate to live down the road from the RAF Museum & get to help out at the Mosquito Museum.

But whenever I go to the Imperial war Museum in London, I cringe at the sign that says 'Blitz Experience' and 'Trench Experience'. I have never been able to bring myself to 'experience' these parts of the museum and always feel irritated without really knowing why.

Recently I read Noble Frankland's book 'History At War' ; he was Director of the IWM and the 'Experiences' were added after he left. he says ; -

'In the IWM, the 'Blitz Experience' is not history. The crunch of the bombs does not impinge on the eardrums, dust does not penetrate the lungs, and the warning of broken glass in the street can safely be ignored....the visitor always comes home alive.

These so-called 'virtual reality' experience exhibitions, however thrilling they may be, are the stuff of theme parks rather than historical museums. In the case of the IWM, there is an additional moral point. Before entering an 'experience', the visitor knows that he will not be killed. The experience is, therefore, bogus and perhaps even dangerously so. The visitor who thinks that he has had the 'Blitz experience' is sadly misled and the spirit of war is devalued. This kind of 'reality' does not serve to avert the glorification of war by presenting it full front ; it serves to make war seem as entertaining as a big dipper at a funfair'.

I agree with him - he articulated my feeling of irritation. Anyone else agree/disagree ?

 

Ironic for a re-enactor, I agree with you. Whenever I go to the IWM I go through the trench experience, hoards of idiotic kids shouting and playing, what is the poing? It is not an 'experience' its a game. Frankly last time I was there I was wondering how you could somehow arrange to have people shot in there on a regular basis just to make it more realistic, maybe wake a few people up.

The problem with these things is as stated, they are too comfortable, there is no assault on the ear drums, the nose or even the eye. This is where I feel living history has a slight advantage for its participants, you can make it uncomfortable. Obviously you can never experience what it is like, but you can struggle to rig up a shelter in high winds or sleep in the open in sub zero conditions, that is as close to the 'experience' as one is ever likely to get.

Part of the problem is this attempt to make history accessible, frankly if you need decoration and theme-parkesque rides to make history enjoyable then you are too late!

 

I think Frankland is absolutely right. The 'experiences' are ultimately attempts at the impossible, and even if they do manage to give some minor impression of life in the trenches then the experience lasts only a few minutes at most before the visitor is returned to the well-lit, air-conditioned spaciousness of the museum itself.

The nearest thing I've ever experienced to combat are the exercises I've been on with the Cadet Force. At worse, I've found myself covered in cam cream, sweat, grass, soaked to the skin in mud and lying in cowshit with a bloody scary regular soldier screaming at me to open fire against an 'enemy' I can't even see while bangers and smoke grenades go off all around me.

But even then I always know that at the end of the day there's an ablutions block where I can get a shower and wash my kit, while there's always food in the mess and a bed for me in my billet. Even on a 24-hour exercise (or a much harder 36-hour ex with the Territorial Army I went on a few months ago), I always know whatever minor hardship I might be facing will be over in a matter of hours. I cannot begin to imagine the life of a regular soldier, sailor or airman in a time of war, or a civilian under bombing.

I agree with Stefan, the desire to make history artificially 'accessible' is misplaced.

 

I haven't been to the Imperial War Museum, but I have seen such things in other museums. The Museum of Science & Industry in Chicago has the U-505 as part of its collection. Walking through the U-505, doesn't really recreate a north Atlantic sea battle of World War II, but it is worth doing. By the way, the Museum of Science & Industry also has an online "VR" tour of the U-505 on its' website, which I think is also worthwhile.

It is unfortunate that some museums overrate their exhibits as authentic experiences since museums cannot recreate battlefield conditions, even with an actual U-Boat. However, unless such exhibits are taking space or funding away from something else the museum ought to have on display, I don't object to museums trying to give visitors more than artifacts in glass cases and displays of photographs.

[ 04. January 2004, 02:17 AM: Message edited by: Crapgame ]

 

I agree with you Martin, but the museums and airshows have to make a buck somehow and if they do not appeal to kids and parents to come and spend money who is going to pay to restore and maintain the aircraft ?

I love aircraft but 90% of the people going to the museum are looking for entertainment and so to make money and stay in business you have to give the people what they want or go out of business.

 

i haven't been to the IWM in years, must be over 20. But here in Norwich we have the Royal Norfolk Regimental museum. In their they have a re-created WW1 trench. I've been through it a couple of times and found it very interesting, not theme parkis at all. As long as the visitor realises they are only getting a small taiste of what it was like, i don't see a problem. And if it gets kids interested in history, then all the better. I agree with Crapgame in that as long as its not taking funds or space away from other things, then its ok.

Have you ever visited the Viking museum in York. thats what the whole museum consits of, a trip through a Viking village. A Viking experiance if you like. And while i know i'm not likely to get pillaged by a hoard of bearded Norwegians, its still educational as well as fun. I think the same goes for these things at the IWM.

 

In principal I agree Bish, my gripe is with the fact that to kids aged below 15 its a game (except some of the really young ones who can get quite into it, though that seems to get replaced by the usual teen things before long) and for those above 15 its of no interest. Even when people do take an interest, they hardly ever have the wit to realise that what they are seeing is not what it was like.

The problem I suppose is that these 'experiences' are fine if you come at them from some sort of knowledge base, but since so few people take any interest in history and still fewer know anything about it how can we expect people to take the time to think about what they are 'experiencing'.

 

I think more people are intereseted in history than you think, especially this peoriod.

And look at it like this, there may be those who see what you do as a game. Sure, you put up shelters in a force ten gale and live under the stars. But at the end of the day, its an 'experiance'. Your useing blanks, barring an accident, everyone goes home.

Haveing been on plenty of excersises, which are essentially no different from what you do, some of which last 4 weeks, but haveing also experianced the real thing, i know the difference. So do guys like Sapper.

Do you.

[ 04. January 2004, 05:25 AM: Message edited by: Bish OBE ]

 

No, but I know there is a difference, my gripe is with people who don't.

 

and these experiances ain't going to make no difference. Ok, they might come out of there thinking they have just walked through the Blitz, but then should others lose out because some people have no gripe on reality. Like i said, if it gets kids interested in history, then its all for the good. Its just part of the buisness of bringing history as much to life as possible, just like what you do. And at the end of it, if people walk out of there with just the slightest bit of appreciation of what their parents or grand parents went through, then it can only be for the good.

 

Fair enough, I have no problem with the museums per se, some of them are very interesting, its the people there I have problems with.

 

The main problem with museums like the IWM is that they are trying to tell a story. In that they are just as much heritage as history and therefore have to be agreed upon. Their was a similar problem to this when the Smithsonian attempted its Enola Gay exhibition in 95. it tried to enter into an historical debate as to the how and why the bomb was used, but became slated and was removed and dumbed down because it was not the excepted view of history. This is the problem we face that are trying to portray a narrative of history.

 

Thanks for the discussion guys.

I know you're right, it's about 'bums on seats' etc etc...

I went to the IWM last week and in the general displays, I couldn't find one single picture or image of a dead body - or in fact anything 'nasty' at all.

I'm not being morbid, but telling a story and leaving out bits that might scare the kids ( and the parents too, from what I could overhear ) seems rather feeble to me.

 

At least you guys have local or nearby museums that portray some ww2 history. All we have around here is a museum that has had the same disply up for at least 15 years. Don't get me wrong it's a nice display buuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuut, I htink after the same thing being displayed for that length of time--should be changed.

I volunteer at this museum and they have tons of military related items that SHOULD be on display buuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuut, all they have up is a Columbus exhibit.

I personally have gone through most of their military and weaponry as I am the guy who makes sure that they are labled corrrectly and or are updated.

It just gets me that all this fine stuff, is only viewable by museum workers and only then in storage. Yesterday was a prime example. I went through three trays of Military weaponry from before, during and after the Civil War. None of that fine stuff will ever have strange eyes viewing them as SHOULD be happening.

 

Folks, I'm going on a limb and a little against the grain but this seems to be a friendly forum and I haven't seen any flaming...

I agree about these exhibits not being entirely realistic and almost arcade like. However, one way to loook at this is museums need to make money and these so called experiences are one way to raise more money.

Secondly, not everyone is a history buff like ourselves. This so called experience helps to educate some people and make them think, "Wow, I never realized these things happened." Hopefully, they want to experience more and read books, etc.

Being an optimist, these so called exhibits are promoting history to some of the younger generation who will be inquisitive and carry on the legacy.

These expereinces help open the door for some who may not be inclined to read a book or watch the history channel at first. These "expereinces" are a segway to hopefully light the fire that fuels the mind.

In closing, These events happend long before my time. Even if it is only 5% realistic. It is 5% more the experience I never got to see for myself.

 

All opinions welcome here, Buck ! ( Well, almost all.... )

I see your point, but just so long as that 5% is actually realistic. The problem for me is when that 5% looks 'cool' or 'awesome' - and then we're in danger of getting a generation who think it's OK to bomb a far-off land.....

 

As you all may or may not know I was in the Ardenne a couple of weeks ago and the effect on my senses is still wearing off me. (I've documented this in the "Battle of the bulge" thread started by Kai.

My friend who accompanied me had this exact same discussion after we visited the 101st foxholes at Foy and the Church at Bastogne...not blowing my trumpet here but not everyone has the opportunity of visiting a battlefield or be involved in battle. I was humbled by this experience, it left me troubled and quiet for long periods of time. The problem with museums in Britain and America are, well, the museums themselves store memorabilia from all around the world, thereby almost trophying them and taking away a degree of reality from the visitor to the museum who views them.

Those of you who have visited verdunne or Normandy or any battlefield will be able to relate to this: Seeing a shot up tank in Houffalaize, or driving up the road where Americans infantry were ambushed and wiped out by the defenders at Assenois (those that weren't hit by their own Artillery!) or even standing in a foxhole that may have received a direct hit that killed its occupants these are things a Museum can never convey.

But lets not fault them for want of trying! If I was Prime minister it would be my duty to try and get every young person to visit such places and have respect for our fallen fathers who have given us decades of relative peace.

I have seen the trench experience and ok, its a bit lame, but we can only say that now that we have seen what it is really like. Imagine the H&S aspects of having your eardrums punctured by artillery strikes or leg blown off by a mine. Civilians don't sign up for such things so we should not expect them to experience such. But to have people walk out with even a modicum of respect for the people who did it for real...surely that is something?

 

Everybody has brought up some good valid points. Do you think our society "sugarcoats" things in trying to be politically correct pleasing everyone.

There used to be a program "scared straight" where they took problemed youngsters and brought them to visit a prison (where they were eventually headed). The prisoners would really lay into these kids and tell them how it really is.

They later dropped this program because it was too harsh.

The bottom line was it worked.

I'm glad some of the recent movies (Saving Private Ryan) are becoming more realistic. The opening scene shows quite a bit of carnage and no glory or romantic thoughts about being on a battlefield.

I wish there was a way to convey the real "experience" and we could spend a lot of time discussing how to do this.

Everyone brought up some good points.