Museum Of Science Renovations | 1 Science Park | West End

Re: Museum Of Science Renovation/ Addition

Time to Regenerate this thread as major things are underway at the ole MOS beginning with the launch in a few weeks of the largest single exhibit in MOS history the "Hall of Human Life" on the 2nd floor of the former "Green Wing"

http://www.mos.org/campaign/facilities-and-sustainability

Rejuvenating Our Iconic Campus
More than half of the Museum's 130,000 square feet of exhibit space will be transformed during the life of The Campaign for the Museum of Science, and with the relocation of the main Information Booth, an open lobby will greet visitors and offer an unobstructed view of the Charles River.

Centered on the museumgoer's experience, key enhancements to all levels of the garage entrance and the concourse will improve initial wayfinding and visitor services. New skylights in the Blue Wing will bring natural light to our Exhibit Halls, and new finishes from floor to ceiling will refresh and contemporize our décor.

Next to come [2015] -- the the early planning stage is well underway thanks to $10 M from the Yawkee Foundation --- the "Charles River Gallery" will open-up in front of you as you enter the MOS

From a story in the Globe that ran last January:

a $21 million gallery overlooking the river that will feature interactive displays on its ecosystem and history, live plant and animal exhibits, and an outdoor garden along the water.

The three-story gallery, funded with a $10 million gift from the Yawkey Foundations, will be the new centerpiece of the 183-year-old science museum, which is in the midst of a broader $250 million campaign to transform nearly half of its exhibit space in coming years.

“These renovations will totally upgrade our image and make the gallery space more state-of-the-art and exciting,” said Ioannis Miaoulis, the museum’s president. “We want to re-orient the museum gradually so visitors understand the natural world, and the human-made world, as well as how they are connected and interdependent.”


The new exhibit space, to be called the Yawkey Gallery on the Charles River, will create a more vibrant entry to the museum that will take better advantage of the museum’s waterfront porch. For example, the project will include massive new, electronically tinted windows that will provide a more dramatic view of the Charles and Boston’s skyline. The gallery will also have digital maps and other visual displays.

Finally there will be a comprehensive exhibit devoted to "What is Technology" as a portal to the former "Blue Wing"
 
Re: Museum Of Science Renovation/ Addition

Does anyone know if any pieces of the page 1 renderings are still going to happen especially the enhancements to the planetarium? I still hope that happens.
 
Re: Museum Of Science Renovation/ Addition

They just finished a major redesign of the Planetarium last year. It doesn't look different from the outside, and I haven't been to it since it reopened, but I hear it's a pretty great time.
 
Re: Museum Of Science Renovation/ Addition

Skylights in the Blue Wing will work wonders for the atmosphere in what currently feels like a cave.
 
Re: Museum Of Science Renovation/ Addition

They just finished a major redesign of the Planetarium last year. It doesn't look different from the outside, and I haven't been to it since it reopened, but I hear it's a pretty great time.

Thanks for the reply. I still hope they do that covering on the outside. It would be aweaome seeing that sitting over the water as you drive into the city.
 
Re: Museum Of Science Renovation/ Addition

Does anyone know if any pieces of the page 1 renderings are still going to happen especially the enhancements to the planetarium? I still hope that happens.

type -- After they fired the Denver Crowd and rehired Peter Kuttner & Cambridge Seven Associates

MOSoverall.gif


The above exotic design is a museum piece

The Cambridge Seven Associates design is much more subtle -- the only major external manifestation will be a new BIG PICTURE WINDOW on the Charles -- with electrochromic glass and probably a grid of smaller scale individual panels with less visible structure

After C7 re-evaluated the existing structures they concluded that with proper internal work a major $250 M re-do of the MOS -- a building plan focused on the 3 New Major Public Components:

1) Natural World featuring the Hall of Human Life -- old Green Wing
2) Entry, Main Lobby and Charles River Gallery -- Old entry Lobby
3) The Built World featuring What is Technology -- old Blue Wing

-- could be re-built and extended essentially within the existing building footprint -- with only a few minor exceptions of infilling between some floors and the front of the parking garage [Green Wall?]

Also to be renovated to a lesser extent (as they have all been already redone relatively recently) are the:

1) Planetarium [lobby area and some underneath stuff]
2) Mugar Omni Theatre
3) "Duck Boat lobby"
4) Discovery Center & access to Cabot Lab and Live Animal Center
5) Food
6) Toys and Trinkets
7) Skyline on 6th Floor and other meeting / event spaces
8) Gordon Wing -- home of the National Center for Technological Literacy

Other project will be underneath, behind or with the walls to improve the physical plant equipment and enhance visitor services


There will be work ongoing at varying intensities for at least the next 5 years

the Fall 2011 MOS report to members and associated potential donors tells a lot of details with some renders:
http://www.mos.org/sites/dev-elvis.mos.org/files/docs/advancement/mos_magazine_fall-2011.pdf
 
It's probably been said before, but it has always struck me that a "museum of science" is kind of an oxymoron. Museums are generally about the past and static...whereas science is completely dynamic and the pace of change renders exhibits irrelevant within months or a few years. And museums aren't where we go to experience new technology nor do museums have the capital to keep up with the rapid pace of change.

The museum of science has always struck me as a glorified omni theater/planetarium with a kitschy children's museum strewn with an old space capsule from the 70s and other things to keep a 7 year old occupied for a couple hours.

Does anyone think it's a successful institution?
 
^ Pretty sure that everyone but you thinks it's a successful institution. :)

It's primary mission is education, and it succeeds hugely in that.
 
^well, that settles that. I retract my statements. It's amazing and anyone who isn't transfixed by retread exhibits from 40 years ago is a moron.
 
^ Pretty sure that everyone but you thinks it's a successful institution. :)

It's primary mission is education, and it succeeds hugely in that.

The MOS has always been a kind of quirky concept. It's a natural history museum except that it doesn't have a whole lot of fossils or skeletons - the only life-sized dinosaur is a model. In fact, the whole natural history section is basically a taxidermy exhibit from the 1930s. The basic components of the "Built World" wing are unchanged for decades, with a few exhibits that change from time to time about the laws of physics or fluid mechanics (or the dear departed virtual fishtank).

It IS kind of a children's museum, really. If you go to the natural history museums in NY, Washington or Chicago they're really quite different from this. A better anaolg might be Science and Industry in Chicago, which has a similar mix of nostalgic curiosities and travelling exhibitions (and a really nice model train set).
 
MOS attempt to position itself with respect to exhibits is complicated by these two 'science' museums:

http://www.hmnh.harvard.edu/on_exhibit.html

https://peabody.harvard.edu/node/195

I am a bit surprised that somebody hadn't approached Harvard and said let's move the exhibited portion of the Harvard collections into a new building and consolidate with exhibits from museum A or B. Harvard has a separate ethno museum in Washington, and the Arnold Arboretum is not exactly on-campus.
 
^well, that settles that. I retract my statements. It's amazing and anyone who isn't transfixed by retread exhibits from 40 years ago is a moron.

Oh stop being dramatic. They redesign constantly because, as you said, science is forever dynamic. Are their exhibits sometimes stale because of lag time? Sure. But Jesus, "retread exhibits from 40 years ago" is either completely false or only true for select exhibits. Some of the museum is being overhauled and updated over the next few years. The nature of science makes it more difficult and more costly for them to not get stale, but they do constantly update exhibits in spite of that. Again, their primary mission, and a large source of revenue for them is educational school groups and summer camps. So yes, it can be kind of kitschy, but the museum doesn't really try to be anything more than that. It doesn't pretend to be a Museum of Natural History. It's more like the Carnegie Science Center in Pittsburgh. In that role, I would contend that it succeeds. You don't have to like visiting it, that makes you neither a moron, nor an enlightened connoisseur who hasn't been sucked in by their scam. But again, I don't think your personal distaste for the museum means that it's a failed concept.
 
The model ship and train parts of the museum are tired and old ... but guess what. I was reading some historical fiction recently which made me make a special trip to the Museum of Science just to refamiliarize myself with that part of the facility. I am damn glad that this part of the museum is still alive and kicking. Science IS dynamic and shifting, but so are we and our interests.

cca
 
Oh stop being dramatic. They redesign constantly because, as you said, science is forever dynamic. Are their exhibits sometimes stale because of lag time? Sure. But Jesus, "retread exhibits from 40 years ago" is either completely false or only true for select exhibits. Some of the museum is being overhauled and updated over the next few years.

THAT SOUNDS ok

Again, their primary mission, and a large source of revenue for them is educational school groups and summer camps. So yes, it can be kind of kitschy, but the museum doesn't really try to be anything more than that.

NOT TRUE

It doesn't pretend to be a Museum of Natural History. It's more like the Carnegie Science Center in Pittsburgh. In that role, I would contend that it succeeds. You don't have to like visiting it, that makes you neither a moron, nor an enlightened connoisseur who hasn't been sucked in by their scam. But again, I don't think your personal distaste for the museum means that it's a failed concept.

PARTIALLY TRUE -- Carnegie is more like what was described and attributed to the MOS except for their dinosaurs that a large, plentiful and definitely real

Busses -- thanks for the rejoinder against the ignorance about the MOS -- as for the others -- I would just ask --- When was the last time you actually visited the MOS other than to suck on a bong during the Pink Floyd laser show in the Planetarium?

Point of Full Disclosure -- I've been a volunteer in the MOS Exhibit Interpreter program on Sunday afternoons for over 20 years

A few MOS facts:

about 700 "permanent exhibits" -- although the mix changes constantly
Some large such as the world's largest air insulated Van de Graaf Generator
Some small and very state of the art -- Nano technology sponsored by the NSF
Some globally unique such as the very detailed 3D model of Mt Everest
An operating SEM [which while about 20 years old] allowing visitors to see things from the scale of Ticks to the very edge of the domain of atoms [200 kX] -- and for which students in some of the high school enhancement programs can prepare their own samples
A Diffusion Cloud Chamber where 24X7 sub atomic particles leave behind their tracks
and a lot more now and for the future

Major Aspects of the MOS -- not hardly garden variety kische:

The Gordon Current Science and Technology Center -- preparing and presenting live programming -- some taken as feed by NECN among other media

Gordon-sponsored Design Challenges -- where under some supervision you can design, build, and test a prototype solution to a given problem --- such as sliding down a hill, sailing, building a trampoline with least bounce, etc.

The aforementioned Charles Hayden Planetarium -- recently renovated with the state-of-the-art in digital projection technology

The Mugar Omni Theatre

The Childrens Discovery Space for preschoolers to interact with the nature of nature

real - live and constantly changing the Butterfly Garden

Theatre of Electricity presenting live demonstrations of the a small and very large Van de Graaf Generator, several Tesla Coils of various sizes including one that "Sings well known songs"

The entire "science and engineering" as process Cluster funded by more than 10 million in NSF grants and including:
Take a Closer Look -- home of the SEM, Cloud Chamber, large screen Thermal IR Camera
Investigate -- including a you are Galileo and you can drop somethings and see if they really fall at the same rate and ther opportunity to experiment with solar cars and fludi flow
Making Models -- home of Everest as well as interactive mapping and modeling of the surface of metals at the atomic level and the surfaces of planers
Natural Mysteries -- where yes there are skeletons of snakes, "Big Game" and Trilobytss collected when the MOS was the pioneering [circa 1830's] New England Natural History Society

The Live Animal Center -- where you can see live snakes, owls, porcupines, etc., -- the MOS is an accredited Zoo

The Gordon Wing [in-fill within the parking garage hosting] the NSF, Gordon and others funded National Center for Technological Literacy -- creator of a series of middle and high school engineering curricular material now part of the core curriculum in more than a dozen states

1.5 Million annual visitors from more than 100 countries and every state
tens of thousands of school kids
adult education programs
HQ for the Intel sponsored Computer Clubhouse with clubhouses around the country

Lead position in the NISE Network {"(Nanoscale Informal Science Education Network "} -- a consortium of 14 museums and universities across the nation funded by a major grant from the National Science Foundation -- producer of a "permanent" but constantly updated exhibit in the Blue Wing on the science and practice of Nano
http://www.nisenet.org/

Yes -- I will admit that there are some shortcomings -- the MOS's largest Real Fossil -- Triceratops Cliff -- is one of only a handful of full and nearly complete Triceratops -- unfortunately a long term loan

When the MOS absorbed the Computer Museum -- they allowed the unique and irreplaceable collection of artifacts to be "legally" pillaged and carried off to Silicon Valley

The formerly working 80 HP Stem Engine is now just sitting there as the old guy who took care of it is now in the big workshop beyond

A number of the oldies but goodies that disappeared such as: the Huge Fresnel Light House Lens; the live display of Boston Harbor from a real marine radar on a "Simulated Ship's Bridge"; Interactive Wall sized Periodic Table -- hard to keep-up with the new elements

I suggest that you come see the Hall of Human Life when it opens in the next few weeks -- where you can have more than a dozen of your parameter measured, stored under an anonymous ID [ you get a unique bar-coded bracelet when you enter) --and then compared in real-time to the mass of other visitors with on-line access to check on how things might have changed since your visit

After you have actually experienced the MOS -- we can talk
http://www.mos.org/exhibits

PS: MOS is also one of two home of the Boston Duck Tours -- except this Saturday when the Red Sox will be borrowing them for a Rolling World Series Ralley
 
THAT SOUNDS ok

PARTIALLY TRUE -- Carnegie is more like what was described and attributed to the MOS except for their dinosaurs that a large, plentiful and definitely real

The Carnegie Science Center does not have any dinosaurs. You are comfusing it with the Carnegie Musuem of Natural History. The largest area in the Science Center is devoted to robots/ the robot hall of fame. It also has a submarine and a huge model train, but it has close to no taxidermy and no fossils on display.
 
The Carnegie Science Center does not have any dinosaurs. You are comfusing it with the Carnegie Musuem of Natural History. The largest area in the Science Center is devoted to robots/ the robot hall of fame. It also has a submarine and a huge model train, but it has close to no taxidermy and no fossils on display.

Found -- you are right of course -- I was just in Pitt last Christmas time to visit my brother and we went to see the Dino's who have been re-ingorated by placing them into the Jurrasic and Mesazoic versions of the New England Life Dioramas -- aka the Moose at the MOS
 
It may be helpful to note that the MOS does not try to be a repository of science like the MFA is a repository of art. Science is a process and a way of interacting with the world. The museum is intended to convey science as a "how" rather than an "it". Prior posters are correct that discoveries made through science are too rapid to make exhibits about but some things are baselines. observations, experiments, models, classifications, etc. You teach the basics and their applications through biology, chemistry, geology and other fields. The MOS does a good job with this.
 
It may be helpful to note that the MOS does not try to be a repository of science like the MFA is a repository of art. Science is a process and a way of interacting with the world. The museum is intended to convey science as a "how" rather than an "it". Prior posters are correct that discoveries made through science are too rapid to make exhibits about but some things are baselines. observations, experiments, models, classifications, etc. You teach the basics and their applications through biology, chemistry, geology and other fields. The MOS does a good job with this.

You're right, but I think the issue is more that a "science" museum isn't really a thing. You have your natural history museums, like Chicago's Field Museum or the Smithsonian Natural History Museum in DC, and you have your experiential "science and technology and other cool stuff for kids" museums like the Exploratorium in SF, which sort of invented the concept.

The MoS tries to do both, with an additional edge of nostalgia in exhibits like the Hall of Electricity, Mathemantica, the ship models, the Apollo capsule, etc. Actually, one of the MoS's real strengths is that it attempts to truly be a museum of "science" with hard lab exhibits like the SEM and science classes for kids (a whole part of the museum I only saw when I was in elementary school and will never see again).

That said, Whigh, a lot of the features you're listing there are pretty gray around the edges. The Van de Graaf is timeless, but it's also 80 years old. Mathematica was installed in many science museums around the country, but this has been the only version left for decades. The Omni Theater must be a money maker, I guess, but its technology is obsolete - there's been IMAX theaters in furniture stores for 10 years in Boston - and the movies it shows are pretty boring.

None of that is a fatal flaw. In fact, nostalgia is the only reason I would still go back to the Museum of Science, and all of the exhibits I loved as a kid were multiple generations old THEN. I bet kids today have the exact same connection to the place. The fact that it's getting scraggly is a good reason to give it a freshening, and that's exactly what this project is doing without cutting anything beloved.
 
You're right, but I think the issue is more that a "science" museum isn't really a thing. You have your natural history museums, like Chicago's Field Museum or the Smithsonian Natural History Museum in DC, and you have your experiential "science and technology and other cool stuff for kids" museums like the Exploratorium in SF, which sort of invented the concept.

The MoS tries to do both, with an additional edge of nostalgia in exhibits like the Hall of Electricity, Mathemantica, the ship models, the Apollo capsule, etc. Actually, one of the MoS's real strengths is that it attempts to truly be a museum of "science" with hard lab exhibits like the SEM and science classes for kids (a whole part of the museum I only saw when I was in elementary school and will never see again).

That said, Whigh, a lot of the features you're listing there are pretty gray around the edges. The Van de Graaf is timeless, but it's also 80 years old. Mathematica was installed in many science museums around the country, but this has been the only version left for decades. The Omni Theater must be a money maker, I guess, but its technology is obsolete - there's been IMAX theaters in furniture stores for 10 years in Boston - and the movies it shows are pretty boring.

None of that is a fatal flaw. In fact, nostalgia is the only reason I would still go back to the Museum of Science, and all of the exhibits I loved as a kid were multiple generations old THEN. I bet kids today have the exact same connection to the place. The fact that it's getting scraggly is a good reason to give it a freshening, and that's exactly what this project is doing without cutting anything beloved.

Mathematica is on its way out. As for scraggliness and nostalgia, go back to the museum in three or four years and I promise you it won't be the same place you went to as a kid. Obviously the Van de Graaf is old as sin, but it's also incredible popular and doesn't really get old.
 

Back
Top