Participatory zones
Admission of visitors' opinions, stories, assessments to the functioning exhibition
Perhaps, museum 2.0 functions more effectively in the space of the exhibition already created. The following factors provide this:
- All visitors can participate without any limitations and entry barriers (it does not take a lot of time, available for the passive- on-Web audience).
- Participants' contribution is more visible, real and felt. The texts and objects created have individuality.
- One can contribute and gain new experience of social interaction simultaneously, co-creation "benefits".
- Participatory zones — the least cost-intensive, an easy to realize participatory museum format.
Everybody can do this — a board and stickers:
- What exhibit impressed most
- What hall is the most boring
- What would you take along
- What else would you like to know
- …
At that participatory zone in the museum is a multi-function instrument. In the context of our project we had to see to its contributing to a dialogic character of exposition and pushing interpretation process to a new level.
One of our objectives was to make the museum a place where "travel starts". This objective demanded that a visitor should move from perception mode to attitude, self-reflection and personal utterance mode, which, in turn, requires certain conditions and incentives. The most crucial one is that a guest gets into a space of other people stories an experience, the space that addresses the visitor' own stand, the space that inspires communication, the space that gives birth to a diversity of museum collection and travel itself' reading.
What are participatory zones like? N. Simon, for instance, identifies 5 stages of social participation. The basis of this scheme is awareness of different ways of visitors' interaction with museum content, museum curators and with each other [1].
- All these forms influence a visitor in a different manner. Some mostly effect emotional sphere and spirit, others pave the way to the level of meanings and values. Still other forms are associated with self-identification and navigation, the fourth group work on sense of involvement and communities build up. To a greater, or, to a lesser extent, they all deepen man in a big social context of conversations around exposition, its artifacts and people who came to see and to participate.
Go to personal stories / votings… / joint objects / recommendations, tags, ratings
3.8.1. PERSONAL STORIES
This type was of utmost importance to our exhibition. Instrumental approach to art of travel treated as an aggregate of styles, approaches, techniques, views, decisions, motivations, sentiments determined this significance. They specifically provoke self-reflection, self-identification, address to personal story and biography in the context of travel [2].
At the same time such zones possess a great communication potential framing talks about each other, personal travel practices.
"What makes you go on a trip?" stand can be seen as the most effective one.
This type was of utmost importance to our exhibition. Instrumental approach to art of travel treated as an aggregate of styles, approaches, techniques, views, decisions, motivations, sentiments determined this significance. They specifically provoke self-reflection, self-identification, address to personal story and biography in the context of travel [2].
At the same time such zones possess a great communication potential framing talks about each other, personal travel practices.
"What makes you go on a trip?" stand can be seen as the most effective one.
Modern art practices have great potential in solving this task, but we I use them in the context of local history museum and this project realization.
This question was targeted to a semantic core of the exhibition, it was clear, certain and interesting. Besides, historic context was created due to the stand’s design: a big paper roll where visitors wrote down their thoughts was enframed with quotations from travelers of the XIX-XX centuries, including our in-depth interviewees. In its form it looked like a wall in social networks when only fresh "posts" of still walking around, or just left viewers came into the view of visitors.
It resulted in quantity and quality of "messages" which were interesting to read.
The second parallel in meaning and indicative in terms of exhibition concept zone in the hall "Memories" was called "Travel episodes you will never forget".
It resulted in quantity and quality of "messages" which were interesting to read.
The second parallel in meaning and indicative in terms of exhibition concept zone in the hall "Memories" was called "Travel episodes you will never forget".
This zone was less effective in terms of quantity and intent to communicate. We relate it to the form of messages' creating. It was a type writing machine. The initial idea was the connection of this object with the similar machine on the writing table of Georgy Levitsky, a Ural traveler — a key character of our exhibition- whose life story opened the exposition. Another reason for this choice was our aspiration to vary participatory zones offering both handwriting and typewriting opportunities.
In practice, although people were impressed by this option, the "instrument" appeared to be more powerful than the goal: visitors, especially young ones, typed what they liked enjoying the very fact of typewriting. One more thing we had not taken into account was that all visitors could not handle a type writer. People who really wanted to contribute courageously typed their stories, or wrote them in hand (we should have seen to it!).
Manner of notes fastening can also be a problem especially when you deal with a chipboard wall. The visitors had to use a strong stapler, and, still not everybody managed to staple their notes.
Therefore, in spite of the good question the design made this zone less effective. Perhaps, it would be better to duplicate the design of "What makes you go on a trip?" stand and to tie up these questions visually, or add a wall to a typewriting zone where people can write with markers as it was at "LOVE" exhibition answering the question "What's the craziest thing you’ve done for love?" [3].
In practice, although people were impressed by this option, the "instrument" appeared to be more powerful than the goal: visitors, especially young ones, typed what they liked enjoying the very fact of typewriting. One more thing we had not taken into account was that all visitors could not handle a type writer. People who really wanted to contribute courageously typed their stories, or wrote them in hand (we should have seen to it!).
Manner of notes fastening can also be a problem especially when you deal with a chipboard wall. The visitors had to use a strong stapler, and, still not everybody managed to staple their notes.
Therefore, in spite of the good question the design made this zone less effective. Perhaps, it would be better to duplicate the design of "What makes you go on a trip?" stand and to tie up these questions visually, or add a wall to a typewriting zone where people can write with markers as it was at "LOVE" exhibition answering the question "What's the craziest thing you’ve done for love?" [3].
The third zone was the stand "What is "itchy feet" for you?" located in Preparations section and stuffed with the museum collection of suitcases. Visitors could write their comments on lower parts of "designer's" bags and trolleys decorating the display.
On the upper parts of suitcases answers obtained in the course of exhibition creation and domestic travelogues hammering were cited.
This zone was not especially full but the texts presented were brilliant, some of them — real masterwork.
This zone was not especially full but the texts presented were brilliant, some of them — real masterwork.
The output was not just a pile of stickers but a collection of individual suitcases where ideas and images of various guests were combined.
A more complicated character of "Cold storage" and "Geo-gram" participatory zones will be viewed in the following chapter.
"Cold storage" zone content had been fleshed out prior to exhibition following our group Vkontakte call for "never- come -true- dream" trips. The library of 200 ideas sent by online users was enriched by 200 exposition visitors' dreams. The absolute success of the zone can be explained by clear navigation, content relevance and a motivating idea of "being about to pack luggage" itself.
"Cold storage" zone content had been fleshed out prior to exhibition following our group Vkontakte call for "never- come -true- dream" trips. The library of 200 ideas sent by online users was enriched by 200 exposition visitors' dreams. The absolute success of the zone can be explained by clear navigation, content relevance and a motivating idea of "being about to pack luggage" itself.
One more opportunity to share was "Geo-gram" zone. The zone core was Tatyana Serykh' travel-history. Similar to it a quest could draw his biography in its geographic dimension on a map.
Our observation allowed us to learn some interesting bits. First, the majority of visitors didn’t take the filled in maps along but left them in the common bank, which spoke about their intent to share. The visitors who took it were mainly adults with a vast travelling experience. They just wanted to take time and create their scheme analogous to Tatyana’s one who appeared to be their "congenial soul": it was somewhat a form of self-reflection, recollection about the epoch and themselves.
Second, without a certain instruction how to join the dots people invented their own ways resulting in arabesque pattern of their personal biographies.
Third, as the map copy reflected the region of former USSR many young viewers had never been there, however, they tried to quarry European and Asian cities within the map limits longing to share their travel experience.
Second, without a certain instruction how to join the dots people invented their own ways resulting in arabesque pattern of their personal biographies.
Third, as the map copy reflected the region of former USSR many young viewers had never been there, however, they tried to quarry European and Asian cities within the map limits longing to share their travel experience.
Fourth, geo-gram filling-in initiated visitors' communication, unknown details clarification ("Have you been there?!", "Where?!").
Fifth, geographical names in small print required either good sight or certain knowledge in geography from quests.
Fifth, geographical names in small print required either good sight or certain knowledge in geography from quests.
We also had a zone designed to set the mood and to "plug in" a visitor rather than to create the content. We built it on the idea that communication is not just words; it can exploit gestures, memories, practices.
This activity attracted people of different ages. You could easily find, for example, a pair of aged tourists enthusiastically folding paper boats. The visitors thought of giving names to toys according to the point of destination.
In contrast to this "easy- to- join" story another participatory zone was meant to be as a tool of exchanging useful, "pragmatic" travel tips. The section called "Books and films about countries and cities" provided visitors with materials that can assist in their preparations for the trip or they could leave their own recommendations for the public to use.
In spite of the fact that this section was in line with our life-oriented context it worked worse than others due to several factors. It required a certain expertise not opinions, and looked more like a test that a participatory zone. It contained too much information: 30 notebooks describing over 150 countries with at least 1−2 tips we had added previously. What is more, two other participatory zones, much more attractive ones, had their own gravity pulling in visitors' eyes.
In contrast to this "easy- to- join" story another participatory zone was meant to be as a tool of exchanging useful, "pragmatic" travel tips. The section called "Books and films about countries and cities" provided visitors with materials that can assist in their preparations for the trip or they could leave their own recommendations for the public to use.
In spite of the fact that this section was in line with our life-oriented context it worked worse than others due to several factors. It required a certain expertise not opinions, and looked more like a test that a participatory zone. It contained too much information: 30 notebooks describing over 150 countries with at least 1−2 tips we had added previously. What is more, two other participatory zones, much more attractive ones, had their own gravity pulling in visitors' eyes.
Though, it happened so that this section managed to find its target audience: some quest highly appreciated pragmatism and "seriousness" of the section in comparison to "light-mindedness" of the "Itchy feet" zone.
Thus, designing participatory zones it is necessary to take into account diverse audiences needs. While one group communicates in a way that makes sense, aiming at attitudes, personal stories exchange, others enjoy more a "pragmatic" component which allows one to create through communication a corpus of knowledge or solutions helping to settle individual life challenges or even those of a community concern.
The example of such a pragmatic mode is the Monterey Bay Aquarium (the USA) Oceanaruim exhibition "Fishing for solution". Visitors wrote their proposals on how to increase fish populations on Comment board. "Staff members didn't write about how the work of the institution was helping solve the problem; instead, they wrote about their own transportation, food, and family planning strategies. Staff members signed their comments with their names and positions at the Aquarium, which further personalized the connection between visitors and the real people who worked at the museum". The exhibition helped establish personal ties between the museum staff and visitors and find creative solutions for actual ecologic issue settlement [4].
Mounting participatory zone we got well aware of the fact that the theme to be discussed with quests should be of paramount importance for guests. Questions' phrasing took a lot of time and debates. But the practice showed the necessity of flexibility, which gave us an opportunity to paraphrase questions in the process of sections' testing and communicating with target audience.
How to find a good question is exemplified by a Digital Collections participatory element in "Santa Cruz collects
exhibition curated by N.Simon:
Digital Collections comment wall. One of the special collections in the show is from Bruce Damer's Digibarn--an idiosyncratic personal museum of computer history. We wanted to create a talkback wall that dealt in some way with the fact that computers have become the repositories for many of our collections, and the increasing availability of cheap digital storage has made hoarders of us all. But most of the prompts we came up with--how do you curate your digital files? what are your most important digital collections?--generated boring responses. After internal prototyping, we came up with a prompt about the opposite of digital collecting--digital loss. The current prompt reads, "I deleted those files because..." and the setup is designed to resemble an old-school computer terminal. It has generated wonderful and diverse stories."
Museum 2.0. blog compiles a lot of such cases. Generally, summarizing this experience one can say that a good question =
The right question and well-designed participatory zone can replace preparatory work in terms of collecting stories, artifacts and audience voices.
Memory Jars installation of «What Santa Cruz collects» [5] example. Our first floor Lezin Gallery is small - about 300 square feet.
The example of such a pragmatic mode is the Monterey Bay Aquarium (the USA) Oceanaruim exhibition "Fishing for solution". Visitors wrote their proposals on how to increase fish populations on Comment board. "Staff members didn't write about how the work of the institution was helping solve the problem; instead, they wrote about their own transportation, food, and family planning strategies. Staff members signed their comments with their names and positions at the Aquarium, which further personalized the connection between visitors and the real people who worked at the museum". The exhibition helped establish personal ties between the museum staff and visitors and find creative solutions for actual ecologic issue settlement [4].
Mounting participatory zone we got well aware of the fact that the theme to be discussed with quests should be of paramount importance for guests. Questions' phrasing took a lot of time and debates. But the practice showed the necessity of flexibility, which gave us an opportunity to paraphrase questions in the process of sections' testing and communicating with target audience.
How to find a good question is exemplified by a Digital Collections participatory element in "Santa Cruz collects
exhibition curated by N.Simon:
Digital Collections comment wall. One of the special collections in the show is from Bruce Damer's Digibarn--an idiosyncratic personal museum of computer history. We wanted to create a talkback wall that dealt in some way with the fact that computers have become the repositories for many of our collections, and the increasing availability of cheap digital storage has made hoarders of us all. But most of the prompts we came up with--how do you curate your digital files? what are your most important digital collections?--generated boring responses. After internal prototyping, we came up with a prompt about the opposite of digital collecting--digital loss. The current prompt reads, "I deleted those files because..." and the setup is designed to resemble an old-school computer terminal. It has generated wonderful and diverse stories."
Museum 2.0. blog compiles a lot of such cases. Generally, summarizing this experience one can say that a good question =
- relevant to how audience sees the theme,
- provides new knowledge (unhacked),
- definite,
- allows for diverse reactions (communication, not testing),
- creativity –generating (not only write something, but draw, create something),
- induces communication,
- sets the mood.
The right question and well-designed participatory zone can replace preparatory work in terms of collecting stories, artifacts and audience voices.
Memory Jars installation of «What Santa Cruz collects» [5] example. Our first floor Lezin Gallery is small - about 300 square feet.
We like to use it as a participatory introduction to the exhibition, to front load the concept that you the visitor are invited to actively contribute to the exhibition at hand. This time, instead of offering lots of little experiences, we devoted the gallery to one experience: making Memory Jars. The idea is simple: floor to ceiling shelving holding mason jars, each of which holds a label that reads "I remember…" We put out donated craft materials and colored pencils and invite visitors to bottle up a memory to add to the collection. This activity was developed after several prototypes intended to explore the idea that some of our most precious collections are not physical at all. We tried collecting dreams, collecting smells or sounds or stories, but memories was most resonant.
We decided (with the support of the James Irvine Foundation) to go big and devote the whole gallery to the activity, spending money to build shelves and buy matching jars. Since the activity is so simple to explain, we hired a local illustrator to create a giant mural to provide instructions in an IKEA dreamland style.
We collect people’s email addresses (opt in) on a clipboard if they want to come get their jar at the end of the show in late November. We’ve been overwhelmed by participation in the first month. We have 400 jars, of which about 300 are filled already. Some are funny, some are sweet, some are poignant, some are sad. We’re going to need more jars. They might not match".
Just imagine how much time it might have taken exposition curators to gather this mass of stories interviewing each person individually. At the same time a prepared-in-advance collection could have closed the door for those who haven’t contributed their stories yet.
A compromise to this story might be such participatory elements whose content is half-way full with the museum or viewers' content inviting the rest of audience to participate.
Some difficulty arises when the museum wants to collect not just "words" but real artifacts from the public. In case with "memories jars" the museum got a multitude of stories and symbolic art-objects but no physical things. On the other hand, if the museum had asked people to bring something real to fill in these jars, a lot fewer people would have responded. It is a completely different level of visitors' efforts and costs — a barrier that limits the number of participants and requires special engagement strategies.
Here we get back to "The art of travel" experience where zones "what surprised you on a trip" and "Share your favorite place" (trips around the Ural region) in the hall "Another world" were opened.
About 50% of display space was stuffed. The rest should be added to during the exhibition. Zones artwork was a challenge: inventing a kind of "empty" design zone addressing several purposes — to play into gallery stylistic without looking "hollow", ignite participation and be ready to co-opt new content (in our case photos with captions).
A compromise to this story might be such participatory elements whose content is half-way full with the museum or viewers' content inviting the rest of audience to participate.
Some difficulty arises when the museum wants to collect not just "words" but real artifacts from the public. In case with "memories jars" the museum got a multitude of stories and symbolic art-objects but no physical things. On the other hand, if the museum had asked people to bring something real to fill in these jars, a lot fewer people would have responded. It is a completely different level of visitors' efforts and costs — a barrier that limits the number of participants and requires special engagement strategies.
Here we get back to "The art of travel" experience where zones "what surprised you on a trip" and "Share your favorite place" (trips around the Ural region) in the hall "Another world" were opened.
About 50% of display space was stuffed. The rest should be added to during the exhibition. Zones artwork was a challenge: inventing a kind of "empty" design zone addressing several purposes — to play into gallery stylistic without looking "hollow", ignite participation and be ready to co-opt new content (in our case photos with captions).
Unfortunately, people did not respond. We suppose that one of the problems was lack of clear navigation and instructions how to take part, or visitors could see it as a design element. However, some viewers were informed what to do by volunteers and guides. (it was enough to load a picture with a comment on our Vkontakte page), but did not follow the call.
Some of visitors intended to share but didn’t do it. Daily routine won over situational wish. To change the situation we even planned to put a PC and a printer with the Internet access so that visitors could copy pictures from their online storage, type texts and print them out. Unluckily, we did not have sufficient resources, but had doubts that it would help. We ought to find another technique to involve people.
The communication mechanism we looked for is presented by the brilliant project "Oh Snap!" of Carnegie Museum of Art in Pennsylvania, the USA.
Some of visitors intended to share but didn’t do it. Daily routine won over situational wish. To change the situation we even planned to put a PC and a printer with the Internet access so that visitors could copy pictures from their online storage, type texts and print them out. Unluckily, we did not have sufficient resources, but had doubts that it would help. We ought to find another technique to involve people.
The communication mechanism we looked for is presented by the brilliant project "Oh Snap!" of Carnegie Museum of Art in Pennsylvania, the USA.
The success (685 pictures in 20 days) was due to a series of factors:
- easy to participate,
- friendly attitude,
- Web and real exhibition combination,
- "incompleteness" - opportunity to develop after the exposition closing,
- Live inspiring culture in the project focus,
- Active PR campaign and a virus character of the inviting clip.
The fact that the museum demonstrated unprecedented trust in audience skills and took the risk of opening exposition with empty walls was most appealing. People highly appreciated this.
How many objects are submitted is not the only criterion of success. People are very positive about the very opportunity to be heard and to be seen as well as about the museum openness.
It is a good idea to refer to system experience of Denver Community Museum, whose mini-exhibitions are built from visitors' stuff [6].
The museum instructs community members and they bring their belongings. It is what ensures active participation and develops community relationships.
The number of stories collected can be modest. For example, our a call-out to bring a bottle charged with memories about people and places attracted 29 viewers, but their stories were original and enticing for other visitors — new museum story tellers in near future.
The resulting exhibition displayed twenty-nine visitor-contributed exhibits: perfume bottles, pill bottles, wine bottles, and homemade vessels filled with evocative objects and images. Many participants designed their projects to be opened, allowing visitors to unfold secrets, take in smells, or discover hidden treasures. In addition to featuring pre-made visitor contributions, Kopke designed a simple interactive tree collage that hung on one gallery wall, holding open bottles with phrases like "First Love" and "Beliefs You Hold Sacred." Visitors could write a memory on a slip of paper and add it to a bottle if desired [7].
3.8.2. Voting, commenting, creating
This, perhaps, is the easiest and at that the most interesting form of visitors' engagement in artifacts and themes discussions. Besides it can serve as a splendid tool to examine visitors' perception. We used it to invite people to vote for most appealing exhibition sections and objects.
Viewers could cast their votes for the exhibits they "liked" and we put the box for ballots in the last exposition hall.
Tennis balls replaced "ballots", which sparked smiles and positive emotions, on the one hand, and caused a kind of incorrect statistics since children were fond of shifting balls from one pigeonhole to another.
This, perhaps, is the easiest and at that the most interesting form of visitors' engagement in artifacts and themes discussions. Besides it can serve as a splendid tool to examine visitors' perception. We used it to invite people to vote for most appealing exhibition sections and objects.
Viewers could cast their votes for the exhibits they "liked" and we put the box for ballots in the last exposition hall.
Tennis balls replaced "ballots", which sparked smiles and positive emotions, on the one hand, and caused a kind of incorrect statistics since children were fond of shifting balls from one pigeonhole to another.
 |  |
Voting of question/answer type was offered in the hall "Preparations". The display was organized around travelling bags of the XIX-XXs entitled "Three things you will take on a trip".
Visitors used markers and pieces of paper to write their choices. Having processed over 100 replies we made a top list of ten most popular things. To learn them a visitor had to fill in his/her own ballot, or inquired others. The principle was similar to that of TV game show "100 to one" and allowed the visitor to evaluate typicality/originality of his/her opinion.
Visitors used markers and pieces of paper to write their choices. Having processed over 100 replies we made a top list of ten most popular things. To learn them a visitor had to fill in his/her own ballot, or inquired others. The principle was similar to that of TV game show "100 to one" and allowed the visitor to evaluate typicality/originality of his/her opinion.
 |  |  |
Another zone built with the help of voting techniques was "Human Travel Library". It was a world map with boxes devoted to various regions. Visitors were invited to fill one of two cards — "I want" / "I share" — and put them into one of them. The card questions included: "Where", "What for", "How", "What price", "the person packing the luggage" (contacts) / "Traveler" (contacts). The format implied that while one group of visitors lodged inquiries the other shared their experience, and our task was to bring them together at Travelers' Club meetings.
This zone was much sought after. We saw where people wanted to go. However, due to the fact that both sides of the cards conveyed information some visitors didn’t managed to see and to fill the box "Contacts". That is why, we were not able to invite them to the Club gatherings. Anyway, after the cards had been processed we found out some people just did not want to leave their contacts: either they did not believe in this tool efficiency, or did not want to disclose personal information. But it is more likely that they could perceive this zone as ideas exchange platform. As a result, there were no travel stories tellers for Travelers' Club but people eager to get consultations were invited to the club meetings.
This zone was much sought after. We saw where people wanted to go. However, due to the fact that both sides of the cards conveyed information some visitors didn’t managed to see and to fill the box "Contacts". That is why, we were not able to invite them to the Club gatherings. Anyway, after the cards had been processed we found out some people just did not want to leave their contacts: either they did not believe in this tool efficiency, or did not want to disclose personal information. But it is more likely that they could perceive this zone as ideas exchange platform. As a result, there were no travel stories tellers for Travelers' Club but people eager to get consultations were invited to the club meetings.
 |  |
This simple tool of voting can play various roles in museum exposition and, for example, turn into an instrument of social discussion.
One of the best illustrations is the Free2Choose experience at the Anne Frank Museum in Amsterdam. Free2choose is a very simple interactive show in which visitors vote on their stances on issues related to freedom. Every few feet on the bench, there is a small voting box about the size of a light switch with two buttons on it, one red (No) and one green (Yes). A one-minute video clip presents an issue. Then, a statement pops up associate with freedom. Visitors see a ticking countdown and are told to vote by pressing either the green (yes) or red (no) button on the voting box. At the end of the countdown, the results are shown for both "Visitors Now" and for "All Visitors" (meaning all visitors to date). The results were unexpected and encouraged visitors to talk with each other directly about the issues. There is an enormous opportunity to go to the next level and facilitate cross-cultural discussion [8].
Or be a tool allowing one to learn something new about himself/herself.
One of the best illustrations is the Free2Choose experience at the Anne Frank Museum in Amsterdam. Free2choose is a very simple interactive show in which visitors vote on their stances on issues related to freedom. Every few feet on the bench, there is a small voting box about the size of a light switch with two buttons on it, one red (No) and one green (Yes). A one-minute video clip presents an issue. Then, a statement pops up associate with freedom. Visitors see a ticking countdown and are told to vote by pressing either the green (yes) or red (no) button on the voting box. At the end of the countdown, the results are shown for both "Visitors Now" and for "All Visitors" (meaning all visitors to date). The results were unexpected and encouraged visitors to talk with each other directly about the issues. There is an enormous opportunity to go to the next level and facilitate cross-cultural discussion [8].
Or be a tool allowing one to learn something new about himself/herself.
«Determine your own love style»[9]
Comments on artifacts
Any modern web-resource contains built-in comment modules via which users can respond to the content presented. A museum institution still lacks this opportunity having just one feedback option — a guestbook. Visitors entered short records concerning the exhibition in question: "Great!", "Splendid!", "Curious!". These comments neither give a clue about how well the authors' idea has been read, nor how particular exhibits and the exposition theme have been perceived. Certainly, it also does not inspire exchange of opinions and visitors are ignorant of other quests views.
It should be noted that such feedback forms can be easily embedded in any exposition without additional costs. Therefore, the question runs along the line of curators' outlook and their ability to realize the potential of feedback for the museum and its visitors.
We used such feedback instruments as a questionnaire (read about it in more retails in chapter 5), test-drive discussions, focus group on total impression of the display.
We also developed a special format to identify most "popular" items — exhibits labels which can be pasted onto a visitor’s ticket (traveler's trophies).
Any modern web-resource contains built-in comment modules via which users can respond to the content presented. A museum institution still lacks this opportunity having just one feedback option — a guestbook. Visitors entered short records concerning the exhibition in question: "Great!", "Splendid!", "Curious!". These comments neither give a clue about how well the authors' idea has been read, nor how particular exhibits and the exposition theme have been perceived. Certainly, it also does not inspire exchange of opinions and visitors are ignorant of other quests views.
It should be noted that such feedback forms can be easily embedded in any exposition without additional costs. Therefore, the question runs along the line of curators' outlook and their ability to realize the potential of feedback for the museum and its visitors.
We used such feedback instruments as a questionnaire (read about it in more retails in chapter 5), test-drive discussions, focus group on total impression of the display.
We also developed a special format to identify most "popular" items — exhibits labels which can be pasted onto a visitor’s ticket (traveler's trophies).
 |  |
Such sets of items were placed in every hall and showed clearly which exhibits impressed the visitors most. In general, the idea of making a collection of items enjoyed popularity and we had to print more stickers on a regular basis.
One more underlying motive of the game was to ignite visitors' communication: friends could compare their collection and exchange their impressions. However, we cannot assess the effectiveness of this instrument as this activity did not have feedback communication.
Putting things in perspective this instrument should be adjusted with a view of younger schoolchildren groups: many of them clued exhibits prompted by their appearance but not by the stories associated with them.
We carried out one more experiment of interviewing visitors about the most impressive exhibit.
One more underlying motive of the game was to ignite visitors' communication: friends could compare their collection and exchange their impressions. However, we cannot assess the effectiveness of this instrument as this activity did not have feedback communication.
Putting things in perspective this instrument should be adjusted with a view of younger schoolchildren groups: many of them clued exhibits prompted by their appearance but not by the stories associated with them.
We carried out one more experiment of interviewing visitors about the most impressive exhibit.
We planned to insert the abstracts into interactive exhibition catalogue with artifacts accompanied by not only the museums stories but also by guests' reactions.
This was quite interesting and switched some viewers from commenting on objects to telling their personal stories.
However, at the start of the project we did not take into account several things. One of them was the equipment. To shoot videos was relatively easy having a good quality camera. The problem was to eliminate noises (in almost every exposition hall auditory accompaniment was on) and to arrange filming with the use of camera stand, (which makes interviews more formal). It is similarly important that a "cameraman" could help an interviewee get rid of 'stage fright'. Since shooting was mainly the task of volunteers videos differed in quality and most of them were not good enough to be catalogued.
Analyzing our project we came across a project (that has much in common in terms of purposes) of The Portland Art Museum, Oregon, USA [10].
This was quite interesting and switched some viewers from commenting on objects to telling their personal stories.
However, at the start of the project we did not take into account several things. One of them was the equipment. To shoot videos was relatively easy having a good quality camera. The problem was to eliminate noises (in almost every exposition hall auditory accompaniment was on) and to arrange filming with the use of camera stand, (which makes interviews more formal). It is similarly important that a "cameraman" could help an interviewee get rid of 'stage fright'. Since shooting was mainly the task of volunteers videos differed in quality and most of them were not good enough to be catalogued.
Analyzing our project we came across a project (that has much in common in terms of purposes) of The Portland Art Museum, Oregon, USA [10].
At first, the museum had planned on having it be video content visitors could record in a special booth. But later they came up with a system that was much more structured and was based on audio for onsite and online use. The final choice was provoked by (as in our case) unwatchable videos and people feeling scary of being on camera. Still, the result is excellent.
Thus, video format is obviously not misplaced, which crowdsourcing European channel Current TV does prove.
"We are trying to figure out how to facilitate people participation in our programs. This is one of a novel format we are working out":
On the screen a young guy about 20 is standing in an empty room commenting on a new indie rocker Conor Oberst. "I was an absolute fan of his first albums but his magic is fading in Cassadaga".
There is no eye-catching graphics, or brilliant cameraman work, but it is droll and memorable. If I were fond of Conor Oberst at the same degree as an ordinary 24-old guy, the commercial could look provoking. "This is our music CDs review. The idea is that every person can video-record his comment, and we just improve the clip quality"[11].
On the screen a young guy about 20 is standing in an empty room commenting on a new indie rocker Conor Oberst. "I was an absolute fan of his first albums but his magic is fading in Cassadaga".
There is no eye-catching graphics, or brilliant cameraman work, but it is droll and memorable. If I were fond of Conor Oberst at the same degree as an ordinary 24-old guy, the commercial could look provoking. "This is our music CDs review. The idea is that every person can video-record his comment, and we just improve the clip quality"[11].
Undoubtedly, there exist simpler forms of visitor-to-visitor communication making them enthusiastic about their comments-on- exhibits' provision.
But more technological decisions capable of including all the comments into cross-visitor discussions are likely to hold a greater potential in the future. Let us turn our attention to the example of Design Museum in Helsinki [12].
In the framework of "The Secret Life of Objects" exhibition an interactive was arranged where a quest could find an object of his interest and live his "like" and emotions inspired, look through onsite comments and join the online dialogue.
During 3 months about 100 comments appeared on the site without special promotion techniques. The comments left were printed out and placed around the objects under discussion. Later they were included in museum guides interpretations.
CREATE YOUR OWN ART OBJECT
One more interactive form is participatory forums associated with art objects creation sparked by artifacts.
In the framework of "The Secret Life of Objects" exhibition an interactive was arranged where a quest could find an object of his interest and live his "like" and emotions inspired, look through onsite comments and join the online dialogue.
During 3 months about 100 comments appeared on the site without special promotion techniques. The comments left were printed out and placed around the objects under discussion. Later they were included in museum guides interpretations.
CREATE YOUR OWN ART OBJECT
One more interactive form is participatory forums associated with art objects creation sparked by artifacts.
The Denver Art Museum ran an exhibition of psychedelic posters dedicated to rock music. People were invited to create their own placards, but instead of standard paper sheets and felt pens organizers handed out sketch-boards with transparencies the bottom of which should be filled with real recycled posters and visitors' own drawings. So, quest created posters to some extent similar to exposed ones but still their own. Later they occupied their place in the exhibition [13].
We did not make use of this form in our project, though several variations were devised.
3.8.3. CREATION OF COLLABORATIVE OBJECTS
Collaborative objects are items made by joint efforts of exhibition visitors. It is not easy to involve people in such an activity but it is worth bothering, hence they give a sense of belonging to something big and meaningful.
Such collections are built on some symbolic forms related to changing people stereotypical attitudes, or joint efforts can contribute to solving some acute cultural or social problems (protection or humanization of cultural, natural environment, social projects crowdsourcing).
We attempted to create objects of both categories. The first was an invitation to create "The Dream Map" reflecting aspirations of various travelers.
Collaborative objects are items made by joint efforts of exhibition visitors. It is not easy to involve people in such an activity but it is worth bothering, hence they give a sense of belonging to something big and meaningful.
Such collections are built on some symbolic forms related to changing people stereotypical attitudes, or joint efforts can contribute to solving some acute cultural or social problems (protection or humanization of cultural, natural environment, social projects crowdsourcing).
We attempted to create objects of both categories. The first was an invitation to create "The Dream Map" reflecting aspirations of various travelers.
To mark the place on the world map we prepared 3000 pieces of post-it plastic for visitors to use, which was really labor-intensive but we laid high hopes on this zone. Unfortunately, it did not work the way we had expected.
We reckoned there was no need in providing instructions, but while some visitors grasped what to do straight away others hesitated to add their dreams to the map. What is more, during Museum Night confusion — due to high attendance and shortage of stuff to mediate interactive zones — ruled, and the map appeared to be dotted with plastic markers: seas, ocean deeps, in a word, those places that could hardly be chosen by anyone. We were disappointed and about to redesign the object. To our surprise, the map’s being "overcrowded" was perceived quite positively. It made the map somewhat magic — it contained traces of hundreds of people craving for opening the world. It heated imagination and assured visitors that impossible was possible!
According to N. Simon a recent story about a student’s experience at a powerful issue-driven exhibition at the Skirball Cultural Center "Half the Sky" demonstrated the importance of symbolic participation.
We reckoned there was no need in providing instructions, but while some visitors grasped what to do straight away others hesitated to add their dreams to the map. What is more, during Museum Night confusion — due to high attendance and shortage of stuff to mediate interactive zones — ruled, and the map appeared to be dotted with plastic markers: seas, ocean deeps, in a word, those places that could hardly be chosen by anyone. We were disappointed and about to redesign the object. To our surprise, the map’s being "overcrowded" was perceived quite positively. It made the map somewhat magic — it contained traces of hundreds of people craving for opening the world. It heated imagination and assured visitors that impossible was possible!
According to N. Simon a recent story about a student’s experience at a powerful issue-driven exhibition at the Skirball Cultural Center "Half the Sky" demonstrated the importance of symbolic participation.
This exhibition about oppression of women worldwide is based on the book by the same title by Nicholas Kristof and Sheryl DuWunn. It’s a hard-hitting show about women who are suffering from and rising out of human trafficking, unequal access to education and health care, and cultures that treat them as disposable property. The exhibition, like the book, is intended not just to tell stories of doom but to encourage visitors to act to help transform the lives of women worldwide. No small task for a museum exhibition. I was involved in early planning for this project, and we were all struck by the enormity of the challenges, our strong desire to make change. .
When I visited the exhibition in November, I saw many participatory opportunities for visitors to act. Some are very specific and useful--postcard petitions to sign and send, a "click to give" campaign run in partnership with a corporate donor. Visitors can share what inspired them in the exhibition and what they plan to do after leaving the museum.
When I visited the exhibition in November, I saw many participatory opportunities for visitors to act. Some are very specific and useful--postcard petitions to sign and send, a "click to give" campaign run in partnership with a corporate donor. Visitors can share what inspired them in the exhibition and what they plan to do after leaving the museum.
But the most beautiful participatory elements were mostly symbolic in nature (and designed by Karina White, a very talented person). The largest was a "wish canopy" that hangs above the entire gallery. Visitors can "share a wish for a woman or girl" or "share a wish for a woman facing a difficult situation." The wishes are then added to the ceiling installation over time, creating a "sky" of wishes for women.
The strangest participatory element was a wall full of dots--20,000 of them, representing just a slice of the 60 million women who are suffering worldwide. There was no specific instruction with the dots. Visitors had colored them in, written tiny messages in them, and used them to make designs.
The strangest participatory element was a wall full of dots--20,000 of them, representing just a slice of the 60 million women who are suffering worldwide. There was no specific instruction with the dots. Visitors had colored them in, written tiny messages in them, and used them to make designs.
I didn’t really understand what the dots were about. To me, they seemed like an activity without a reason--purely symbolic, and weak symbolism at that. My perspective on the dots changed when I read a short blog post about a visit by a young visitor named B.J. (age/gender unknown). B.J. described Half the Sky this way:
"The area was huge and completely white. They had little areas where stories of women suffering and the good they had done. They also had activities. One was where you wrote a wish for a woman you know and for a struggling woman out there. The other was were you colored in a dot with any color, saying you supported women. There were 20,000 dots. I knew I couldn’t do the wish. What was I going to say? Sorry your life isn’t awesome! Hope it gets better! That was what everyone would write and it was completely pointless, to me. So i did the dots. I colored and colored and colored and colored. Every dot was a new color, some were multi-color. For each dot, I felt like I was trying to help, or give support, somehow. When we left I was kind of stunned. While the other kids were talking about what was happening at school, changed but wanting to temporaily forget about anything really important, I sat their in silence, thinking. I thought about the women who tried so hard and suffered so much. I thought about the dots. And I thought about how many I would have colored, given the time. Maybe a thousand. Supporting a thousand".
This account fascinated me for several reasons. B.J. clearly was moved by the exhibition and didn’t know how to respond. B.J. was not ready to do the concrete action of sharing a specific wish for a woman. B.J. didn’t see that as a meaningful way to engage. But B.J. did see the dots as meaningful.
I don’t think that B.J. thought that filling in dots actually meant s/he was taking useful action. But it was a way for B.J. to express a newfound concern for women in need. It made me realize that symbolic participation might be a way for us to help visitors take the first step toward action by allowing them to express an emotional reaction. It’s not practical to imagine that every visitor is ready to sign a petition or express his/her intention to change or act in a specific way. The dots provide a kind of scaffolding, allowing someone like B.J. to show s/he cares. And that’s not weak or useless at all [14].
The zone "You can help make a dream come true" was designed as one more collective object. The dream to be realized was that of persons with spinal atrophy who wanted to sail down the Kolyma River. We put a milestone with a money slot at the display devoted to their travel itineraries. We were concerned about people’s reaction and whether they were ready to act. One of the design ideas was to make a model wheel-chair so that a visitor making a donation could add some part to the object to visualize this collective action. But in practice it was not implemented.
I don’t think that B.J. thought that filling in dots actually meant s/he was taking useful action. But it was a way for B.J. to express a newfound concern for women in need. It made me realize that symbolic participation might be a way for us to help visitors take the first step toward action by allowing them to express an emotional reaction. It’s not practical to imagine that every visitor is ready to sign a petition or express his/her intention to change or act in a specific way. The dots provide a kind of scaffolding, allowing someone like B.J. to show s/he cares. And that’s not weak or useless at all [14].
The zone "You can help make a dream come true" was designed as one more collective object. The dream to be realized was that of persons with spinal atrophy who wanted to sail down the Kolyma River. We put a milestone with a money slot at the display devoted to their travel itineraries. We were concerned about people’s reaction and whether they were ready to act. One of the design ideas was to make a model wheel-chair so that a visitor making a donation could add some part to the object to visualize this collective action. But in practice it was not implemented.
Yet, the zone was powerful in its impact: the sum collected equaled the price of one wheel-chair. We could help one disabled person. It was great.
3.8.4. FILTERING OR A PATHWAY WITH A LONGER PERSPECTIVE
Web 2.0 generated a copious amount of information and its filtering, assessing and sorting out, became a problem. But this is the very task networks users do while voting, compiling files and ratings, commenting on content online. People get accustomed to it and join in willingly.
But it can be museum content, too.
A parallel can be drawn with gigantic collections of large museums: no one is able to master their multitudinous artifacts. By contrast, users' services present an instrument that goes beyond the scope of navigation and is capable of becoming a form of museum interpretation and dialogue about the past.
Coming back to present day reality we can say that museums mainly make use of 1.0.- mechanisms among them the most famous are excursions, which are in fact curators' files and collections offered to audience. The museum trend to produce interactive guidebooks enabling a quest to conduct self-guided tours around the exposition does not differ in essence. It changes ways of presenting content but not principles of selection.
Museum 2.0 offers to enrich this system by involving visitors' recommendation system. Both web-oriented and non-web projects have gained a considerable experience in the field and even such neologisms as "collaborative filtering" and "folksonomy" were coined. The public is ready for participatory museum activities; the effect of them is tremendous. We longed to introduce it at our exhibition "The art of travel" but due to a number of reasons we did not do it.
But we are certain to make something of the kind in our next projects! We keep on traveling.
3.8.5. IMPORTANT ISSUES
- Courtesy
- "1:10:89" rule at the exhibition
- 2.0 specifics in attending to guests
- What to do with the content creates by visitors
COURTESY
When we invite our friend to visit us we do our flat out, decorate it. The same law is applicable to 2.0 exhibitions. It must be friendly, hospitable, cozy, inducing communication and sharing. The design of participatory zones where narratives, emotions and visitors artifacts will be placed should be artful, varied, comfortable, inviting. This is crucial.
 |  |  |
"1:10:89" RULE APPLIED TO EXHIBITIONS
According to "1:10:89" rule introduced by Bradley Horowitz on the basis of some operation principles of Yahoo Groups, a photo-exchange site "Flickr" and "Wikipedia" [15]
viewers dominate in the networks (89%), while commentators and authors constitute mere 1%. The question is whether this proportion exists in museum 2.0 projects and if yes, what its figures depend on.
Creating open exposition project we are interested in maximum audience participation. At that one should bear in mind that not only authors but general cultural, social, anthropological and other factors determine public responsiveness. However, it is worth considering to what extent engagement in participatory zones diverse in form and content differs depending on visitors' age and gender. Here we again can reference a more complex classification devised by N. Simon — see more details
According to "1:10:89" rule introduced by Bradley Horowitz on the basis of some operation principles of Yahoo Groups, a photo-exchange site "Flickr" and "Wikipedia" [15]
viewers dominate in the networks (89%), while commentators and authors constitute mere 1%. The question is whether this proportion exists in museum 2.0 projects and if yes, what its figures depend on.
Creating open exposition project we are interested in maximum audience participation. At that one should bear in mind that not only authors but general cultural, social, anthropological and other factors determine public responsiveness. However, it is worth considering to what extent engagement in participatory zones diverse in form and content differs depending on visitors' age and gender. Here we again can reference a more complex classification devised by N. Simon — see more details
and report on our exhibition finings (further details in chapter 5).
2.0 SPECIFICS IN ATTENDING TO GUESTS
Outlining exhibition in the spirit of participatory culture you should take into account both material and human recourses required the moment the exposition opens. Some renovations are necessary in terms of expendable materials (markers, stickers, paper, walls, etc.), new navigators and moderators should be trained for participatory zones. One more task is content screening (pre-moderation of texts and comments is not specified, and inadequate content (we have some of it as well as our American colleagues) must be taken away. Certainly, there is always a lot to do with guests' messages, posts, photos and artifacts' online placing.
WHAT TO DO WITH THE CONTENT CREATED BY VISITORS
Even 10% commentators and 1% authors can generate a plenty of materials. Participatory zones are regularly overcrowded during the exhibition work. What to do with them should be decided on.
In many N. Simon’s projects visitors were invited to write on the walls which were later repainted for the next groups of visitors to use. Neither morally, nor technically we were ready to follow this step. For us it seemed to be a kind of sacrilege to eliminate people’s thoughts, feelings, and narratives.
However, in the course of time we changed our mind. To a greater extent, it was caused by "what makes you go on a trip?" experience. Its form was very much like a social network wall when new posts appear on the top of the list. We asked themselves who rolled back news feed nowadays and realized that nobody does it. It must be a feature of our time to live in abundance of texts, situational dialogues, increasingly accumulating information fields. Though this phenomenon might be of a more complex character — only real time communication is valued. New motives for conversations should be created instead of listening to the old ones.
Yet, to wipe all traces clear cannot be a rule for each participatory zone and object. Sometimes visitors create outstanding content that can and should be transformed into some art-objects translating collective meanings, and community sense.
We keep all the materials produced and are looking for a solution for a better creative form to present it. One idea is to unite people from different cities since our exhibition is on a tour across the Urals.
Outlining exhibition in the spirit of participatory culture you should take into account both material and human recourses required the moment the exposition opens. Some renovations are necessary in terms of expendable materials (markers, stickers, paper, walls, etc.), new navigators and moderators should be trained for participatory zones. One more task is content screening (pre-moderation of texts and comments is not specified, and inadequate content (we have some of it as well as our American colleagues) must be taken away. Certainly, there is always a lot to do with guests' messages, posts, photos and artifacts' online placing.
WHAT TO DO WITH THE CONTENT CREATED BY VISITORS
Even 10% commentators and 1% authors can generate a plenty of materials. Participatory zones are regularly overcrowded during the exhibition work. What to do with them should be decided on.
In many N. Simon’s projects visitors were invited to write on the walls which were later repainted for the next groups of visitors to use. Neither morally, nor technically we were ready to follow this step. For us it seemed to be a kind of sacrilege to eliminate people’s thoughts, feelings, and narratives.
However, in the course of time we changed our mind. To a greater extent, it was caused by "what makes you go on a trip?" experience. Its form was very much like a social network wall when new posts appear on the top of the list. We asked themselves who rolled back news feed nowadays and realized that nobody does it. It must be a feature of our time to live in abundance of texts, situational dialogues, increasingly accumulating information fields. Though this phenomenon might be of a more complex character — only real time communication is valued. New motives for conversations should be created instead of listening to the old ones.
Yet, to wipe all traces clear cannot be a rule for each participatory zone and object. Sometimes visitors create outstanding content that can and should be transformed into some art-objects translating collective meanings, and community sense.
We keep all the materials produced and are looking for a solution for a better creative form to present it. One idea is to unite people from different cities since our exhibition is on a tour across the Urals.
Introduction
1. The idea
2. Tools
3. A long journey
3.1. Community participation
3.2. Viewers' involvement
3.3. A move towards people
3.4. Collecting artifacts and stories
3.5. Viewers – co-authors in copy-writing
3.6. Collaborative exposition design
3.7. Testing
3.8. Participatory zones
3.9. Exhibition catalogue in 2.0. format
3.10. Participants and co-authors motivation
4. Research on the world of travel
4.1. Origins of geobiography
4.2. Roads we choose
4.3. Make up your mind!
4.4. To discover the world
4.5. To ignite others
5. Perception
Results (Visitors' social portrait, Visitors satisfaction level and underlying factors, The respondents' assessment of the project concept innovation, Visitors' assessment of separate exhibition halls)
Acknowledgements
1. The idea
2. Tools
3. A long journey
3.1. Community participation
3.2. Viewers' involvement
3.3. A move towards people
3.4. Collecting artifacts and stories
3.5. Viewers – co-authors in copy-writing
3.6. Collaborative exposition design
3.7. Testing
3.8. Participatory zones
3.9. Exhibition catalogue in 2.0. format
3.10. Participants and co-authors motivation
4. Research on the world of travel
4.1. Origins of geobiography
4.2. Roads we choose
4.3. Make up your mind!
4.4. To discover the world
4.5. To ignite others
5. Perception
Results (Visitors' social portrait, Visitors satisfaction level and underlying factors, The respondents' assessment of the project concept innovation, Visitors' assessment of separate exhibition halls)
Acknowledgements
