The Victoria and Albert Museum

I am very impressed by the logo for the Victoria and Albert Museum. I think it’s pretty and simple and clean. The institution it represents is immediately clear upon sight, without the viewer needing to pause and wonder what the logo stands for. I love the trick with the “&” creating the cross-bar of the “A.” I also like that the lines creating the three characters are not all the same size, but vary in thickness. This seems to me to convey delicacy. If each stroke were of the same size, the logo would appear more created, more forced. The way it is, it seems like a lovely, seamless scripted device that just so happens to hint at the wonderful treasures hidden inside.

When I walked into the Cast Courts at the Victoria and Albert Museum, I was completely awed. Perhaps I should have been less amazed at the objects, since they are plaster casts and not originals, but I almost felt more awed, thinking that these wonderful objects had been painstakingly reproduced and reassembled for my viewing pleasure and convenience. I walked into the room on the left first, the one full of Italian and Spanish casts. The giant arch on the left side of the door really demands immediate attention. It is simply beautiful. The gold pain really made it stand out, as did it’s immense size. I really loved this room, and the way the ceiling was so very far up, and the walls were light orange-colored and thus made the room seem much grander. All the plaster casts were lightish gray, so they too added to the brightness of the room. I was very happy to see some objects there that I will probably never see in real life. I had never realized that “The David” is SO big! It’s pretty amazing to walk through a room and be able to enjoy hundreds of years of art and history in a small space. I wasn’t quite as impressed with the other room, however. I felt it was much more cluttered (though the first was as well). The room itself was darker, and the objects within varied in color from white to black. The black objects seemed to suck the light from the room, making it seem less grand, and perhaps even a bit more sinister. The row of plaster effigies I first stumbled into probably helped further the sinister feel. I still immensely enjoyed looking and marveling at all the wonderful casts from all over time and space, especially Trajen's Column. 

Compared to the figures in the International System of Signs, I felt that the Isotype figures did have much more “personality.” The Isotype people, for instance, could be expressing not only function (as in, “Gent’s Loo Here”), but also subtle things like class or even race or emotion. I thought the frame showing unemployment rates in Britain was a particularly strong example of this. The pictures show white male figures standing in lines, wearing caps and looking downward, thus conveying a rather dejected appearance. The graph is then not only functional in that it accurately and clearly displays information, but it also gives a visual element to the graph as well, perhaps reminding viewers that the numbers they are considering are real human lives. I was very impressed that the simple Isotype figures could so easily portray just about anything. One of my favorite Isotype pictures was of the “Crusader” fighting the “Infidel.”  I thought it was interesting that the straight-forward, uncomplicated lines that formed the two cartoonish figures could so easily convey what they set out to. I’m not quite sure how the Isotype and International System of Signs figures compare when it comes to communicating to a large group of people. Perhaps the International System’s basic, plain “stick figures” are more universal, since they’re pretty well stripped of any identifying characteristics. On the other hand, there was something interesting about being able to make the figures look like the actual people they are supposed to represent, which the Isotype form does very well, especially in the picture of African citizens voting.

The patterns I chose to compare and contrast both incorporate “organic” figures with symmetric, “man-made” shapes. The Iranian carpet fragment from the Middle East Collection portrays animals and floral designs in a repeating pattern. The focal points of the fragment are two lions, displayed upside-down. These lions not only function as representations of lions, but also as a design element. The shapes of the lion’s bodies echo the curving lines of the floral elements of the pattern, as do the shapes of the bodies of the other figures shown on the carpet, including the wolves at the top, the scary human-faced birds at each upper corner, the dragon- or griffin-like creatures under the lions, and the deer figures near the bottom. The piece from the Ironwork Collection, the “Aumbry Grille,” also uses curving lines to etch an outline, but incorporates vine-like tendrils to execute the pattern. Like in the carpet fragment, there is a strange element of not-quite-human forms, in the men’s heads at the top of either side of the grille, which seem to sprout out of vertical vines. I wish the description of the grille explained why the men’s heads were included. To me, they’re extremely disturbing, but this piece would have held the Communion vessels during Mass, so I wonder who the heads represent and why they’re growing out of vines? One of my favorite aspects of this piece is the keyhole on the left side of the front panel. I didn’t notice the keyhole at first, but it caught my eye as I walked by. The keyhole reminds me of the many layers of creatures and plants in the carpet fragment: you never know what you’ll find when you look hard.

I can't claim to be terribly familiar with the Madison Metro system, but it seems like a decent system for a sparsely-populated city. The only architecture I have noticed are the bus stops. As bus stops go, they seem pretty functional. The logo seems to me to be less than lovely. The bright orange, red and blue colors remind me of bad 80s commercials or a truncated rainbow. I've never liked how the background is tilted. It makes me feel motion sick. I think the word "Metro" under the big M is rather redundant. Either the M should be synonymous for "Metro" or it's not doing it's job properly. The London Underground system, on the other hand, is classic. Obviously it has the advantage of being a London institution, but the circle and crossbar design is instantaneously recognizable. It's a clean, simple logo that communicates its purpose perfectly. The O is also a nice little echo of the tube tunnel. Some of the tube stations are architectural marvels in themselves, while others display only the bare minimum to remain functional. I LOVE the maps for the tube system. Not being familiar with public transportation, I tend to be easily confused by the Madison bus system (or even the London bus system), but the tube is so straight-forward, even I can't get it messed up.

Though it's impossible to pick one piece to be my "favorite," I'll choose a tabernacle grille of wrought iron, made in Austria or Germany around 1850. I love the gothic revival style of the piece, which is apparently modeled after a 15th century "Tyrolean type." The grille is pretty, but not as pretty as, say, the enamled turban ornaments in the Middle Eastern collection, or the elaborate Japanese armor on display in the Asian collection; I chose this piece as my favorite because it's just a little different than I had expected. As I was taking pictures of the left side of the grille to potentially use for my compare and contrast a pattern answer, I was really amazed at the delicate pattern. Then, I moved to the right side to take more pictures, and I was surprised to notice that the right side was totally different from the left side. Both scrolling patterns were similar in style, but still completely different! This intrigued me. Why would this be so? Every other grill I'd seen in the Ironworks collection had been symmetrical. I just really enjoyed the whimsy that the differences provided. I also fell in love with the dragon-looking head at the center of the piece. At first, the head just blends into the complex patterns and gothic arches, but when I finally noticed it, I realized that it's a very strange, quirky little addition.

Left side

Close-up on left pattern

Close-up on right pattern

"Dragon" head

The Science Museum

I really enjoy the Science Museum’s logo. I think that it is playful and interactive, and thus represents the museum very well. Though it is perhaps rather difficult to read straight-off, it is very recognizable in shape and style. My favorite aspect of the logo is that, the more I look at it, the more interesting it is. I love that the I and the E in the first line are intertwined, and it’s a fun mind game to puzzle over their shape. Since the E in the first line is different from the E in the second and the E in the fourth line, it’s even more interactive and visually appealing. I also love that most of the Es, Ms, Cs, Ns and Us are very similar in shape. I did notice some inconsistencies with the use of the logo and the font used in the logo, however. For example, the M in “MAP” on the floor plan is different from the M in the logo, which is a bit inconsistent, especially on the floor plan. I assume this was to make the word “MAP” more easily readable.

Honestly, I was not impressed by the organization of the floor plan, or by the maps and guides. I felt that I was constantly lost, and couldn’t easily access the exhibits or floors I was aiming for. I found myself continuously turned around and confused. On the maps, most exhibits were given only a title, without any kind of description. This made deciding what looked interesting very difficult. For example, on the basement level there was an exhibit titled “Things.” I have no idea whether or not this exhibit would have interested me. What “things” is the exhibit about? I thought that a brief description, perhaps in a side-bar, would have been extremely helpful.

I loved the orange sign just outside the café. I thought that the juxtaposition of the N in “Revolution” and the C in “Café” was brilliant. I also liked the positioning of the words as almost a border across the left and top of the sign. I was interested enough to read the menu. I thought the big purple wall-sized “shop” sign was very effective at conveying its message. The shop seemed to do a good job at extending the brand throughout, with lots and lots of branded merchandise. I loved the high ceiling with the helter-skelter lights hanging above the shop. The lights made the space feel like a true extension of the museum, almost like it was an exhibit itself. The soft lavender-ish color was also nice, giving the room a futuresque quality that I appreciated. I felt like it was a nice, bright space, perfectly conducive to spending money on silly little trinkets emblazoned with the logo. The people I saw browsing in the shop certainly seemed to enjoy purchasing bouncy balls and bendy erasers and glitter water bottles with the iconic symbol. The Science Museum's logo is not only effective, but marketable.



I thought the Science museum did a pretty good job at integrating glass cases with displays of touchable, glass-less objects. In particular, the “Making the Modern World” exhibit on the ground floor seemed to use diverse display methods. I liked the big machinery displayed at the center of the floor without cases, though many did have rope or “Do not touch” signs posted. I particularly liked the large Fresnel light house lens, as it reminds me of the one in the Devil’s Island lighthouse in Lake Superior’s Apostle Islands back home. The dozens of little British schoolboys who passed me in the exhibit really seemed to enjoy the tower of cars at the far side of the room. They seemed to like the colors and the whimsy the tower expressed. Around the edges of the room, there were traditional glass cases, but they weren’t presented in a very traditional way. They alternated between a glass box-shaped display, and a 3-sided glass display that could be explored. I really liked this method, since it was much more interactive and visually stimulating that just a plain glass box. The museum also incorporated lots of touch-screen computers helpfully displayed at child-level. Personally, these are not my favorite displays, but the little children seemed to enjoy them.

My friend Pa standing in one of the "inverse" glass box displays

I found a particularly memorable display in the “Talking Points” section of the “Wellcome Wing.” The exhibit was titled “Effective, defective, creative,” by artist Yinka Shonibare and consisted of an explanation on a red sign below a large screen that showed 12 different moving images of prenatal ultrasounds. The sign explains that the images show “healthy” fetuses in blue, labeled “Effective,” and fetuses that are “at risk” in yellow, labeled “Defective.” The final panel shows both “effective blue” and “defective yellow,” labeled “Creative.” I’m not entirely sure why this exhibit struck me as memorable. I think it was a very provocative display, and very poignant in its minimalism, and one that I’m not sure would be found in a main-stream museum in the United States. Perhaps the exhibit appeals to some of my greatest fears, as a human, and also as a woman with strong maternal instincts. I can’t help but imagine the emotional turmoil the parents of “defective” fetuses must feel when faced with the decision to continue or discontinue the pregnancy. That the exhibit was able to elicit this strong emotional response impressed me. Shonibare’s exhibit also brings up the question, what do we value in our society? We say we value diversity, but is this true? The overall effect of the exhibit was extremely unsettling, which made me want to include it in my description of the museum as a whole.



One of the exhibits that impressed me most with its content was a display of a skeleton. The text boxes in and around the display told the viewer that scientists have been able to analyze the bones of the skeleton to discover some interesting facts, such as his gender (male) from his pelvic bones, and the time he died (about 2000 years ago). The text boxes then go on to say that his DNA revealed the most about him. Around a corner, the viewer discovers several profiles of people whose DNA can be traced back to the skeleton in the case, showing a picture and where they live. Then, the text reveals a startling fact: 1 in every 4 Europeans is genetically related to the skeleton. I thought this display did a good job at teaching and was still interesting enough to convey memorable information.