This area of the website is currently "under construction", please check back again over the next few days.

Thank you,

SS 28/11/2011.

1 SIEM SALEM FINAL VIDEO

Apologies about the video quality (upload limitations).

Why?

That is all.

Spot the difference

The world is where we live from WWF on Vimeo.

Make Tangible

They call it "Digital Ecology"

Kind of a physical representation of animal behaviours.



Pretty cool.

Morphological Good Stuff

Ok, yes, it's kind of inarguable that humans have had a lot of negative impact on the natural environment and blah blah blah who cares... but I came across a conservation argument that didn't bore my pants off:

"(most) Animal activists know nothing about the conservation of animals, they are ignorant, living in the past and ill informed..."

Now for a few examples of non-traditional conservation strategies that are proven to work but you never seem to hear put forth by vocal animal activists...

1- Hunting is a GOOD THING

Did you know that Elephants are NOT an endangered or even a vulnerable species?
The fact is they are just a "flagship species" for many activists, they are a charismatic animal, easily recognisable; mention that they're endangered, they are being poached to extinction for their ivory, and, well, people care!

Now, keeping that fact in mind let's have a quick look at the world of government regulated safari hunting that is common in many parts of southern Africa.

Many governments in Africa have set a price on the cost of shooting an elephant in Africa, this price is $50,000.

You may think that is horrible, putting a price on the life of Elly the Elephant, but this is actually one of the best ways to ensure elephants don't become extinct in their natural environment.

90% of Elephants in Africa life outside of natural reserves, this means they wander in and out of communities, and if they are pests and unwanted they will be shot... but $50,000 is a lot of money for a small African community to pay for shooting the elephants crushing their houses and pestering their children.

So, welcome the PROFESSIONAL hunter. A hunter will come in, pay $10,000 to the community, $10,000 to animal conservation groups and $30,000 to local government to come in and shoot the elephant.

Now the community is rid of the "pest", they have $10,000 to repair the damage caused and elephant proof their community for the future, the conversationalists in the area have $10,000 to put into monitoring and protecting the elephants in the area, and the local government has $30,000 to keep the program running, protect elephants from illegal poachers, and go about their business. Oh, and the elephant has been killed in a regulated, sustainable and humane way.

Makes sense, right?

But for some reason a similar scheme for crocodiles in the Northern Territory of Australia was shot down, due to vocal backlash from animal activists who think it cruel to shoot a croc.

There are 75,000 crocodiles in the Northern Territory, so many that they are attacking each other over limited territory and dying of injury, or starving to death, and turning to livestock and even occasionally people to feed themselves as they are so populous there is not enough traditional food sources... it's a pretty shitty crowded and competitive existence for a NT croc.

25,000 crocodiles less would solve this problem for the crocodiles, for the locals, and also give local indigenous people in the area a chance to make a sustainable income from their land.

The fact is it is difficult for some species of animal and humans to co-exist, we are not going to start culling humans to ensure crocodile habits are not encroached on, so why not sensibly maintain numbers of crocodiles and use them, their meat and their skin to ensure the quality of life for wild crocodiles and the humans who live around them?


2- Animals are SAFER in captivity

Many "Urban Conversationalists" believe that the safest place for animals is out in the bush, far away from humans. We don't see them, we don't touch them, they are safe and everyone is happy.

Well... no.

There are many reasons that animals are not actually safe in their natural environments, one easy to grasp example is because of Cane Toads.

As cane toads sweep through Australia they are wiping out many carnivorous marsupials as they go. The Eastern Quoll for example no longer exists in it's natural habitat of eastern Ausralia. If it weren't for programs rearing quolls in captivity they would be completely extinct.

Would anyone care?

Well, a lot of people I'm sure have no idea what a quoll is, so here is a picture:

Cute right? They're also extremely intelligent, sociable animals that make clean and interesting pets.

Now I know I'd be rather concerned if I heard that all the cute awww fluffy baby kittens in the world were going to be extinct! I see them all the time, I interact with them, I understand the (social) value of them.

So why not allow people to keep native animals such as quolls as pets? You could learn about them, appreciate them, have fun with them, and if your quoll runs away, oh well, at least it wont go feral and kill other native... quolls... And in the end if all quolls become extinct in the wild then maybe quoll pet breeders, who are now wealthy generous people, being paid $1000 per pet quoll, could release some of their captive quolls into conservation and integration programs, I mean they wouldn't want their super cute livelihood to go extinct.


3- You should be allowed to CATCH and USE animals

In South Africa crocodile breeders were allowed to capture and breed ENDANGERED wild crocodiles for their own gain, so long as they agreed to release 2% of all crocodiles they bred back into the wild.

Crocodiles in South Africa are now abundant, in regulated numbers, and safe from extinction and there is a booming and sustainable crocodile meat, pet and skin industry as a result.

The crocodiles are not pests, like in Australia, or endangered like they were, they are useful, and are preserved by the people who have placed a value on them.


Also the world of "Morphing" snakes is actually highly beneficial for preserving endangered snake species.

Morphing is when snake breeders cross species of snake to create interesting and beautifully patterned quirky cross-breeds. They then sell these amazingly beautiful and weird snakes to "Morph Collectors" for ridiculously high sums of money.

This sounds sick, except many breeders of Morphs have a genuine interest in snakes, and interest in preserving the integrity of the pure breds. They also breed many rare snakes that are nearing extinction in the wild by using the funds they make from selling their morphs.

The Morph collectors are happy and snakes that are becoming extinct in the wild have "insurance collections" in captivity. The snakes are now useful, commercially valuable, and worth protecting. What's wrong with that?


So?

Well, here's a random chain of thought:

Humans limited to urban environment are not running through the wild hunting their food as intended, so to ensure all humans don't become pent up aggressive balls of lard we have created sports.

In our urban centers we have sporting precincts, where you can go watch sport, buy sporting goods, socialise and train in team sports, support your team etc... It's taken care of a very animal need in a fun, convenient and commercial way.

There are sporting precincts, business hubs, entertainment quarters, shopping centers, university communities....

So why not have Animal Precincts? Urbanimal Precincts even.

People are animals, we like animals, we use animals so why not create a place where you can do what's natural in an urban, comfortable, convenient and useful way.

You can go and watch animals for amusement, purchase animals as pets, purchase animal goods (meat, fleece), undergo training for sustainable hunting licenses, learn about growing your own pet food, visit the vet, visit owner and pet social clubs, etc etc etc....
All approached with such quirky, scientifically and commercially viable conservation methods similar to the examples mentioned above.
Why leave animals out in the ever degrading wild to die alone? They are fun, as humans we do have a very real use for many of them, they are have social and economic value, we are animals too, why not integrate them into our cities in ways that benefit us as well as increasing the welfare of the animals we live with?

I think it makes total sense.

SUBMISSIONS S1 2011

ALL SUBMISSIONS ARE BELOW, PLEASE MAKE SURE TO HIT THE "OLDER POSTS" BUTTON TO MAKE SURE YOU SEE EVERYTHING!

4 MARKETING IMAGES

RESEARCH MATRIX FINAL

EXPERIMENT 1 - ANIMAL PERCEPTION




EXPERIMENT 2 -FEASIBILITY STUDY





EXPERIMENT 3 - THEMATIC DESIGN + INTERACTION

please see older posts for the accompanying documentation and explanation

EXPERIMENT 3 + DOCUMENTATION

DESIGN AND ARRANGEMENT RATIONALE

Beyond circulation and animal welfare the zoo is arranged (curated) not according to genealogy but to thematic links.

(please click on individual images to see in clearer detail)

Section 1: Safari /"Arctica": Contrast

 In this section the theme is CONTRAST. There are two groups of animals with two different strategic themes that sit interwoven with one another.

The “Safari” section is all about large African animals, and winding through the large exhibits on long ramps of low incline, you can at points walk into the animal enclosure (walk amongst the Zebras, Antelope and Gazelle on an elevated platform in their exhibit) and at times see more than one animal at a time (Cheetah in front Hyena behind). The circulation also winds out and around the exterior of the building envelope. The overall feel is that of a horizontal journey through a flat, vast and horizontal artificial landscape.

This contrasts sharply with the “Arctica” section, which features animals from Antarctica and The Arctic Circle. These animals are close together and joined via Hydraulic lift in the rear. You are surrounded by animals, ice and water on all sides with no views to the outside world. With large slabs of glass showing cross sections through the water bodies of the exhibits, the zoo patrons are totally immersed in an icy, glassy and modern experience.

It is an area of HOT/COLD, VAST SPACE/IMMERSION, UNCONTROLLED WONDERING/CONTROLLED DESCENT, DRY/WATER.

Section 2: Play + Interaction

This section is all about animals that humans can engage with on a more interactive and intimate level. It’s about fun.

First the zoo patrons can wonder through the Primate hanging jungle, weaving in and out of the primate enclosures on elevated platforms to interact with the most intelligent species in the animal kingdom at eye level whilst experiencing a vertical and hanging experience.

Next one can enter the “Cute Arena” wondering around small animal enclosures than make you go “awww”, you can view meerkats, pandas and lemurs on a small intimate scale, before entering into the “Australian Patting Zoo” where you can get up close and pat a Kangaroo.

Section 3: Paradise and Luxury

This section is about excess and indulgence. It is themed to reflect the menageries of the past. In here you start at the top level and luxuriously wind down through exhibits of unashamedly exotic and dangerous animals: brightly coloured birds next to black panthers, exquisitely patterned snakes sit behind class lining the circulation spaces. It is all moodily lit with spot lights on the animals, like walking through sparkly gems on display in a jewellery store. The downward ramping makes it an easy, slow, and luxurious experience of the visual senses.

So Ka-Wa-IIIII!!!

Check this out - it's the Nekomimi Headband:



Because sometimes being able to talk/write/sign/sing/paint/dance is just NOT expression enough.

No no, we need to look to our furry friends to really express how we feel.

Ah animals, what would life be without them?

*ears drop*








(lol... ear boner at 0:44)

Oh Em Gee! It's a JUNGLE out there!

So one of the most over-hyped news stories of the last few months (So hyped it made a Larry King top 10 list) was a story of an Egyptian Cobra escaping from the Bronx Zoo.

Big woop?

In a city where there are threats of getting hit by a taxi, mugged on the subway, hit by people throwing detritus out of there windows, severe food poisoning etc etc etc all of a sudden everyone was going nuts at the idea of one tiny (albeit deadly poisonous) snake being potentially loose in the city.

It's just interesting how city dwellers react to nature - so unknown, so dangerous, so threatening.

It's a snake people!

Is it because when we were young Fairy Tales always depicted "The Woods" and the natural as the scary, the dark, the unknown...

Cities are not safe places, maybe it's time we introduced some nature back into our urbanised lives to put it all back into perspective.

EXPERIMENT 2 + DOCUMENTATION

MARKETING IMAGE 2:

EXPERIMENT 2: Feasibility Experimentation for a Zoo in the Seagram Building





EXPERIMENT 2 DOCUMENTATION:

Yes, it's a tad dull, but in experimenting if a Zooscraper is feasible we decided for the first step we must run through fundamental building requirements, including circulation for zoo patrons, minimum massing requirements for animals, structural testing, and placement of animals in relation to each other.

Only when we were satisfied that these requirements could be fulfilled satisfactorily did we move onto the schematic design of the building.

-Circulation

The circulation is divided into 3 major lift stops and ramps. We ensured at no point did the ramp incline exceed 1:18, that there were landings in compliance with Australian Standards and also that every 3 storeys there was a completely flat level.

The circulation in each of the three areas has a different objective:

In the "Safari" area from the main entry it is very planar, and the circulation wraps outside the building as well as right inside of animal enclosures, this makes for a simulated horizontal experience, like one is wondering through a Savannah.

In the Primates area the ramps are narrow and wind around in between the primate enclosures - you can see above and below the ramps, so the overall impact is that you are hanging and suspended in a vertical space.

In the top section you wind down the ramps, at a slow and luxurious pace, passing the beautiful animals in this area almost like an exhibit as they line the circulation spaces.

-Minimum Massing


Above you can see the minimum massing animal requirements and supplementary services before it was organised as per the marketing image and experiment 3.

-STRUCTURAL STUDY

There was a question in designing our building about the animals that need large bodies of water and if this is possible – as we concluded that large bodies of water are heavier than any singular animal in the zoo, or even a group of animals – Below is the structural analysis of a leopard seal enclosure, one of the largest bodies of water in the zoo spanning 13mx18mx4m and weighing over 54 tonnes.

(54 N of Force UDLL, calculated estimating the amount of water required for the seal enclosure – 13mx18mx4m) on standard steel member UB + UC dimensions (see image for specific member details)

The Deflection forces on the columns and beams – the most deflected beam is highlighted to be analysed.

The Deflection on the most deflected beam – 7mm

The maximum deflection before failing for a beam this size (125UB610) is 13.5mm, therefor it is easily structurally possible to have large masses of water in the building assuming correct waterproofing and reinforcing is provided.

-Animal Housing Requirements and Organization 


We used the standards from the NSW Department of Primary Industries as the main basis of our animal enclosure parameters.  The documents with the prescribed standards are here:
http://www.dpi.nsw.gov.au/agriculture/livestock/animal-welfare/exhibit

Primates are the most complex animals found in the building with the most comprehensive set of requirements for their placement in proximity to one another and to the zoo patron:

Here are some non exhaustive notes on the prescribed standards for the housing of primates. 

The relevant schedules and additional information are here:

http://www.dpi.nsw.gov.au/agriculture/livestock/animal-welfare/exhibit/prescribed-standards/primates

Group caging

Primates must not be exhibited singly, with the exception of adult Orangutans. Primates

must be held with other members of their own species in one of the types of group

listed for that species in Schedule 3.

Construction

Enclosures may be open, semi-enclosed or totally enclosed or consist of islands surrounded by water.

Must be provided protection from wind, rain and extremes in temperature.

Access to both shade and sunlight.

Must include living or fresh vegetation.

For some species, this can be achieved by establishing plants in the exhibit or by using potted

plants or replenishable turf which can be rotated, to represent the natural habitat and preferably be accessible to the animals. It is recognised that with some species such as macaques and baboons, provision of a naturalistic setting may be difficult to maintain. In these instances, all attempts must be made to provide access to living vegetation and to other replenishable items, such as large cut branches and areas of natural substrate for foraging.

The majority of the enclosure must be out of visual range of any neighbouring exhibits

housing potential predator species or other groups of the same primate species if the species is territorial. Where visual contact is available, and signs of distress are observed, action must be taken to alleviate this distress.

This does not preclude the primates from being able to see other groups or potential predators from some parts of the exhibit. Such contact may in fact stimulate normal behaviours and provide for some level of enrichment. The effects will depend on the species and individuals.

Primate enclosures must be constructed so that the enclosed animals can rest at least 2

body lengths above the eye level of any member of the viewing public. Monkey pits are therefore not acceptable housing for any primate species. Exception: where the viewing public is in an enclosed building and views primates through a sealed glass frame and the primates are able to rest at least at the eye level of any member of the public viewing the animals from inside that building.

Body lengths are defined in Schedule 1.

Space

Minimum enclosure dimensions are set out in Schedule One.

These requirements are based on an enclosure to hold three animals or a pair plus offspring (except for Orangutan, where requirements are for two adults, and chimpanzees and gorillas where the minimum is for five adults). Exhibitors should refrain from basing enclosure designs solely on the minimum size however. In order to provide an appropriate environment, many factors must be provided for, space being just one of these. The size of the enclosure must be based on ability to provide all of the factors including; social grouping, climbing structures, nesting and feeding station and predicted growth of the group.

Substrate: the material which covers the ground or floor, for example bedding or litter placed on the

flooring of a cage, box, stall or enclosure, or the soil or grass covering of an outdoor ground surface.

The enclosure must be well drained.

Mixture of artificial and natural, or all natural substrate must be provided, to allow for

normal behaviours, such as foraging and scent marking.

Capture facilities

Each exhibit must allow access to an area such as a nest box, raceway or night den,

suitable for the physical isolation of individuals so that animals can be restricted for

close examination and veterinary treatment.

Requirements for Fences and other Enclosure Barriers

Schedule Two.

Exhibit Furniture

Schedule Three. Minimum height of mandatory climbing structures is given in Schedule One. Where more than one species are kept together, the cage furniture must be the sum of that required for each species. In general, enclosures must be furnished with horizontal, vertical and sloping pathways,

shelves and perches above ground level. New enclosures must include animal access doors at a level which allows the animals to use their normal method of locomotion (i.e. above ground level for arboreal and semi-arboreal species). There must be areas within the exhibit for any animal to withdraw from the group, (e.g.to hide from an aggressor) and from the public. This may be provided by visual

barriers.

Lighting

must be either natural or mimic that of the wild

Access to ample direct sunlight, or artificial light with a similar UV spectrum, is

required for maintenance of normal vitamin D levels in many species.

Temperature

between 18 and 30 degrees Celsius.

 Naturalism is not essential in off-exhibit holding enclosures, but is preferred because of the

benefits to the animals’ health and well being.

Olafur Eliasson

The Mediated Motion

Kunsthaus Bregenz, Austria, 2001

The Weather Project

Turbine Hall, Tate Modern, London, UK, 2003

Waterfall 1998

Neue Galerie am Landesmuseum Joanneum, Graz, Austria, 2000, Palacio de Cristal, Parque del Retiro, Museo Nacional Centro de Arte Reina Sofia, Madrid, 2003

Green River

Tokyo, Japan, 2001 Stockholm, Sweden, 2000 Los Angeles, USA, 1999 Moss, Norway, 1998

Bremen, Germany, 1998

So in right now.

So the winner of Tropfest 2011 is an animal themed mishmash of awesome.

EXPERIMENT 1 + DOCUMENTATION

EXPERIMENT 1

ANIMAL PERCEPTION EXPERIEMENT:

5 Animals, 1 Building Lobby, 5 Seconds

This is an experiment to speculate what would happen if 5 animals of different and conflicting species were placed in one building lobby designed specifically for human use.

The speculated results of how the animals perceive their surroundings and react to one another are
recorded in a series of film strips from each animals point of view and visual ability.

Insight is revealed into which animals interact, in what ways, and how they occupy the building space.





So what happened? Well...

The Giraffe was nonchalantly standing in the corner swinging its head from side to side to have a look what was outside, and then something made it crash to the floor.

Meanwhile we can see the lion sitting behind the lifts, then it spies the giraffe, slowly stalks it, and - POUNCE

While this is happening the fish is outside in the fountain, oblivious, swimming around and staring up at the Seagram building through the water.

The Bird meanwhile is batting up against the glass, looking outside, then inside, then outside again, then it swoops inside... etc. Poor thing.

And lastly the snake sitting in it's quiet enclave watches the lion walk past, and then the giraffe fall to the floor. It doesn't move.



ANIMAL PERCEPTION DOCUMENTATION:


Animal Perception Study:
This experiment is to represent how animals may occupy and perceive a space constructed specifically for humans.
It takes place in the Seagram Building lobby and forecourt, where 5 animals have been placed
-Giraffe
-Lion
-Eagle
-Snake
-Fish



Giraffe Perception

Vision: Distance is 20/30 and 2 Cone Colour (this is similar to red/green colour blindness in humans, Giraffes can distinguish brightness is greens and blues but yellow’s and reds are indistinguishable, also looking blue and greenish)with a narrow field of vision with poor peripheral detail. The result of this is blurry vision, but not too much worse than that of a human with perfect vision, but the lack of colour perception, contrast, and ability to capture light means the overall vision quality is quite poor, lacking in detail and grainy.

Movement: Vision is Binocular with a blind spot immediately in front. To overcome this giraffes move their heads up and down and side to side to see what is immediately in front of them.

Behaviour: Giraffes are animals that live in an open Savannah environment, even when they sleep they do so standing in the open and do not seek shelter. Because of this behavioural pattern it can be assumed that if a giraffe is put in an enclosure such as the Seagram Building Foyer it is likely they would stick to the glass periphery rather than venturing inwards.

IMG 1

An example of how red/green is perceived

IMG 2

The giraffes blind spots are shaded in grey






Lion Perception

Vision: Lions have a very wide field of vision, which is very clear right up to the end of their peripheral vision. Their 2 cone colour perception with very few rods, they only really see in black and white – colour is not essential for their hunting and survival. Instead they have a very fast frame rate and can see in very sharp detail even in low light. In bright light their vision is slightly less than that of humans, but in limited light it is stronger.

Movement: Lions tend to walk in straight and controlled lines, focusing on what is in front of them. Being an apex predator means they have no animals that prey on them, and thus are not concerned with scanning their environments for threats.

Behaviour: Lions are lazy animals, they seek out shelter and rest for the majority of the day, while hunting at night. If they do make a move they slowly stalk their prey, creeping up as close as they can in hiding only attacking when they are so close that their prey might perceive them – then their movements are lightning fast and precise. In the Seagram Lobby they may seek out any dark quiet shelter they can find to rest rather than remaining in the open.

IMG 1
Lions see in very poor colour


IMG 2
Their field of vision is 200 degrees (humans have 180 degree vision)






Fish Perception
Vision: Surprisingly fish have some of the best vision in the animal kingdom. Only fish and birds have 4 Cone colour perception – which means they can see colours that humans cannot. Their vision however is distorted as their eyes bulge to allow is as much light as possible under water.

Movement: The majority of fish species see out to the sides and not in front and when swimming in schools they can sense the movement of the water in front of them that they are swimming into but can see what is to the side of them, some fish swing their heads side to side to overcome their blind spot.

Behaviour: Fish are timid and obviously must live in water. In the Seagram Lobby area they only place they could survive would being the fountain, they would most likely stick to the edges in the more still water to avoid strong water currents and bursts of water, fish need to remain constantly moving to extract oxygen from the water.



Bird Perception

Vision: Birds have the best vision of all warm blooded creatures, they have not only 4 cone colour perception which allows them to see variations in colour invisible to humans but many species have an extremely fast frame rate and very sharp vision. Some even can see magnetic fields!

Movement: Because birds have such amazing vision they can afford to move through spaces very quickly and with great breadth of movement when flying, the very rarely crash even though to a humans slow eye it may seem that they come very close.

Behaviour: In an enclosed space a bird may become overwhelmed by the small size especially if it is crowded and will most likely become frantic in trying to find an exit.

IMG 1
Birds can perceive subtlety in colour that This colour perception combined
humans can not.




IMG 2
With fast frame rate and magnetic perception means birds see the birds far more quickly and vibrantly than humans do.



Snake Perception

Vision: Most snakes have very poor vision, only really being able to discern between light and dark accompanied by very fuzzy black and white images. However some species of snake can sense infrared heat, meaning they can see their prey very clearly in close range (<2m).

Movement and Behaviour: Snakes move very little, but if they sense much vibration in the floor close by they may depending on the type of snake stalk it and investigate it as prey, or more likely move away.

IMG 1 + 2
Snakes have very poor detail vision But can sense infrared heat in sharp detail



Additional Animals:

Kangaroo Perception
Vision: Kangaroos have very poor day and night vision, this may be due to there being minimal obstructions in their natural habitat and relying on finding food and assessing it with a very keen sense of smell.
Movement and Behaviour: Kangaroos take very large bounding strides, and are used to large spaces, in a small space with multiple obstructions and a cold floor, like the Seagram lobby, a Kangaroo may easily become overwhelmed and after some failed attempts at escape may become aggressive.

FINAL RESEARCH MATRIX

After experimenting with flash animations for the research matrix we decided the most fluid way to view and understand all of our research was as a large format A0 document framed by three questions. We still have the print out and pin it up to refer to for inspiration and focus.

There are 3 Questions posed in the Matrix:

Why Zoos?
Why Zoos in an Urban Context?
Why Zoos in a building form?

And to answer there are case studies, investigations, art precedents, cultural references, academic quotes and more.

BEASTIAL - Photography of Helmut Newton

 

 RAQID SHAW - GARDEN OF EARTHLY DELIGHTS X

BOSCHE - GARDEN OF EARTHLY DELIGHTS

Draft Experiment 3

The Seagram Building

This little video outlines the relvence of the Seagram Building in architectural history, as well as outlining it's structural rationale, materials and organisation.

This is part of the reseacrh we undertook before deciding the Seagram Building was the skyscraper we wanted to use as our template to experiment if a zoo can be fit into a skyscraper.

Please see the submissions area for the results.

The Dominance of Aesthetics

I came across this following passage Jean Nouvel put forward at the First International Symposium on Zoo Design and Construction held at the Paigton Zoo, Devon England in 1975.

"The exhibition of wild animals in captivity must always follow the rules of aesthetics, that is to say that the visitor must all the time feel himself to be in pleasant surroundings.

To obey this rule, the method of exhibition must follow the taste of the period, and the thoughts which the animals being shown arouse in the mind of the visitor."

Known for his preoccupation with architectural theatrics, it could be said that this way of thinking has been carried on in his works, right through to the The Musée du quai Branly which has received heavy criticism for a perceived reliance in its exhibitions on visual appeal and theatrics, as opposed to explanation and context.


Bernice Murphy, co-founder of the Sydney MCA and now National Director of Museums Australia and Chair of the Ethics Committee of the International Council of Museums. She told a Sydney symposium on 'Australian Arts in an International Context' that she found the whole of Quai Branly to be a "regressive museology" and the presentation of Aboriginal art "in a vegetal environment" to be "an exotic mise en scène" in the worst taste.

MICHAEL KIMMELMAN of the New York Times:

"If the Marx Brothers designed a museum for dark people, they might have come up with the permanent-collection galleries: devised as a spooky jungle, red and black and murky, the objects in it chosen and arranged with hardly any discernible logic, the place is briefly thrilling, as spectacle, but brow-slappingly wrongheaded. Colonialism of a bygone era is replaced by a whole new French brand of condescension."

"Think of the museum as a kind of ghetto for the "other," a word Mr. Chirac has taken to using: an enormous, rambling, crepuscular cavern that tries to evoke a journey into the jungle, downriver, where suddenly scary masks or totem poles loom out of the darkness and everything is meant to be foreign and exotic. The Crayola-colored facade and its garden set the stage for this passage from civilization."

I went the museum myself in 2009.(above photos are my own) Admittedly it did come across as a bit on the nose like Kimmelman had mentioned, right from the moment you enter where you see the elevated UFO like museum looming over a barren landscape setting. It's hard not to read into such an arrangement but then again I think it should be taken into consideration that I definitely sit on the more " prone to being difficult" end in the spectrum of cultural sensitivity.

There were some exciting sequence of spaces inside the museum, which was a stark and refreshing contrast of the clean sober spaces of the many more conventional museum spaces in Paris. I think it should be commended in its attempt to use space to add to the narrative of the housed collection. I think it's a great concept, the problem is in the clumsily heavy handed execution. The sequence of spaces is compounded with jarring effects and it got a bit chaotic and distracted from the exhibits. The lasting impression was that of style over substance.