Critique Phase

My analysis of the critique phase of the FW is based on a transcript of the audio recording of the discussion between participants and researchers after the visit and evaluation of the exhibition “Typisk Dem [Typical]” at IKM, as well as the written notes made by the participants, during the visit.

Several comments during the discussion touched on issues relevant to the development of an interactive installation. In an attempt to categorise the comments shortly after the workshop, I identified themes of media, social interactions, content, visitor contributed content and interactivity. These themes were used as a starting point for the fantasy phase of the FW.

I later conducted a more thorough thematic analysis and revised the themes accordingly. I identified four main themes that seemed to shape the museum

experience reported by the participants, namely space, engagement, content (media/

objects) and usability.

Space is about the physical attributes of the exhibition. The physical space affords and constrains how the visitor can engage with the exhibits. The participants identified framing of thematic areas, supporting concentrated reflection on a specific topic and the support of different social interactions as affordances of the exhibition space, while lack of boundaries and a lack of privacy or spaces for social encounters were identified as constraints.

Within this context of the physical space, the participants described their engagement with content, through media and objects. The participants engaged with the exhibition in different ways: By consuming content passively or through active

involvement – through physical or intellectual activity in the form of practical tasks, through participation with self-generated content or interaction with other visitors.

The possibility to actively engage with the exhibition was described as positive by several participants. Particularly the opportunity to contribute to the exhibition by adding your own content was perceived as a rewarding activity. The young people argued that participatory activities, made them reflect more deeply on the topics, they felt included and that their voice was heard. They felt that they connected to other visitors by studying their contributions.

Figure 12: Visitor participation through texts and photocopies of pictures in the installation “The Anatomy of Prejudice” by Thierry Geoffroy/Colonel at IKM. The installation asks visitors to share traces of prejudice from their

lives.

While most participants seemed to prefer the practical tasks and

participatory activities rather than passively receiving information in the form of texts, video or audio, a few comments suggested that there might be too much activity and that there should be room for contemplation and relaxation. One of the researchers pointed out: “… you had to do something to access… the content… So, I thought it was good because you were constantly in motion somehow, but I also found that it was difficult for me to relax because I had to do something all the time…”

The discussion on social interactions was inconclusive as well. Some

participants thought that a museum visit should be a social activity. They criticised traits of the exhibition that could counteract possible social interactions, like for example audio played through headphones that would isolate the listener or the lack of appropriate physical spaces for personal encounters and discussion. Others found that the museum visit could be an individual experience as well. The proponents of the individual visit argued that certain characteristics that could be seen as isolating, actually could serve different social contexts: Where there are more than one pair of headphones available, people could either listen individually or two or more could listen to the same material, taking the headphones off one ear if they wanted to talk.

One participant described several small rooms in the exhibition that each had a specific theme. These rooms could cater both an individual experience, entering the room alone and concentrating on the one topic exhibited there, or they could be the place for social interaction as the topic would be a natural conversation starter for the people meeting in the room. This flexibility and openness to cater for different users and different social experiences was summed up by one participant: “Jeg synes at det er veldig fint at ... selv om vi er mange forskjellige mennesker, så ... har alle funnet noe de liker ... og at det kan være individuelt og sosialt ... [I think it is nice that … even though we are many different people, everybody found something they liked ...

and that it can be something individual or social …]”

The participants identified positive and negative aspects of different media in the exhibition. Most negative remarks were made about written text. Several

participants criticised that there was too much text in too small print, which was experienced as overwhelming and tiresome, something that was a problem with many exhibitions, one participant claimed. A few negative points were made on sound as well, mostly about the potentially isolating effect of headphones as mentioned and the fact that sound from one installation was deafening and therefore disturbing other areas of the exhibition. Only one negative remark was made about one video which was perceived as too long. The positive comments on sound and video outweighed the negative ones. The participants experienced the video material as stimulating and stressed the immersive qualities of good quality audio experiences through headphones.

Besides positive and negative comments on particular media, another theme that emerged was that of multiple formats of media used in conjunction. It was claimed, that a variety of media could be useful to keep up the visitors’ interest and that different media could support each other, such as text providing supplementary information about a video.

Figure 13: Examples of different media and forms of visitor participation in the exhibition ‘Typisk dem’ at IKM.

(Screenshot from IKM website)

Another theme was concerned with the exhibition content. Two arguments stood out in this regard. The participants appreciated content they could personally relate to, such as newspaper excerpts from recent events or clips from films they had watched. It was uttered that these items made the exhibition more “real”, easier to relate to, up-to-date or recognisable, as well as allowing new meanings to arise from the content in the new context it appeared in. As one participant put it: “... Den [filmen] ble brukt som et så aktivt virkemiddel ... Fordi du setter noe du kjenner i en litt ukjent setting også får det på en måte en ny betydning ... [That film was used so

actively … Because you put something you know in a somewhat unknown setting and somehow, it gets a new meaning that way…]” Another point that was made was that a diversity of content would enrich the exhibition experience. This diversity, it was argued, could be achieved by presenting different voices on a subject as well as by an adequate amount of choices when selecting from pre-made content in an interactive setting.

Lastly, I identified the theme of usability, describing the ease of use and learnability of the exhibition. Comments in this regard were about lack of contextual information for some content, lack of guidance on how to use an interactive exhibit

or missing feedback when interacting with an exhibit. The participants reported that they reacted with frustration or irritation when they would not understand some part of an installation and that they just might walk away from an exhibit that had usability issues.