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.