The special exhibition on the Silk Road at the Art Science Museum was ending its run, so I decided to visit it yesterday, before only the Genghi Khan and Shipwrecked Treasures exhibitions were left.
The verdict? Do not, absolutely do NOT visit the Art Science Museum unless the $30 (incl. booking fee) admission fee is worth the special exhibitions you’re intending to see.
The special exhibitions were good, but the permanent exhibits at the museum are virtually non-existent. Excerpts from the the website’s description include:
“The permanent exhibition..takes visitors on a journey inside the creative process across three unique spaces: Curiosity, Inspiration and Expression.
Curiosity is an arrival gallery that encourages guests to ponder the very nature of how we define art and science, what it means to us, and how it influences our world.
Inspiration is an interactive gallery that celebrates the flashpoint of ingenuity powering the worlds of both art and science.
Expression is a dynamic multi media gallery providing an emotional, impassioned demonstration of the power of human beings to harness inspiration to make the world a better place.
- 3 galleries spanning two levels with nearly 800 square meters of exhibition space
- Your journey begins along a meditative path of Floating Stairs which invites you to question the relationships between art and science”
What all this really means is this: the Curiosity Gallery is just the lift landing. Inspiration is essentially a large room with several computer terminals with touch screens for visitors to ‘play’ with. It will occupy visitors for maybe 15 minutes at best. Expression is where visitors watch a video featuring famous scientists who were also artists and vice versa, such as Leonardo da Vinci. One of the two levels is the staircase – and nothing but a staircase, save for a few pictures of past inventors whom few would recognise anyway.
The uninspiring ‘Inspiration’ gallery.
Whatever examples the museum listed to illustrate the relationship between Art and Science were poor, with da Vinci being one of few relevant examples. For example, how are the Kung Ming lanterns considered art? Furthermore, the museum fails to put forth a convincing argument for how art and science are related –the interactive media simply tell visitors of the scientific aspects of the examples given without linking the science back to the art. Probably mainly because the art-science relationship in those examples were non-existent and highly tenuous at best.
And they used American-English. Tsk.
Frankly, I was impressed by the museum until I reached the permanent exhibit levels, as I’d started with the special exhibits. Even the museum shop didn’t belie the true quality of the museum as it had some interesting things on sale:
Warhol-esque mint boxes and astronaut pens. One is clearly representative of art and the other of science. So that they’re in the same shop is representative of art-science?
It’s a pity the museum content is such a disappointment, as it’s an architecturally interesting building which I’d be quite happy to pitch to visitors and locals alike.
The interesting thing about the falling water was that one could get wet sitting outside, depending on the wind direction.
The surroundings of the Art Science Museum are great too. It started out a bit hazy.
But cleared up as the day progressed.
Note the waves on the water’s surface
Check out the reflection of Fullerton Hotel and the surrounding buildings
I love the way the stairs look
0 comments:
Post a Comment