The DesignJournal PP 77–98 VOLUME 13,ISSUE1 , and forthosewhoseektobridge designprocess incontemporary contexts andnarrativesas aguidetothe design considerationsof concepts, a preliminary mapofthekeyinterpretive experience. Thisarticleconcludes with the institutionofmuseumandvisitors’ desires ofpotentialuserstoreshape both problem andconnectingwiththeneeds designers’ creative role inframingthe Tongarewa, thisarticle considersthe the MuseumofNewZealand/Te Papa environment. Byexaminingthecaseof increasingly audience-centred its contributiontointerpretation inthe changing role ofexhibitiondesignand ABSTRACT University ofOtago,Dunedin,NewZealand Noel Waite Freelance designer, UKandNewZealand Alice Lake-Hammond Knowledge Gap Bridging the Exhibition Design: PUBLISHERS DIRECTLY FROMTHE REPRINTS AVAILABLE This articleconsidersthe LICENSE ONLY PERMITTED BY PHOTOCOPYING PRINTED INTHEUK © BERG2010

77 The Design Journal DOI: ???????????? 78 The Design Journal Alice Lake-HammondandNoelWaite a range of traditional trades and media, artists, graphic, industrial industrial graphic, artists, media, and trades traditional of range a has been a catholic occupation, drawing on versatile innovators from contrast, by their design, Exhibition role. architectonic their relinquished establish correspondingly they and organizations, parent professional through identity architectural their from themselves As distance to sought field. design graphic and of professions the the of differentiation and segmentation the seen also has standards, quality of promotion and definition positive the alongside which, century twentieth the throughout design of ization exhibition design. This can, in part, to be attributed to the profession­ devoted been has attention little how surprising is it education, the fields of design and museology both and theirtroubled respective practitioners. has that issue an – context cultural of of interpretation expense the at artefacts of form the with preoccupation a was collections isolated these of result Museum tangible less Albert a However, & today. Victoria the in found be can legacy physical its study,and critical for teaching a of development approach the was this to Central industry. and craft art, between gap the education in terms of the South Kensington system sought to bridge Introduction museums, narrative KEYWORDS: exhibitiondesign,interpretation, user-centred design, one worthyoffurthercriticalconsideration. be seenasanimportantculturalrole fordesignand democratic participationinitsdisseminationcan knowledge andsatisfyinganincreasing desire for in bridgingthegapbetweengrowing expert audiences. the gapbetweenexpertknowledgeandpublic its European counterparts. European its behind lagged it that was design British of assessment critical the gested that it was a defining moment in terms of design criticism, and sug ­ also has However,production.(1988) Greenhalghcultural and industrial of exhibition nationalist the for forum international vital a initiated and commodities, viewed people way the changed artificial to a triumphant Crystal Palace and subversion of the natural with the was expansion to today’s shopping mall. Paxton’s imperial inflation of the humble glasshouse and spectacular, production popular,and ephemeral drawn been have parallels and industrial efflor the of of display escence This consumption. mass of emergence the + This creative interdisciplinary role fordesign Given this relationship between museums and design history and with the culmination of the Industrial Revolution and and Revolution Industrial the of culmination the with design of origin the locates that history design a for point starting conventional a is Exhibition Industrial 1851 The 1 The resultant reorganization of design design of reorganization resultant The al­ ­ to what Greenblatt (1991) terms ‘wonder’ terms (1991) Greenblatt what to recourse little is there and covers the within concealed is content intellectual the (where of exhibition the in problem wicked a Turnbull which he was Alexander responsible for safeguarding. Having identified Zealand’s New of holdings precious and rare the democratize to of ability the recognized perceptively aimed at changing existing situations into preferred ones’ (1996). He Simon’s dictum that ‘Everyone Herbert designs demonstrates who ably devises but library,courses research of national action a of head in France and Italy’, is written from the perspective of an experienced (2000) article in import most and, exhibitions, of communication and organization the both make and systematize know­ collect, to was it job whose librarian, this hib field ofdesignpracticeandasiteworthyfurtherinquiry. dynamic a both design exhibition make factors these All audiences. prospective and current of requirements greater the to that given be required attention have expenditure public justify to numbers exhibition planning process. Lastly, political calls for increased visitor of exhibitions has led to the growing participation of designers in the approach to communication design that promotes a variety of of variety a promotes that interactions audience design communication to approach sophisticated more a required has elitism of charges in to The response knowledge institutionalized designers. of democratization exhibition the for for demand responsibilities and opportunities design with specific cultural references at both the exhibition and and level. institutional exhibition the both at references cultural specific with design exhibition. public and process planning, to approach coordinated a demands and it is this common ground of , designer and audience that problem are ultimately addressed in terms of a physical gallery space, communication exhibition of particular a of aspects knowledge All audience. their intimate have to likely more also are they museum particular a within employed are designers exhibition the trade If shows. with case the is as client-oriented simply than collaborative and collegial more be to tended has of form the in experts content with relationship their addition, In teams. multi-disciplinary meant project-oriented in working also to accustomed are have designers exhibition conservation and preservation of requirements complex the with combined exhibitions individual to relevance their and interior designers as well as architects. The diversity of skills and the problem of a ‘minds-on’ exhibition, and to explore exhibition exhibition explore to and exhibition, ‘minds-on’ a of problem the of heart the to author the accompanying into reader the seduce to carefully framed as a pilgrimage. This narrative strategy is calculated It is revealing that one of the most insightful articles about ex about articles insightful most the of one that revealing is It Changes in the field of museology of field the in Changes ition design was written not by a designer but a librarian. For For librarian. a but designer a by not written was design ­ition ledge public, implicitly recognized the importance of design in design of importance the recognized implicitly public, ledge antly, encouraging receptiveness to new ideas. Jim Traue’s Jim ideas. new to receptiveness encouraging ­antly, Design Issues, ‘Seducing the Eye: Exhibition Design 4 The increasing technological complexity and cost and complexity technological increasing The 3 and seeks to integrate intelligent information intelligent integrate to seeks and 2 have also provided greater greater provided also have 5 ), his articulate essay is is essay articulate his ), Exhibition Design:BridgingtheKnowledgeGap ­

79 The Design Journal 80 The Design Journal Alice Lake-HammondandNoelWaite duty tocommunicatewithits audience: its and society in role museum’s the of acknowledgement greater a include to broadened was definition this 1974 By 2009). (ICOM), cultural and scientific significance’ (International Council of Museums purpose of study, education and enjoyment, collections of objects of the for displays, and conserves which institution permanent ‘any as (ICOM) Museums’ evolving definitionof of a museum. In 1961Council ICOM described a museum International the in reflected is This 2005). (Marstine, heritage’ cultural own those their of controlgiving represented ‘decolonizing, in role museum’s the theory about museum New explicit is part. a are objects these which of cultures living and peoples the with engagement active more to to way given approach audience-centred more exhibiting. a Passive custodial preservation of objects of in museums has been favour has in knowledge of challenged keeper exclusive the as role the century, museum’s twentieth the of half latter the over However, content and expert. curator collection the of needs the serving to limited been has design while layout, exhibition the determined traditionally the entire exhibition process exhibition entire the and interpretation to design’scontribution of and designers role exhibition changing the considers article this analysis, critical of lack both the museological and design literature. design and museological the both in unexamined largely remained has theory and practice design of significance the process, exhibition museum the in place a secured now has designer the that signals contribution his While Exhibitions. in Designer’ Exhibition the of Role ‘The on exhibition design as a relatively young profession (2002) in his chapter describes Mayrand Yves acknowledgement. little recently,received until has, process exhibition the to design of value century,the last the over considerably evolved have exhibitions museum Although Design +Museums provide acognitivemapbutnottopredetermine theroute. goal is to entice people to explore and share in their discoveries – to the common Their owners. storeby curator, or they designers be authors, established patterns the of sense make to willing are who audience engaged an requires still exhibition any that importantly, morebut, narrative, linear singular a with a not is exhibition an that designer’smantra the Traueunderstood alike. stores boutique provincial and museums international by applied principles design age. herit­ cultural of preservation the for storehouses and knowledge of museum environment. which which service of society institution non-profit permanent a making, is museum A Museums have historically been regarded solely as institutions institutions as solely regarded been historically have Museums 8 Collection objects and the availability of display space have have space display of availability the and objects Collection acquires , conserves, conserves, , and its development, and open to the public, 7 in the increasingly audience-centred audience-centred increasingly the in researches, communicates researches, The Manual of Museum of Manual The 6 In response to this this to response In in the in , and and , process –from concepttoconstruction. exhibition contemporary the of stages all in participation active to has role designer’s the museum’sfromthe evolved of servant technical intentions curatorial practice, In museums. contemporary by it made has faced problems communication 2005) complex the for 2001, suitable eminently (Buchanan, systems and of orders interactions complex more to symbols and objects on focus a from for the collection and research of the exhibition’s content, but but content, exhibition’s the of in research and collection the for responsible still is curator exhibition An interpretive.’ fundamentally subject to multiple interpretations, but the very act of presentation is is present exhibits information the just not endeavour: interpretive displaying collections, exhibition can now be viewed as an eminently of matter straightforward seemingly a ‘Once visitors: to information meaningful communicating on emphasis more and object the on in explains shar in involved more and knowledge of interpretations diverse to open minoradditionsin2007,thisdefinitionstillstandstoday.With ledge, the contemporary exhibition process has become a collab­ a processbecome exhibition has contemporary the ledge, 1995). Where once the curator was the sole keeper of expert know­ (Wallace, truths’ universal than rather interpretations particular are exhibitions that acknowledging towards ‘trend accompanying an is the traditional absolute reliance on institutional scholarship and there process necessary to produce challenging new museum exhibitions. research creative wider the of part as but communication of terms in simply not design, of significance the to given been has little attention correspondingly analysis, critical much to subject been have While developments in museum theory, policy and curatorial practice exhibition’sinterpretationsthe own of their form and with, message. designers to ensure that the exhibition audience can access, interact throughout the 20 the throughout grown has and opportunity this to enthusiastically responded has practice design Exhibition themselves. audience the increasingly, ative effort involving curators, designers, educators, technicians and, Museum’, William TramposchMuseum’, William the (1998)outlines the specificlocalneed Reinventing Papa: ‘Te In museum. national Zealand’s New of and exhibition designers were instrumental in reshaping the concept of design the Zealand/TeNew Tongarewa,of Papa Museum by the architectswhere exemplified best perhaps is shift paradigm This Concept toConcrete inAotearoa NewZealand ­creas The institution of the museum has thus become increasingly increasingly become thus has museum the of institution The Council ofMuseums(ICOM),2009)[authors’italics]. Greater community awareness and involvement has also replaced material evidence of man and his environment. his and man of evidence material enjoyment, and education study, of purpose the for exhibits, ing these with a variety of public audiences. As Lisa Roberts Roberts Lisa As audiences. public of variety a with these ­ing ingly draws on the interpretive abilities of communication communication of abilities interpretive the on draws ­ingly there is less focus less is there (1997) , Narrative to Knowledge From th century. The evolution of the design discipline discipline design the of evolution The century. 9 (International (International Exhibition Design:BridgingtheKnowledgeGap or ­

81 The Design Journal 82 The Design Journal Alice Lake-HammondandNoelWaite local culturalcontext (Hunt,1998). complex this addressing with struggled practitioners international (MoNZPO), Office Project 1990). According to one of the assessors, those involving significant Zealand New of (Museum future’ and will in a recognisable way reflect our cultures – our collective memory of expectations the satisfy must Zealand Zealand, the expectation New of was plainly principle stated founding that a ‘[t]he as Museum biculturalism of New acknowledging challenge. While architectural key a as 1990) (MoNZPO), Office Project Zealand New of (Museum significance’ spiritual its and environment natural the with belief Maori of integration ‘the stressed again One Two).(VolumeVolume studies technical of volume 156-page a and One) (Volume context its and site the on information general of up made brief two-volume substantial more a with providedwere They 1990. in round second the to through progressed 10 possible a of 5 only stage, first the in entrants 37 the Of 1989). (Anon., identity’ means for each to contribute effectively to a statement of the nation’s providingthe and heritage cultural and tradition mainstreamsof two the country, recognising the mana country,the recognisingthe natureof bicultural ‘expressthe to ability conceptual the possessed the on who team design and architect premised an of but design, was a of not selection competition architectural The (ECP). Plan the taxonomic compartmentalization of the traditional museum museum 2002). traditional the (Kirshenblatt-Gimblett, of compartmentalization taxonomic the than malls shopping and exhibitions industrial international of acle spect­ competing morethe owed to that forum a in identity national explore would that proposed was museum national new a 1980s, mid- the in economy market deregulated a protected to a state welfare from social restructuring economic radical a on embarked Zealand New as Just half-century. subsequent the in museums of was built in 1936 and the changing attitudes to, and under­ for a new building to replace the inadequate National Museum which pebu Associates Ralph of Appelbaum appointment the and competition architectural national inter an involving processes, design independent but parallel two initiated Board museum the Associates, Boston & Johnson with Verner E. firm consultation planning After 1). Figure (see 1988 in established was Board Development Project a industries, related declining. that process remarkable began by identifying the problem of why museum attendances werea shaped (1998) international larger community’ a to museum and needs, bicultural to trends, national to responding and listening of process ‘the explained, Tramposch Zealand, New In civilized.’ being of mark a as cited is troupe, and of a national folklore, particularly as legitimated by a national museum these claims, is fundamental to bolster the politics to of culture: institutions the possession and own, your of “folklore” a history, a past, Heritage, and Museums After researching international best practice in museums and and museums in practice best international researching After Kirshenblatt-Gimblett argued, ‘Having a ‘Having argued, Kirshenblatt-Gimblett 11 to develop an Exhibitions Concept Concept Exhibitions an develop to 10 In In 12 and significance of each of the of each of significance and Destination Culture: Tourism, Tourism, Culture: Destination New Zealanders that it that Zealanders New all stand­ ings ­ marae the of siting the by established sea and harbour the to relationship assertive The 3. and 2); Figure (see division curatorial fourfold the architectural precedence to the tripartite institutional framework over and connected the two separated parts of the museum; that 2. The decision to give encounter and mediation of space a Watea, Papa or Verandah Great The 1. design: JASMAX’s of distin features three guishing identified Hunt John Judge concept. winning the as matrix for the inevitable re-designinevitable morethe of for availability matrix the with clearly flexible a provided plan, exhibition an of development independent and ultimately winning response to the complex brief which, given the New Zealand architectural firm JASMAX’sfirm architectural Zealand New 14 on a promontory (Hunt, 1998, p. 16). This was an intelligent, 13 design was selected was design Exhibition Design:BridgingtheKnowledgeGap ­ Te Papa. Museum ofNewZealand, process ofthenew competition anddesign exhibition planning, The and Figure 1 Te PapaTongarewa). Museum ofNewZealand MU000477/001/0002, and Instructions;01.1990 1 GeneralInformation Documents andVolume Competition: Stage2 (Architect Selection competition documentation Te Papa’s architectural and Historyassetoutin Maori, Environment, departments ofArt, The fourcuratorial Figure 2

83 The Design Journal 84 The Design Journal Alice Lake-HammondandNoelWaite 1998a, p.19). Pete Bossley;Bossley, Jasmax DesignDirector cultural model(diagramby substituted atripartite concept planthat firm JASMAX’s winning New Zealandarchitectural Figure 3 constraint, in the knowledge it would be addressed by the ECP.the by addressed be would it knowledge the in constraint, practical a to division curatorial fourfold the relegating involved This design. the in biculturalism embedding thereby constraint, radical the as land) common (the Papatuanuku and treaty) of right by land the to discovery), first the of to right belonging by (those land Tiriti Tangata belonging (those Whenua Tangata encompassing division tripartite institutional the adopted JASMAX 3), (Figure TePapa for the of design winning their purpose of terms In designed’. primary being system the or object with deal that those are radical ‘[t]he constraints where constraints, ‘practical’ and distinction ‘radical’ important an between makes also He problem. design the ing fram in constraints key identifying of importance the explains and legislators, and users, clients, designers, as constraints generators internal of key into identifies He taken be solution’. the must forming which when account ‘issues means he which by straints’, and museologicalfunctionwithinthebrief. multiculturalism biculturalism, of tensions the reconciled JASMAX (2006) provides a useful model of design problems that explains how problem of a new bicultural national museum that responded to to responded that changes within museology.museum national bicultural new a of problem the framed JASMAX how of terms in significant proved that design of a separately developed ECP, it is the second feature of JASMAX’s uncertainty critical the Given parameters. exhibition internal defined living institution. It will reach out to its audience . audience its to out reach will It institution. living dynamic, a is result ‘[t]he Appelbaum, to according and, JASMAX and visitorexperience. representationbicultural balanced of expense the at museum the of functions preservation and collection the to pre-eminence give not does that design user-centred strongly a as regarded be also can Lawson (2006) discusses design problems in terms of ‘con of terms in problems design discusses (2006) Lawson The ECP was approved three months after the appointment of of appointment the after months three approved was ECP The 15 In How Designers Think, Bryan Lawson . . and encourage and . 16 It ­ ­ fault line (Figure 5), which aligned with the initiating tripartite primary tripartite initiating the with aligned which 5), (Figure line fault symbolizing the concept of wall Papatuanuku and the bisecting nearby earthquake a was Watea Papa the of place In cultures. two the together drawing and separating both building, the ‘cleaved’ that space wedge a into internalized was place meeting outdoor gesture an of architectural symbolic The Government. Audit the by Management imposed Value strict a and ECP the accommodate to years two next the over concept design their developed JASMAX (Papa place proposal. competition meeting their in expressionarchitectural an Watea)as and concourse entry symbolic a providing separated the Tangata Whenua and Tangata Tiritiri exhibition spaces, also provided a It significant challenge tohistory. the architects, who had physically Zealand New Aotearoa the bicultural a enable of to presentation History and Maori between particularly adjacency, of areas and zones the the by between supported was departments Dialogue curatorial compartments. institutional functional by ensure exhibition experiences were holistic and not overly determined to intention clear a signalled requirements,it curatorial differing their and collections individual of integrity the acknowledged this While curatorial four exhibition spaces oriented around a central core or the of translation sharedintegrated dedicated, and into departments) collections (two the resolved More it 1990). Anon., in pragmatically, (quoted past’ the of museums traditional the in than ways varied more and new in museums use to people ihonui (Figure 4). Exhibition Design:BridgingtheKnowledgeGap 1998, p.21). reproduced inGorbey, Te PapaTongarewa; Museum ofNewZealand MU000361/002/0003, Plan; circa1990–1992; (Exhibitions Conceptual a centralcore orihonui spaces orientedaround integrated exhibition (two departments)and of dedicated,shared departments bymeans the fourcuratorial Plan (ECP)accommodated The ExhibitionsConcept Figure 4

85 The Design Journal 86 The Design Journal 1998b, p.23). Pete Bossley;Bossley, by JasmaxDesignDirector a bisectingwall(diagram ‘cleaved’ thebuildingand of anewwedgespacethat plan bytheincorporation its architectural concept ECP, JASMAXre-designed theintroduction ofthe With Figure 5 Alice Lake-HammondandNoelWaite It also demonstrated the value of designers’ creative involvement in involvement creative designers’ of value the demonstrated also It balanced that understanding. and knowledge local with practice best international process design reflective a indicates context local of subject the been intense debate, the designers’ explicit engagement with the specific has mandate to bicultural degree its the achieved While it be. which could museum a what redefined doing so in and numbers visitor declining of problem the and irrelevance institutional of charges addressed successfully TePapa audiences. central issue of the relationship between museums and their diverse Aotearoa the in the addressing towards way some went innovations that context Zealand New design the acknowledge not does other functions of the museum was valid, was museum the of functions other the with integration its by compromised was art of display the that and museum national a for iconic sufficiently not was architecture the that Criticism predicted. numbers the times three of million), 3.5 population a (from visitors million 2 expectations: all exceeded operation of year first its in results The practices. conventional bound by being without museology of field the within professional of developments account took and engagement, audience of level visitors’ experience within it. By careful and considered framing framing problem considered the and of careful By it. within experience visitors’ hib­ ex­ situated culturally a through internally and architecture through continue toshapeit. who visitors the museum’s and identity the national and culturefor with engagement platform radical more a provided of status building, symbolic the the of expense the at come have may it while the architects to resolve the and internal constraints, external which, enabled ‘wedge’ the of generator design additional generator.The dev The role of designers in the design of Te Papa, both externally externally both TePapa, of design the in designers of role The ition concept, reshaped both the institution of the museum and museum the of institution the both reshaped concept, ition ­elop ments in museology, in ­ments 17 that took account of critical and theoretical theoretical and critical of account took that 18 the design provided for a greater greater a for provided design the 19 but we would argue argue would we but Professionalism +Audience: potential users. of desires and needs the with connecting and problem the framing who we are and our physical world . world physical our and are we who about tell to stories powerful ‘Wehave it: put himself Appelbaum as powerful would be capable of adapting to the changing needs sacrifice of its users. Or to that environment willingness working integrated an for a symbolism architectural entailed above, suggested com­ the to attached significance the demonstrates Plan Concept tions Exhibi­ the develop itself. to Associates Appelbaum design Ralph of choice The exhibition of professionalization the and processes design of orientation the in changes by both possible made has been This interpretation. exhibition dynamic for settings contextual in design of role con key the demonstrates Papa Te of example The approach to design that facilitates engagement with critical critical with to critical institutional engagement constraints of collections and conservation and facilitates respond that exhibitions to contributed has that discourse museological design to interdisciplinary approach integrated An collections. growing their for ilities responsibincreasinglycomplex had ­ who curators by born load the redistributed and access and preservation between gap perennial the bridged both museums by faced problem communication the into diverseexhibitionexperiences. and presentation of their collections and other intangible information interpretation translation, the on emphasis more place increasingly but heritage cultural research and preserve collect, still Museums (1999). ones’ traditional more alongside ferment can ideas radical ‘where places multi-dimensional, and multi-faceted more become new this In mid-1970s. the collaborative environment, in Appelbaum suggests that museums have emerge to began that exhibitions the increasingly audience-centred, interpretive approach to museum focused and narrative-driven museum exhibition design aligned with people- to Appelbaum’scommitment 1997). Gladstone, in (quoted you’ve been in fantasy-based leisure, such as a theme park or movie’ issues and values, things you don’t get a chance to talk about when quoted inAnon.,1992) public experience. (Graeme Shadwell, Te Papa Project disappointing Director, a and museum, deficient a in results approach a into fit pre they so compromised be to have functions public complex of out and museological critical the requirements,whether briefed or arises functional, form a whose building museum we’re effective cost whether is question key The The involvement of designers such as Appelbaum in reframing reframing in Appelbaum as such designers of involvement The cept development and the determination of culturally situated situated culturally of determination the and development ­cept municative function of exhibitions, which, as Graeme Shadwell Graeme as which, exhibitions, of function municative conceived exotic architectural shell. Invariably the latter latter the Invariably shell. architectural exotic ­conceived . . I want people to talk about talk to people want I . Exhibition Design:BridgingtheKnowledgeGap

87 The Design Journal 88 The Design Journal Alice Lake-HammondandNoelWaite in all stages of the exhibition process and, although the curator curator the although and, process exhibition the of stages all in participate actively can designer exhibition the so doing In (1999). materials’ and surfaces and graphics and colours select ultimately and frameworks narrative develop then, ideas, and the test subject curator the the with of knowledge curator’s the in display. ‘immerse of to themselves designer point the requires the this at Appelbaum, meet to According responsibilities exhibition Their engaging and experience. dynamic a into it translate and content exhibition the interpret to curator the with works designer exhibition gatherer and custodian provides them with such knowledge, and the interesting and appropriate manner. The curator’s position as content an in information this convey to ability the and subject exhibition the A formulated attention. of understanding deep audience’s a from comes concept exhibition successful the narratives, engage and attract to experiential designed and diverse into matured have exhibition exhibitions design, of of discipline emergent the presentation by Assisted the content. to approach designerly more a in and process, the increased interpretive function content of museums has resulted exhibition the to choice of collection objects remains an integral part of the exhibition responsibility curator’s the While displays. object static just than more into evolved museum have exhibitions societies, developed most in experienced expectations audience and imperatives commercial increasing the by Influenced Bridging theGap interaction and organization design. graphic, of fields of fields integrated more the and design, architectural and industrial traditional the encompasses design Exhibition are conceived broadly in terms of purpose, presentation and people. walls ofthemuseum. as an important cultural role for design that extends well beyond the seen be can dissemination its in increasing participation democratic an for desire satisfying and knowledge expert growing between its and audience. This creative intellectual content role for design in bridging the the gap between link communicative the construction, forming to and concept from 1989), (Buchanan, production’ of . idea or thought the ‘intelligence, the providing together, process exhibition the binds that vision holistic a provides design way, this in applied When interaction. audience for allows that development exhibition organizing and information exhibition translating of means a offers but presentation, of method a provides only apply not to Design able context. given and a in skills appropriately them design of variety a in proficient be must all (Buchanan, 2005). Rather that than being specialists, exhibition designers recognise ‘we as information’ well-communicated on dependent are activities human design information of importance the visual integrates it com­ that way the in design exhibition to significant munication and the design of material objects. It also highlights also It objects. material of design the and munication 20 Interaction design is particularly

.

. that organises all levels levels all organises that . responsibilities. A modeloftheexhibitiondesignprocess, mappinginterpretive designconsiderationsand respective roles and Figure 6 development ofsuccessfulexhibitionprogrammes. the in instrumental is that professionals, museum other alongside collaboration, their is it responsibilities, separate have designer and of interpretive exhibition design within museums as a means of of means a as museums encouraging productive dialogue between within designers and curators to design exhibition interpretive of exhibition experience. This article concludes with a preliminary the outline in visitors engage and attract to understanding communicative the and skills technical the vision, the providing audience, exhibition the and information curatorial the between gap knowledge the ing bridg for responsible is designer exhibition the of role interpretive be The will 6). (Figure it audience exhibition how the by of interpreted and received awareness an and information exhibition the of communication coherent and clear the includes This audience. its designer’s main concern is the relationship between this content and exhibition the content, exhibition the of knowledge expert retainsan in curator the fluent While is (2001). languages’ who exhibition and someone technical both by language with performed as be role, should interpretive interpreters, ‘primary the that argues He process. planning exhibition the to value immense of is visitor the designer’s position between the academic source of information and In his book Designing Exhibitions, Giles Velarde suggests that the 21 Exhibition Design:BridgingtheKnowledgeGap ­

89 The Design Journal 90 The Design Journal Alice Lake-HammondandNoelWaite specifically identified andgeneralaudiences. for development narrative and contextual with alignment and space to ensure a good fit between collection artefacts and available gallery considerable is there scope for designers to exhibitions, engage with curators in concept individual development of multicultural terms In Zealand’s increasing diversity. for New allowing also Aotearoa while identity, bicultural communicating for solutions design Concept Exhibitions provided and nation the of complexities cultural the addressed Plan resulting The space. architectural its within developments nation’s cultural the future accommodate reflect and would diversity cultural which direction, conceptual strong a document and devise to Team the Development enabled Concept museum’s expertise design interpretive RAA’s redevelopment. museum’s the shaped plan concept initial an of design the where strategy design guiding a of value the demonstrates redevelopment Tein Papa’srole architectonic (RAA) Associates’ Appelbaum Ralph 2002). Lord, and (Lord goals’ programme the meet will design the how as well as articulated are layout general and idea the which stage in ‘early the the is This with plan. conceptual begins strong a of development development exhibition contemporary of objects, collection a with began display exhibition the historically, While Concepts meaningful and dynamic increasingly exhibition experiencesforallaudiencegroups. create to narrative and in audience and combination with the interpretive considerations of concept, context content space, of constituents fundamental the explores is and engagement designer audience’s the for exhibition responsible The directly programmes. exhibition engaging of skills of the designer have become indispensable in the development exhibition the whereinterpretativeis the rolecommunication This and information. with visitors of connect variety and a groups audience accommodate diverse to formulated narratives, meaningful develop collaborative the on increasedemphasis an been Therehas design. human-centred or user- of terms in design of discipline the in have con development, exhibition guide to audi continue content Although and discipline. space design integrated more a of in emergence the evolved and function have interpretive increasing elements museum’s the with basic alignment These audience. and content ered throughout the history of the museum: gallery space, collection persev have design exhibition of constituents fundamental Three Interpretive DesignConsiderations integrity. creative,achieve audience-centred conceptual have that exhibitions ­temp ence considerations have become increasingly influential in in influential increasingly become have considerations ­ence ment of strong exhibition concepts, contextual setting and and setting contextual concepts, exhibition strong of ­ment orary exhibition development (Miles (Miles development exhibition ­orary et al et , 1988), as they they as 1988), , ­ the necessarystructure to formulatemeaning: thereforecoherentwill narrative exhibition providewith audience the the designer lends continuity to the whole exhibition (Dean, 1996). A storyline comprehensible a along framework this them, extending by about and learning in visitor the assist will that artefacts lection col the for framework a provides designer exhibition the settings contextual communicative in information and objects arranging By Narratives exhibition. situation opposite could undermine the the subtlety, as and reduce just the impact of a small-scale impenetrable, and confusing being the of to risk the runs context space small the a in match concept big help A curator’s concept. can space particular a of opport unities and limits the of understanding sound A movement. and specific practical constraints and shapes issues of scale, orienta­ imposes which space, gallery the is context interpretive this of ents the From indiv­ experience. own their and meaningful them between establish and relationships objects exhibition apply the to to audience concepts the the enable to knowledge, general and expert the most dynamic interpretive context that bridges the gap between In settings. Design ofEducationalExhibits,Milesetal(1988)explainsthat: contextual strong provide also must exhibitions To communicate complex information effectively, conceptually driven Contexts meaning, rather than viewing it as a series of separate entities. entities. separate of series a as it viewing than rather complete meaning, exhibition’s the discover to visitor strong the A enables contexts. narrative surrounding their and in another display, on one to objects relation the of sense make to audience the allows stories, and while random facts . facts random while and stories, of terms in think We narrative. understood easily and strong a Human memory is best served by the exhibit that is built around determine can designer and curator the collaboration, Through must present his objects he in a coherent and information, informative context. background of the know audience already elite who an scholars to himself restrict to wishes he that be unless must own designer their exhibit the for beyond lesson The little existence. communicate can themselves, by Even under ideal circumstances, the fact remains that objects, The application of a narrative structure to an exhibition design design exhibition an to structure narrative a of application The the helpofsomebroad andunifyingideas.(Milesetal,1988) with facts other to related be can they unless forgotten soon are facts understood poorly and isolated that true generally idual exhibition designer’s perspective, one of the key con­ key designer’sthe exhibition of idual one perspective, . . may be remembered, it is it remembered, be may . Exhibition Design:BridgingtheKnowledgeGap stitu­ The The tion ­ ­

91 The Design Journal 92 The Design Journal Alice Lake-HammondandNoelWaite Conclusion looking. passive than rather story, the with interaction and in context the immersion both encourages participation active This journey. audience’s the probable for and fingerposts as act all routes entrance-ways circulation of of sight-lines the within placement three-dimensional elements, and strategic graphic The panels, interpretive exhibition. artefacts, key the of and ideas objects between larger the connections make to audience the assist to nodes as utilized be can entire these significance, the their on of Depending aspects These discrete it. knowledge. and prior interest to personal their according access exhibition within to patterns audience the circulation enable therefore and entry one weave than gallery a more a is to employ there if often particularly subplots, exhibitions narrative of individual narrative, master audience. wide a reach to ability an its is of structure beauty narrative The implicit (1997). sees’ she or he what about narrative a in constructing is engaged visitor every because interpretation and explains, Roberts As experience unique way. individually an with away same come ‘will visitor the each in narrative the in will visitors engage two no that recognizes designer It the that important understandings. is own interpret their to develop and visitor concept individual exhibition the each encouraging exists, one that implies but story, a audience the tell directly not does design The The then is audience in an narrative. the participant active exhibition to space. its narrative through move to which physically the audience allows with clues visual an exhibition of theatre, traditional set However, unlike a reward. uncover a with audience the provides overwhelm it,tocreate astageforitsperformance’(2002). to not and enhance to content, the – conceal not – reveal to is job with them distracting excess information. As Mayrand explains, ‘[t]he exhibition without designer’s message exhibition the to access audiences allowing successful, more be to tends narrative subtle a fact, In complex. or explicit be to need not does structure Narrative cities and nations. However, focus on the striking architectural architectural striking the on focus However, of nations. lives and cultural cities the to contributors and communicators active to repositories cultural elite from museums of reinvention architectural the to decade last the in devoted been has attention Considerable However, just as museums have moved away from a universal universal a from away moved have museums as just However, narrative designed a performance, stage a as way same the In engaging andinspiring.(Appelbaum, 1999) can construct a narrative that’s not merely comprehensible but a kind of map for others to follow as experience learning own our use visitor’sand the shoes in to ourselves that we don’t understand at first. We put ourselves something explaining of process the by inspired is work [O]ur . . . Out of this experience we 2. 1. Notes of field the that argue would exhibition designisoneplacetheycanreliably befound. we and future, new our inspire seeing and of ways knowledge new integrate us past, help to our communicators understand articulate for need growing a is there knowledge and public audiences. In an information-saturated world, museums, and for those who seek to bridge the gap between expert is offered as a guide to the exhibition design process in contemporary considerations design exhibition interpretive of map preliminary Our participa­ community and knowledge public interdisciplinary for responded to the challenges and opportunities posed by the demand designers, alongside the many other museum workers, have actively and environ culturally of example valuable a is audiences growing their of that expectations diverse narratives the exceed occasionally evocative and accommodate, developing and the framing exhibitions of development, context conceptual in designers exhibition of participation increased The education. and literature museological and design within attention critical and historical further of worthy is by their curators has provided a fertile studio for design innovation that identified and collections their in evidenced as change scientific and cultural to museums of attentiveness The itself. design natureof the in changes anticipated even and mirrored has architects formation in and designers interaction to media, electronic of development the with and, designers interior and product to treasurescurator’s relationship to specific national and broader audiences. international their and addressed be to issues key the of articulation clearer a be can there spaces, problem communication as exhibitions treating By and community museum the museums. with dialogue a in designers contemporary involving in design model exhibition useful a interpretive offers for it argue would we addressed, it design problems the of terms in Papa Te examining by However, literature. museological in press.receivedattention also critical It considerable reflected than in the considerable debate better it this occasioned in was thenowhere popular and Zealand, New Aotearoa in museums experience and understand people many way the changed Papa Te design. exhibition of field the in processes design collaborative holistic, and innovation of history interior an obscure Sydney’s Powerhouse or Modern Tate London’s at obsolescence industrial of re-use adaptive the or Guggenheim Gehry’s Bilbao Frank of forms The evolution of exhibition designers from display artists of the the of artists display from designers exhibition of evolution The See Peter Vergo’s (1989) groundbreaking book Practice: AnIntroduction (2005). book groundbreaking Museology (1989) Vergo’s Peter See criticism’ design to of (Greenhalgh, 1988). history the appropriate for point more starting be a as would it regard it Perhaps design. the of for point history starting a as used often is 1851 reason this ‘For mentally responsive design. Contrary to some stereotypes, stereotypes, some to Contrary design. responsive ­mentally and Janet Marstine’s Marstine’s Janet and New Museum Theory and and Theory Museum New Exhibition Design:BridgingtheKnowledgeGap The New New The tion. ­

93 The Design Journal 94 The Design Journal Alice Lake-HammondandNoelWaite 11. 10. 15. 14. 13. 12. 9. 8. 7. 6. 5. 4. 3. at: http://www.raany.com [accessed 28 February 2009]. 2009]. February 28 also See [accessed http://www.raany.com at: See and Healy (2006). Witcomb See biculturalism. of principle founding a to ment its for scrutiny critical embrace of the intense principles of the of new museology and site its com­ the been has museum Papa Te evolving ICOM’s of CouncilofMuseums(ICOM)(2009). definition seeInternational timeline detailed more a For 2004). SeealsoHooper-Greenhill (2003). (1992)andWitcomb (1995, Bennett see analysis, Foucaultian nuanced more a Lake- For from adapted been has Hammond (2006). article this for material The Notable exceptionsare Dean(1994)andBelcher(1993). uniqueness, toevokeanexaltedattention’(Greenblatt, 1991). of sense arresting an convey to tracks, her or his in viewer the ‘By pp. 150–161;DonovanGreen, pp.162–167. – (1996) Bradford Appelbaum, Ralph and 142–147; pp. Associates, Smolan Carbone Wurman in examples museum See exhibition of cross-fertilization practices. in resulted technology also and has science centres and history, social between history, boundaries natural rigid of dissolution accompanying The final ECP. the included that phase design the in accommodated be not to the bicultural demands of the brief, but the Papa Watea could The first and third were strong symbolic architectural re­ aspx [accessed28February 2009]. www.tepapa.govt.nz/WhatsOn/exhibitions/Pages/TheMarae. Tongarewa. Papa Te | Zealand all for ‘marae a as Marae’. (French,‘The people’ also See 1998). Whiting Cliff kaihautu by conceived was The marae is a Maori communal meeting place that, at Te Papa, documentary GettingtoOurPlace[film],NewZealandOnAir. Structure fly-on-the-wall 1999 Preston’sremarkable Design Gaylene and (1991) Concepts Papa’s Te Examines Zealand New Architecture TePapa: of Designing The Zealand, of issue 1998 February special the (1998); of_New_Zealand [accessed 28 February 2009]. See also French www.jasmax.com/#/Portfolio/Te_Papa_Tongarewa_Museum_ http:// at: Available Papa. Te of portfolio web JASMAX’s See collectives and inanimateobjects. individuals, to attributed be can and prestige and authority to refer to Zealand New in used commonly is Mana aspx?item=raa&style=a [accessed28February2009]. newseum.org/press_info/press_materials/architect/about. I mean the power of the displayed object to stop to object displayed the of power the mean I wonder ap Aplam Associates Appelbaum Ralph Newseum itre] Aalbe t http://www. at: Available [internet]. [internet]. Available at: http:// at: Available [internet]. [internet]. Available Available [internet]. Architecture New New Architecture Museum of New of Museum ; Simeral Simeral ; sp­ onses mit­ Belcher, M. (1993). (1993). M. Belcher, A century: 21st the for museums ‘Designing (1999). R. Appelbaum, Bennett, Tony. (1995). Tony.(1995). Bennett, Anon. (1990). ‘Exhibitions conceptual plan approved’. approved’. plan conceptual ‘Exhibitions (1990). Anon. (1989). Anon. References 21. 20. 19. 18. 17. 16. Anon. (1992). (1992). Anon. Bennett, Tony.Bennett, (2004). Technology Museum, pp.39–52,81–95. Design and (ed.), C. Zhang, In study’. casebook Zealand Te Papa Tongarewa. Smithsonian InstitutionPress. Zealand. 1989 April 4 on Held Meeting its at Board Development Project the by Adopted Tongarewa: 1990. Wellington, NZ: Museum of New Zealand Te Papa Papa Te Zealand New of Museum Tongarewa. NZ: Wellington, 1990. Tongarewa Papa Zealand/Te New [periodical], Politics. London:Routledge. Colonialism. London:Routledge. (Buchanan and Margolin, 1995, xiii), what Buchanan has has See ‘Design Dialogues’ section in Buchanan Waite and Rasmussen (2006). what xiii), elsewhere 1995, termedthefourorders ofdesign(2001,2005). Margolin, and (Buchanan objects, activities and services, and systems and environments’ physical images, and signs world: human-made or artificial the discipline design a of ‘con­ development the with aligned also It and redevelopment oftheartgalleries. Art representation has since been addressed with the expansion ented control andaccesstotheirownculturalheritage. repres ­ those gives museum open the of notion the extension, productioncultural By of 202). framework (p. engagement’ and effectiveand alternative offeringan in succeed reformand civic of project cultural traditional museum’s the of with break diversity-might recognition the democracy, access, museum-of new the of discourses ‘the that argues (2006) Message Kylie temporarily suspendingsomeissues’(2006). by giving structure and direction to thinking while simultaneously design in contradictions inevitable the and complexity massive the handle to design the enables focus selective This activity. of phase or period a for way particular a in situation design the . ‘“framing” Lawson to According See Darke(1978). patterns. settlement European and landform the to response Maori of generators design bicultural the shows also 3 Figure cerned with cerned the conception and planning of all instances of A Concept for the Museum of New Zealand/TeNew Papa of Museum the for Concept A , Vol. 88. Gaoxiong Shi, Taiwan: National Science & Science Taiwan:National Shi, Gaoxiong 88. Vol. ,

Museum of New Zealand/Te Papa Tongarewa Tongarewa Papa Zealand/Te New of Museum 2, July 1992. Wellington, NZ: Museum of New New of Museum NZ: Wellington, 1992. July 2, xiiin i Museums. in Exhibitions Pasts beyond Memory: Evolution, Museums, Evolution, Memory: beyond Pasts The Birth of the Museum: History, Theory, History, Museum: the of Birth The . Wellington: Museum of New New of Museum Wellington: . . . involves selectively viewing selectively involves . Museum Exhibition Planning Exhibition Museum [periodical], Washington, DC: DC: Washington,

1, September September 1, Exhibition Design:BridgingtheKnowledgeGap Museum of of Museum

95 The Design Journal 96 The Design Journal Alice Lake-HammondandNoelWaite Buchanan, R. (2001). ‘Design research and the new learning’. argument, Rhetoric, design: by ‘Declaration (1989). R. Buchanan, Bossley, P. (1998b). ‘Redirect, redevelop’. Bossley, P. (1998a). ‘Concepts in culture’. Buchanan, R. and Margolin, V. (eds) (1995). (1995). (eds) V. Margolin, and R. Buchanan, and future common, The inquiry: as ‘Design (2005). R. Buchanan, Dean, D. (1994). D. Dean, process’. design the and generator primary ‘The (1978). J. Darke, French, A. (1998). ‘Setting standards’. standards’. ‘Setting (1998). A. French, Gladstone, V. (1997). ‘Revolution in the sanctuaries’. sanctuaries’. the in ‘Revolution (1997). V. Gladstone, Healy, C. and Witcomb, A. (eds) (2006). (2006). (eds) A. Witcomb, and C. Healy, (1988). P. Greenhalgh, and I. Karp, In wonder’. and ‘Resonance (1991). S. Greenblatt, Hunt, J. (1998). ‘Process of selection’. selection’. of ‘Process (1998). J. Hunt, (1992). E. Hooper-Greenhill, definitions’. Design ‘Concepts: (1998). K. Gorbey, International Council of Museums (ICOM) (2009). ‘Development of of ‘Development (2009). (ICOM) Museums of Council International University ofChicagoPress, pp.91–109. Criticism (ed.), V. and Theory Margolin, History, In Discourse: Design practice’. design in demonstration and Structure, February1998specialissue,22–23. TeExamines Zealand New Architecture Papa’s Design Concepts Structure, February1998specialissue,18–19. TeExamines Zealand New Architecture Papa’s Design Concepts [CD]. Melbourne: MonashUniversity.[CD]. Melbourne: de Bono, A. and (eds), Futureground Conference VolumeD. 2: Proceed ­ Durling, J., Redmond, In design’. of ground current Issues, 17(4),3–23. of theEDRA9.Washington, DC:EDRA,pp.325–337. Proceedings Research: Design Environmental in Directions New Cambridge, MA:MITPress. Routledge. Structure, February1998specialissue,68–72. TeExamines Zealand New Architecture Papa’s Design Concepts Manchester: ManchesterUniversityPress. 1851–1939 Fairs, World’s and Exhibitions, Great Universelles, 148–162. pp. Institute, Smithsonian DC: Washington, Display. Museum of (eds), D. S. Lavine, Knowledge. London:Routledge. ePress. Culture in Experiments Papa’s Te Examines Zealand Concepts Design Structure, New Architecture Papa: Te of 96(10), 138–142. the museum definition according to ICOM Statutes (2007–1946)’. Structure, February1998specialissue, 14–16. TeExamines Zealand New Architecture Papa’s Design Concepts Museum Exhibition: Theory and Practice. and Theory Exhibition: Museum Exhibiting Cultures: The Poetics and Politics and Poetics The Cultures: Exhibiting . Victoria, Australia: Monash University University Monash Australia: Victoria, . Ephemeral Vistas: The Expositions Expositions The Vistas: Ephemeral February 1998 special issue, Museums and the Shaping of of Shaping the and Museums The Designing of Te Papa: Papa: Te of Designing The The Designing of Te Papa: Papa: Te of Designing The The Designing of Te Papa: The Designing of Te Papa: South Pacific Museums: Museums: Pacific South The Idea of Design of Idea The The Designing Designing The . Chicago, IL: IL: Chicago, . ARTnews London: 20–21. Design ings . . , Lord, B. and Lord, G. D. (1997). Roberts, L. (1997). L. Roberts, (1990). (MoNZPO) ProjectOffice Zealand New of Museum Velarde, G. (2001). (2001). G. Velarde, exhibition Contemporary eye: the ‘Seducing (2000). E. J. Traue, museum’. the Reinventing Papa: ‘Te (1998). J. W. Tramposch, (1996). A. H. Simon, Plan’. Concept Exhibitions the from ‘Excerpts (1991). S. Simeral, Lawson, B. (2006). (2006). B. Lawson, of exploration An design: ‘Interpretive (2006). A. Lake-Hammond, In catalyst’. as museum ‘The (2002). B. Kirshenblatt-Gimblett, (1998). B. Kirshenblatt-Gimblett, Waite, N. and Rasmussen, T.Rasmussen, museum: Waite,and the N. outside ‘Houses (2006). Vergo, Peter(1989).TheNewMuseology.London:Reaktion. Message, K. (2006). (2006). K. Message, B. Lord, In designer’. exhibition the of Y.role Mayrand, ‘The (2002). (2005). (ed.) Janet Marstine, (2002). (eds) D. G. Lord, and B. Lord, Miles, R. S. in collaboration with Alt, M. B., Gosling, D. C., Lewis, B. Project Office. Information and Instructions. General 1: Volume Documents. 2 Stage Competition. Selection design inFranceandItaly’.DesignIssues,16(2),62–74. Museum ManagementandCuratorship,17(4),339–350. MIT Press. Museum Anthropology,15(4),12–18 Smithsonian Institute. Demystified, 4 University ofOtago,Dunedin. practice’. and theory through design exhibition Challenge? Stockholm:Riksutställningar, pp.55–69. Ågren, P-U. and Nyman, S. (eds), Press. Heritage and Museums html [accessed9January2009]. ICOM Journal ofMuseumsAotearoa , 31(1),13–17. housing’. state of future the Designing crescent: Savage Ashgate. Creek, CA:AltaMira,pp.405–424. and Lord, G. D. (eds), Introduction. Malden,MA:Blackwell. Exhibitions. Walnut Creek, CA:AltaMira. London: HMSO. 2 N. and Tout, A. F. (eds) (1988). Oxford: Berg. nd edn.London:Allen&Unwin. [internet]. Available at http://icom.museum/hist_def_eng. at Available [internet]. th edn.Oxford: Elsevier, Architectural Press. . Washington,DC: Narrative. to Knowledge From The Sciences of the Artificial. the of Sciences The How Designers Think: The Design Process Process Design The Think: Designers How einn Exhibitions Designing New Museums and the Making of Culture of Making the and Museums New The Manual of Museum Exhibitions. Walnut . Berkeley, CA: University of California California of University CA: Berkeley, . New Museum Theory and Practice: An Practice: and Theory Museum New The Manual of Museum Management. Wellington: Museum of New Zealand The Design of Educational Exhibits, Destination Culture: Tourism, Tourism, Culture: Destination Museum 2000: Confirmation or The Manual of Museum Museum of Manual The 2 , nd edn. Aldershot: Aldershot: edn. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge, MCApSc thesis, MCApSc Exhibition Design:BridgingtheKnowledgeGap Architect TeAra: .

97 The Design Journal 98 The Design Journal Alice Lake-HammondandNoelWaite comments. their for reviewers anonymous the and Bossley Pete to also Thanks thesis. Masters her on based article Alice this writing in support Lake-Hammond to Bursary Otago Publishing of Postgraduate a University providing the for acknowledge to like would authors The Acknowledgements Website: http://www.design.otago.ac.nz/people/staff/noelwaite.php Email: [email protected] Tel: +6434797511 56, Box PO Otägo, o Dunedin |Ötepoti9056,NewZealandAotearoa. Wänanga Whare Te | Otago of University Waite Noel Dr Website: www.alicelakehammond.com Email: [email protected] Tel: +44(0)7940431169 7095, NewZealand|Aotearoa. Lake-Hammond Alice Addresses forCorrespondence an as exhibition curatoranddesigner.practise to continues also he exhibition and history, culture, print and design design are interests research His theory. and history design teaches he where Zealand, New Otago, of University Dr Noel Waite is a Senior Lecturer in the Design Studies Department, exhibition and design. performance video live video design, music event and film production, branding, and advertising design, website to work on a variety of projects including graphic design, publishing, continues and media, of spectrum broad a across communication UK and New Zealand. She is interested the in between design working as designer freelance interpretation a and is Lake-Hammond Alice Biographies Wurman, R. S. and Bradford, P. (eds) (1996). (2003). A. Witcomb, In messages’. changing media, ‘Changing (1995). M. Wallace, Zurich: GraphisInc. Mausoleum. London:Routledge. Routledge, pp.107–123. (ed.), E. Hooper-Greenhill, , Department of Design Studies | Te Toki a Rata, Rata, a Toki Te | Studies Design of Department , , Foxhill R.D.1, Wakefield, Nelson | Whakatu Whakatu | Nelson Wakefield, R.D.1, Foxhill , Re-Imagining the Museum: Beyond the the Beyond Museum: the Re-Imagining Museum, Media, Message Media, Museum, Information Architects. . London: London: .