The Academy of Natural Sciences

 

           Our visit to the Academy of Natural Sciences really got me thinking about the often underestimated role that art plays in science museums. I was particularly fascinated by the museum’s dioramas, the majority of which were created between the 1930s and 50s. Building these was a major collaborative task, involving both scientists and artists. First, the animals were killed and skinned on site. Then, their bones were carefully reconstructed in the desired pose and covered with wire, plaster, and lastly their original skin. Everything else in dioramas was created entirely by hand; it took a whole team of artisans to paint the backdrop and make every single leaf and rock, with meticulous attention paid to detail and accuracy. For many museum-goers who saw these in the 1930s, this was the closest thing they could do to actually experiencing such exotic animals in their natural habitats. Yes, there were zoos at the time, but the animals were kept in metal cages, completely out of context. I admired the dioramas not only because they are incredible scientific and artistic achievements, especially considering the technological limitations of the time period in which they were made, but also because they provide visitors with a perspective on how our society’s idea of a “multi-media” museum exhibit have changed over time.  

            Since the rise of movies and television, the dioramas have lost their magical quality for many people. To simply glance at them, without any knowledge of their historical significance or the incredible amount of work that went into them, could certainly leave some 21^st imaginations unimpressed. We had the great opportunity to meet some of the people who work at the museum, and learn how they are dealing with this problem. We got to go behind-the-scenes and see some of the plans for upcoming exhibits, all of which seek to explain the history and debunk the myths and assumptions behind the dioramas, while increasing understanding and appreciation for them. One of them explains the taxidermic process, and will include items for visitors to touch. Another details the process of painting the backdrops, using objects, some actually from the 30s and some new, to demonstrate all of the steps. The big one that they are working on is an exhibit built around a film about a particular expedition (I’ve forgotten which one) and will also include plants, rocks, and trees made by artists. We learned about companies that rent out exhibits to museums, and others that make accurate plant replicas, both of which I didn’t even know existed before this trip. I personally found it to be one of our more informative visits.

            I genuinely admire the people who work in this museum. I think that they are all very intelligent, creative, and dedicated individuals, and that together they will definitely succeed in keeping the Academy of Natural Sciences relevant in the years to come. This was the perfect place to visit last in the semester because it directed our thoughts toward the future of museums.

The National Constitution Center

            By merely gazing at the National Constitution Center from the outside, you can really get a sense of what it’s all about. Located in the heart of old city, near the Liberty Bell Center and U.S. mint, the NCC is a huge, grandiose building surrounded by a vast expanse of green space. There is a jumbo-sized American flag in its spectacular front window. The preamble to the constitution is artfully etched out on the building’s concrete façade, though the only words discernible from far away are “we the people.”

            Upon entering the museum and observing the lobby’s super-high ceilings, visitors feel a combination of awe and comfort. The display of all 50 state flags immediately evokes a sense of national unity, and the quotes on the wall, such as Teddy Roosevelt’s “The people themselves must be the ultimate makers of their Constitution,” suggest to visitors that they belong here and that their presence is important.

            The next stop is a high-tech theatre in which visitors watch a presentation called Freedom Rising. I found this part of the visit to be particularly interesting. This is not simply a film. The theatre is circular. In the center of it is a small stage where a very serious live narrator stands. Everywhere you turn your head, iconic and highly emotional images and video clips flash before your eyes: Martin Luther King Jr’s “I have a dream” speech, Women’s Suffrage activists, footage from 9/11, Vietnam, World War II—the list goes on and on. For me, it was honestly quite overwhelming. I personally felt that this bordered on emotional manipulation; to have all those powerful and historically significant images just simultaneously thrown at you with only a broad, sweeping general explanation. I kept wondering to myself, exactly how short of an attention span is this museum assuming we have?

            Next, visitors walk up a staircase and out into the main exhibit hall, which is also circular, suggesting a kind of democratic freedom to choose your own path. There are lots of exhibits to choose from, ranging from the super-interactive and high-tech to the more traditional look-at-the-stuff-and-read-the-poster sort of displays. It was very apparent to me that the NCC is trying to appeal to all different age groups, and I honestly think they are pulling it off as best as they can. The truth is that it’s difficult to create a heritage museum, especially one that celebrates the collective past of 300 million people, which can easily appeal to a wide range of demographics. I may have personally felt that Freedom Rising was a bit much, but I speculate that for most visitors, especially schoolchildren, it is probably an appropriate and effective attraction.

            Although I sensed a conservative bias at times, I also recognized the museum’s efforts to maintain an appeal to diversity and free speech. The overall message of the museum, as I read it, is that our definition of who exactly “we the people” includes has expanded and evolved over time, and the well-crafted, open-to-interpretation nature of our constitution has allowed for these great societal revisions. It’s definitely a nice message, and one that most Americans, including myself, agree with. I think that the NCC successfully achieves its goal as a heritage museum, and that the view of heritage it has constructed is a broadly appealing one. Sure, it is blatantly nationalistic, but I think it also does a decent job at acknowledging the darker parts of our nation’s past. I may not have agreed with all of its methods, but I still felt welcome there despite the fact.