Choice of Museum: Singapore Marinetime Gallery
Location: Marina Coastal Drive
Date went: Friday afternoon
Pictures:
My first impression of this museum is that it is very quiet, there is not a lot of people there. Also if it is to be taken with regards to things that is related to this course, I would say there is not much to talk about. Only like the first few parts of the museum is actually related to telling the history of singapore's trade before and after 14th century. The rest is all related to ships.
Layout:
1. Words are very lengthy and very little visual
Especially for the part regarding the history of singapore's trade. The only key visual is some artifacts taken from the fort canning dig, broken pieces of pottery and some examples of what was being traded during the 14th century.
After that segment, the rest of the museum shows the different ships and examples of how singapore as a trading port look like, the ships used and how things are being exported.
2. Layout is somewhat messy as i find it difficult to jump from location to location. I did not really understand how the flow of time is suppose to be.
The museum aim is to make it like a timeline kind of experience, from the 14th century to the present modern day shipping post but because of the layout, I do not quite understand which direction Is the time flowing to.
- Certain exhibits are place in the centre and certain exhibits are linked two ways.
- There's a clear path but certain but of the museums o
3. It does not look like a museum from the outside
- I mistaken it as an office
- No clear signs that it is an exhibit
Learning:
1. Staff
- The staff is only seen at the front, the receptionist. They greeted us and gave me a brief outline on what the museum have.
- Quite hospitable staff
- Perhaps have some staff stationed inside? No questions could be asked about the content inside as the staff is only at the reception of the museum
- The picture in the website show someone guiding the students around and explain the exhibit but when i was there, there was no staff around in the exhibit.
2. Experiential learning
- Tries to make use of experience to let visitors understand.
e.g the walk in container, simulator, pieces of wildlife found in singapore's coastal regions
- Perhaps the use of more experiential learning rather than just throwing the models of ships and some artifacts found in 14th century
- More can be improved for the first part of the museum under the before 14th century past
3. "River story"
- Highlights only the singapore river as the main location for singapore's trade
- Kallang river?
- There are other location for singapore's trade other than the singapore river during the 14th century
- missing informations
4. Proportion of information
- There is more exhibition on the part of after 14th century
- Did not capture the entire timeline of singapore's trading history
- Focus more on the current singapore's port structure and trading
5. Irrelevant exhibit
- I do not need to know about the oil rig
- Useless information and waste of space
- Rethink about the purpose of the museum:
"The gallery is designed for a self-guided experience, learn Singapore's transformation from a small trading post into a premier Global Hub Port and leading International Maritime Centre. Discover stories that led to our growth and our strategy for the future."
Design factor:
Content:
1. Inconsistency in certain areas like the use of singapore and singapura.
- I feel that we should not name this space as Singapore pre 14th century.
2. Stanford Raffles
- The way they portray raffles here is incorrect considering the Raffles lecture. Here the raffles is portrayed to have asked for the signature from the sultan diplomatically but from what i learnt in the lecture, he sort of force the sultan to give singapore to him.
3. The singapore stone
"One possible theory"
This is a museum of facts, why put theories that are not proven true?
4. The malay annals
"Ohhh singapore is mention twice! WOaaah singapore history.. we must include one chunk of space just to talk about this"
- Dying to get attention
- Exaggerating about the history
- SO what if we are mention twice in annals? Can have a brief mention but we do not need to dedicate one chunk of space just to exaggerate this point
- As if we have nothing else to talk about
Exhibits: