One area the video commented on that I found interesting was the relationship between the artifacts and the people who came to observe them, that the artifacts can act as a bridge between strangers. To create this bridge, Nina’s museum seems to be combining three seemingly distinct components of a museum, the museum’s exhibits, the interactivity of such exhibits, and the visitors who are interested in seeing them. Through maker spaces, people can directly engage with the theme of the museum, art and history in this case, while a clever design of the space and setup can stimulate social interactions. There seems to be an opportunity to create a complete experience that promotes engagement, learning, and socialization at the same time, at least for those who are willing to invest in all three aspects.

I do wonder about the flexibility of a museum like the Santa Cruz Museum in terms of how it can serve all types of visitors effectively at the same time. If a visitor is not interested in the creative spaces or the social interactions, how can the exhibits themselves make up for the lack of those experiences? How difficult is it to strike a balance between these elements? How about people with different levels of background knowledge of the topic? I am interested to explore this idea further, but for now, from Nina’s description of the Santa Cruz Museum, I can see people, including museum staff and novel visitors, working together to create an experience that can be inclusive, engaging, and educational all at the same time.