It’s strange now to think that simple text labels next to museum objects were once considered to be a cutting edge form of visitor engagement. I had never heard the term “tombstone labels” before but I think that’s a great description of how those labels come across to visitors today. I certainly wouldn’t say that these labels no longer have a place in museums but they’re inadequate as the main interaction visitors have with an object. Anna Baccaglini argues that the next stage in visitor engagement is to let visitors have more physical contact with objects whenever possible. I think this is an interesting idea and I can immediately see the potential benefits with certain objects but I’m a little skeptical that it’s inherently useful. It makes perfect sense that handling crafted goods or tools would give visitors a better sense of their construction and use. However the value of being able to walk up and put your hand on a painting is much more abstract.

The third chapter of Multi-Sensory Museum Experiences gave several examples of museums that had taken steps to make their collections more hands-on. The two that stood out to me were the idea of a “material book” and the use of replicas alongside original pieces. I’ve experienced the latter of these firsthand at the Smithsonian Natural History Museum. They have a large display of casts of dinosaur fossils which aren’t fully hands-on but are able to be experienced fairly close-up. There’s also a functional laboratory attached to the exhibit where real fossils are analyzed and worked on. Visitors can look in through large windows and even though there’s much more of a barrier there, the authenticity of it adds a lot to the replicas outside.