3 ms·
I agree we should strive to see originals in person. Other than this, I think a book is almost better educational than the alternative at the museum. Usually,
by mejutoco 3y ago
I agree we should strive to see originals in person.
Other than this, I think a book is almost better educational than the alternative at the museum. Usually, the object is sitting there with a tiny text explaining nothing (mixed medium, untitled).
Audio-guides are usually horrible. Multimedia explanations are very often as interactive as a powerpoint; many interactive, if present, elements are broken.
Only good guided tours (not constantly available) seem to provide good educational value. Other than this I either: knew exactly what I was going to see; I saw some objects/painting, and only later, reading in books, I appreciated why they were interesting.
- doodlebugging 3y agoI agree about books in that context for the same reasons you list. A description in a book can add so much more context to the description that it can place you in the shoes of the craftsman who made the item on display. Audio guides are okay for context in some situations but I have found that you end up standing in one place while the narration completes and your group moves on without you. Maybe that's just me. (Ummm, has anyone seen Dad?). Guided tours are interesting especially when the guide knows the material and wants to present it in ways that encourage the visitors to ask questions.