Comparing the National Army Museum and Imperial War Museum

As you enter the Holocaust exhibition in the Imperial War Museum you are greeted by a video depicting Jewish people reminiscing about what life was like before the Nazi’s. As you go through the rooms you are following a specific timeline of events which culminate in the mass murder in the concentration camps and the defeat of Hitler and the Nazis. It feels as though you are being told a story and the way the exhibition is displayed it has an impact, there isn't too much information and it’s in a wide range of media such as videos, posters and artefacts  I think the Museum is portraying Jews as “the ultimate victim.”

In Contrast, when you enter the World War I & World War II exhibition in the National Army Museum the layout has a less personal atmosphere, there doesn't seem to be a flow in the information given which makes it harder to decipher the story it is trying to tell. When walking through the exhibition you feel almost overwhelmed with the amount of information on offer, there doesn't seem to be a single angle or vested interest imposed on you.  However, it has a more interactive approach as they have remodelled many scenes from battle incorporating sound effects and realistic dummies.

Overall, I feel I engaged more with the Imperial War Museum. The general layout and display felt more personal and although there was less information you still got a wider picture of what happened as if you were being told the story first hand and thus evoking more emotion. However, although the exhibitions had a brief crossover through WWII and Germany I feel I can’t fully evaluate them against each other as they are predominantly for different purposes and are presenting different histories.

Mining the British Museum

Masquerade Room as part of the Sainsburies African Galleries

The British Museum is organised by a series of galleries each containing artefacts from a certain culture, the separate rooms in these galleries are then used to group together similar objects from either the same region or time. This is how the curator tries to represent every culture, although every culture is analysed by an outsider. Therefore it can be argued that it isn’t an accurate representation of these cultures as the curators ideas are projected onto us through the displays.

The Masquerade Room tries to create a narrative of culture, they have a general synopsis of the tradition of Masquerade opposite a huge display cabinet filled with various masks that are used in traditional ceremonies across Africa. The masks are divided into 4 categories;

1. What is a Mask- A general introduction into the different kinds of masks and their purposes
2. Wild Beasts- Masks emulating wild animals, as a way for the wearer to channel their spirits
3.  Female Masks- Females aren’t generally allowed in Masquerade, therefore men wear female masks to portray women in the ceremonies.
4. The Dead- Masks used to channel spirits of the dead, or help relatives into the next life.

I think the room tries to tell a story, about the different masquerade traditions throughout Africa. However I feel that they leave out some key points in the labelling cards e.g. if a particular colour means certain individuals are more powerful. The more extravagant the mask = the more power the individuals or the village has? The Voice of the story is the Curator instead of a primary source, they choose which masks are on show and what labels each mask is given and by doing so project their own views and insights into the tradition on us.