te papa
Lino P. Stavole
How many people do they get a year?
Do they cater to early childhood curriculum?
Do you know if they are hiring?
ChrissyR
> How successful has Te Papa been?
That would depend on how one measured success and, in the case of
a cultural thing like Te Papa, what opinions one had on the need for it.
> How many people do they get a year?
Ask then - they are in the phone book.
> Do they cater to early childhood curriculum?
Ask then - they are in the phone book.
> Do you know if they are hiring?
Ask then - they are in the phone book.
In short - Ask then - they are in the phone book.
Chrissy.
Allan-John Marsh
Are you trying to be funny? You're not trying to be mature, I can see.
You're also not holding to the purpose of a newsgroup. If you can't
answer, don't.
cat...@my-deja.com
It appears the poster does not live in NZ.
Cath
>
>
Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
Lino P. Stavole
I will check it out on the web though:)
ChrissyR
Chrissy.
Lino P. Stavole <crea...@famvid.com> wrote in message news:N7O46.204$456....@news-east.usenetserver.com...
tonii
Couldn't you have used this reply without the smat alec attitude you so
frequently spout.
<SIGH> some people make me sick.
ChrissyR <C...@home.gen.nz> wrote in message
news:97856332...@shelley.paradise.net.nz...
ChrissyR
> <SIGH> some people make me sick.
I know the feeling.
Chrissy.
Lino P. Stavole
conversations on this group before.
I know of this saying "No harm, No foul"
which translated means....
no harm done then no foul called. Well, at least in sports...
or something like that.
Let keep it informative AND fun kids.
ChrissyR
> conversations on this group before.
> I know of this saying "No harm, No foul"
I don't think my SOH is all THAT strange - and most people get it.
The way it happens is that the person I am replying to gets it and
others don't.
Chrissy.
Lino P. Stavole
ChrissyR
Lino wrote
Lino P. Stavole
ChrissyR
ChrissyR
> you are referring to . ?
Tat is always a possibility - but it is usually an indication that the cost is directed
at one person and they will know what it means.
Chrissy
Brian M. Harmer
Isn't that a good reason to take it to e-mail?
The whole point of news groups is the *everyone*
sees them.
E. Scrooge
Brian M. Harmer <brian....@vuw.ac.nz> wrote in article
<97876446...@totara.its.vuw.ac.nz>...
That sums it up nicely, Brian.
E. Scrooge
Lino P. Stavole
E. Scrooge wrote in message <01c077bf$10ecff00$6feeadcb@oemcomputer>...
I've never enjoyed reading redundant information from people's earlier post.
If I felt that I needed to refer to it then I expanded the thread and looked
for the info I needed. I thought that I'd lead by example.
However, If you think that I should then from now on this newsgroup I will.
No problem.
However, the reason I didn't reply to Chrissy in private was to show the
group that I didn't take it the wrong way and they shouldn't either. I also
thought we could end this silly thread and start discussing important things
like..... mmm?....stuff:-)
Karen Hayward
You may find the answers to some of your questions at the Te Papa
museum site...
Karen Hayward
ChrissyR
<<snipped>>
> group that I didn't take it the wrong way and they shouldn't either. I also
> thought we could end this silly thread and start discussing important things
> like..... mmm?....stuff:-)
But now we are going to have a discussion on the how and whats of a
discussion.
BTW - you replied in the most appropriate manner - thank you.
Chrissy.
G
Lino P. Stavole <crea...@famvid.com> wrote in article
<70E46.4715$6K6....@news-east.usenetserver.com>...
> How successful has Te Papa been?
>
Depends who you ask and how you measure success. In terms of people through
the door, one cannot deny its success. I'm not sure of the exact figures,
but I think they have had over a million 'visits' a year since they have
been open - remarkable since NZ's population is only around 3.8 million.
Children love the place but how much they actually learn is another
question. One of the constant criticisms is that the museum suffers from a
severe case of exhibition 'dumbing down'. All captions seem to have been
written at around a 12-year-old child's level. Many adults get frustrated
at poor level of description on exhibits, but are thrilled at the same time
that their kids are occupied for a couple of hours. The institution has
also come under strong criticism for it's treatment of it's National Art
Collection (sod all displayed - and often poorly) and it's 'theme park'
approach. The layout of the building is confusing and the design of the
exterior is hardly befitting what is supposed to be a national icon.
Admittedly some of these criticisms have been addressed and work is
currently underway to develop a new art gallery.
An interesting point is that while Te Papa has been extensively reviewed
and studied by the international museums fraternity, no one has yet to copy
it.
One of the more extreme criticisms of Te Papa was published a couple of
years ago by Theodore Dalrymple writing in the British centre-left magazine
"The New Statesman". The article is reproduced below. While very
Euro-centric, he does raise some interesting points (plenty of ammo for Te
Papa knockers here!)
Regards,
G.J.T
Wellington
============================================
The New Statesman
An amusement arcade masquerading as a museum
Theodore Dalrymple visits New Zealand to find the lowest common denominator
is now official cultural policy
................................................
To celebrate the first anniversary of the opening of New Zealand's new
national museum, Te Papa, on 14 February, the staff have decided to
construct a 48-yard-long pavlova, which is said to be the national pudding.
Slices will be handed out to visitors who arrive on the museum's birthday.
Actually, there is a long-running dispute as to whether the honour of
inventing the pavlova belongs to New Zealand or Australia. If the two
countries were in the Balkans, they'd probably be at war by now over the
question. It also happens that there is a dispute over the meaning of the
museum's name. "Te Papa" is supposed to be Maori for "Our Place", but many
Maori deny this.
But even if Te Papa really does mean Our Place, there is something rather
unpleasant about the name. It buttonholes you and precludes criticism for
if
you are not entirely at home in Our Place, it means you are not one of us.
And if you are not one of us, who exactly are you?
The museum now dominates Wellington harbour. Built at what, for so small a
nation, was vast expense, the contents are nevertheless few; and, as befits
a postmodernist age, the museum is billed as accessible and interactive.
The first impression on entry is of a giant amusement arcade. There are
virtual-reality machines on which you can windsurf or water-ski. Coloured
lights flash, there is a lot of electronic whizzing and banging. A young
man
dressed like a ball boy at Wimbledon approaches. He is one of the Te Papa
hosts, who appear on posters throughout the city: "Helpful. On to it.
Stimulating. Te Papa host."
He asks whether you would like to be photographed digitally in 3-D in one
of
a number of poses: pursued in a jeep by moas (huge, extinct flightless
birds); riding a tyrannosaurus; riding a Harley Davidson; sitting in a
Christmas stocking; with a condor landing on an outstretched arm; in a
space
capsule bearing the New Zealand flag.
The offer refused, the on-to-it Te Papa host is not downcast. He offers one
of the rides instead. There are two, Blastback and Future Rush, with a
cut-price offer for both. I choose Blastback, which compresses 65 million
years of geological and evolutionary history into eight minutes.
Before buying the ticket, however, I am enjoined to read the following
warning: "Blastback and Future Rush are exciting attractions that involve
motion simulation and laser effects. People are advised not to experience
these attractions if they suffer from the following conditions: epilepsy,
dizziness, neck disorders, back disorders, heart disorders. These
attractions may also be unsuitable for women who are pregnant."
It seems, then, that the rides at Te Papa successfully combine two modern
tendencies, the craving for excitement and anxiety about health. Te Papa
wants to be exciting and innovative, but not the first museum in the world
to be sued for causing a miscarriage.
Another on-to-it Te Papa host says, "Thanks, mate," as he takes my ticket
for Blastback. The other visitors and I walk through about ten yards of
plastic primeval forest, and then enter a small cinema auditorium, where we
must fasten our safety belts. For the next eight minutes we are jolted
hither and thither, tipped backwards and forwards, while the screen plunges
us to the depths of the ocean, propels us into the crater of a volcano,
rushes us over foaming white water, speeds us through the undergrowth of a
forest and attaches us to the wings of a high-soaring bird in a fast-moving
sequence without any apparent reason or narrative purpose.
"That's it, folks," announces the on-to-it Te Papa host when the 65 million
years compressed into eight minutes are over.
No information whatever has been conveyed by Blastback, only sensation (in
my case, the sensation of mild motion sickness). Sensation is much more
democratic than information, which - unlike sensation - is neither sought
nor understood by all. Therefore information must be eliminated.
I progress to the exhibits. There is an astonishing cacophony, as a variety
of recordings are played when people press the interactive buttons: the
barking of dogs, the baa-ing of sheep, music and so forth. One is invited
to
"Hold a soundshell to your ear, press the button and hear some freaky,
weird
stuff about nearby creations".
There is no obvious principle by which the exhibits are arranged. As the
hectoring slogans (a little reminiscent of the museums of religion and
atheism in the Soviet Union) put it, "Everyone has a place at our place",
"Where there are people there is art" and "Home is where the art is". "Is
it treasure or junk?" the visitor is asked, to be told that, "Everyone has
an opinion". And since what is treasure to one person may be junk to
another, the museum authorities are exonerated in advance for their choice
of exhibit. They cannot be criticised because there is no fixed standard by
which to make a judgement. After all, one man's opinion is as good as
another's.
Distinctions are dissolved between categories of endeavour. A landscape
painting is placed next to an exhibit of little plastic figurines of the
All
Blacks rugby team, which are given out at petrol stations when you spend
more than $20 on fuel and are called the Small Blacks. We are flattered
into
supposing that, merely by virtue of living and consuming, we are
contributing greatly to civilisation.
Political correctness is much in evidence. As is well known, the New
Zealanders are keen on sport, and it is only natural, therefore, that in a
museum dedicated to every phase of national life there should be a
representation of this activity. And since the sport in which the New
Zealanders undoubtedly excel is rugby, it is also only natural that this
should be the sport depicted. And so there is a photograph of a game of
rugby in progress, played by young, mixed-sex teams.
I watched the visitors as they looked at this photograph for any sign of
amusement, any sign of ironical detachment or intellectual rebellion; but
no, they simply looked at it and moved on. And thus they accepted with
sinister equanimity what amounted to a deliberate propagandistic lie, that
the most typical expression of New Zealand rugby is the mixed-sex team.
Despite the expected genuflections in the direction of multiculturalism,
the
greatest insult in Te Papa (other than to the intelligence of the visitors)
is to the Maori, for the finest examples of their magnificent wood-carving
art, which even to an unschooled eye such as mine were obviously of the
deepest significance to those who made them, are placed in the midst of the
household detritus of modern New Zealand. Nothing could be more demeaning
to
the men who devoted their lifetimes in mastering the art of carving.
Not that the visitors to Te Papa are allowed to contemplate the Maori
expression of man's artistic and religious impulse in silence: far from it.
As soon as they enter one of the great carved wooden buildings now housed
in
the museum, coloured lights come on by remote control and a recording is
activated: "Welcome, visitors, to this magnificent storehouse called Te
Takinga . . . We see this unusually large and elaborate pataka as evidence
of our Mana in Te Papa Tongarawa, the museum of New Zealand."
The recording, by a man with a vaguely Maori accent, conveys no information
about Maori life whatever. Who he represents, who "we" are in his unctuous
little speech, is not explained. Mana, by the way, means power and status:
precisely the underlying obsessions of the politically correct.
The coloured lights and the recording prevent the exercise of the
imagination, while at the same time they serve no intellectual function.
They are not so much entertainment as distraction from the possibility of
thought; in Te Papa, the mind is never left to its own devices, but
undergoes constant sensory stimulation. Te Papa is the MTV of museums.
Te Papa is only a straw in the cultural wind. Its atmosphere is similar to
the modern hospital's - another temple to the short attention span, another
example of modern man's inability to be alone with his thoughts. Once upon
a
time, silence was regarded as part of the cure, and hospitals had an almost
monastic quiet. No longer. Wards are now alive with the sound of music and
televisions.
Te Papa does make one or two small concessions to the museum as formerly
conceived. On the third floor, in a bare concrete gallery, ill-lit and
unadvertised, there are two rows of paintings. There are no signs to say
what they are, or who they are by. For a small and young nation, not
entirely sure of its cultural identity, New Zealand has a considerable
tradition of painting: but the visitors to this gallery are made to feel
that, by visiting it, they are doing something almost illicit. There is a
dirty-postcard feel to the gallery, as if it were the inside of a dirty old
man's raincoat.
Then there is the library at Te Papa. "Here," says a notice, "you'll find
magnificent books and soft seats - the ideal place to browse and stay." The
library is also the ideal place, says the notice, "to take a short break
from the hurly-burly of Te Papa."
The hurly-burly of a museum? The very idea is the antithesis of learning,
let alone of scholarship. One leaves Te Papa knowing no more than when one
entered it. If one has the mentality of a child of limited intelligence and
curiosity, one might have been amused or kept out of trouble for a while,
but nothing more. There are, surely, other institutions, which require no
public subsidies, to achieve that limited (and limiting) end.
Only one question filled my mind as I left Te Papa. Who is the correct kind
of person to run it?
Certainly not a curator, because no detailed knowledge of any subject is
necessary. A casino owner, perhaps, or the manager of an amusement arcade.
Te Papa is the institutional exemplar of the lowest common demoninator
turned into official cultural policy, and stands as a terrible warning to
the rest of the world.
Lino P. Stavole
who wrote this editorial is imbedded in an arcane ideal. Te Papa is
obviously focused on implementing open-mindedness to young eager minds. It
sounds like it is following the trend of countless youth museums around the
world....... To place the building blocks of information in the minds of the
young, to make it fun and exciting, to make it diverse and achievable.
Museums of this nature have other outreach programs that offer more in
depth explanations and follow through. The building itself should only act
as a prism, A place to focus people's curiosities, to send them out into the
world and hope they'll seek out more information. Do art museums have a
painting, then underneath it explain to patrons the sciences and intricacies
of impressionism. No.... I am biased. And my opinions are exactly, that
....opinions. Just like the author of that article I guess. I apologize for
my horrible grammar.
G wrote in message <01c07909$de4b0960$cf32...@wc039068.wcc.govt.nz>...
G
> Now, this is what I was asking for! How exciting. Unfortunately the
person
> who wrote this editorial is imbedded in an arcane ideal. Te Papa is
> obviously focused on implementing open-mindedness to young eager minds.
It
> sounds like it is following the trend of countless youth museums around
the
> world....... To place the building blocks of information in the minds of
the
> young, to make it fun and exciting, to make it diverse and achievable.
>
> Museums of this nature have other outreach programs that offer more in
> depth explanations and follow through. The building itself should only
act
> as a prism, A place to focus people's curiosities, to send them out into
the
> world and hope they'll seek out more information. Do art museums have a
> painting, then underneath it explain to patrons the sciences and
intricacies
> of impressionism.
(snipity doo-da)
You are quite right about Theodore Dalrymple being old school. I suspect
that he would like to see everything in glass cases. Many however (myself
included) think that Te Papa has gone too far in the other direction where
entertainment has taken precedence over education. Glass-case type museums
still have their place and are still valid. One of the most famous of these
is the Pitt Rivers Museum in Oxford
(http://units.ox.ac.uk/departments/prm/). With glass cases from ground
level up to head-height absolutely crammed with stuff, it is fascinating to
both young and old. I have witnessed many a 7 year-old squealing with
delight, their faces pressed up against the glass of Victorian cabinetry of
the Pitt Rivers, pointing at the wonderful treasures inside. The fact that
their were no buttons to push did not seem to detract from the experience.
Some of the major British museums seem to have found the perfect medium
between the old (i.e. glass case) and new (i.e. interactive) schools of
museum thought. The Imperial War Museum and the Science Museum (both in
London) are excellent examples. I remember the Smithsonian museums in
Washington DC being similar. More locally, the Auckland War Memorial Museum
is just fantastic (and this is coming from a Wellingtonian!)
You point out how Te Papa seems to have taken a path similar to many youth
museums around the world. The difference here is that Te Papa is not
supposed to be a youth museum. It is supposed to be the National Museum of
New Zealand. It should be there for all New Zealander's - not just to
excite the minds of 12-year-olds.
I heard an amusing story recently from some Wellingtonian friends currently
living in the UK. They have young twin sons. One weekend the family caught
the Channel Tunnel for a weekend trip to Paris. During a trip to the
Louvre, European mothers and fathers could be seen crouching next to their
youngsters, pointing out and telling them about some of the world's great
works of art. My friend's sons, having been brought up on a diet of Te
Papa, had to be restrained from 'interacting' with the art works :)
Regards,
G.J. Toth
Wellington
Ashley
"Lino P. Stavole" <crea...@famvid.com> wrote in message
news:bJ866.124$lk3....@news-east.usenetserver.com...
> Now, this is what I was asking for! How exciting. Unfortunately the person
> who wrote this editorial is imbedded in an arcane ideal. Te Papa is
> obviously focused on implementing open-mindedness to young eager minds. It
> sounds like it is following the trend of countless youth museums around
the
> world....... To place the building blocks of information in the minds of
the
> young, to make it fun and exciting, to make it diverse and achievable.
>
It is stunning. I saw about 30% of everything there was to see, and want to
go back with a week to spare. I didn't get to spend *any* time in the
interactive section, my time was spent purely among the exhibits. I think
the interactive section probably deserves a day to itself :-)
AFAIC, the building is stunning. Some people don't like it - so what's new?
Some people also think museums and learning should be serious and not fun.
To them I say "Bah, humbug".
Patrick Ford
> i think they have now
Of course we have. It was blatantly transparent, and quite obvious to
everyone.
Maybe I mean it was transparently blatant.
--
Patrick Ford
Auckland, New Zealand
E. Scrooge
I can't seem to recall your name.
Perhaps I should've left some of your post to help my poor old memory, and
make this easier for any other poor bugger that happens to see it.
E. Scrooge
ChrissyR
> Did he?....
Yes.
> hmm.....
Why the uncertainty.
> What were we talking about again?...
We are talking about THAT thing. Isn't it obvious?
> Funny that, I can't seem to recall your name.
I can - I never have problems remembering my name.
> Perhaps I should've left some of your post to help my poor old memory, and
> make this easier for any other poor bugger that happens to see it.
You could have - but if you decide not to then I will accept that you did what
you thought was best. I will accept that you knew what you were doing.
You know who - or do you.
E. Scrooge
ChrissyR <C...@home.gen.nz> wrote in article
<9791176...@shelley.paradise.net.nz>...
> E. Scrooge wrote
>
> > Did he?....
>
> Yes.
Right you are then.
> > hmm.....
>
> Why the uncertainty.
I forgot.
> > What were we talking about again?...
>
> We are talking about THAT thing. Isn't it obvious?
If you say so.
> > Funny that, I can't seem to recall your name.
>
> I can - I never have problems remembering my name.
That's the main thing then.
> > Perhaps I should've left some of your post to help my poor old memory,
and
> > make this easier for any other poor bugger that happens to see it.
>
> You could have - but if you decide not to then I will accept that you did
what
> you thought was best. I will accept that you knew what you were doing.
That's more than I could do.
> You know who - or do you.
Sure. Weren't you out a few weeks back delivering all the presents?
E. Scrooge
ChrissyR
> ChrissyR wrote
> > E. Scrooge wrote
> > > Did he?....
> > Yes.
> Right you are then.
Aren't I always.
> > > hmm.....
> > Why the uncertainty.
> I forgot.
No I know why you want the bits left on the posts - it is so YOU are reminded
what YOU said.
> > > What were we talking about again?...
> > We are talking about THAT thing. Isn't it obvious?
> If you say so.
I do.
> > > Funny that, I can't seem to recall your name.
> > I can - I never have problems remembering my name.
> That's the main thing then.
I know.
> > > Perhaps I should've left some of your post to help my poor old memory, and
> > > make this easier for any other poor bugger that happens to see it.
> > You could have - but if you decide not to then I will accept that you did what
> > you thought was best. I will accept that you knew what you were doing.
> That's more than I could do.
Well - it is good that someone (namely me) has faith in you, even if you do not.
> > You know who - or do you.
> Sure. Weren't you out a few weeks back delivering all the presents?
Damn you - I thought I'd disguised myself better than that.
Chrissy.
Lino P. Stavole
ChrissyR wrote in message <97912993...@shelley.paradise.net.nz>...
E. Scrooge
> E. Scrooge wrote
> > ChrissyR wrote
> > > E. Scrooge wrote
>
> > > > Did he?....
> > > Yes.
> > Right you are then.
> Aren't I always.
Could be.
> > > > hmm.....
> > > Why the uncertainty.
> > I forgot.
> No I know why you want the bits left on the posts - it is so YOU are
reminded
> what YOU said.
I wouldn't have known that.
> > > > What were we talking about again?...
> > > We are talking about THAT thing. Isn't it obvious?
> > If you say so.
> I do.
So it would seem.
> > > > Funny that, I can't seem to recall your name.
> > > I can - I never have problems remembering my name.
> > That's the main thing then.
> I know.
I thought you would.
> > > > Perhaps I should've left some of your post to help my poor old
memory, and
> > > > make this easier for any other poor bugger that happens to see it.
> > > You could have - but if you decide not to then I will accept that you
did what
> > > you thought was best. I will accept that you knew what you were
doing.
> > That's more than I could do.
> Well - it is good that someone (namely me) has faith in you, even if you
do not.
Could well be.
> > > You know who - or do you.
> > Sure. Weren't you out a few weeks back delivering all the presents?
> Damn you - I thought I'd disguised myself better than that.
> Chrissy.
Better luck at Easter then, when you hand out the eggs. LOL
E. Scrooge
Wascal Wabbit
Elmer Thud
Wascal Wabbit <bu...@nuts.com> wrote in article
<i04r5t43ghjb85nk0...@4ax.com>...
> Definitely
Here pesky little wabbit, come to Elmer. hehehe....
We must be wery wery quiet, if we're to get this sneeky wabbit...
Elmer Thud
Brian M. Harmer
"Lino P. Stavole" <crea...@famvid.com> wrote in message
news:NYQ56.32429$456.4...@news-east.usenetserver.com...
> I've never enjoyed reading redundant information from people's earlier
post.
> If I felt that I needed to refer to it then I expanded the thread and
looked
> for the info I needed. I thought that I'd lead by example.
Redundant information is not required. Just leave enough to make
sense. Many of us delete posts once we've read them, so "expanding
the thread" is not an option.