For this lecture, we had two guests who work at the the Army Museum come and talk to us about their work and also gave a really interesting presentation on the history of the military red coat.
Following on from this, we were set the following blog task...
Blog task - Army Museum and Imperial War Museum
Visit
both the museums’ permanent collections.
Both deal with conflict but from a very different perspective.
Your
first few paragraphs should consider the differences in display and point of
view. What story is the museum trying to
convey? What, if any, vested interest
does it have and how is this communicated through the gallery and display
design?
The
second issue to consider is emotional response.
War is a highly sensitive subject and is difficult to transfer from the
‘battlefield’ to the museum.
Consider
the following questions?
Have
either museums changed your perspective/understanding of conflict?
If so
how have they changed this? (factual information, material culture, gallery
design…)
How did
you react to the museum exhibits, spaces and narrative? Which of the two did you find it easier to
engage with or which of the two had a bigger emotional impact on you? Why was this?
Again focus on the museum design, narrative and communication of this
narrative through objects.
This is
a pretty complex task which will take you a few days if not weeks to put
together so take your time in considering the issues raised.
 |
| Display from National Army Museum |
 |
Display from Imperial War Museum
|
To begin with, both museums vary in their display and content. For example, the Imperial War Museum had an entire exhibition entitled 'A Family in Wartime' in which models and rooms were set up as depicted above. It had an eclectic collection of objects, photographs and paintings which were displayed to depict all sorts of aspects of the war, such as: the role of women, children, gas masks, how people lived, etc. Each had display boards with information, as well as video and audio clips. It seemed to me appropriate, since it was aimed at a younger audience and had lots of interactive aspects. Nevertheless, it was also just as interesting and inclusive for adults too.
In contrast to this, I would say the National Army Museum, was much more aimed at children, on the whole. Most, if not all were child friendly and this was evident by the display - mainly mannequins or statues with reenactments of wartime depictions; some in glass cabinets and others open which encouraged interaction. The layout of the Museum was in a way that as you moved up the building, you progressed through different events in time in chronological order - Level 1 to Level 5 progresses from as early as 1784 all the way through to present day.
From what I saw, I would say the childish nature of the exhibitions at the National Army Museum creates a less serious image of war. In a way, I think the exhibitions seem to celebrate the heroism of soldiers and Britain, rather than focusing on the loss, tragedy and devastation. In contrast, the Imperial War Museum had age restricted exhibitions such as the Holocaust Exhibition which was very serious and fairly intense in content.
Personally, I think I preferred the Imperial War Museum, since I felt it was more age appropriate to me, although some of the exhibitions were very heavy in content which made it less engaging. In particular I found the Holocaust Exhibition had the most emotional impact. It felt more personal to me, since I am Jewish. Having grown up in a Jewish school all my life, we were taught from a young age about the Holocaust, but there were things in this exhibition which I learnt about which I previously wasn't aware of. We were never made aware that the Nazis raped the women, in fact we were told they didn't dare touch them as they didn't want to be contaminated by the Jews. I also can't recall seeing this kind of content in any other Holocaust Exhibition I've been to; so this came as quite a shock when I read about it in the exhibition. This in a way changed my perspective on war. I think it's important to keep serious topics like the Holocaust raw and honest both in content and layout. I would say the Imperial War Museum commits to this successfully. The exhibition was dark, cold and oppressive, which added to the sense of eeriness, creating a bigger emotional impact. The display had similar aspects to what you see when you visit the museums in the concentration camp in Auschwitz; cabinets of items which belonged to the prisoners in the camps: shoes, toys, false teeth and other belongings. Sometimes written information isn't sufficient, you need to see genuine pieces of history which make it real.
Both museums dealt with modern day war in Afghanistan quite differently. The National Army Museum seemed quite aware and sensitive of its young audience. The content was factual yet their agenda seemed to be aimed at painting the British as heroic. There were lots of happy pictures of soldiers reuniting with their families, therefore portraying war as more of a celebration of community and nationalism rather than devastation. Taking an opposing point of view, the Imperial War Museum had an exhibition which looked at the facts and figures of the Afghanistan War by quantifying things with diagrams, such as how much water the soldiers drink a day and how many letters are sent. It was a lot more factual and realistic in content.
.jpg) |
| A photograph I took of a soldier being reunited with his children - National Army Museum |
Overall, I would say both museums do a wonderful job of portraying War but personally, I found the Imperial War more engaging. Nevertheless, the National Army was just as informative but maybe slightly more child friendly.
.jpg)
