Museum Report - Jewish Museum
Your impressions of the look and feel of the whole place.
The Jewish Museum had a very unified look. It was quite clean with “Old New York” architecture. Walking through the museums it felt aesthetically cohesive -- the display cases, wall colors and wall text felt related but not identical. Most of the walls and the floors marble which gave it a stately presence. I loved the mix of contemporary and historic artifacts and art. I haven’t seen many museums that are both art and history museums focusing on a specific people, however at the Jewish Museum this mix felt effortless and made sense conceptually.
What works, what doesn’t?
What worked: The cohesive feeling of the space really worked for me. In contrast to the Museum of the City of New York, which felt like each exhibition space had its own visual sense, The Jewish Museum felt very unified. From this starting place of visual-cohesion they were able to make some fun and unexpected design choices, such as a small room with bright pink walls, or a floor-display box (for a tapestry) that was painted the same color as the walls: baby blue. I think these design choices were particularly successful because there wasn't any visual confusion. Additionally, as I touched on above, the mix of contemporary and historic artifacts and art was a new approach for me and I think they do it quite successfully.
What didn’t work: I was actually at the Jewish museum as part of a study with HG&Co user testing the Jewish Museum’s new audio guide. There was some interesting introductory information about the history of the museum and the reasoning behind the current exhibitions. All of this was explained on the 3rd floor at the exit of the elevators. I felt like there should have been a bench so that I could have sat and more comfortably listened to the audio. Additionally, in the pink room which I mentioned above, there were iPads on the four walls each of which had further information about the objects on display, I thought this was a great way to bring the objects to life and give visitors adjacency. However, the placement of the iPads blocked some of the objects and made them hard to see. I think the positioning of the iPads should be re-considered.
Do you feel welcomed, is the place intimidating or comfortable, what’s the atmosphere?
When I first walked into the museum I was immediately presented by a huge security desk. After having my bag checked and walking through a metal detector I walked up 3 stairs into an austere marble foyer. This whole experience felt quite ominous, like I was entering a highly protected space.. maybe an embassy or the UN. I didn't dislike this feeling, I was just struck by the gradness, it gave me the feeling that the objects/collection were highly guarded.. that they were fragile and sacred.
Every place has an emotional, social and intellectual gestalt—its interface. Do your best to describe it.
I got the sense that this space was well cared for, wealthy and took itself quite seriously. The museum felt rigid, and formal yet beautiful, bright and clean. There was an elegance to the museum but some fun, unexpected design choices that stood out proudly as the “quirky” facets of the museum.
A word (or two) for its personality?
Serious and elegant.
A memorable object, exhibit, hall or interaction (person-to-person)
The pink room which I mentioned above was striking. Additionally in the Rachel Feinstein: Maiden, Mother, Crone exhibit there was a part of the room that was sectioned off with half walls, the entrance to which had perfectly curved walls. These replicated the forms common in Feinstein’s work and therefore felt cohesive and whimsical.
Hospitality: how hard is it to find the bathrooms, how nice are the guards, can you find your way around.
I asked a guard where I could find the bathrooms and he kindly directed me to the lower level where there is a Russ and Daughters counter and seating area as well as the bathrooms and water fountain. All of this was well-marked and aesthetically cohesive with the rest of the museum.
Who’s there? Ages, demographics, and other details you notice about visitors.
I went to the Jewish Museum on a Monday afternoon and it was almost empty. I saw a couple young Asian people who I think were students as well as a couple of older white people.
Are they coming as one, twos, or in groups?
All of the people I saw at the museum were in groups of 2s or 3s.
How do people socialize at the museum?
I did not see any socializing at the museum besides people within their groups.
Does anyone socialize outside their group?
I did not see any socializing outside of groups.
Does anyone ask questions?
I did not see anyone asking questions.
Did you ask a question or socialize?
The only question I asked was where I could find the bathroom.
Think about what behaviors the museum space supports in regards to socializing, learning, and engagement.
Notice the exhibits.
Are they designed for one person, two people, or a group?
The exhibitions were designed for groups. I say this because the sides and shelves display cases were clear which allowed multiple people from multiple angles to view objects at the same time. Similarly, there were objects placed throughout the exhibition space (not only on the wall) all of which were viewable from 360°. The interactive components, such as the iPad and the large print text folders were for individual use.
Is there a deep dive into content, or is the information “scaffolded” appropriately?
The content was scaffolded. In the exhibition spaces there was an introductory text, then labels that described specific groups of objects, and then labels for each object.
If there are any interactive technology exhibits, are they working? How do people interact with them? Get granular, think input/output.
The only interactive technology I saw were the iPads used to identify and gain specific information about a series of objects. The iPads were working well and the layout was clear. When I approached an iPad I saw a schematic of the display case that was in front of me with descriptive words in each quadrant of the schematic giving a broad overview of the category of object I was looking at, such as “games”, “adornments” etc.. If I clicked on a category, I was brought to a screen with more information about the category and then images of the object that were on display in that category. If I clicked on one of the images it brought me to information about that specific object, such as date, material, acquisition information. I found all of this intuitive, informative and engaging.
Spend a few minutes on the museum’s website.
Does the website ‘feel” like its specific museum?
The website feels like the audio tour app, they have the same interface and aesthetics, but they don’t feel like the museum. The website it predominantly dark colors, blue and black, whereas the museum was light, white and pastels. The website has lots of information on it about upcoming events, the history of the museum, articles about the lives of Jewish people in NYC, as well as exhibition information, hours, cost and directions.
Would you ever go back to the website? Why?
I would go back to this website only to find current and upcoming exhibition details and opening hours information.
Missed Opportunities… think about what you would change or improve
I think there is a lot of information about the museums that I would not have had access to if I hadn’t used the audio tour. One of the most compelling things about the museum is its history, I think this information should be on display, rather than only in the audio guide or on the website.
Curved Walls in Rachel Feinstein: Maiden, Mother, Crone
Pink Room, permanent collection