My visit to the ArtScience Museum was worth more than I thought. The issues on the display design could have been hard to answer. I haven't read the hard copy of the Straits Times yet on comments by other visitors, but I have the feeling they may have been thinking some similar issues. But my primary issue would be the level of sensitivity of the design displays at the museum as well the type of exibits at the museum. No doubt that our museum is a small one and that we do not have any monumental treasures of big countries, I had thought the number of artefacts would have been at least more than what I was thinking. The museum does not match the quality of the Asians Civilisations Museum which has, I think, the best collection of artefacts in the country in terms of both quantity and quality. In comparison a mere check with the American Museum of Natural history online would instantly tell you that our exhibits aren't anything close to what others have. Despite so, the price of the tickets here are comparable to the top museums in the world. The interactive displays are no doubt world class. And so are the interiors and the exterior of the museum. I had very high hopes when I stepped into the museum just 2 days ago. When I was looking at the display, I cannot help but to wonder who did it and how the people have done so. The arrangement of the 2 apples and 1 banana in the Turfan area in the Silk Road Exhibition made me think how that display could have been allowed? The make of the camel was another. The quiver of arrows shooting into the Mongolian soldier was another that left me dumbfounded. It wasn't so much of the arrows that got stuck into the soldier, it was something comical about the whole display that made me wanted to both cry and laugh at the same time as I was wondering if arrows could actually go through both the human skull and the helmet in that manner <??>
Acknowledgingly, mongolian arrows were the most powerful at that time, reaching the average span of around 200 to 340 yards per shot. But I was wondering if that speed could actually pierce through the the head that much. I decided to make a quick investigation and came to a conclusion that the likelihood of an arrow going through the head of the soldier with the helmet on was very unlikely. (see picture below)
Notice the soldier beside the gigantic war machine.
Closeup of the 'arrowed' soldier. Typically the arrow that puched him diagonally right through the helmet, his skull and come out to the other end of his head. Understandably arrows do pierce in shots. But to have them display in the manner above looks somewhat illogical and even comical.
I feel the level of sensitivity in design has to be taken seriously, typically in the case of doing up a museum exhibit. The point of accuracy to historical details as well as other physical details must be respected. When we invent, innovate, design or do anything for that matter, certain funcational law of nature and culture need to be taken care of. And of course my ticket was itself somewhat puzzling. But then again, that was far too miniscue little issue. I just hope the next time I visit the museum again, it will be a far better experience. - Karen Fu
Reference:
1. ArtScience Museum now opens, Straits Times, 19 Feb 2011 post.
2. Warriors of the Chinggis Khan(Genghis Khan)
3. A brief history of the Mongols.
4. Ancient Mongolian Weaponry.
5. The Mongolian Bow
Acknowledgingly, mongolian arrows were the most powerful at that time, reaching the average span of around 200 to 340 yards per shot. But I was wondering if that speed could actually pierce through the the head that much. I decided to make a quick investigation and came to a conclusion that the likelihood of an arrow going through the head of the soldier with the helmet on was very unlikely. (see picture below)
Notice the soldier beside the gigantic war machine.
Closeup of the 'arrowed' soldier. Typically the arrow that puched him diagonally right through the helmet, his skull and come out to the other end of his head. Understandably arrows do pierce in shots. But to have them display in the manner above looks somewhat illogical and even comical.I feel the level of sensitivity in design has to be taken seriously, typically in the case of doing up a museum exhibit. The point of accuracy to historical details as well as other physical details must be respected. When we invent, innovate, design or do anything for that matter, certain funcational law of nature and culture need to be taken care of. And of course my ticket was itself somewhat puzzling. But then again, that was far too miniscue little issue. I just hope the next time I visit the museum again, it will be a far better experience. - Karen Fu
Reference:
1. ArtScience Museum now opens, Straits Times, 19 Feb 2011 post.
2. Warriors of the Chinggis Khan(Genghis Khan)
3. A brief history of the Mongols.
4. Ancient Mongolian Weaponry.
5. The Mongolian Bow
0 comments:
Post a Comment