Senior Studio F21
09.14.21
Extraordinary Ordinary Things Museum
I was excited to learn that we would be working with the CMoA Exraordinary Ordinary Things Exhibition for our senior project this semester. Having external interests in history and anthropology, it seems like a great opportunity to merge these skills into a cohesive project. As someone in products, the subject matter of the museum also caught my eye. After taking products studios, the idea that everyday objects are extraordinary and should be appreciated as such really resonates with me. However, after speaking with Rachel from the museum as well as actually visiting it, I found I had more critiques of the exhibition than I had compliments, all of which led me towards a series of questions and concerns that seem like good, yet broad, places to start for initial brainstorms and ideas.
While going through the museum, I think I was more focused on the narrative of the space and the affordances of it rather than the objects themselves. Potentially this is because of me looking at this through a historical lens and my own interests surrounding material and visual culture. However, I think because of that, I thought a lot about context both in the environment of a museum as well as from history.
Overall, I felt as though the exhibit lacked narrative, and it felt like a wierd mish-mash of objects that were poorly described and displayed in a way that left me feeling confused. I wish that opportunities for learning were leveraged (for example, lessons of cultural appropriation, accessibility, etc.), and explored to understand an object’s role in our lives and their impact on people, society, and culture. Every lesson felt shallow, and I felt as if the designer’s role was minimized to aesthetics. I would like to expand on aspects of these critiques to round out areas that I felt were missing from the museum.
Exploring Schenley Plaza and Craig Street
When I actually went to Schenley and Craig, I had some logistical questions that could possibly be constraints to a potential project:
- Where to get power if there is a lighting/electrical component to our projects?
- Are businesses actively participating, are they allowing us to use shop space, are we supposed to drive patrons to these businesses, and/or are we just using the sidewalk spaces outside?
The spaces themselves I am quite familiar with, as I live in the area, so some notes about each of the spaces:
Craig St. is typically used for people on the move. There are restaurants and shops, but most people choose to pick up food and leave. Occasionally (typically after afternoon classes and around dinnertime) there are people who do camp at certain shops and restaurants such as Fuku Tea. During peak class times, most people who walk by are college students, but there are also a fair number of middle aged adults who frequent the shops, particularly near the PNC towards Fifth St. There is an eclectic mix of buildings, ranging from Pitt and CMU buildings, bookstores, various banks, a karaoke banks, and a range of restaraunts. Theres few places to stop and sit, and the sidewalks can feel crowded and hard to navigate at peak hours. There are trees along the sides of the street that could possibly be used.
Schenley Plaza is a much more sedentary place. Typically used on a sunny day, it is a place for college students, families, and others to go relax. There are gardens and benches, as well as tables for people to go sit. The large field is typically used for events, and the heavy foot traffic on Forbes means people typically stop to check out whatever events are happening. There are no outlets near the grass, but there are a couple of them towards the food kiosks. There is weak wifi for public use in the area as well. I cannot say I really remember what it is like in the winter, but my guess is that the field would get icy, and not super ideal.
Co-Creation Workshop
The co-creation workshop was quite an interesting experience. I do have my complaints again, as the Chinese medicine bit felt unnecessary and appropriatory, but I do think there are important themes of finding and creating meaning in objects through ritual. It brings up important questions heading into the brainstorming process. For example:
- How do tangible interactions allow people to connect to objects?
- What makes an experience feel “special” or “unique”? What makes an object feel “special” or “unique”?
- To what extent does an experience have to be “extraordinary” to derive meaning from it?
- How might we allow audiences to better connect to the extraordinary parts of ordinary objects through tangible experiences?
Having these questions in mind will be good to inform and frame my thinking going into group work.
Carrie Furnace/Carnegie Library
From what it sounds like, the tour guide that I had at Carrie Furnace was less focused on the art versus the furnace and the history of Pittsburgh steel. From what little we did get from the tour in terms of art, I really enjoyed how almost all of the art is made from reclaimed materials from the furnace. It adds new life to pre-existing objects and recontextualizes the old materials into new marvels. In no way to the art pieces detract from the history or the meaning of the furnace site, but instead, it offers new entry points for the viewer to engage with it. Again, questions are raised and frameworks are created for us: How might we find ways to recontextualize an object to bring new meaning and different forms of engagement to a space (in this case, the exhibition)?
The Carnegie Library was another example of recontextualization, but instead of an object, they utilize the space. I loved how this library is a hub for community engagement. A large problem I have with museums, and a problem that it does not seem like the CMoA is trying to solve, is the lack of socio-economic diversity of its patrons. A museum tends to exist, and those who can afford to take the time and spend the money are able to benefit from what the museum has to offer. On the contrary, the community in Braddock exists, and the library makes the offers to benefit the community. The services offered by the library play an active role versus the exhibitions at the museum play a passive role. I wonder if bringing the tangible experiences out into the public will be able to diversify the audiences and can contribute to the local community around us (something I would argue CMU does not do enough).
Un-Convention + In-Class Workshop
The un-convention held during class was really helpful to me. As I stated before, I walked into the museum as well as the project prompt with my own perspective based on my external interests. I really liked seeing more of how people were interpreting objects and challenging the environments that we were given. Reflecting on my own process, I approached my thinking and therefore my board as if I were going to write an analytical essay instead of a design project. I do think that this is definitely something that could add to the brainstorming and ideating portion of group work, but I definitely have to revert my thinking towards a design prompt again. I would like to go back and pay more attention to the objects, partially because I was under the assumption that we were making something based on the museum’s mission statement versus one of the objects, but also to see how my thoughts and attitudes on the museum change.
The in-class workshop was a fun way for me to think about implied versus derived meanings of objects. My group got off to a slow start due to the fact that we tried to stay very true to the intended inspirations and meanings that influenced the designers to create these objects. However, as the workshop progressed, we focused less on that and instead focused on the meaning that we each found in the objects from our own subjective experiences. I wonder if those degrees of interpretation bastardize the meanings of the object or exhibition space, or if that is a natural part of design and should be embraced going into our projects. Everything we create will be an interpretation of an interpretation, and what the visitors get from that will be one more level of interpretation. While this leads to fun, creative, and curious ideas, I wonder if there is a line for how far this can and/or should go.
