April 2020
Museum Experiences in a Post-Pandemic World
M. W. Burns
Museum Experiences in a Post-Pandemic World
M. W. Burns
Ubiquitous museology defines the world around is as a collection in situ.
A couple of months ago the idea of people filling museum halls, indulging in hands-on experiences, touch activated technologies and other physical forms of engagement would have been business as usual. Suddenly, everything is different.
Nobody is completely sure how the public will respond once the COVID-19 pandemic is under control, nor what impact health guidelines and regulations will have on the operations of public spaces. But, it appears that institutions like museums will need to find ways of engaging audiences that don't evoke the anxiety likely produced by packed exhibition halls and overly used hands-on activities. Even when efforts are made to sterilize commonly shared surfaces, outfit every threshold with hand sanitizers, and apply limited/timed access to exhibitions it is possible the stigma will linger.
A recent analysis indicates that people's visitations to cultural venues requiring close proximity to other patrons, like movie theaters and concert halls, will drop. It also suggests a distrust of touch-based activities like those found inside science museums and children's museums. However, the study also indicates that the motivation to visit natural settings like parks and botanic gardens could increase. Also, sites that tend to be more passive (zoos, aquariums and art museums) may see increased visitation.
While it is too early to predict the fate of cultural attractions that base their missions and educational efforts on physical participation, no time has been lost brainstorming (emergency) responses.
A new interest in germ zapping materials has entered discussions around the survival of "touchable" or "hands-on" museum experiences. As investments in sprays, wipes and gels increase, and designers and builders eye products like antimicrobial construction materials, we may see a revived interest in metals like brass, silver and copper. These metals have natural antiseptic properties that destroy bacteria, viruses, molds, fungi and other microorganisms. And although these materials tend to be pricey, their strategic application to commonly shared surfaces would be much better than steel or aluminum which can harbor microbes for months.
Other solutions for reducing shared surface contact may be found in technologies that offer different modes of user activation. The design of traditional exhibitions is architectural in nature. Exhibitions are usually static spaces people move through and interact with in physical ways. But technologies like eye tracking, voice recognition and gesture control can offer modes of accessing content and activating space that require no physical contact with screens, handles or equipment. The popularity of these tools is bound to grow and transform physical exhibition spaces into dynamic media rich environments that respond to users far more than they generally do now.
But museums are ultimately about real stuff. What if the answer to designing post-pandemic, interactive museum experiences is not simply in alternative material choices or technologies, but in rethinking the physical form and logistics of the interactions themselves?
Most of the things people touch in built environments were designed to be touched: Railings, door handles, ATM screens, grocery checkouts, elevator buttons, gas pump handles, shopping cart handles, museum interactives.
In nature, it’s a different story. Commonly shared surfaces are rare. If you pick up a pine cone, touch the bark of a tree, run your hand though sand, or pick up a stick, it’s very unlikely that same pine cone, tree bark, sand or stick had been handled by other people. In nature we find multiple samples of things, so many things that touching the same objects as someone else is highly unusual.
There are built environments that begin to approach this kind of condition. Grocery stores and other retail spaces where multiples products are made available offer a model of physical interaction with greatly reduced shared surfaces. Yes, someone else might have picked up that can of soup and put it back for a different brand, and certainly the person who stocked the shelf touched it, but this amount of shared surface contact doesn't come close to the touchscreen at the self-checkout. That said, retail spaces can still funnel people into close proximity and this is the other challenge we need to consider.
Open, outdoor spaces can alleviate this problem. Museums with access to exterior grounds could focus on programming those spaces with experiences that reduce shared surface contact, and enable social distancing. We can imagine a number of games, activities and challenges that easily pass these guidelines. Taking things outside the building can work as a kind of pressure valve by distributing visitors between interior and exterior attractions and thus accommodating social distancing.
But, museums don't need to own land to take their mission to the outside world. It may be time to take another look at ubiquitous museology , the practice of integrating museum experiences into seemingly ordinary environments. This approach of redefining the footprint of the museum experience offers ways to expand the reach of a museum's mission, make connections to things, places and phenomena that align with its educational criteria, and establish a reciprocal flow of visitors between these exterior sites and the brick and mortar building. Ubiquitous museology defines the world around us as a "collection in situ", already occupying spaces for informal learning. Educators, developers and designers find opportunities for engagement in circumstances that already exist. The practice is green and cost effective (less needs to be built when embracing pre-existing situations).
We know museums will need to re-evaluate their operations and forms of engagement. Many of the visitor experiences developed before COVID-19 will continue to function (perhaps with some tweaks), but the impact of this pandemic, and the possibility of future ones, require us to take another look at how museums have been designed to operate and serve the public. While the goals, messages, and desired outcomes may stay the same, how museums encourage their audiences to connect, and support them is currently under anxious re-examination. Taking time to pull back and look at the big picture is important. Pull back further to see that everything museums hold originated in the world at large. Part of the answer to the future survival of museums lies as much in where these experience happen than in how they happen.
Nobody is completely sure how the public will respond once the COVID-19 pandemic is under control, nor what impact health guidelines and regulations will have on the operations of public spaces. But, it appears that institutions like museums will need to find ways of engaging audiences that don't evoke the anxiety likely produced by packed exhibition halls and overly used hands-on activities. Even when efforts are made to sterilize commonly shared surfaces, outfit every threshold with hand sanitizers, and apply limited/timed access to exhibitions it is possible the stigma will linger.
A recent analysis indicates that people's visitations to cultural venues requiring close proximity to other patrons, like movie theaters and concert halls, will drop. It also suggests a distrust of touch-based activities like those found inside science museums and children's museums. However, the study also indicates that the motivation to visit natural settings like parks and botanic gardens could increase. Also, sites that tend to be more passive (zoos, aquariums and art museums) may see increased visitation.
While it is too early to predict the fate of cultural attractions that base their missions and educational efforts on physical participation, no time has been lost brainstorming (emergency) responses.
A new interest in germ zapping materials has entered discussions around the survival of "touchable" or "hands-on" museum experiences. As investments in sprays, wipes and gels increase, and designers and builders eye products like antimicrobial construction materials, we may see a revived interest in metals like brass, silver and copper. These metals have natural antiseptic properties that destroy bacteria, viruses, molds, fungi and other microorganisms. And although these materials tend to be pricey, their strategic application to commonly shared surfaces would be much better than steel or aluminum which can harbor microbes for months.
Other solutions for reducing shared surface contact may be found in technologies that offer different modes of user activation. The design of traditional exhibitions is architectural in nature. Exhibitions are usually static spaces people move through and interact with in physical ways. But technologies like eye tracking, voice recognition and gesture control can offer modes of accessing content and activating space that require no physical contact with screens, handles or equipment. The popularity of these tools is bound to grow and transform physical exhibition spaces into dynamic media rich environments that respond to users far more than they generally do now.
But museums are ultimately about real stuff. What if the answer to designing post-pandemic, interactive museum experiences is not simply in alternative material choices or technologies, but in rethinking the physical form and logistics of the interactions themselves?
Most of the things people touch in built environments were designed to be touched: Railings, door handles, ATM screens, grocery checkouts, elevator buttons, gas pump handles, shopping cart handles, museum interactives.
In nature, it’s a different story. Commonly shared surfaces are rare. If you pick up a pine cone, touch the bark of a tree, run your hand though sand, or pick up a stick, it’s very unlikely that same pine cone, tree bark, sand or stick had been handled by other people. In nature we find multiple samples of things, so many things that touching the same objects as someone else is highly unusual.
There are built environments that begin to approach this kind of condition. Grocery stores and other retail spaces where multiples products are made available offer a model of physical interaction with greatly reduced shared surfaces. Yes, someone else might have picked up that can of soup and put it back for a different brand, and certainly the person who stocked the shelf touched it, but this amount of shared surface contact doesn't come close to the touchscreen at the self-checkout. That said, retail spaces can still funnel people into close proximity and this is the other challenge we need to consider.
Open, outdoor spaces can alleviate this problem. Museums with access to exterior grounds could focus on programming those spaces with experiences that reduce shared surface contact, and enable social distancing. We can imagine a number of games, activities and challenges that easily pass these guidelines. Taking things outside the building can work as a kind of pressure valve by distributing visitors between interior and exterior attractions and thus accommodating social distancing.
But, museums don't need to own land to take their mission to the outside world. It may be time to take another look at ubiquitous museology , the practice of integrating museum experiences into seemingly ordinary environments. This approach of redefining the footprint of the museum experience offers ways to expand the reach of a museum's mission, make connections to things, places and phenomena that align with its educational criteria, and establish a reciprocal flow of visitors between these exterior sites and the brick and mortar building. Ubiquitous museology defines the world around us as a "collection in situ", already occupying spaces for informal learning. Educators, developers and designers find opportunities for engagement in circumstances that already exist. The practice is green and cost effective (less needs to be built when embracing pre-existing situations).
We know museums will need to re-evaluate their operations and forms of engagement. Many of the visitor experiences developed before COVID-19 will continue to function (perhaps with some tweaks), but the impact of this pandemic, and the possibility of future ones, require us to take another look at how museums have been designed to operate and serve the public. While the goals, messages, and desired outcomes may stay the same, how museums encourage their audiences to connect, and support them is currently under anxious re-examination. Taking time to pull back and look at the big picture is important. Pull back further to see that everything museums hold originated in the world at large. Part of the answer to the future survival of museums lies as much in where these experience happen than in how they happen.