from Sharon Macdonald, ed., The Politics of Display:Museums, science, culture. London and New York:Routledge, 1998.

(ib id .: 86)

100 Andrew Barry

comrasr. the relatively und isciplined bod y o f , he visito r has an increasinglyimportan t pan 10 play both in tile co ntemporary science museum and whal iso flen called 'the science cenlre' .l Today, rhc visitor to rhc museum or the sciencecentre is oflen encou raged 10 intemcr or to 'play' with an exhibit . In effect. thevisitor is expected 10 make scientific principles visible 10 themselves th roughthe use o f rouch , sme ll. hearing or the sense o f ph ysical effecu o n their ow nbodies [D urant 199 2; S). In a mann er fo reign to the practice of co ntcmpoflilryexperimenta l science, the body is itself a sou rce o f knowled ge (G rego ry1989, 4).

In exploring Ihe sign ificance: and recent h istory of iureractivir y, this chapterfocuses Oil two conte mporary science mu seum s or science centres; rhc ScienceMuseum in Lon do n and the Cite des Sciences CI dcl'Indusrric at 1..;1 Villcrtc inParis.' In many ways these insritu nons arc unique. In Lo ndon, inre racriviry hasdevelo ped in a museum wh ich has evo lved gradually over a lo ng period of li meand c uries with it 3 co mplex histo rical legacy. This levcy consists nOI onl yo f rich collection of material artefacts, but also a h isto ry of w:lYS o f d isp layingand visiting which goes back 10 rhe niuereemh cenlury. In the first part ofthe chapter I focus o n rhe key role that in teractive devices arc expe cted 10 playin brea king the museum awJ.y from what are regarded as so me of rhe morep roblemaric fenures of rhis pnsr:

By co urrast 10 rhc Science Museum, Ill(' C ile is a recern development . andrhe techno logy of in tcrac rivity is irncgral 10 the insli lulio ns co nceptio n anddesign . Wherc:as rhe Science Museu m houses a \':lSI collectio n of histo ricalanenclS, the Ci te displays lill ie of rhe rradirional cu ratorial ime resl in collect ionand the hislOry of technology, III rhe seco nd pan o f this chapter, I argue Ihaliureracrive devices funcnon in the Cue. no t just as a presentational d evices. bUIas a key elem ent of the insritution's vision of the rcchuo togical prescllt.

CONSU MERS AN D C ITIZ ENS H I P, T HE SCIEN CEM USEU M AND T HE EX PLORATOR I UM

In Britain . rhe new emphasis o n ' inrerscrivn y' a n be understood. in pari . inrelal ion ro broader changes in the public funct ion of Ihe museum . -11\ (" modernsc ience museum o riginally developeJ in the ninCICCOlh cellfUfY as a pbce whereIhe successes of the imperial Sl'ale coulJ be displayed and where ' EuropeanproduCli\'e prowess was typically explaintd as ;1 justific;Hion for empire' (BC'ntlellet (II. 1993: 59) .~ Btl! il W;lS also illle ndeJ {() be :1 liber,,1 space wilhin whicha bo urgeois public wou ld parli cipate. and be seen 10 part icipate, in Iheir owncultu ral and mor,ll improvemenl. T hus, Ihe populalion would be managed , asTony Benn ett argues, ' by provid ing il wilh the resou rces and con lexlS in whichit might beco me sclf-cd uc:lt ing :and self* regulating' (Ben net t 1995; 40). Asan insti tut ion of go\"('.rn l1lcOI , the mu.scum would aCI not so much Ihroughco m ro lling and discip lin ing ,ht public. bUI by enlisling ils active SUPPOtl fo rlilx'ml values and ohjecli vcs,

On inte ractivity 101

Museums and expositio ns, in d rawing on . .. tech niques and rhe to rics o fd isplay and pedago gic relatio ns ... provided if co ntext in wh ich working andmiddle-class publi cs could be bro ught together and th e fer mer - having beentuto red into forms o f behaviour to suit them for rhc occasion - could beexposed 10 the improvi ng inAuence of rhc latter,

The co mplex o f museums developed at Soulh Kensin gton in the IS505 beca methe paradigm of this libcflll i exhib itionary slr:neg)' (ib id.: 40 ).

In recent years. however, the libera l conceptio n of cultu re as a means ofindiv idual imp rovemcru has had 10 run alo ngside - if nOI co mpete with - nco­liberal no tio ns o f cul ture as a consume r product (Silverstone 199 2: 4 1). T ilerradinonalm useum has been :IC<.·U$t.-d o f bein g 100 pate rnalist , 100 domiuauxl h}'the co ncerns of cu rato rs and the fetishism of the artefact, and 100 dependentllpon public subsidy.' Whal is said to be required is a new recogni tio n o f dll'co mperinve character o f rhe visitor busi ness i" addilion 10 rhe old er preoccupa·no ns with scho larship and public edu cauon. T he museum is bUI a 'P~1fI of ,Iu'leisure and tou rist ind ust ries' (Kirby 1985: 9 1).

Fo r Neil Cossons, di rector of the Londo n Science Muscu m in the [ate 1')80,and 1990s the new co ncern with rhe customer was a challenge rh.u shouldbe welcomed, for, with lhe declinc of stare fund ing. 'spending power, and thvn-­fore cho ice. [wo uld be put] into the hands of rhe people'. Fo r the museums.accordi ng 10 e OMOnS. rhe impli cations were clea r: 'The banlefidd will he themarketplace and rhe casuahics will be rhose museums rhat fa il t? adJ pl'(Cossons 1987: IS). Seen in th is co ntext. ' imeracrivi ry' has a double lun Cl ioll .Firsr. il is on e o f a range of tech n ical me thods - :llo ng wilh COSI co ntrol, \' i~i fO l

research , quality assurance , merken ng and custo mer relations - whi ch wnul, lena ble th e museum to forge a more 'eco no mic' relation bo lh wit h irs v i~i lt)r) .

and with private ind ustry.c, As o ne co mmentato r has not ed:

for interactive medi a the combinatio n o f: I . multiplexing as a delivery muJ e:2. int eract iviry as an in lrin sio lly engaging form of media; 3. niche market ;n~

as an advertising S l flllt~; 4. the affiuenl status of museum visito rs :lS ademographi c group; 5. museums' sr.UUJ as pillars of respcclabi lil)' o nscient ific, e.nvironmelllal and h("rilage issues . .. will greatly l llUC-.ISC" Iheau t:lclivencss o( museum s to spo nsors.

(Nash 199 2: 184)

Seco nd . the tech nolo gy of illteraCliviry had a ftlncrion in the COllleXI of h ro:ade rchanges in pol itia l Ihinking o n bOlh Ihe Lefl and Ihe RighI. Conlempo rarypoli tic l Ihinking is increasingly sceptical o f the political and ("Cono mic co mpc*len ce of Ihe St UI.' and . in ils slead , relies Oil Ihe sd f-go\·erning a pacilics of m("indiv idu :ll. Ihe f:lmil)'. the en lerpr ise o r the co mmunilY (Barry, O sbo rne andRose 1996). As Nikolas Rose observes, fhe subjeci o( wh:ll he calls 'ad\':lnctd'lihcr:a l (orms of goVerTllllem is givell unpreccdel\l ed responsih iliry (or governing

102 Andrew Barry

his o r her own :lfT:lirs, Fo r ad vanced libe ralism, the task o f the public :1I 11 hor i t ie,~

is not to direct o r p rovide for rhc cirizcn but to csrablish lhe co nd itio ns withinwh ich the citizen cou ld bec ome an 'active ;.gelll in his or her ow n govcmrncm'(Rose 1993: 296). Seen in this conrcs r. im cracr ivc devices have :1 fun ct ion .for they m:lYfoster agency. expcrimeruatio n and enterp rise. rhus enhancin g theself-gcvc m ing capacities of the citizen. lnreracriviry promises. in ot her wo rds.to rum the museum visitor imc :1 mo re ucrive self (cf Sua rbc-u 19') 2: 4 1- 3.Ma cdonald 199 3).

T he assooanon of the idea and technique, of imeracriviry wit h a broaderco nceptio n of the pu blic fum:t ion of the science mu seum w as not new. In 1969.the nuclear physicis t Frank O ppenheimer. who had bee n blacklis ted frompracrisiug as a scten tist by rhc House Un-American Aceiviries C ornminee. esrab­lishcd the Exploratori um in San Francisco as an ..hernaiivc to the tradition..lscience mu seum . For O ppenheime r. exist ing mu seums in the Uuircd Scueso ftt" ll glo rified the ach ien: me llls of ea rlier scient ists .It the expl' nsc of (·nablingvisito rs 10 ('ngage in a process of discovery themselves." T he radica l mos;l.gc:of the Esplora ro rium W;lS o ne o f ,lmttKTilli{' t'mptJlIJI"rmmt (cf C ruikshank1996) . The public would be empowered th rou gh being able to imeraa wit hOhjl"CIS as an expc run emal scientis t dOC'S in the natural wo rld of the labo rmory,Acco rd ing to Hilde Hein . "ill(er:Jct i\'e petbgogic tech nique con tains a kt-"}' 10

empowermelH lhat co uld Ir:mloform education o n a broad scale an d nu ke anavenue of gcnerJI sclf-dcrcrminarion" (Hein I9'JO: xvi]. In sho rt, \·isitors wo uldbe p:mi cip:lnts r.tlher Ihan men: ol>Sl'f\'en;, lncrf':lsingly co nel'rncd abou! till'growi ng inten-st in Ill}'~ l i cism , drugs :lnd w Il'rn religion s in lh<- )'o llng<- r gcn­e" llion . Oppenhcim er h imself expresst'C! till' intdlcctual :Illd polilical aspir:n ionsof Ihc Explor:llOriulIl in th('S,;: tcmu :

The wholc po int of Ihe ExplorJlOrium is to make il possib le for pl'Opll' 10believt· th:n Ihey c:m undersr:md Ihl' wo rld around Ihem , I th ink a 10 1 ofpt-'Opl,' h:l\'c givl'n lip If)'ing to co mp rt:!ll'nd things, and /i'lit'll tllf'Jgil't' lipmitlJ tilt' plrysiml worMIlrq gil't' /lP witb tilt' StKittl (/lui political Wf/ rM /l1 1l'l'll

(ib id .: xv. emphasis added )

If 1I1l' ide:1 of iTller:lctio n W:IS celHr:ll co what 1I1e Explor:llO riulli W:I~ Ir)'ing10 do . how W;lS il po ssible 10 realize this in pr:lClicc:? \Vh:1l W :IS :m irner:ICli vctl'Chniqur: and how co uld illle r:lCtivil)' rmpoII.Jt'r? In lhe early yC:lrs, 1I1l' Explo r:t­to rium's :llt l'mptS 10 dl'VelOp panicip:ll(ll)' and illler:lClivc exhibits were, nildoubl , rudi ment:!ry. The Explor:lloriu lll staff had , themselves, to lcarn how 10embody Oppenheinll' r:$ r:lJ ical ph iloso phy in :I lcchn ical fO rtn, Howl'ver, thl'CCl1I rt· was able elr;lw o n :lnd [mils-till: OIher model s of imeracti vit)', O ne' W:IS:llempora ry exh ibilio n of Cybemrti{' Sm'f/dipirywhic h had o rigina lly been shownat the 1l1Sl illlte of Co ntempo rJ ry Art s ill London fro m August 10 OClOber1968 and which W·.IS designed 10 explo re fhe rclarions hetwel·tl o::re:u ivity .Ind'cybe rnetic' u:c1ltlologi,'lo such :l~ co mputers. ro bo ls :md lIICCh:Ul iclil fecdb :tckSySlc m,\. For O I'I>t:n heimcr .•nd the Exp lo ralOrium lhe origi n~ (lr the Cyllt'rllrrir

On tnteractivlty 103

Srrrnt/ipiryas:111 art exhibition acco rded with the ccm re's modern ist philosophy,Firsl. neither Oppculwio-er no r the exhibition o rga llizt,·fS pe rceived a fUlltb ­meum] d isrincnon bet ween an and science. For 0PI>t:n heimer. science had an'acsrheric dimension ' and art and science were un ited in the ' huma n quest forundersl.lnd ing· (ib id .: svi}. Acco rdi ng 10 the exh ihilio n organize rs. ':1.1 no poiruwas it clear to :In}' of rhc visito rs \V'Jlking around the exh ibitio n. wh ich of till'various drawings, objects and nmchuncs were 111.1dl· by amsr s and wh ich 1ll.1I1e.'hy cngin''t''rs: or. whet her the phm ogr:' phic blow -ups of rexrs mourned 011

the wall ~ were the works o f l)O(.'ts or sciemis r, ' [Reichard t 197 1: II ). Blurrin~ t ill'bo un daries o f art and science was :111 illll)()rl,UII pan o f the Explo ratoriumvl)l'(b gogic Str.llc::gy. for by do ing SO il was hoped rhat the celll re's visitors llli ~lll

Ix-gill 10 underst and that science W'J\a {,"" titY .lcli \'ity,In rcrms of th{' Exp lorJtori ll m'~ pbilo-ophy. .I second positive feature of the.'

ICA exh ibi tio n was Ihat il engagl.J with science al the k \'C1o f mater ial pr:lll iu 'r ather than ma d )' at the level o f metapho rical associario n. VisitOrs could lu \(':I practical :IS well ," visual experience of ll'(:h nolngy. The insrructious to one ufthe exhibils o f C"'t'm~til' S,,,.1tt!ipity, for ex..mple. invited the mu seum vi~i lllr

10 imer:KI wit h :I machine by lIlrn ing knobs that "di llS! the phase and Ircqucn..~of two wan: oscilb tion \ rctarivc 10 on e anot her in o rder to produce .I v.l ri ~·t ~

of patt erns (Hein )')90: 38). Thus. rill: rclarionelrip between sci(·ntifie. nrm.uhcmancal rnu h an d an would . th rough a procl'SS of iu reracrio n. be rt...·l·;lk,,1tn the unin;riall.J. '111is philo«)ph)' \ t ill l)('r~iSll> , Add rC"Si ng wh :1I I", pt're.t·jn'\10 be the "cr isis in science l"(l u"":I l iol1' . the nt"\\' di rCl'to r of tht' Explor.Jtorilim . I ),Gocry DdacOlc has cre:lled a 'G :lll rl' fo r Publ ic Exh ibition' which 'providl'\inform:ll :.cience {'d UC:l tio n lh rough illltTJCtive ~'xh ibi ls wh ich .Idd r....' ,lIu lcxplo r{' t lil' rd;ll ion~h;p \)erw("Cn sciellc..... art :Inti hu mall l>crceptiOil (1)t.'I.i, ill' ·

1'192).1\ fu n her illlell('ctu:I! r:ni Ol1ale for th(· ide.. of tlil' illtenlcli\·t· exhibi l in the.'

Explllr:ltori ullI was lo un d ill lhe work of the p~}'chologi s l Richard c, rq ;.or)'. Inhis Ro\,..1 Institut ion Ch ristmas k'(:lUn'~ of 196 7/8 . G r(-gory had ,'xptlllnd{·,1 .1

lhoor)" which held thai viswil perception elllailt"(! a co mplex ilHl'gr:ninn of tlU"pl'rc('iw rs" illl,' rprelive d isl)()sil ion~ wilh ~x(('rna l stimuli. Accordi ng 10 e n·go r}'.

percepti on is nOl a maHcr of scnso ry inform:lIl£ln giving pl' rc('p, illll ,llldguid ing beh:lviour d irectly. hut r:Hller lh l" perc.'plll ..1 syMem i\ :1 ' l{)o k up'sysrem : in which senso ry illfnrrll:ll io n is used 10 bui ld gr;,d u:.lly. :md 10 ~dl'cl

from. :l11 internal rcpl'rtoin: of 'perceptu al hypothcSt's·.(G rego ry 1970: 174)

Tram b ti ng th is infO pr.lct ic ,l t ert1l ~ . lhe Explor:no riu lll ' le.· l lhl' visito r 1'1(' Ihcbbo nltor y Sllh jl'(:IS of their OW II percept ual rxperime nts' (Hein 1990: 72),T he itHClHIt.J eAl":l of Ihi~ pedagogic Slratl1O' wa:. n'H j U~ 1 t,l teach perccplU:t1t1, (~ry. but 10 cncu ur,ll;c tlie \'bi lOr to t'xpt:ricllce the proce:.S of discovery :mdIIim to become ~ 11 expcr;Il\C' lller.

104 Andrew Barry

T he extrao rd inary enth usiasm for intc racriviry, wh ich had 1x,(,11 ini l i:lled byrhe Explcratori um in the late 1960s and subsequen tly spread across d ie UnitedSo res. fina lly ar rived in Europe in the lllid- 1980s with the ope ning of theLa unch Pad galll'ry at rhc Lo ndon Science Mu seum . the Cite des Scit"llCcs cr del'Ind usrric in Paris and Richard Gregory's own Exploratory in Bristol. By rhec:u ly 19905 till: growth of inte ractive science exhibits in Britain had been

phenomenal (Stc\'cnson 1994: 30). Ind eed , a veritable inreracrives movcrncnrhad emerged wit h rhe fonmillion of associations such as the Brilish lmc ract ivcsC rollI' (BIG ) and the European Coilaborarice Science. Industry and TechnologyExhibit ors (ECS IT E). C urators . ed ucauonalins and museum managers began toshare rheir ideas about tilt' [un ct ion and design of irueracrives and enco urage theuse o f inreractives in exhibition ~paces in wh ich they had previously nOI beenfound, such as :1IrI galleries.

If the Exploraro riu m provid ed a modd fo r the iureracrives moverucm illBrirain il wo uld be a mistake to imagine that rhe inl er:lc!i\'iIY in Britain w'U

simply a copy of rhe Ame rion o riginal. As scciclcgise of techno logy have beenar pains to argue. Ihc process whereby a technology is 'rransferred' from o ne placeto ano ther should be eboughr of as a form o f translatio n o r reirnerpreta rion ratherrhan merely a fo rm ofd itTusion [Latou r 1986). In rhe U K, the radica l con cernso f the American ccmre wirh the: issue of Clllpower me lll wcre mar gin alized and.with cx ccprinns, O ppl' lIheimers interests in the links between science and :mwere igno red . Instead , inreracnviry came to operoue in relation 10 rhc failure ofIhe trad it ional science mu sell lll 10 :ldd ress a r.n her more Olund ;lIle SCi of co ncernswilh Ihe- public unders•.Ulding ofscience and the :lII ract ivencss of Ihe lllUliCUOl 10visirors.

C riticism of Ihe Ir.ld irio n:11 science mUSl'u m was most forcefully m:lde byRichard G rt'gory. fou nder o f Ihe Bristo l Explo rato ry :lnd former adv iser 10 theExplo rato rium. l:or G rego ry, ' looking al Ihe lrad ition al mUSC'lIlllSof sc ience wefind rcmarkably lill Ie science' (G rt.ogo fy 19 89 : 7), Gregory s,.1W the thl." l'SSl' lIIi;11fealUre o f science as expef i rnen r~lI ion , so that in o rde r 10 ellabll." Ihe public10 get an 'illlUilivl' fl."c1 for , , . lhl." princ.: iples of science' handS-Oll in tcmClivcexpt:ricnces were, Ill' believed. cril ical. ' I suggesl', wrot c G rego ry. ' thai Ihemajor aim o f imel':lClive scienCe centrcs, after st'jmul:ll ing inlc resl and cu rios ity.sho uld be sclting up h:l1ld-w:lvjng cxpbnations giving useful in tu il ive accoullts'(ib id. : 5).

Tht' ncw illterac.:live science eelll res were cen ain ly po pular. 'Sc ience CI'tll res:Hll':lCt visito rs like magnels' , nor ed the t'd uca tio n officer al the Scicnce Musculllrespo nsibll.' fo r Launch Pad (Stevenson n .d .: 18). 1111cracli \'C exh ibits, whet herIOClled wilh in science cen tres o r in mo re trad itional objecl-c.:ent red exhib itio naryspaces wcre also co nsislen tly raled highly by Ihe public accordi ng 10 visito rresearch . According 10 Ihe SciencI' Museu m's own rcsc.1reh Lau nch Pad receives7 14 visitOrs pe r Slluarc melre of galler}' space per year. whi lc the enlire muscumH."Cci\·cs o nly 44 visito r'S per Sllu:ltc mClrc I>cr year (Thomas n.d .: 3) .a T his popu­Iarily has pro\'e(1 bm h a benefit and p rob lcm for tht' dC'\'c!opmcnl of il1l t'racliw

On interactivify 105

exhibitions. Certainly, the ("leI lh:n iuteracrivcs are popula r is of consider ablecommercial and pohncal significa nce in a period in which the mu seum ortilt' .science centre is increasingly u nderstood a~ o ne par i of a bro ader leisureindustry and where the tradi tion al curatorial co ncern wirh collec non has beendownplayed. Accusa tions that inte ract ive science cent res arc merely expensiveplaygro unds Ihal COlWey Iinlc of1111." tedious and d ifficult rcaliry of science can he:met wi th the responsc thai th is is whal rhc publ ic wants." If inreracnve gallerievenable rhe public 10 han " fu n and to enjoy some kind of experi ence of science'rhcn. ill rhis view, that is sufficielll juslifie.ll ion for thei r developmen t. In a periodin whi ch visitor numbers art' taken 10 be o ne of ti ll' kl'y pe rfo rm ance indicuor-,used in museums, rheu rhc C:ISC for increasin g tile space given 10 interactiveexhibi ls within rhe museum can "ppear un answerable (c( Thomas n.d .).

However. the recognition that visitors came 1'0 intcra cdve science cem res andexhibit io ns to enjoy themselves crea red a probl em for proponen ts o fi n teraclivil}'(G rcgory 1989 : 2). In rhe view I)f their dc.') iglll·r'S, in reracnve exhibits wen'always cxpecred to be as milch insrrumcnrs of inform al ed ucati on :IS a means ofenrerrain me m. T he museum visito r was con ceived of as an arrive learner, andnot jusl :l-S a co nsumer. C rincs pointed 10 the lack o f historical or ind u-arialcon tcxtualizanon of many interactive eahibirs and rhe fr<'qllerl! absence of .III}'

cxplanarion of what scic mifi c principii'S were suppo sed ro be revealed I h rull~h

the process of ime raceion. Some exhibits. il was said. can be inte rp reted in W<lr'wh ich lead mu seum visitors 10 }iris,. conclusions.HI Ind eed , il is uncl ear whetherany of Ihe scil.'llIific principi a. Ihal many int t'r.aclivcs; are meant 10 dem on Slr.lll·would be gras ped by :my excepl Ihose alr\.":Idy po ssessing a good scil:n1ififc<luatio n. 1I Mon:o \"er, some Ilueslio n wht,ther many iOleraaive devices :Ifl:

really inleraclive. Ma ny so-calico inll' f;lCli\'e touch-screen co mpUlers. forexample. simply :lllow Ihe visito r to selecl from a predetermi ned SCI o f opliuns.Far from provid ing [he possibilitics for experimelllalio n, such illle rdCl ivc dC\'il"!'Smay merel}' .serve 10 crealI.' Ihe illusion of cho ice (Str:u ht' rn 1992 : 42).

T here arc. no doubt . many d iffefl'!U interp retalions and reSpQnSl'S to lhisco mplex co njunCiure. At the London Science Museum large nu mbers ofhll mao'explainers' are employed 10 m:lkc sure Ihal the imeral:live cxhibits do Ihe jobthey are itllen dcd to do. New gallcrit's such as He;lhh Mailers and the lelllllOraryt xhibitio n span', Science Box. incorpol':ltc increasingly so phist ic:lIed inln:lcli v("clthib ils as a maHer o f co u rse. I! T here is 1I0 W rnorl' emphasis o n tailo ringinteract ives to particular age-ranges so lhal it is pos.~ ib l e to act On thc spedfi(lechn ical co mpetencies and intcrests o f the r 0tlng visilOr. In I hesc circumslances,ga llery designers increasingly draw on the d ivers(: insigills of visiwr research ,ergo no mics. soc iology, tll'vclo pm ellt:Jl ps}'chology and ed ucatio nal IhCilry 10('llSurc that the nL'W ime raclive galleries pro\'C 10 be l~d u C'd l iona l as wd l as(·Ille rta in ing. l.l To an eXlent unparalleled in Ihe past. Ihe muscum visitOr hashl,<:Oml: Ihe obj ect o f invcsligalion. If illler::IClivc lech nologies :u e cxp«led10 en h:mce Ihe agency of the visilo r and 10 ch:lll ncl il in the m oM prod ucli\'('di rect ion , then lilc specific dyn:llnic of I hi~ ag('ncy IIlIISI ilself be known (c(

106 Andrew Bar ry

Foucault 1979) , The visitor; it s('1: If1.~ , has been incre:lsingl)' called o n It) internetwi 111 exh ibits and respond to the growing nu mber of explainers. .lcw rs andresearchers who :alSl) inh ab it the m useu m.

C YBO RCS A N O CU LTU RE, T H E C IT E

In what follows I wan t 10 loo k at ,t IllU;>C'UIlI where ' irueracl iYit)" has a ratherd iffe-H' m ~C t of resonances . At th l· Cir c des Sciences el de l'[ndusrric at La Villcnein Paris, "intcrncriviry' fu ncl io ns, I suggest. no t just in relation IU notio ns of rhcvisito r as actin' re usum cr and learner; bUI in rerms o f a projec t which cen tresaro und n p.m icular vision of the rclanon bcrween h um ans and mach in~ ,

O pened in 1986 , La Villcnc was on e of a nu mber of o the r major co nSlOlCl io nprojec ts - includ ing the K;LSt illt· 0 IXTd ho use and the Ik'auho u rg - whichdo minated Parisian cullll rdl l>olicy in the 1970n lld 1980;). \X/hcre:lS, in rhc UK,the im peratives of cultural policy 1)("(', II 11C illuea~i ngly unde rstood in I t''rl11 ~ ofnotion ) o f co n:.u ll1cr demand and com mercia l viability, the oMcmi ble objec rivco f rhe developments in Ildril> was 10 broaden public part icipat io n in culture. Al>Na thalie Heinich ha.' noted. o ne goa l of rhc Bcacbourg projec t W -AS (0 'democ­r.ll i.sc= culture' and to somehow 'reco nc ile the im pera tives of maS;) co nsum ptio nwith "highe r" cul tural p roduction' {l Icinic h 19 88: 199- 200), Likewise. a kl'}'aim o f the dcvclopmcm of the site at La Villet te was 10 enab le a I.u ger public 10

recognize d ie' \"Jlllt· and expe rience thl.· exciecme ur of science. Thus. rhe pu blicwould come to place as much \~...11It, in -.cicnce and tl.'Chno logy as the Frt"l1ch St;m'itsclf.14

In practice, rhc techniques USI..-d al La Viltenc 10 l.'nCOllr,lge public inte restin science olx:y 110 simple log ic and are. no doubt. cc nr r adict o ry, O n rhe onehand . the C ite tries 10 go 10 mee t the wider publics taste not iusl Ih ro ugh/lltlg ,,,isfIlioll, bur, by lJlu rr ing the tradi tion;11 bound aries between educa tionand popular culurrc. Echoing the philoso ph)' o f 111:II1Y b te niucrecnt h-ccnr uryexhibi tio ns. science is prc:.ellled not JUSt :IS knowledge bUI al>o as I> lx~r;II.:le :andenten. lln rnelU:

Ahove all the Ci te J t'l> Scicn,,:cl> l.·t lk·l'Ind usllie is a place 1(J learn and :a pl.lccto h;IVC fUll ,

l.:t Villell e: a new W:I )' of seeing, listt'n illg. IC:lrni ng of amazement andernolio n! A place fo r cre;n ivil)' amI leisure. for di scovery :lIld pl;ly.

(Cite: n,d .)

O n the Olhcr hand , L:l Villeltl.' is no t elll irely withou t Ihe corwcllIionalmarks of cu ltural cap it:a!. III the par k outsidt~ the Ci (t~, there arc a number of'dccu nstruc tio ni,s t' :arch iroctu ral lo \lies designed by Bcrn :a rd Tkh um i (De rrid:a1986) . :m experimenl:al l>osimodern garde n. :a research centre for thc h i,~to ry

of s..: iellcc :lIld Il'ClllIOlugy, as well Ihe new nat ion al cOllSC' rv:ato r)' of music - 'a("o m plex co nceiVl-d :b a \ d m ul:a t ing enviro n menr and mecting pl:acc for lh e i1ru,

On inte ra ctivity 107

sciences and m usic' (C ite n.d.) . t \ Even in the Cite itself theft' is a ruul rimcdi.rlibra ry. :111 inh'rn:u iOl\:I1 co nference ccrn rc and assoc iated infor mation services .In ad di tion , mirror ing ill(' ph ilosophy of the Exploe norium. ilo (/1<"

' Expe rimenta l gallery' which exh ibits "init iatives in an'.

the Expc rirneru al gallef)' exhibits artwo rk closel y rd ared to the fields o fscience, tech nology ;md indu .\ try. "l1lt1u~h thelot." works arc neither illllsl rJt iwno r educational in nature, th(')' do rep rt"M:llI a cen;l;n poe tI)', m yth . humo urand even cril icism. The an isrs do not share rhe same views o n the wo rld a,do scienti sts bLH instead provide an answer to Iht'SC views .

(Cire 19 88 : JO)

Al firsl sight, La Vi llc llc:~ gt'SHUt:.s towards art and itl> Hirtarion s with 11IN 'mod ern ism :appear to mi rro r the lkauoourgs- ent husiasm fo r tec hnology, Sinu'irs openi ng, lo r exam ple, rhe Bcaubourg has been associated wirh Pierre Bou lt·£,lnsrinu de Recherche ('I de Coord ina rion Acoul>liq ue/Musiqu(, (l RCAM ). ,1

centre whi ch ca rries o ut research ill avam -gard c l'om puter music (Born 1., t)S).And in 1984/5 rhe Bcaobo urg suppo ned experiments ill collec rive co nt ptlto;- rwrit ing in :m exhjhir enti tlcd LI'S I mmll1; r im lx. wh ich provided a vchrcle I(.rthe ph ilosopher jean -Pranr o is L}u rJrd 10 specula te J boll{ the impossibili ty u lconsensus th rou gh communicnion [Posrer 1990: 114).

Yet des pit e rhe appa rl.·nl parallels bcrween the cult ural sl rateg ics o f lilt' tWHinsti tutions their broader ideological reson ances arc quite different. In til(' 1..1:-<.'

Figure 6.' La Mediatheque: Cite des Sciences et de l'Industrie (photograph byJean"Yves Gregoire, courtesy ol lhe CM des SCiences el de l' lnduslrle)

108 Andrew Barry

of rhc Bcaubc urg. rhc ccmrc's close relation 10 technology serves to legit imizeirs ident ity as an innovanvc cultural insti tution - reinforcing the illl,lge givenro il by Richard Rogers' bold architectural design. By comparison, in rhc caseof the Ci le. ':ln' will always rcmain :11 the Ol;lrgins of an esrablislunem whichis d ominan..-d by a vision of the informat ion age. and which tries tOO hard 10

be futu ristic. Iron ically, it is the Ci ll.' which appea rs 10 be the more convcunoualof Ihe two insrinnions: its bigh-rcch Str ucture immed iately conjuring up notso much an image of innovation :md creativity, bUI :I hislOry of so l1l:lnyearlier exhibitions and philosophi es in which progress has been equated withrecbnological change,

Allhough rhe Cile's rclanon 10 rhe fUIIITe is only tOO F.ulli liar. irs reprC'­semation of rechuclogy is none rhe less distinct ive. Whereas du' museums ofthe nineteenth Cl'llIury art jcularcd rhe evolu tionary metaphors of biolog)'and political economy, the C itc's taxou omics draw on the new ahisto rjcal sciencesof communicnion, 111l'Ory. cybernetics. psychology and ecology (cf, jordanova1989 : 23 ). Exhibit areas are de voted 10 a whole series of topics concerned wirhrhe bodi ly and perceptual ca pacit ies of hum ans; sound. vision, lighl g:lnu"S, thereprescnranon of sp2ce, expression and behaviour. Moreo ver, 2hhough Ihe Ci u~

J (K'S possess Ih(" shiny rockets and cars 10 be found in all tt".lditional sciencem useums, its dominam imagl"S are those associated nor so much with hardware.hut with language. software and the metaphors of the 'information society' . Thisis a museum c fin fomuuio n. nerworks. environmem. multimedia, interfaces andpanicipnicn (Cilc 1995: 23).

In practi ce. thl'SC ideas art' manifcsred ill a number of differem w:lys. At them OSI basic level. tbe Ci tc is full of ' illlt'r:Jcti \'e exhibits and audio-visual prCS('I1 'ratio ns', 'co m puter-based displays and games'. 'pamcipauvc. hands-on d isplays'and 'srare-of-rhe-an museum technology'. Each of these devices has, 110 doubt.a specific didacnc [uncrlon and enrenainmem value. BUI collcoivcly. themuseum's inrcracrivc media also have a metonymic d K'CI. As cue curator pUl itto me. alluding 10 McLuh:m , 'the medium if the message' . At La Villcne , the[inu re ;1interactive. Visitors 10 the museum purchase nor a ticket but a machinereadable smart card on which is written the deman d ' Dcc ouvrez!'.

However, interactive technologies do nOI simply funcrion as rhetorical tropes.T hey also serve 10 organize tilt" internal space of die museum. As Roger Silver,Stone h :l.~ argued, the visitor's experience of a museum may be understood :ISa narrative ill space. Ihe structure of which is governed, bu t n OI determined,by the spatial organizat ion of the museum itself. T his idea, derived from thework of Michel de Cencau. 'encourages us .. , to begin to analYle the rhetoricaland narrati ve strategies which are prescnt borh in :111 exhibition's layout and inthe routes which individuals consrrucr through it' (Silverstone 1988: 235) .In the case of the C itc, rhc internal space of the museum apparently takes a quiteconvenno nal form : rhe visitor is guided around a rhree-dimensioual spacedi vided into exhibitions. shops, galleries and cafes. However. the existenceof 'illlt>racliw' devices alld technologies cre:Hes disconti nuilies in this space.

On interaclivi ty 109

Figure 6.2 Discover! RighI simutalOl's in the Cile (photograph by Bernard Baud!n.courtesy ol lhe Cite des Sciences el de I'Industriel

pun cruring the visitor's rou te and establishing a furt her 'foun h' audio-visualdimension wi thin which the visitor is encouraged 10 place him or III:rsd r. 10participa te and 10 interact. Thus, the visitor is not simply an observer of themuseum's machines ~ he or she is posit ioned within them. In the 'So und' exhihjlarea, for example, a comp uter game called a 'voice-actuated note-gobble r' servesto display the lone of a person's voice. The ' Light games' area includes a sectiondevoted to rhc explanation of interference which brings togelher a nu mber of'hands-on' displays. In Ihe 'Aeronaut ics' area some of the mOSI popular exhih iOiarc Hight simulators. In rhc ' Environment' area computer based ime racuvemult imedia allow the visito r to explore topics such as grecnery, air and trees.

JUSt outside of the Ci tc, th e position of the muscum visitor in the museum'scxhibnionary sirategy is dramatically symbolized by a huge J · D Omnimaxcinema - LaGeode - in which 'visual effects combine with sound effecrs 10 trans­port lite speCialOrs iruo the midst of the actio n surrounding [hem' (Ci l~

1'188: ')4) . Relll'Cling on Ihe sign ificllIce of La GOOde, Paul Virilio reminds

110 Andrew Barry

us that 'the fll~ i(Jn/co l1 fu~ion o fcamera. projec tion ~)'~ tcm and aud itorium in 1I1l'Imax/ornnimax process. is p:m of a long tradi tion of"mob ile fr:l.I11 ing" in cinema,daring from , he invemiou of Ihc tracking shot in 1898' (Virilio 1990 ; I n ).Pb cin g the O mnimax in rclaricn 10 the ea rly histo ry of cinema i.) certainlyapproprhne. Like Ihe cinema of the 1890s and 1900s. COllle mllOr:lr Y IMAXIO mn imax cinema is less concerned wirhnarrative, than wichexhib ition , ~pc."(,I Jdt·

and :lO'CCt IElsaesser 1990). Howev er, the econo mic co ndi lio nsof lMAX and earlycinema are quire d iOcrcn l. \X' lu:n'as sma ll-scale producnou companies playedan iruporrant ro le in Ihe development o f C'J rly cinema. rhe relat ive scarcityo f lMAX/O mnimax audirorinand rhecxpeose o f fibn prodocriou have me:lnlt halrhcdcvelopmem of lMAX/Onmilllax depends e n corporJte spon-o rship (\'('o llc'n199.}). In La c, t.:ode, o ne popu lar progrJmme is a film o f Ihe Space Slu llI leprod uced by NASA and the Lockheed Co rpo ralion. The Space' Shull lc is apart icular ly ap propriate sub ject :tt rhe CiICI for irs dcsign is based on rbeview Ihal it m(wm lhat resea rch in .)p3ce depends o n rhe involvement tlf hu nlJ ns:1I1d docs nOI rely SQleI)' o n rhe o peration o f remore-conrrolled insrrum cnts.In d l C' Sh UIlI.:, humans arc 'explorers' push ing back the final Ironner o f space;they have- the Rigbr StuD: Howev er. eq ually signihC:llu l)', the physical andperceptual capacities of their o wn bodies arc rhc o bjects of rbe 5hll((lescicnrisrs' experiments. T hus, :11 k~Jsl som e of lin' expcrimems performed in lilt'5h ull ie bear some com parison [Q those tha t migh t be found in the main bodyo f rhe mu seum .

Figure 6.3 La Geode: luturism in the Cite (photograph by Arna ud legrain,COUrlasy 01the CM de s Sciences at de l'Industria)

On lnte raclivity 111

In rhc C ia' the idea Ih:u science and technology reconfi gure the bou udancsbetween humans and non -h um ans is a pervasive o nc - rep resented nOI jusl inthe ub iquity oftiu tc racrivc' techniques bur in the voca bula ry and taxono my ofthe mu seums exh ibits . The Eanh is understood as a 'machine' and as a 'space­sh ip' . Computers can ' talk'. 'An imal and \'t'gelable kingdoms co me to life inthe form of automato ns'. Robots lind humans live in a 'cybernetic zoo'. Andma rriage is presented in terms of ncnous ofwade' and ·sys t ~'m'.I/,

Acco rd ing to Do n na Haraway, there is a rremendo us po litical pot ent ia! in thedevelopment of conlem pornry co mmun ication and bic-rcch nclogies. Tc be sure.she nOICS, such technologies have a crucial ro le in the cond uct o f modern Slates,muhinarional co rpo ratio ns. military powc'r and labou r-comrol syslems {Haraway199 1: 1(.; ) , bUI rhey also rend er obsolete the b inary oppositio ns betweeno rgan isms and machines, rl-.'cal ing thai 'Ihere- is no fun darnen ral. o ruclcgica lseparation in ou r for mal knowledge of machine and o rganism, o f techniGl1and orga n ic' ( ibid.: 178). T hus. the idea of the- cyborg provides rhe basis forchallenging the essemiahsm of mu ch colllcmporJry polil ical lhoughl.

Perhaps . A \'isil 10 rhe C ile suggCSl.s. however, thJt rather less prod uctivepo ssibilirie, may ofien be assocc red wirh rhe fashio nab le figure of rhc cyborg.Instead of explo ring ihc changing role o f technologies in the co nsrinn io n o fthe soci:il and the indiv id ual, rhe Ci le's exhibio freeze rhe relanon in a seri,·,of d isassociated and reificd ' imeraCliu n;..'. T h us, in a double movement, scien ceis popularized but , at the same lime , mysli fit.-d. Iron ically 100, alrh c ugh it ha,made hu ge invesrmcms in media and in formation « ch nologics. the C ile (,ftenf:li ls to make :l.IIy reliable con necrions with debates about science in the worldoutside: and there is lillie sense of the ago nistic relations which invariably markscielHific and rccbnologica! change,P In b rief, al La Villcue, lhe irllcr:Kliunbclw...-cn humans and machi ncs can all 100 t.'3sily beco me }'et anOlhe r obkcl 0 1110

which cd ebrJlOry high-t...'Ch fanl:lsie:s can Ix projected .

CONC LU SI O N

T here are tWO lew..h o f cril icism thai can ll1:ide of the development o f i llln ­activity in the calltemporary scit' nce Jlluseu m. At o ne level. a series of CI Ut'S t ion~

have been asked abo ut Ihe usc and cfft.'Ctivelless of illll'raclivcs, nQI 1':::I\ t bymllSClim professio nals an d interactivc designers themselves. As cr il ics :llIdresearchers havt· poi ntt·d OUl, ma ny illteraclives fu nclion :IS simple :lIn U :;C' rn C Il ('~

or d ist ractio ns :ind/or experime ntal g,llllCS for the scit'llt inc:,lly wd l.t'du cated .J-!owc\'cr, the fMce of such criticisms ha~ not bee n :IIlY dt'd inc in interCSI inintcr:lCtiw s. O n the cOlll rary. cril icism h:ls provoked profcssioll :lls II) improvethc design of int t'r:lct i\'C devices, la ilori ng ,h c'ir design more closely to Ihe n«d$,capacities and behaviour of rM I mu sc'ulll visito rs, :lIld illlcg r:lIing them morecarefully wilh the more tradi l ional lc'xt- and objecl -based exhibils. In hrief. thenOlion o f irHef'Jctivity has co me to be Ihe cen tre o f a rap id ly cxp:lnJ ing cycleuf intellc'Clual, financial and Icchn iC'JI invt'l'tmcnb in th ... public presen tat ion orliCicllce- and tech nology.

112 Andrew Barry

At another leve l. it is important ro inrcrroga re the fo rm s o f po lit ica l reasoni ngwhich have justified th is rema rkable level of iuvcstmc ut in imeracriviry,Accord ing to M ichel Calion ' technical objects ... more o r less explicit ly defineand d istribute roles 10 hu mans and non-humans' (Calio n 199 1; 137). Certa inly,

some of th ose associ a ted with science mu seu ms and science ccru res have ho pedtha t inte ractive devices could serve bo th 10 d istrib ute roles to humans an d togenerate particular hu m an capac it ies. Indeed. inrcracrivcs have fuucno ncd as akind o f technical so lutio n to the vario us problems tha t ha ve em erged aro und therelations between scien ce an d the public . At the Explomrorium . for exam ple.inrcracrlves we re co nce ived o f as WJys of d isseminat ing .1 sense o f scieruifi cexpe rime nta rion 10 the wider p ub lic. In tu rn , th e capac ity ro be an ex per ime nterwas taken 10 be equivalen t 10 democrat ic em pOwe rme nt. At 1.,;1 Villette. the ideaand tech no logy of inre racriviry co nnects rogc rher. in an ambit io us project , thebo dy of the ind ivid ual visi tor with a fantast ic visio n of a rechuological nati o n.

In cont ras t 10 Prance and th e US A. Brit ish political and intellectual cultu reo fte n appea rs be more am bivalcm tow ards scie nce and rcchn olc gy" Il rit ishcritics have argued persuasively rha t museums sho uld 3Ul' rnpl 10 repr('setltsc ience and rccbuology as com plex politic al and cultura l o bjects: as activitiesmarked by co rnesrarion . un cert ainty and und ecida bil ity. Indeed , fiu fromem phasizing th e impo rtance o f new forms of in rcractiviry, such nrgumcnrs pointro the co nt inuing ccnrraliry o f cn!!l!t'liQIlS 10 the public fu nct ion o f rhc co ntent­porary m useu m of science. I' Acco rd ing to Jim Bennc n . a ltho ugh 'many of ou rform er collec t io n d ispla ys wert; u ninsp ired , unimagin nrive and uochallenging_. . collect ions arc the founda tio ns o f all g rea t m useums' an d they sho uldconr inue 10 ha ve a ce nt ral place in m useum display (Bcnnc u, C ha pte r 10).Ahhough nor ent irely ignored . however, effo rts to m hink rhc fuucrion o f them useum co llec tio n have been secondary to :1 ra the r diffe rent Se t o f co ncern swi th qncs rion s of co nsu mer choi ce and vis itor be haviour. It has be en the physicaland perceptual capacities of the visito r, along with th e development of newtechn ologies of imc ractiviry, which haw co rne to be o ne of the dom inant pointsof refe rence in co nt em po rary debates abo ut the desi gn . funcrio n and fu ture of th e

modern moseum of sc ience.

A C KNOW LEDG MEN TS

T hanks to Sharo n M acd o nald and Roger Silvc rsrone for the ir co m me nts: roStepht'n Joh nsron for his help and advice: an d ro a ll the staff a t rhe Sc ienceM useum an d La Ville tte who helped ml' with this research.

N OT ES

Accord ing lO one recent Commentator; ' Museums arc: . .• inhere ndy inICr:l.C1ivt'nluhim<:'d i3_T ht' visilo r i .~ in COlHr<l1of the path $alon£ which they navigale lhroughlhe anifuns. images, sounds a lld reXtSand tlwy arc unt ler no obligalion to f{l ilow dleline;tr SlrUClUre imposed by th(" wr.uor ' (Bearman 1<)9 3: liB).

On interactivity 113

2 Unlike die rradinonal science museum, die typical science cent re doc s not bouse anhisto rical collection bur is likely to rely heavily on the usc ofirucracrive exhibits_Fora discussion of rhc diiferenn" see Du rall! ( 1992),

3 T hroughout rhis unldc I refer 10 rhc National Museum of Science and lndusrry(N MSI) :IS thl' Science Museum,

4 For a discussion of the ltislOry of the science ruuseorn in lite eighteent h century secHoopcr-C rccnhill (J 991) , According ro S('h ~ tl"r the public presenrarion of sciencesometimes involved an extraordinary levl·I of peblic debate; natural philosop herscompeted for p;uronage and audiences and 'critics sought to subvert lhe status of rhelectu rer's ente rprise ' (Schaffer 1993; 190).

5 Set' for ex;tmple the article by (he Science Museum d irector Dr Neil Cossons in theUSltlll'r ( 1987). According to one membe r of the museum slaff at rhe lime "l'h ...inferenc e in the article Ihar the srafl in the nation al mu seums are a load of dinosau rswith uncarint; altitudes 10 lite puhlic W:IS not well received' (letter to rhe author. 30Ju ne 1987).

(i A combinat ion nfi ncreasin~ aucmion to markcdng and (he development of a publiccontroversy about impQsing museum etury charges has given rhc Science M USl '1H1l

a higher public profile (cf_Cossons 19') 1: 185). However, itSactivities probably drawmuch less publiccomment than Olher museums of comparable size. As one museumcu rato r noted: 'whal is done by the Nationa l Callery. the V&A, rhc Tat e ere, halways subjco 10 bo rh media hype fw d informed comment . from layman ;ultlsp.:eia list alike. Alas the sasne cann o t be said of the Science Muscum' [lett er to theauthor I II June 1987; emphasis in original). The silt'nee of the media and the publicin relation to die po lit ics of the Science Mu seum appears to be inversely rdal ed rothe noise genera ted by visitors. Accordi ng to 011<' souvenir guid~, ' (T he ScienceMuseum] is somewhere where pe ople feel free, and often cxcited; where I1le)· t:llkloudly (somerimcs too loudly) and even laugh. II is d ifferenl from most museums'(RiclllSllijk 1980: I ).

1 Accordi ng ro Hcin there were tWOimportan t influences on Oppenheimer's th il1k il\~.

One was the London Science Museum Chil dren 's Gallery ( 193(,...91), "'h id lc<)tll:line(1 exhibi ts which could Ix: 0l>cratell by rho child. T he other IVa' die 1'.,]:1 "de Ia Decouvert e which. unlike tradi tional science mus eums. did nor concern ilwltprimarily with the pres ervation of ancfacrs. Created in 1937. the Palais ,kwrillt:dirsclfns 'a scicnritic cultural centre' in which a Iargc nUll1 llt;' r of scit'nrific ~' X IX: 1 inlcnhwere (and still arc) demonst rated tCl visitors (H udson 1987: 103). AC«lrJ in~ I<l ihfoundn. Jean Perrill, one of th,"objectives of the l'ab.is was lO reali7.e tlu: p'll cm ialfor sdemific rt's<.:arch whicb hl"hoped might be found in the populatio ll al large. FutPerrin. lhosc young pt:'Opl to wlto had not been favoured hy a good eduGui" n, hUI

who had ;l particular aptitudl' tor rcsc:lrch and who had ('nough ent hu~iasl1l 3nd,-tlng)' tCl make it their vocarlon. should he rceogni1.ed and encouraged hy theNatio nal RtoSt'arch Scrvice (Maury 1994: 24).

8 For a overview of comentpo rJ ry muscum visiwr slUllil's SCI' Bicknell and Fannel u(199J) .

9 0 11e widely cirt...i t'x:ttnplc of such an accusation i .~ $horrlantl (19117). One (eamf... or'this denigration of CO tll pu l ~'r- bascd in teraCt ive museutll clthibils is lheir aSSOCiationwith imeract;vt' computer gamcs. As l.csli(" HadJ on obser\'t'S ' tIlo lJI pan ics aboutgames. including fears of addictioll. the ~ e ffccts~ of {kscnsitis:llitlll and of l'SClpismh:lve spanned a range of pul itie:.t l clmpaigns. mt-Jb attention 3nd at:ldtomic, mainlypsyd lological analysis' (Haddon 1993: 124)_

10 One lIlernlx'r of thl' Science M ll SCUIII euuC'Jlioll starr remembered the ~utllple (If animcr:lcl i\-t' wiler.· a ligbt sign;ll w:lS imerpf ett...1 by Illany visitOrs:1$ the ~'",iuSt' nu helIhan tht' ... fft·u tlf the phen'lrllt 'nClll thaI .he inter:lcrivr;, ....".l~ rtle:tnt HI dem(IMlr.lte.

1 14 Andrew Barry

AnOlh~r suggCStN rhar m:my §cif'nlifi e principles wh ich :a re: su pposed 10 be f"C\'c::a lcdby in ter.lClivcs would onl y be co mprehensible: by A·le\·cl seud ems and :abo w­[in rerviews cond ucted :a t the Science M useum, London. Jun C' 1995).

II As Sh:a ron M:acdon:ald suggcsu . the failure ofin reracnves to commenjcare 1ciC'lIIifieprinciples m:ay. in pan. Ieflrel the limil :a!ions o f rhe museum as :a mc:'dium:'museu ms mighl no t be panicularly good .. . at gelling across scienlillc fXls "nc.lderails. than fiHlhering underslanc.ling through mo re gen eral images :m d lIlC5S:ag~"S

about the nature of science. its Il'lm ih ilit ies. its relevance 'Illd its limit:ations'(Macdonald 194)2: 408: l'm ph ;l,~is in o rigiual).

12 In the Sc ience Museum rhere was ccusldcreblc di s:agll"1:nlent all'llUl whe ther Ih issho uld be co nside red a problem or nul. Proponents of irtl l"l',lCtiv ily noted that theMuseum had a IQngsmn(ling interest in imcmceiviry front the openi ng of till'C hildren's Gall ery ( 1936) o nwards. Man y o rhers thought th:1.l int~'grJtion of int er­actives with his tori cal objects could be a problem as it raises qU"'S1 iOlI$, tor eaarnplc,ahaut how to d...fine the boundaries between ohjeCis with which the pu blic couldand could nOI im eraa , More generally. the development of i n t~f:laivi l y in lhemuseum 1'101 onl)' raised qucs tions aboUl the fun ct ion o f inter:aclive deviccs bul alsoabolll the functio n of t radi rio l\2l objects. O n Ihc:k poi n.., my thanks to Sh:a ronMacdonald . Stephen Johnston and Gi lli:an Th omas.

U In l..:ash and Urr>"s (1994) terms the: museum Ixg;in to be eng;.gN in a r.llhcreseensive procns of retleaive modc:rni7.:ll ion. In th is process . rhe museum visito r wasnor necessarily (,vn«prw li1.M as an ind ividual co nsumer. M any visitors came as panof f:am ily groups or in $(:11001 parries :.rnd viriror research and n hihi tio n dnign ha~

10 lake this into account. In add ilion. Ihl' muse um W:lS aware th:lt ma ny of iu ad uh... isirors wert' Illale: and midd le d :ass :.r nd . in Ih is COlllnr. issues of class ,u l(1 gt11d... rha\'(' heco lne ;I. fl'at ur", of ...xh ibilion dl'Sign . A defa il...d exam inati" n o f tilt' ways inwhi ch di fferent designs of intl....1Clive l'xhibifs addressed sl}C(ific kinds of mu scumvisitor is beyo nd the .scope of this ch:lpler.

14 T he post ·war f rench Siale has. at least at tht· kn·1of pQlitiCiI rhl-·Iork . t...nded 1II

p1ac~ grcat stress on the im po rlance: of sciellce alltl tl-'Chllo lngy for Ihe: mOOerni:t.;r·lion of Fr.mce. By co m r:asl. in the UK. illle rCSt in int l'rJCfi... it)· :u lIo ngsf sci...nti~1.S

:lnd nm,K'um slaff dl·...dopnl at the hl'igh r o f wh.:1.1 was perccivN 10 be gove:rnmenthost ility w......u d) Kicn((" in Ihe mid ·1980s.

15 Th~ juxl:aposilio n o f scif'mil1c C'X hibirio ns and iono..... 'i\·e: :arch il C'Cfur~ " 'D: nof newin Par is (sec SI:antper 1989).

16 A5 Corne lius Cas tori;l.d is nores.: ·O rdin;l. l)· monals are eOJo:lfcJ Iogc:-Ihct wilh Nohcll:a urc:a tcs in rhe coils of:a new mYfholog)' (~mach incs whi ch fh ink~. o r - though r asa m:ach inc~ )' (C:asro ri:adis 1984: 230).

17 Comp:a rc Ihis wilh Bruno u lOur's :tCcoum o f the need for democrat ic scit n tificinstitutions - :a · p.:a r' i :am~nr of Ihings' (u to ur 1993: 142- 5).

18 A5 David Edg('r1on obscrvt.'S. ,Il ",situatio n in Brita in is mure co mplia u cd th:ul lhis.In the lw",mie,h cem u ry an important si rand of pol iriall Ihinking in Britain hassu ppo rted the develo p ment o f a{lvancl·{1 scie nces and ll'Chno logks - for mili rarypu rposes (Edge rtOn 1991 ).

19 For accou nts of fhe d illicuh it."S of representi ng controversy in SCiCIICl' mllkunu $1.>("

Young and l.c... idow (1984). Macd onald and Sil\'e:rslOne: (I9'J2) and Ross (1995).One sc:nior me: mber o f the sl:aff of the Science Musc:om 5Ugg<'StN 10 m~ Ihal it wasdi fficuh for Ihe Sciene:e Museum 10 rt'Spo nd to conremporary public controw-rsicsbc:c:ausc o f Ihe high sl:lIld:ards of profcssio n:a lism (:and he: nce:l im~ :and opensc) whichwere dem:anded o f g;rlle:rydesignC"l"$. for:a mo re- ge:ne-ral d iscussion o f Ihe imporlane:eof controversy ro the public u nderstanding o f nnce: SCC"Wynn~ (1992. 19(3). On~

of Ihe successful recenr :allemp l:lo 10 incorpor.u e: rece:nl :appro:achcs 10 the hisro ry :a nd

On in te ra ctivi ty 115

.sociology o f sc ience: in museum design "-.1$ u ude na ken :al she Whipple- Museu m ofthe Histo ry of Sck ece in C~mbridge. (Sec Iknnni N ill 1993 a nd J. Iknn\'f1C h:a pler 10).

REFER EN C ES

Barf)'. A. ( 19') 5) ' R" I>Ort i n~ and visu:alisillt:·. in C. Jenks k d.) ViliUlI C"bur,.. I..o ndu n:Roulledgc.

Barry. A.. T. O sho rne lIn{1 N . nose k ds) ( 1')')(,) F()t/(i",1t 'II/d I)()/it;m/ Rrfli ,m./.ivrfl//islII, Nrll·/ibrm/ism (//,,/ IMril/1//tli/irs III GfJl)(rIIl1Irlll. London : UC I. I' r.:s,1C hiC1lgo: C h icagu Un i ersilY l'rcss.

Hcarman , D , (1993) ' 1Ilt r:lcti ... ity in American museums'. ft"lISr" m A"1I11l1Krlllrllf (//111

('ufl/rors" ;p. 12. PI'. 1H3-93,lknnerr. J .• R. Brain, K. Bycrofi. S. Schaffer. H . Sihu lll :and R. SI:ak, ( 1993) 1:.'mrm·, t>{

""pirs. <::ambridge: Whipple Museum o f the H i~fo l)' of Scie nce.Hennen, 1'. (1')<)5) 71K Hirth of tiN M "YUIII: HiSlfJ" . 1'/".0" . Po/itirs. 1,,111,11111 :

RlIllrlc:'dge.Ilidme:l1 , S. and G. Fnmclll (OOs) (1993) MusrulN Vimor Studin in lIN I'}'}(h. I u n, l"n

Scicnc~ ~ l ll5C"Um .

Born. G. ( 1995) &lliOIlU'izi,tt Cultll": IRCAM. Him/a aud tiN IlI1t;tutiolltl/i:<ltu'" of tl.,.Musicdl A''dIlt·Gilrdr. Bcrkd{·y. CA: Uni\'coily ofC:a lifo rnia PITS3i.

Csllon. ,,"- O')'J I) "Techno-economic no:twork) ;lIld irreversibility", in J. La" (...1.) AS«-wlOf:! ofMomtrrs: t isnJl 011 POH't"r, Trr/molog'f <IIU{ IflJ/l/ iml/iOIi (Sol'iolt>gtc,,1Htl'/('1l 1

Mnllt>gmph). PI" 132-{, I . l .ond ou: Rour lcdgc.C :I)lo ri:ldis C. (1984) Crosmmds III tip l..IIbyrill/lJ. C:arnb ridge:. MA: Th,' M IT I'l{') ' .

C ite ,k~ Sf it'nces l't d\' I'lnd u. t ri.·. diR'Ction de l:r Cummunication Cl dll dcv{·I"PI...·nwnr( 198K) Or, dN Scimtrs rr Ilr I'Il/dustfi t". 1':lris.

-- (ru l.) vi);I" r infornmt;oll .__ ( 1'195) E\f, fom: (;tlidr (I) til' I'rmuwrlll E...hibi';om {6 th edition). P" ri~ : D irnfl" l1

dl' 1.1Cl.,m rnllni('J fin n et de b I' romolio n. 1a Vil1cue-.Cussons. N. ( 1987) 'Ad"I" o r d ie: d:lng... 1'$ or:a ,jinoS";,lur menulil),·. 1i)/('"t", ( I(, l\ p tll),

pp . 18---20 .-_ (I')<JI ) 'Scho larship o r ,K·lf-indulgence:' RSA jounlal (I:roruaf)') !.\') 1~4 "1.

pp. 184-91 .C ru iksh:lnk. B. (19'}6) ' KC"oIUlion$ " 'ilhin: sc: lf. go \·em me:nr :and w lf·\·)u....·!Il·. til

A. B:arl)·. T. Osborne :and N . Rose (oos) Fou{'Ittilt dl1l1 Politiml Rtdum: I ,bmllm...I\'ro·/i"",t/ill" dlld !lJItiom,litirs ,[Got!ffI'tllrm. pp . 231 -52. Londu n: UCI 1'(0 )/

C hic:ago: Chialgo Un;"e:rsil)' l' rCS$.Dfl;l.cOll' . G . ( 1992) hnp : llwww.exploralofium .Nu/ge:ntral/d i rn:lon. \· i~inn.lllnll.

Ix- rrid:a , J. (19 86) 'Point d,' folic - rn:aint ;lin:ulI l'arc hif\'Cfurc', AA filt~ 12. Pll . 6 ')- 7') ,D llralll . J . ( 1992) ·Jrll rod uClio n· . in J . D lIl':lnt (n l.) ftlllst"l</lls <l IIfI rlJr "uM".

Ulllirrsl<l lldillg o[SrimCt, I.o ndo n: Science Mu s... um .!':{Igcr w n, D . (1991) ' l. ihe ral 111 i1 ilariSI11 and rh.· IJr itish Sl;ll{"·. M '/II 1.1i R"J/rw. 185.

J.ln- F...b,F.l):J\·sser. T . (cd .) (1990) Elf/y Cillrlfl<l: SpIlCt. Fmmt. MIrT<ltit.'t, Lo rl{lo n: Uritish f illll

ln stiIUll·.Founult , fI.·l. ( 1979) fJ;sripli llr lltlli 1'tmillt, H arnlond~""'o rth : P~ngu in .

GJlisoll1. I' . (1994) 'Th~ onlOloro' o f tile encmy: NorllCrr Wiener and Ihc cyb~rncde

... ision·. Critic<l1 '1/(,lIi". 2 1 (Au tumn) . Pl" 228....(,(1.l.; rq,'Ury, It (1970 ) 11Jr ImrUlgttlt I:.Jc. u.>ndon : W...ide nfcld &: N icho!50n ._ _ (1989) "r u rning minds to lcie:nce by hand~-on expLuralion: the nalurc :and

pol...nt ial of Ihe Ita nd~·on rn roiu nl·. in Nuffi c:ld Inte: rxr: i\ e:$cif'oce and T «hnolottv

116 Andrew Barry

Prolecr Shari llg Srit'lIrt': Imm i ll fhr Dt'I~/opmf'llr of If/rt f,tefit lf S(irll,.,. (llId Tt'dmolJJg'/Ct'lIfn J, London: Nuffield hlllnd;l.Iion /Collllllim:c on rhe Publi c U ru k rsland ing ofScicnee.

Haddon. L. (1993 ) ' {rucracrivc galll"'s', in 1'. H ayward and T. Woll en Icds) FmurrVisions : Neso 7(r/mologin ofrlJI' S(rt'f'II, pp. 123--47, London : British him lnsritutc.

H araway, I). (199l) SilllimlS, Cy borgs Iwd W01llm : Til( R('i!ll~mioll ofNfl/ lfrt', London:Free Assoclarlon Books.

Hein. H . (1')90) 71J1' Exploratorinm: 77,t' MIIsf'l/1II IIJ L d"O fJIto'1' Wash ingto n, DC:Smhhsoniun lnsriu uiun Press.

H einieh , N. ( 1988 ) 'The I'omp idou Ccm re and irs publ ic rh... lim its of a utopian sue',in R. Lumley Icd.} 711t' M umull Tim('-II/(/rhi!l(': PUlling e U/lllrt'S 01/ Dispitly.PP' 199-2[ 2, Lo ndon: Rourlcdgc.

Hooper-Greenhill. E. (19?2) MUir/lim lINd fhl' Shllp i llg of KI/oll'irdgl" Lo ndo n:ROUlI ...dge.

H udson. K. (1987) M IISt'ltIIISof"iflll l' l/t"(', Cambr idge: C ambridge U niversity PreSS.jordnnova. L. ( 1989) 'O hjcces o f kn owledge: an historic al pe rspe cti ve ou mu.st"um s' , in

1'. Vergo (cd.) 71lt Nrto MlISr/Jlogy, London: Rcakrion Bocks.Kirby. S. (1988) ' Policy and politics: charges, spo nsorsh ip and bias' , in It Luml ey (cd.)

TIlt M /l5('1I1II Ti me M ll riJil/f , Lo ndo n: Rourlcdgc/Comedia.Lash. S. and J. UIrY (19')4) /:''(ol/omi($ ofS~~IISJ1Ild SPiIt:I', Lo ndo n: Sage. .Latou r, n. ( 1986 ) The p<lwe~ of :l.-~s\}("ia l ion · , in J. l.aw (cd.) Pouffr, An ion II//(/ {ltIi1.

Lon don: Routledge.-- (1')93) WI' f1m~ Nl'lia 81'(// M (ldrTJI, Heme! Hern psl"" ld: Harvester Wh ealsheaf.Law, J. (1986) 'O n power ~nd irs tactics: :l vi ~'w from tlu- socio logy of ~( ietK"c'.

Soci(llogir,11H('lIi('w 34 (1), pp . 1- 3 5.l.evidow. L and It Young ( 19 84 ) · F.xhih iling nuclear l)\)w("r: th e Science Museum

cove r-up' , HlllliMI SciI'llCl'. 14. Pl" 53-79.Macdonald, S. (l9'J2) 'C uhural imagin ing ;Ulmng mu seum visitors', MUJI'ItIll

/l.1/11l11gl'lI/(,//1 ,wd Cimuorship, 11, PI" 401 - 9.-- (I993) 'Un nOUVl-.tU "corps lies visileurs": tlIusecs el chang...mem s cu h urcls' ,

I'ub/ia (' f Musl t'S. 3. PI" 13- 27 .Ma e<jonaIJ. S. :Jnd It Silvt.'rs lOne ( 1990) 'Rewri d ng rh~ mu seums' liclions: laxono m i...s.

slor i...s :Uld readers' . C/lI""'11Sflulin 4 (2), I'p. 17(..-9 1.-- (1992) 'Science on display: th... reprcSI.·nralion of sciem ilic CtlnlrOl'ers)' in IIlUSt:url1

\'xhihilions', P/lUic Undm lll lld i llg 0f5(;('//((', 1, pp . 69- R7.Mau ry, J-P. ( 994) Lf PI/hlis dt: /n IJl r.ou/'('ru, I'ari ~: Gallimard.Nash , C. (1992) ' 1llleraClivc IIlt'tlia in muscum s: look ing backwa rds. forwa rJs and si,le·

ways', M mr/l 1ll M (u/Ilgl'''Irllt /1",/ C/lfJllorship. 1I, pp. 17 1-84.I'osl... r. M . (1990) TI,., ModI' IIf InjbmlluiolJ: PII$/JmlrfllfJIlislJI /l lId Soci,11 Cimu.w,C~ rnbri,lge: Po li!),.

- - ( 1995) 771( Smllld M rd ill Agr. Ca mbridge: Polily.Reichard t. j. (cd .) ( 197 1) Cybl'm f t iN. Art 11/1(1 Mf'IIs, LonJon : Stud io ViSl<l .RielllsJ ijk. j . van (1980) 71/(, Sril' lIrr M II1I'/lIII, London : The Science Museum .H,)~. N. (1993) 'G ov... rnmeillo aUlhor ilYan, l ...xpc rd~ in a(lvanced libera lism ', /:''(ol/omy

flIN! Soriny. 22 (3), 283--99.__ (1996) 'G overn ing ~ advanceJ~ liber.11 democracics' , in A. Barry. T. Osbor nc anJ

N. Hore ({'ds) FOImml/ nlld Politiml R('t/Soll: Lih('f{llism, Nro-libr",IiJI1I Il llt!Rm iofltllit it'S 0fC·o/lrm mnu. Lo ndo n: UCL PresslChicago: C hicago Uni "crsily Press.

Ross, M . (1995) 'M useu ms and com roversy: !h... (as(; o f pas.~i \'e smo king' , 5ri(//rr liSCultllrr. 5 ( I). Pl'. 147- 51.

Schaffer, S. (1992 ) 'Self evid ence' . Crifiml l llll"iry IS, pp . 3 27- 6 2.__ ( 19'))) 'T Ill' co nsu llling flamc: dcc l ri C'~a l showme n and T or}' mys ri~ in lhe wo rl,l

On interactivi ly 117

of goods', in j . Brewer and R. POTI er [cds) Comll ll/filion Il1Id til( World of GO/lrb.London : Rowlnlge.

Science Museum: the N ation al Museum of Science and Ind ustry (1986) , 'Mallagt'mt'!llPlan',I'(llldon .

Shonla nd. M. ( 1987) 'No business like show bu siness'. N,lturr, 328 , p. 213.Sdvcrs tone.. ~ . ~ ~ 988 ) ' M u~eu ll1s and rhe med ia: a theo retica l and methodological

explo rat ion'. O)r Illumllfllll/'il JOIin/lll llf Must!uI/I ~1'l!/(/gl'lIItJ1 l (l1/d Cll rl/lorship, 7,pp . 23 [......41.

- .- (1992) T he med iullI is rhe mus eum: on objects and IOfjic.s in rimes and spares'.rn J. D umm (toJ.) MllirlllllJ III,,! rhr Public Ulldl'rsftl /ll l i lig !if Srimrr, Lond on : S~'i~' nl<'Museum .

'stamper, j .W. ( 1989) "The g:t le ri~' (If machines o f the 1889 Paris World '~ Fair .TrrhJlolor;y (Illd (i,buft'. 30 (2 ), pp. :B O- 53.

Stevenson, j . (n.d.) "The philosoph)' behind bunch pall', Science Museum, j()lmlltl "IEdl/fl1l;ol/ (lful Alusrums, 8, pp . 10-18.

-.- (1994) ·G ~· tl i ng 10 Gr ips' . MUJrlllm j ourtidL May, pp . 30-2.Snarhcrn . ~1. ~ ! 9(2 ) R~PTOII,,(i'lg thr " i ,lllf(': Amhropology. Kimhip (llId Ihl' NI'III

Rrproliurtlllf 7l'rlmologus, Manchesler: Man chesler University Press.Tho~ll as , G . [n.d.) The Nauonal Museum of Science end 11l(lust ry: f.""Icing til<' (Ullin.' ,

nume o.Virilio, P. (1990) 'C arco ct su rgery: cinema in dl<: year 2000 ' , in A. Kuhn (cd.] Altm

20 " 1'; Cil l l ll rtl i T/)('o'1 «nd COlI/rmpom'1 Sf im rt' Firfiol/ Ci" f7IUf, Lo nd on : Vn.~o.WQII ...n. T. ( 1993) 'The bigger the bella: front cincmascop e 10 IMAX'. in P. H.l),w.rnl

:Illd T. Woll en (cds) FUlurr ViJif>llS: NI'III T/'flmo logia of t1)(' Sarl'''' pp . 10- :10 ,London : Hrili,<h Film lnst irutc.

Wynrw, B. (1992) 'Mis unde rstood mislll1dcrsl :rnding.s: social iJ em it ic$ and dlt' puhlkuptake o f scie nce', I 'uhlir Ull dl'f'Sllf/ldi"8 ojSril'''CI', 1, I'p . 281- 304 .

-- (1993) 'Public uprake of science. a case for instuu riona] rdl...xivity', l 'uhi,1'U lldt:rJllfll di ,18 oj"Sril'lI(l' . 2, PI'. 32 1- 37.