Posts
As many of you know, I subscribe to the Society of American Archivists emailing alias, and am, in short, a complete archives dork. Anyway, Last night, I sent in a question asking about differences in graduate degrees. This prompted a flood of discussion, mostly on-list, but some off-list as well.
Basically, I asked if a Masters in Archives or Library Science is better. Here is one related thread I found particularly interesting and true:
When you ask Joe Blow on the street what a librarian is, they instantly know SOMETHING about what a librarian does. When you ask the same person what an archivist is, they give you that quizzical look. Thus the need last year for the short saying of what an archivist does.
We cannot hope to make a name for ourselves, to take control of our destiny, until we are able to define for ourselves what an archivist is and what an archivist does. Heck, most people can't even pronounce it right - they pronounce it 'arch I vist" instead of "arch-iv-ist" with the long I instead of the short i. I've known archivists who can't say it correctly. If you cannot pronounce your professional title correctly, how can you hope that the person on the street will know what it is you do and the importance you have in society?
Wednesday, September 30, 2009
Washington DC Trip (April 2009)
I just got back from a 4-day weekend in Washington DC. I had been planning this trip for weeks, figuring out all the details. For those of you who may not know, I want to be an archivist. Washington DC is one of the centers in the world for archiving, so I set up appointments with archivists at the Library of Congress, National Archives, Smithsonian, and planned to stop by and hopefully get to talk to someone at the Holocaust Museum Archives. In total, I had 6 informational interviews in 2 days (Thursday and Friday, because, of course, I could only visit museums, not archives, on Saturday and Sunday): LOC-1, NARA-2, Am Hist-2, Holocaust-1, and got to meet far more than 6 archivists. In addition to visiting those archives, I went through the public areas of: The Library of Congress, Holocaust Museum, American History Museum, Air & Space Museum, Postal Museum, Natural History Museum (briefly), American Indian Museum (briefly), and the Castle (Smithsonian headquarters). These experiences I had just a week ago Thursday and Friday, were life-changing - I have yet to see the exact degree to which they were..
My first interview was with the head of the Rare Books at the Library of Congress, a St. Olaf graduate. He held a major grudge against "normal" archivists, saying they were not as skilled as rare book archivists. However, he did offer me a paid internship for summer 2010...
All of the archivists I interviewed had MLS degrees, library degrees. Most or all of them also had history degrees, either at the BA or MA level. Most took no more than 10 years from grad school to get to the position they were currently in. One person said it would probably be possible to get a job with a MA in museology; everyone else seemed skeptical. Many seemed skeptical of my plan to work as an archivist without a history degree, but German was generally considered an ok alternative. Psycholinguistics was hardly mentioned.
Now here comes the question: Do I change my course plan, and go to library school, or stick with the original plan, and get a museology degree? I've always thought I wanted to work in a mid-sized museum, where a museology degree would be preferable...although MLS degrees would also be just about equally functional. But what if I wanted to "move up," to Washington-level archiving? What if I want to take a break from the non-profit sector and work at Microsoft for a few years to save up some money? A museology degree would count for something, sure, but not near as much as an ALA-certified MLS with archives certificate/concentration.
So of course, Friday night, I immediately jumped on the computer and did research on grad schools. My requirements: ALA-certified, archives concentration/program option, urban location. My current top choices are: Pratt Institute (NY), Queens College (NY), San Jose State University, and University of British Columbia (Vancouver, Canada).
As for fun aspects of my trip, I stayed with a friend who goes to George Washington University, so I got to pretty much be in the center of everything. I met some of her friends, saw the area, went to the memorials and monuments (and massively scraped up my leg when I tripped on my morning run!), ate some good ethnic food for once, and went to a Marian Anderson commemorative concert at the Lincoln Memorial, with the Marine Band and Chicago Children's Chorus, among other performers.
My first interview was with the head of the Rare Books at the Library of Congress, a St. Olaf graduate. He held a major grudge against "normal" archivists, saying they were not as skilled as rare book archivists. However, he did offer me a paid internship for summer 2010...
All of the archivists I interviewed had MLS degrees, library degrees. Most or all of them also had history degrees, either at the BA or MA level. Most took no more than 10 years from grad school to get to the position they were currently in. One person said it would probably be possible to get a job with a MA in museology; everyone else seemed skeptical. Many seemed skeptical of my plan to work as an archivist without a history degree, but German was generally considered an ok alternative. Psycholinguistics was hardly mentioned.
Now here comes the question: Do I change my course plan, and go to library school, or stick with the original plan, and get a museology degree? I've always thought I wanted to work in a mid-sized museum, where a museology degree would be preferable...although MLS degrees would also be just about equally functional. But what if I wanted to "move up," to Washington-level archiving? What if I want to take a break from the non-profit sector and work at Microsoft for a few years to save up some money? A museology degree would count for something, sure, but not near as much as an ALA-certified MLS with archives certificate/concentration.
So of course, Friday night, I immediately jumped on the computer and did research on grad schools. My requirements: ALA-certified, archives concentration/program option, urban location. My current top choices are: Pratt Institute (NY), Queens College (NY), San Jose State University, and University of British Columbia (Vancouver, Canada).
As for fun aspects of my trip, I stayed with a friend who goes to George Washington University, so I got to pretty much be in the center of everything. I met some of her friends, saw the area, went to the memorials and monuments (and massively scraped up my leg when I tripped on my morning run!), ate some good ethnic food for once, and went to a Marian Anderson commemorative concert at the Lincoln Memorial, with the Marine Band and Chicago Children's Chorus, among other performers.
Museum Reviews (from my trip to Germany, Tromso, Norway and London, England in January 2008)
Roman Museum
The museum was very interesting; I thought the most interesting parts were the grave stones, which there were quite a lot of. I could understand a fair amount of the Latin, although it was a bit rusty. It was nice that they had transcriptions and translations into German. Some of the information was also translated into English and French, but only some. I understand to an extent why they only translated some of it, but it would have been nice if everything was reliably translated – I heard a lot of English-speaking tourists there. The museum was set up about exactly between that of an art museum and that of a history museum. Although there was almost no Roman art on display, everything was artifacts, there wasn’t anything interactive or chronological. It was organized mostly, by type of artifact. This was, in a way, nice, however, I would have preferred it to be chronologically organized, if it would have been possible, because then I probably wouldn’t have gotten a headache so fast from reading tombstone after tombstone. Another thing that disappointed me, was the lack of text. There were captions for most artifacts, however, there were almost no signs that explained the Roman history. I couldn’t find one sign that said the date of when Rome conquered Colognia, much less how. Near the end of our visit, Micot asked a docent about pictures (I was farther away, so I didn’t completely hear his question). Anyway, she pointed him to a room, where there were pictures of the excavation. That was less interesting to me, but it was a nice, information-filled room. However, it was totally hidden! There was a sign on the door, saying what was inside, but if one wasn’t looking for it, they would completely pass it by! When we left, we had to squeeze through the entrance way. They had all but about 3’ roped off from the entrance hall to the museum. There was a guy standing there checking tickets. OK, I understand why they did that; but really, how many people are going to try and walk in without a ticket? How hard would it be to control 8’ instead of 3’? The gift shop, also, was puny, and practically non-existent.
Lindt Chocolate Museum
This was a much bigger museum, and also much more crowded. It was very crowded. True, the factory/museum was on a tiny island in the Rhine, but I believe they could have improved their crowd management techniques. The direction of flow was very clear. The exhibits started out with a history of the cocoa bean, how it is harvested, how it came to Europe, etc. After this initial background on what chocolate is, we came into a huge room with chocolate machines. I’m pretty sure that only about half of the machines there were functional (the actual factory must have been on the other side of the building somewhere), but there was somebody handing out free samples of melted chocolate on a stick, and there were also people actually making and packaging chocolate behind Plexiglas walls, which had all the explanation needed about what was happening. There was a stand where they were selling truffles for 0.5€ each, and Hannah thought that was insanely expensive. After we lagged in this room for forever, we continued up to more exhibits. These exhibits explained the history of chocolate in Europe. Did you know that before chocolate bars, people drank hot chocolate as a luxury drink? Then hot chocolate would be a normal drink, and THEN chocolate bars came. There were lots of interesting artifacts; old candy wrappers, old advertisements, etc…up through interesting collections of new artifacts, including 500 Kinder Egg surprises, and a Kit-Kat bench. This chain of exhibits plopped us back in the factory room, and we were forced to go back through the first exhibit hall, to come back out into the lobby. This is what museums should always avoid! Backwards traffic flow! I really don’t think it would have been hard to built a bridge going directly to the exit (bridges connected all the exhibits with the factory room). From the lobby, there was a café (I would have LOVED to try the hot chocolate, but the Trippes, I’m positive, would have found that a complete waste of money, so I didn’t even ask). The gift shop was huge; it had every sort of fancy Lindt, Hussel, and Mozart chocolate. The Christmas candy was 50% off, so I got a cinnamon chocolate bar, and Christmas truffles for 3.5€. However, as I was about to grab the cinnamon bar, a store clerk steps in front of me, and organizes the display for a good minute, as I give up trying to reach around her for the chocolate. We’re specifically told not to step in front of people to fix the displays! For good reason! I also found it strange, that they had a collection of totally random metal sign things, that had nothing to do with chocolate (the Trippes bought 3 of them), yet had no books or educational things about chocolate.
Polaria (Tromso)
The museum was really quite good, despite being quite small. The main exhibit area had nicely made displayed about polar exploration and global warming. There were also a handful of interactive exhibits, including a quiz of museum content (I got 60% before going through). Everything was in Norwegian and English, and about 90% also had German. The main part of the museum seemed to be the panoramic video. Every half hour, they showed 18-minute videos of arctic scenery and animals, and played music to go along with it. It was really nicely done. The theater leads you into another exhibit about arctic animals. This exhibit reminded me of the Titanic at PSC, because it had fake icebergs all over, and also had appropriate lighting and floors. From here, you came to a small aquarium. There was a seal, and also about 5 medium-sized tanks with various other kinds of animals.
Since the museum was so small, $13 seemed quite steep to me, but the museum was very well done. It had plenty of interactive displays and activities for kids, and the diagrams were all very well presented. This was also the first completely bi/trilingual (other than in Luxemburg, where there are 3 official languages) museum I’ve seen. Most museums only translate some things into English, and often will shorten captions as well.
The gift shop was very cute, and had a very nice selection of kid and adult gifts, as well as some Tromso things. The only bad thing was that it seemed very squished, when the exhibits were quite open. I didn’t look at the café upstairs.
Polar Museum
The museum apparently was known to be a destination where tourists “shouldn’t go,” because some Americans got freaked out, and reported some exceptionally gory parts of the museum. I was ready for anything, but I never saw anything exceptionally bad.
The first room I went into (which actually was supposed to be the last room) was completely in English, about the explorer who found the Northwest Passage. There was a TV playing the PBS documentary on it. It was interesting, although small. To get to the min section of the museum, you had to go through the gift shop. There were a series of different rooms about polar exploration and hunting. There were lots of mannequins, which were a bit freaky at times, and some of them were stabbing animals or whatever, but nothing was particularly gory. What I found weird though, was that the entirety of the main exhibits was in Norwegian, except for the tags on artifacts, which were mostly translated into English and German. These are the things that are usually left un-translated. I didn’t read that much of the information; I got there at 2:15, and the museum closed at 3:00, so I didn’t want to be too slow. The detail of the models and scenes was so awesome, that it seriously distracted (me, at least) from the massive amounts of information on the walls. It’s really nice to have spectacular visuals, but somehow it seemed too much.
British Library
It was remarkable! There was a courtyard with a café, and then inside, they quickly looked through bags. I’m not exactly sure what they were looking for though. The galleries were cool. There was an exhibit on Avant Garde, which talked about how it was represented in different cities in the era preceding WWI. There was also a very impressive collection of stamps on display. However, I DEFINITELY agree with Rick Steves about the best part of the library. The collection of original documents is simply remarkable! There were plenty of texts I didn’t care about, but there was an awesome collection of amazing artifacts: the original copy of Beowulf in Old English, the original manuscripts of Beethoven’s 9th, Edgar’s Enigma Variations, a Mahler Symphony, and many others. They also had Beethoven’s tuning fork, which had been passed down through generations of musicians, including Holst, and eventually (actually, relatively recently), it landed in the museum. There were also numerous significant copies of the Magna Carta, including one that was so old, it was almost completely illegible. It’s paper from 1215!
British Museum
The British Museum is huge! It is the largest museum in London, housing LOTS of artifacts, which I swear, are mostly out of stone. The map cost ₤2, and once I had studied it, I could generally figure out where things were. However, it was insanely crowded. February isn’t even tourist season! I looked mostly at the Greek, Roman, and Egyptian things, seeing of special note, lots of carvings from the Parthenon, and the Rosetta Stone. However, I was left unsatisfied. There was simply too much on display. I can appreciate massive museums for their educational value, especially to art historians, anthropologists, etc, but for the general public, they are simply boring. They seem to reduce the value of everything, simply by having so many things. The library gallery was impressive, because it was reasonably small, and only had certain things on display. For example, if I went to a museum with most or all of Beethoven’s original manuscripts, the novelty would quickly wear off. However, when there are only a few significant and well captioned artifacts, it is much more impressive. The British Museum, like the Louvre, is simply a must-see because it has one or two top-level, world-famous artifacts, and because it is simply so big. However, I doubt that the majority of the visitors actually care about the majority of the things that they see. They just take up space, won’t budge when you want to pass, and hurt the artifacts by exposing them to insane amounts of flash photography. Another thing is, that although I respect their idea of regular museum rotation, two Roman exhibits were closed for rotation or whatever. Not pleased.
Natural History Museum
It was amazingly castle-esque from the outside, and on the inside, it seemed like a dinosaur castle, because the entryway was stone with stained glass windows, and a dinosaur skeleton right in the middle.
I started out by going through the human biology exhibit, which turned out to mostly be focused on development. It always amuses me how European museums don’t shy away from sex. Almost all of the diograms/etc were naked, and some were amusingly graphic. To my enjoyment, the exhibit continued from pregnancy, birth, growing, adolescence, hormones, etc, to neurology and even some psycholinguistics! The exhibit was very visually stimulating, interactive and educational. My only complaint is that it did not follow a sequencial path, so I could not be sure if I’d seen everything.
I went for a quick tour around the animal exhibits. They had a ton of skeletons and stuffed animals, and they even had a caption that said that whales’ penises are 3m long. European liberalism again.
My favorite exhibit was the ecology one. It followed a path, and set the mood. It was dark, and really conveyed the message that ecology depends on humans to stay alive. After that, I went into the geology exhibits. They had a very impressive display of rocks and minerals. The exhibit on volcanoes and earthquakes was good, but personally, I am sick of going to earthquake exhibits for people who have no idea what an earthquake is (examples: Minneapolis SC, Luxemburg SC, Tromso Museum). There was a corner where they had a set-up where you could “experience” an earthquake, and it was so crowded, that I couldn’t pass through, so I just walked out backwards through the exhibit.
Although this museum too was very crowded, it was big, but also manageable, and very nicely interactive. They had one or two exhibits that cost extra, including one on arctic exploration, which was advertised everywhere. However, after being in Tromso, I believe that their facts were a bit off. “Can you surive temperatures of -20?” Welcome to Minnesota. -20C~-3F. “Can you survive 6 months of complete darkness?” MAYBE you’d get that at the pole. But seriously, how many people go THAT far. Also, in the winter, I would bet it’s much colder than -20C!
The dinosaur rooms were free, like the majority of the museum, but apparently were so popular that they needed to have a line, which looked 30-60 minutes long. So I didn’t see the dinos. Big deal.
Science Museum
That wins my vote for best museum…ever. I started with the gift shop, and even from there, they had me. They had two gift shops, across the hall from each other – one with books, the other with toys, gifts, etc. There was a fair amount of overlap with us on the space toys, but this store was more awesome than our store and the PSC store combined. It was comparable to Top 10 Toys in both size and variety, but they also had things for adults, including these “dryer balls” which should be used instead of dryer sheets, and apparently reduce drying time by 25%.
Finally, I dragged myself into the exhibits. The opening gallery was about space exploration. There was no track to follow, but it was an open gallery, so you could see well where you had been. It was set up very well, but again, I find it amusing when I country who has designed one rocket ever, has an exhibit on space exploration. From what I could tell, they had 2 real artifacts: the Apollo 10 capsule, and a payload that had been on the shuttle.
The next room though, was utterly stunning. Two airplanes hang suspended in the air, the room is filled with boats, cars, engines, and other artifacts. The general theme is the evolution of “technology,” but the inspiring spread-out display style actually enhanced the cohesion of the artifacts.
Upstairs was another gallery with airplanes. This exhibit was similar to what it would be like if TMOF opened out the entire Red Barn, and summarized the entire history of flight there. It was a combination of the gallery and exhibit style of layout.
I decided to go on a simulator. The museum has a 3-D IMAX, 3 simulators, and a set of more arcade-style simpulators. For students, it was only ₤1.5. It was a “roller coaster ride through space,” which turned out to be a bit pathetic, but I guess it was decent for what it was.
Like the dino exhibit at the NHM, the interactive exhibit here had a line to get in. This probably was for the better, but for me, who just wanted to look, it was a bit inconvenient, so I didn’t go in. Instead, I went upstairs to the medical exhibits. This section was much bigger than I had anticipated. They had an impressive collection of ancient and modern medical instruments. They also had excellent explanations for everything. In the second room, there were life-size displays of doctors offices from ancient times up to now. It was all extremely interesting. I had to force myself to leave around 5, so I could check out Harrods before it closed at 6.
Imperial War Museum
The store was just a bit smaller than that at TMOF, but had a very similar selection. It was less visually and thematically organized, but practically organized, which I preferred. There was a lot of overlap with what we carry, but with an addition of all things camouflage.
This is my kind of museum! In the front, there was a temporary exhibit on Dan Radcliffe’s new movie about WWI. I touched Dan’s chair! :-p From there, you came into the gallery. This is my kind of museum! Airplanes and tanks everywhere. Airplanes hanging from the ceiling make you feel relaxed and free…or maybe that’s just me. The gallery was not made of glass, and was less than ½ as big as the Great Gallery, but it had the exact same effect.
From the gallery, there was access to all the other exhibits. The museum was not packed, but it was filled with school children in uniform. I’m used to that environment at TMOF, and I love it. There was a little submarine exhibit, which was cute and interactive, but that was pretty much the only interactive exhibit in the whole place…but boy, did they pull it off! The first exhibit I went through was called the “Children’s’ War,” which was about how children experienced WWII. Very informative, with interesting artifacts, and awesome mock-up displays.
Next, I went through the WWI&II exhibits. These had a well-marked-out path (like everything except the gallery). However, it was a bit of a maze, and I couldn’t help but wonder how long it took employees and volunteers to learn their way around. This exhibit was also excellently done – my favorite were the massive amounts of mannequins in uniforms in cases. In the WWI section, there was a “trench experience.” I went in, but practically ran through. That thing is freaky!!! Ours is for complete whimps in comparison! Since it seemed likely that they would have a live theater program, I was just waiting for one of the mannequins to pop out at me – that’s what they do at TMOF! In the WWII section, they had a blitz simulation. Here, they warned “No unaccompanied minors, people with anxiety disorders, etc.” But although this was cool, I didn’t find it very scary at all.
By this point, I had been through about half of the exhibitions, and I was just waiting for the exceptional exhibits to end, and the rest to be just normal quality. No. Everything here is absolutely perfectly done.
The holocaust exhibit was very well done. Comparable to the one in DC…just minus the bridge part. Before going in, they specifically said no photography, and no cell phones. I found it odd that they were strict about this, but not in a security sense. However, I’m really glad they did this. Although I would have liked to get some pictures, the atmosphere of people talking on phones and taking pictures would have really lessened the effect of the exhibit.
That I can remember, (other than actually going to the camp) this is the first holocaust exhibit I’ve been to since being in Germany. Being able to read and understand everything, and knowing the geography, made it hit home for me much more than before. Germany today has its own culture, and although there are remnants of West/East animosity, the holocaust has been completely “forgotten.” This was a shocking reminder of the fact that my friends in Germany’s parents and grandparents experienced the holocaust. They just don’t talk about it. Oma only talks about the inflation, not the war or Nazis or anything.
Museum of London
I expected this to be similar to the British Museum, so I was prepared to find the Roman exhibit, and then be on my way. I walked up to the desk, and a woman greeted me nicely. She said that only a section of the museum was open – the older stuff. It was set up in the style of a standard natural history museum. It started with an exhibit on prehistoric London, which mostly documented the animals and homosapiens. This was nice, but the bird chirping sound effects were annoyingly loud. The exhibit on the Romans was only on Roman London, but it was still cool. They also had exhibits on the fire and the plague. The store contained more touristy London stuff than topic-specific gifts.
Transport Museum
The Transport Museum was $10 for student admission, but was well worth it. They had it set up in a nice sequential order, with stamps for your map to keep track of if you’d seen everything. After about 30 minutes, I sat down and just died. My feet hurt, my whole body was tired, and I just wanted to sleep, so I sat down for a good while and just wrote and stared into space. The museum continued to be very good, but had a very strong focus on subways – they’re about 150 years old! There was nothing on airplanes though :( but the transport division doesn’t deal with flight. However, the last part was awesome – it was all about how London already is “the world’s greenest capital,” and how they’re becoming even greener. London is awesome. Germany and Norway are both pretty green, but it seems to be at an inconvenient level. London has so many systems in place, that it is often more convenient to be green.
The museum was very interesting; I thought the most interesting parts were the grave stones, which there were quite a lot of. I could understand a fair amount of the Latin, although it was a bit rusty. It was nice that they had transcriptions and translations into German. Some of the information was also translated into English and French, but only some. I understand to an extent why they only translated some of it, but it would have been nice if everything was reliably translated – I heard a lot of English-speaking tourists there. The museum was set up about exactly between that of an art museum and that of a history museum. Although there was almost no Roman art on display, everything was artifacts, there wasn’t anything interactive or chronological. It was organized mostly, by type of artifact. This was, in a way, nice, however, I would have preferred it to be chronologically organized, if it would have been possible, because then I probably wouldn’t have gotten a headache so fast from reading tombstone after tombstone. Another thing that disappointed me, was the lack of text. There were captions for most artifacts, however, there were almost no signs that explained the Roman history. I couldn’t find one sign that said the date of when Rome conquered Colognia, much less how. Near the end of our visit, Micot asked a docent about pictures (I was farther away, so I didn’t completely hear his question). Anyway, she pointed him to a room, where there were pictures of the excavation. That was less interesting to me, but it was a nice, information-filled room. However, it was totally hidden! There was a sign on the door, saying what was inside, but if one wasn’t looking for it, they would completely pass it by! When we left, we had to squeeze through the entrance way. They had all but about 3’ roped off from the entrance hall to the museum. There was a guy standing there checking tickets. OK, I understand why they did that; but really, how many people are going to try and walk in without a ticket? How hard would it be to control 8’ instead of 3’? The gift shop, also, was puny, and practically non-existent.
Lindt Chocolate Museum
This was a much bigger museum, and also much more crowded. It was very crowded. True, the factory/museum was on a tiny island in the Rhine, but I believe they could have improved their crowd management techniques. The direction of flow was very clear. The exhibits started out with a history of the cocoa bean, how it is harvested, how it came to Europe, etc. After this initial background on what chocolate is, we came into a huge room with chocolate machines. I’m pretty sure that only about half of the machines there were functional (the actual factory must have been on the other side of the building somewhere), but there was somebody handing out free samples of melted chocolate on a stick, and there were also people actually making and packaging chocolate behind Plexiglas walls, which had all the explanation needed about what was happening. There was a stand where they were selling truffles for 0.5€ each, and Hannah thought that was insanely expensive. After we lagged in this room for forever, we continued up to more exhibits. These exhibits explained the history of chocolate in Europe. Did you know that before chocolate bars, people drank hot chocolate as a luxury drink? Then hot chocolate would be a normal drink, and THEN chocolate bars came. There were lots of interesting artifacts; old candy wrappers, old advertisements, etc…up through interesting collections of new artifacts, including 500 Kinder Egg surprises, and a Kit-Kat bench. This chain of exhibits plopped us back in the factory room, and we were forced to go back through the first exhibit hall, to come back out into the lobby. This is what museums should always avoid! Backwards traffic flow! I really don’t think it would have been hard to built a bridge going directly to the exit (bridges connected all the exhibits with the factory room). From the lobby, there was a café (I would have LOVED to try the hot chocolate, but the Trippes, I’m positive, would have found that a complete waste of money, so I didn’t even ask). The gift shop was huge; it had every sort of fancy Lindt, Hussel, and Mozart chocolate. The Christmas candy was 50% off, so I got a cinnamon chocolate bar, and Christmas truffles for 3.5€. However, as I was about to grab the cinnamon bar, a store clerk steps in front of me, and organizes the display for a good minute, as I give up trying to reach around her for the chocolate. We’re specifically told not to step in front of people to fix the displays! For good reason! I also found it strange, that they had a collection of totally random metal sign things, that had nothing to do with chocolate (the Trippes bought 3 of them), yet had no books or educational things about chocolate.
Polaria (Tromso)
The museum was really quite good, despite being quite small. The main exhibit area had nicely made displayed about polar exploration and global warming. There were also a handful of interactive exhibits, including a quiz of museum content (I got 60% before going through). Everything was in Norwegian and English, and about 90% also had German. The main part of the museum seemed to be the panoramic video. Every half hour, they showed 18-minute videos of arctic scenery and animals, and played music to go along with it. It was really nicely done. The theater leads you into another exhibit about arctic animals. This exhibit reminded me of the Titanic at PSC, because it had fake icebergs all over, and also had appropriate lighting and floors. From here, you came to a small aquarium. There was a seal, and also about 5 medium-sized tanks with various other kinds of animals.
Since the museum was so small, $13 seemed quite steep to me, but the museum was very well done. It had plenty of interactive displays and activities for kids, and the diagrams were all very well presented. This was also the first completely bi/trilingual (other than in Luxemburg, where there are 3 official languages) museum I’ve seen. Most museums only translate some things into English, and often will shorten captions as well.
The gift shop was very cute, and had a very nice selection of kid and adult gifts, as well as some Tromso things. The only bad thing was that it seemed very squished, when the exhibits were quite open. I didn’t look at the café upstairs.
Polar Museum
The museum apparently was known to be a destination where tourists “shouldn’t go,” because some Americans got freaked out, and reported some exceptionally gory parts of the museum. I was ready for anything, but I never saw anything exceptionally bad.
The first room I went into (which actually was supposed to be the last room) was completely in English, about the explorer who found the Northwest Passage. There was a TV playing the PBS documentary on it. It was interesting, although small. To get to the min section of the museum, you had to go through the gift shop. There were a series of different rooms about polar exploration and hunting. There were lots of mannequins, which were a bit freaky at times, and some of them were stabbing animals or whatever, but nothing was particularly gory. What I found weird though, was that the entirety of the main exhibits was in Norwegian, except for the tags on artifacts, which were mostly translated into English and German. These are the things that are usually left un-translated. I didn’t read that much of the information; I got there at 2:15, and the museum closed at 3:00, so I didn’t want to be too slow. The detail of the models and scenes was so awesome, that it seriously distracted (me, at least) from the massive amounts of information on the walls. It’s really nice to have spectacular visuals, but somehow it seemed too much.
British Library
It was remarkable! There was a courtyard with a café, and then inside, they quickly looked through bags. I’m not exactly sure what they were looking for though. The galleries were cool. There was an exhibit on Avant Garde, which talked about how it was represented in different cities in the era preceding WWI. There was also a very impressive collection of stamps on display. However, I DEFINITELY agree with Rick Steves about the best part of the library. The collection of original documents is simply remarkable! There were plenty of texts I didn’t care about, but there was an awesome collection of amazing artifacts: the original copy of Beowulf in Old English, the original manuscripts of Beethoven’s 9th, Edgar’s Enigma Variations, a Mahler Symphony, and many others. They also had Beethoven’s tuning fork, which had been passed down through generations of musicians, including Holst, and eventually (actually, relatively recently), it landed in the museum. There were also numerous significant copies of the Magna Carta, including one that was so old, it was almost completely illegible. It’s paper from 1215!
British Museum
The British Museum is huge! It is the largest museum in London, housing LOTS of artifacts, which I swear, are mostly out of stone. The map cost ₤2, and once I had studied it, I could generally figure out where things were. However, it was insanely crowded. February isn’t even tourist season! I looked mostly at the Greek, Roman, and Egyptian things, seeing of special note, lots of carvings from the Parthenon, and the Rosetta Stone. However, I was left unsatisfied. There was simply too much on display. I can appreciate massive museums for their educational value, especially to art historians, anthropologists, etc, but for the general public, they are simply boring. They seem to reduce the value of everything, simply by having so many things. The library gallery was impressive, because it was reasonably small, and only had certain things on display. For example, if I went to a museum with most or all of Beethoven’s original manuscripts, the novelty would quickly wear off. However, when there are only a few significant and well captioned artifacts, it is much more impressive. The British Museum, like the Louvre, is simply a must-see because it has one or two top-level, world-famous artifacts, and because it is simply so big. However, I doubt that the majority of the visitors actually care about the majority of the things that they see. They just take up space, won’t budge when you want to pass, and hurt the artifacts by exposing them to insane amounts of flash photography. Another thing is, that although I respect their idea of regular museum rotation, two Roman exhibits were closed for rotation or whatever. Not pleased.
Natural History Museum
It was amazingly castle-esque from the outside, and on the inside, it seemed like a dinosaur castle, because the entryway was stone with stained glass windows, and a dinosaur skeleton right in the middle.
I started out by going through the human biology exhibit, which turned out to mostly be focused on development. It always amuses me how European museums don’t shy away from sex. Almost all of the diograms/etc were naked, and some were amusingly graphic. To my enjoyment, the exhibit continued from pregnancy, birth, growing, adolescence, hormones, etc, to neurology and even some psycholinguistics! The exhibit was very visually stimulating, interactive and educational. My only complaint is that it did not follow a sequencial path, so I could not be sure if I’d seen everything.
I went for a quick tour around the animal exhibits. They had a ton of skeletons and stuffed animals, and they even had a caption that said that whales’ penises are 3m long. European liberalism again.
My favorite exhibit was the ecology one. It followed a path, and set the mood. It was dark, and really conveyed the message that ecology depends on humans to stay alive. After that, I went into the geology exhibits. They had a very impressive display of rocks and minerals. The exhibit on volcanoes and earthquakes was good, but personally, I am sick of going to earthquake exhibits for people who have no idea what an earthquake is (examples: Minneapolis SC, Luxemburg SC, Tromso Museum). There was a corner where they had a set-up where you could “experience” an earthquake, and it was so crowded, that I couldn’t pass through, so I just walked out backwards through the exhibit.
Although this museum too was very crowded, it was big, but also manageable, and very nicely interactive. They had one or two exhibits that cost extra, including one on arctic exploration, which was advertised everywhere. However, after being in Tromso, I believe that their facts were a bit off. “Can you surive temperatures of -20?” Welcome to Minnesota. -20C~-3F. “Can you survive 6 months of complete darkness?” MAYBE you’d get that at the pole. But seriously, how many people go THAT far. Also, in the winter, I would bet it’s much colder than -20C!
The dinosaur rooms were free, like the majority of the museum, but apparently were so popular that they needed to have a line, which looked 30-60 minutes long. So I didn’t see the dinos. Big deal.
Science Museum
That wins my vote for best museum…ever. I started with the gift shop, and even from there, they had me. They had two gift shops, across the hall from each other – one with books, the other with toys, gifts, etc. There was a fair amount of overlap with us on the space toys, but this store was more awesome than our store and the PSC store combined. It was comparable to Top 10 Toys in both size and variety, but they also had things for adults, including these “dryer balls” which should be used instead of dryer sheets, and apparently reduce drying time by 25%.
Finally, I dragged myself into the exhibits. The opening gallery was about space exploration. There was no track to follow, but it was an open gallery, so you could see well where you had been. It was set up very well, but again, I find it amusing when I country who has designed one rocket ever, has an exhibit on space exploration. From what I could tell, they had 2 real artifacts: the Apollo 10 capsule, and a payload that had been on the shuttle.
The next room though, was utterly stunning. Two airplanes hang suspended in the air, the room is filled with boats, cars, engines, and other artifacts. The general theme is the evolution of “technology,” but the inspiring spread-out display style actually enhanced the cohesion of the artifacts.
Upstairs was another gallery with airplanes. This exhibit was similar to what it would be like if TMOF opened out the entire Red Barn, and summarized the entire history of flight there. It was a combination of the gallery and exhibit style of layout.
I decided to go on a simulator. The museum has a 3-D IMAX, 3 simulators, and a set of more arcade-style simpulators. For students, it was only ₤1.5. It was a “roller coaster ride through space,” which turned out to be a bit pathetic, but I guess it was decent for what it was.
Like the dino exhibit at the NHM, the interactive exhibit here had a line to get in. This probably was for the better, but for me, who just wanted to look, it was a bit inconvenient, so I didn’t go in. Instead, I went upstairs to the medical exhibits. This section was much bigger than I had anticipated. They had an impressive collection of ancient and modern medical instruments. They also had excellent explanations for everything. In the second room, there were life-size displays of doctors offices from ancient times up to now. It was all extremely interesting. I had to force myself to leave around 5, so I could check out Harrods before it closed at 6.
Imperial War Museum
The store was just a bit smaller than that at TMOF, but had a very similar selection. It was less visually and thematically organized, but practically organized, which I preferred. There was a lot of overlap with what we carry, but with an addition of all things camouflage.
This is my kind of museum! In the front, there was a temporary exhibit on Dan Radcliffe’s new movie about WWI. I touched Dan’s chair! :-p From there, you came into the gallery. This is my kind of museum! Airplanes and tanks everywhere. Airplanes hanging from the ceiling make you feel relaxed and free…or maybe that’s just me. The gallery was not made of glass, and was less than ½ as big as the Great Gallery, but it had the exact same effect.
From the gallery, there was access to all the other exhibits. The museum was not packed, but it was filled with school children in uniform. I’m used to that environment at TMOF, and I love it. There was a little submarine exhibit, which was cute and interactive, but that was pretty much the only interactive exhibit in the whole place…but boy, did they pull it off! The first exhibit I went through was called the “Children’s’ War,” which was about how children experienced WWII. Very informative, with interesting artifacts, and awesome mock-up displays.
Next, I went through the WWI&II exhibits. These had a well-marked-out path (like everything except the gallery). However, it was a bit of a maze, and I couldn’t help but wonder how long it took employees and volunteers to learn their way around. This exhibit was also excellently done – my favorite were the massive amounts of mannequins in uniforms in cases. In the WWI section, there was a “trench experience.” I went in, but practically ran through. That thing is freaky!!! Ours is for complete whimps in comparison! Since it seemed likely that they would have a live theater program, I was just waiting for one of the mannequins to pop out at me – that’s what they do at TMOF! In the WWII section, they had a blitz simulation. Here, they warned “No unaccompanied minors, people with anxiety disorders, etc.” But although this was cool, I didn’t find it very scary at all.
By this point, I had been through about half of the exhibitions, and I was just waiting for the exceptional exhibits to end, and the rest to be just normal quality. No. Everything here is absolutely perfectly done.
The holocaust exhibit was very well done. Comparable to the one in DC…just minus the bridge part. Before going in, they specifically said no photography, and no cell phones. I found it odd that they were strict about this, but not in a security sense. However, I’m really glad they did this. Although I would have liked to get some pictures, the atmosphere of people talking on phones and taking pictures would have really lessened the effect of the exhibit.
That I can remember, (other than actually going to the camp) this is the first holocaust exhibit I’ve been to since being in Germany. Being able to read and understand everything, and knowing the geography, made it hit home for me much more than before. Germany today has its own culture, and although there are remnants of West/East animosity, the holocaust has been completely “forgotten.” This was a shocking reminder of the fact that my friends in Germany’s parents and grandparents experienced the holocaust. They just don’t talk about it. Oma only talks about the inflation, not the war or Nazis or anything.
Museum of London
I expected this to be similar to the British Museum, so I was prepared to find the Roman exhibit, and then be on my way. I walked up to the desk, and a woman greeted me nicely. She said that only a section of the museum was open – the older stuff. It was set up in the style of a standard natural history museum. It started with an exhibit on prehistoric London, which mostly documented the animals and homosapiens. This was nice, but the bird chirping sound effects were annoyingly loud. The exhibit on the Romans was only on Roman London, but it was still cool. They also had exhibits on the fire and the plague. The store contained more touristy London stuff than topic-specific gifts.
Transport Museum
The Transport Museum was $10 for student admission, but was well worth it. They had it set up in a nice sequential order, with stamps for your map to keep track of if you’d seen everything. After about 30 minutes, I sat down and just died. My feet hurt, my whole body was tired, and I just wanted to sleep, so I sat down for a good while and just wrote and stared into space. The museum continued to be very good, but had a very strong focus on subways – they’re about 150 years old! There was nothing on airplanes though :( but the transport division doesn’t deal with flight. However, the last part was awesome – it was all about how London already is “the world’s greenest capital,” and how they’re becoming even greener. London is awesome. Germany and Norway are both pretty green, but it seems to be at an inconvenient level. London has so many systems in place, that it is often more convenient to be green.
Musical Reviews (from my trip to Tromso, Norway and London, England in January 2008)
Chicago in Tromso
The band was onstage, as appropriate for Chicago. The trumpet player was bad, but everyone else was pretty good. The conductor also played Reed IV: clarinet, alto, bari, bass clar. The bass player doubled on clarinet/tenor…on Broadway the bass doubled on tuba. I really wonder how the scores are written, because who the heck doubles on bass and any wind instrument???
The show’s strengths were choreography, dancing, and costumes. The singing was decent, but not spectacular. Roxie looked a lot like a blonde Millie after her “makeover,” which I found very amusing. There was this song that I don’t really remember from the Broadway production, which Roxie sings about basically how she loves her baby. The choreography and costuming for this was HILLARIOUS, because they had the four male ensemble members dress in baby costumes, which were AWESOME, and dance around like babies. It was simply well done. The best number, however, was Mr. Celophane; “Mr. Celofon.” I think the song works way better in Norwegian. The vowels just sound much more helpless and boring. Amos was also probably my favorite of the cast. He was just so cute, and perfect for his role!
At first it was cute, when in “Razzle Dazzle” (“Blend og omvend dem”) the ensemble was dressed as clowns, and did circus-y things. However, that song leads into the court scene, and the ensemble remained in those costumes, and acted as the judge, jury, etc. There was also a woman dressed as lady liberty, who sat next to the judge. There were also tons of references to red, white and blue, and there were also three enormous US flags as the backdrop for the courtroom. I know the musical kind of makes fun of the court system, but don’t associate that so strongly with all American courts!
Something I also found amusing, was that guys dropped their pants twice onstage. Once, a clown pretended to be going to the bathroom, and we could see his briefs. The other time, when Roxie is supposed to be having sex with Fred Casely, he dropped his pants, and she dropped her panties. However, Roxie blocked us from seeing anything, and Roxie was wearing a skirt. It was an interesting effect, but to me seems a little risky, but whatever. Nothing inappropriate was shown.
Blood Brothers
The show was good – it was nice to see a professional production of something that was definitely sub-par at Olaf. As the overture began, people continued talking, and the lights were slow to go down, which was disappointing, but the music was impressive. Having the right musicians for the orchestration is a plus. ;) However, I noticed that when the saxist came in for the first two solos, it was late. Maybe they started it with a cresc., or maybe it was differently written, but my personal opinion was that he was just a bit out of it. The orchestra was on a platform above and to the side of the stage, so from the seats, you could only see the director, but they had a good synthesizer, which the 80’s music demands. I wasn’t a huge fan of the casting though. Mr. & Mrs. Lyons were excellent, but I didn’t really like anyone else. I knew from the OLCR that some words were changed in the version we used, because of British vs US English, but there were actually a few major cuts and additions to monologues, going both ways. This show has been running in London for 20 years straight, but it only lasted 2 on Broadway, and didn’t win (at least any major) Tonys. Is it because Brits prefer serious shows more than Americans, or is there more to it than that?
The second act proved to be much better. The main problem seemed to be that fully grown actors couldn’t play kids. With them dressed older, Mickey seriously looked like a young Hugh Grant (think Notting Hill) and, especially in the *sexy* 14-year-old costume, Linda looked like Hugh’s Natalie in Love Actually. There was also an interesting scene that was omitted from our version, where Mrs. Lyons tries to kill Mrs. Johnston. The last scene was extremely powerful. It’s bad enough when you’re under the stage in a college production, but from the audience at a London production – that’s serious stuff!!! They came out for a few bows – the first time they were totally serious, and they gradually smiled more as the came out, ending finally with a casual, happy bow. The bows music was also better put together than ours – they actually played a medly. However, in the finale, the sax line was missing – it was sad.
Lord of The Rings-The Musical
The set was amazing – tree branches entangled the entire theatre. Around 7:15, the hobbits came onstage and tried to “catch fireflies” while walking around the theatre. It was a cute touch.
The show was, in short, awesome. There was lots of folk music used, mostly in hobbit scenes, but not exclusively. I have gotten a much greater appreciation for folk music, especially fiddle music, after this interim. The first sign of not complete happiness was when Gandalf was kidnapped, however an air of happiness, or at least optimism, remained throughout the first act. The show was more towards the genre of the Lion King. It was by no means a “conventional” musical. There were many impressive dances with unconventional vocal lines. Most of it was indeed sung in English, for the understanding of plot, but there were a good number of songs sung in Elvish or other Tolkein languages. The first act ended with the entire theatre being filled with wind and stage smoke, as Gandalf was taken by the dragon. They also blew tons of black confetti, so it really did feel like you were falling through darkness with Gandalf. (I caught two pieces :-p) This is a serious adventure show, so you’ll grab onto your seat, but it is not so dramatic that I would have stayed in my sad mood after Blood Brothers. This musical really picks you up and takes you to Middle Earth!!! The acting is good, but a bit disorienting, because Mary looks like the movie Frodo, and Boromir looks more like the movie Legolas. Pippen though, is absolutely hilarious, because his voice is so high, that it seems like his part is played by a woman. In this version, he is written to be even more stupidly talkative than in the movies. Gandalf also, is much more casual, but seemingly more easily angered than in the movies. I really want to read the books now to see what the original take on all this is!
The Hobbits’ attitude toward nice food, and being care-free about money helped to smoothen out my thoughts about budgeting in London. I’ll try not to spend too much, but I’ll still have all the fun I planned on. I will also use my WF card more, just to make sure I don’t end up over charging my BoA card.
Act 2 opened with Gollum climbing down the tree branches that covered the front of the stage, and then going around and mumbling “My precious…” The second two acts continued like the first, having some “normal” musical songs, such as a love song between Aragorn and Arwen, and a song about the legends that would be told about them, sung by Frodo and Sam. The battle scenes were impressively intricate dances, spurred on, mostly by the tympani. Galadriel kept coming back, far more than in the movie, and I’ll bet more then in the books as well. However, she fulfilled the role of the diva, very similarly to Spamalot. She sang through many of the battle, and other significant scenes, often while on ropes or on the highest platform.
The stage had an intricate set of rotating and rising platforms, which were used extremely well. The rotation enhanced the choreographed fight scenes, and emphasized the significance of the journey.
The end did, however, prove to drag on. The climax, when Gollum falls into the fire of Mordor, was resolved with the return of Gandalf, and the re-uniting of everyone, but they just had to go back to the Shire, and clean it up, dance while they planted fires, and then have a prolonged good-bye when Frodo left again. However, the show got an instant standing ovation, and the show ended with a whirlwind of happy confetti, just like the first act had ended. (I got some of that too, although I had to pick it up on my way out, because the wind wasn’t on, so it didn’t blow all the way back to row N.
Buddy-The Buddy Holly Story
The programs were $12. I didn’t want to drop that much. The ushers wouldn’t let us find our own seats. “G12 – that’s in the middle of the 7th row.” “Yes, I know, Thanks.” He also told me to go in the other door, because then, I woudn’t have to pass as many people. He was wrong. From the door he pointed to, I had to pass the only person sitting in the row. My seat was next to his, and he whistled to the country music playing before the curtain opened. He better not whistle during the show!
I thought I had remembered Buddy Holly as an oldies singer I liked, but I had doubts with the country before the show, and during the first scene. But then, I understood. The show is a story of the life of Buddy Holly, as he emerged from a country singer to a rock star. Good, it was what I remembered – I take-off on Elvis. The cast was awesome – almost everyone reminded me of someone I know. The country radio host reminded me of Bob Calla, the drummer was a combination between DJ and Jason Teiken, Buddy was a combination between Dan Radcliffe and Dan in Scared Scriptless. There was no pit – everything was played onstage, which was impressive. I was surprised when a sax came onstage. I would have been so much better. Granted, I can’t act, especially not a black singer, but I could have played a way better sax. Also, there were two people who were supposed to be black, but the actors were white. Ugh. It confuses me though – how could his music have sounded black? He sounds so much like Elvis! It’s good, but it’s definitely white stuff. Here’s a question though: Why was I born in 1988? Why not 1950? Be a kid with Elvis, grow up with sock hops, in a time where brass and saxes are mainstream, and then go through hippie music, harder, but still danceable rock, and finally, fun 80’s stuff. Past the 80’s, there really hasn’t been much good music – discos are sex, and concerts are mosh pits. Sure, it can be fun – but like Chicago says, “Got no class.”
The second act was basically just a concert in Iowa. They did a perfect job at imitating Midwesterners. It wasn’t so strong Midwestern, but America nowhere-ville with bad weather. However, they portrayed it perfectly – I completely forgot I was in the UK when they sang the Star Spangled Banner. They did a bad job at it, but that was called for; it was supposed to be sung by the town’s beauty pageant winner, and in small-town Iowa, they aren’t very good. The concert was awesome too. True to the American style…if only you could get 50’s rock today at real good concerts and clubs! The show was simply awesome. They played a couple tunes I didn’t know, but I knew a good handful. My hands surprisingly didn’t get very sore from clapping through the whole time. The woman in front of me though, couldn’t keep the beat at all…I don’t understand how people just clap, but not on beat at all. The guy next to me, pulled out his video camera for certain songs. Do you realize that’s super illegal there?
Cabaret
Like all shows here, the acting was very realistic and personable. In some cases, this is good, but I found it strange that the MC part was not at all overacted. The costuming was insane, but the acting was…normal.
Sally was very good. The accents were, at first though, bad, but then I realized it was almost perfect Berlin accents. Cliff had a perfect American accent too. I don’t think I would place it as Pennsylvania – more OR or San Francisco, but I really think there must be a good amount of American actors in London. The show was MUCH more risqué than our version. Cliff was gay, there were people streaking onstage (I don’t think they were wearing body suits, at least for the most part), and there were massive numbers of fake penises. It would be funny to see the prop & costume rooms. In “Two Ladies” when they said “but nothing beats threes,” they weren’t referring to people, but to breasts. She “had 3”. Since I know the show well, I knew what to expect, but everyone laughed when we saw that such a big deal was being made about a pineapple.
The people behind me were talking about the show during intermission. They found the Nazi song(Tomorrow Belongs to Me) “chilling”, and one of them vaguely remembered the monkey song. I confirmed that she remembered it correctly – that I was in the show a few years ago. She asked if I was in a professional production. I explained how our version was very toned down, because some people were as young as 13.
The second act was serious. The song “Cabaret” was well performed, but still had a huge hint of “something’s wrong”-ness. The MC reminded me of the King of Saiam. I should look up who that actor is and see if he’s ever played that role. In the second act, he had no make-up, and it really reminded me of that.
They sang “money makes the world go ‘round, but not the telephone song. Why was our version different??? The violinist, bari/clarinetist, and a trumpet player were doubles in the orchestra, and actors. The orchestra was onstage, but most of the time, it was hidden by sets.
The play ended, not by a melancholy Nazi march, like our version, but with every one of the Cabaret dancers, including the MC, lining up facing the back of the stage, stripping, and then having rain/gas fall from the celing above them. The bows were happier, but it still left you feeling completely cold. I was shivering all the way back.
The band was onstage, as appropriate for Chicago. The trumpet player was bad, but everyone else was pretty good. The conductor also played Reed IV: clarinet, alto, bari, bass clar. The bass player doubled on clarinet/tenor…on Broadway the bass doubled on tuba. I really wonder how the scores are written, because who the heck doubles on bass and any wind instrument???
The show’s strengths were choreography, dancing, and costumes. The singing was decent, but not spectacular. Roxie looked a lot like a blonde Millie after her “makeover,” which I found very amusing. There was this song that I don’t really remember from the Broadway production, which Roxie sings about basically how she loves her baby. The choreography and costuming for this was HILLARIOUS, because they had the four male ensemble members dress in baby costumes, which were AWESOME, and dance around like babies. It was simply well done. The best number, however, was Mr. Celophane; “Mr. Celofon.” I think the song works way better in Norwegian. The vowels just sound much more helpless and boring. Amos was also probably my favorite of the cast. He was just so cute, and perfect for his role!
At first it was cute, when in “Razzle Dazzle” (“Blend og omvend dem”) the ensemble was dressed as clowns, and did circus-y things. However, that song leads into the court scene, and the ensemble remained in those costumes, and acted as the judge, jury, etc. There was also a woman dressed as lady liberty, who sat next to the judge. There were also tons of references to red, white and blue, and there were also three enormous US flags as the backdrop for the courtroom. I know the musical kind of makes fun of the court system, but don’t associate that so strongly with all American courts!
Something I also found amusing, was that guys dropped their pants twice onstage. Once, a clown pretended to be going to the bathroom, and we could see his briefs. The other time, when Roxie is supposed to be having sex with Fred Casely, he dropped his pants, and she dropped her panties. However, Roxie blocked us from seeing anything, and Roxie was wearing a skirt. It was an interesting effect, but to me seems a little risky, but whatever. Nothing inappropriate was shown.
Blood Brothers
The show was good – it was nice to see a professional production of something that was definitely sub-par at Olaf. As the overture began, people continued talking, and the lights were slow to go down, which was disappointing, but the music was impressive. Having the right musicians for the orchestration is a plus. ;) However, I noticed that when the saxist came in for the first two solos, it was late. Maybe they started it with a cresc., or maybe it was differently written, but my personal opinion was that he was just a bit out of it. The orchestra was on a platform above and to the side of the stage, so from the seats, you could only see the director, but they had a good synthesizer, which the 80’s music demands. I wasn’t a huge fan of the casting though. Mr. & Mrs. Lyons were excellent, but I didn’t really like anyone else. I knew from the OLCR that some words were changed in the version we used, because of British vs US English, but there were actually a few major cuts and additions to monologues, going both ways. This show has been running in London for 20 years straight, but it only lasted 2 on Broadway, and didn’t win (at least any major) Tonys. Is it because Brits prefer serious shows more than Americans, or is there more to it than that?
The second act proved to be much better. The main problem seemed to be that fully grown actors couldn’t play kids. With them dressed older, Mickey seriously looked like a young Hugh Grant (think Notting Hill) and, especially in the *sexy* 14-year-old costume, Linda looked like Hugh’s Natalie in Love Actually. There was also an interesting scene that was omitted from our version, where Mrs. Lyons tries to kill Mrs. Johnston. The last scene was extremely powerful. It’s bad enough when you’re under the stage in a college production, but from the audience at a London production – that’s serious stuff!!! They came out for a few bows – the first time they were totally serious, and they gradually smiled more as the came out, ending finally with a casual, happy bow. The bows music was also better put together than ours – they actually played a medly. However, in the finale, the sax line was missing – it was sad.
Lord of The Rings-The Musical
The set was amazing – tree branches entangled the entire theatre. Around 7:15, the hobbits came onstage and tried to “catch fireflies” while walking around the theatre. It was a cute touch.
The show was, in short, awesome. There was lots of folk music used, mostly in hobbit scenes, but not exclusively. I have gotten a much greater appreciation for folk music, especially fiddle music, after this interim. The first sign of not complete happiness was when Gandalf was kidnapped, however an air of happiness, or at least optimism, remained throughout the first act. The show was more towards the genre of the Lion King. It was by no means a “conventional” musical. There were many impressive dances with unconventional vocal lines. Most of it was indeed sung in English, for the understanding of plot, but there were a good number of songs sung in Elvish or other Tolkein languages. The first act ended with the entire theatre being filled with wind and stage smoke, as Gandalf was taken by the dragon. They also blew tons of black confetti, so it really did feel like you were falling through darkness with Gandalf. (I caught two pieces :-p) This is a serious adventure show, so you’ll grab onto your seat, but it is not so dramatic that I would have stayed in my sad mood after Blood Brothers. This musical really picks you up and takes you to Middle Earth!!! The acting is good, but a bit disorienting, because Mary looks like the movie Frodo, and Boromir looks more like the movie Legolas. Pippen though, is absolutely hilarious, because his voice is so high, that it seems like his part is played by a woman. In this version, he is written to be even more stupidly talkative than in the movies. Gandalf also, is much more casual, but seemingly more easily angered than in the movies. I really want to read the books now to see what the original take on all this is!
The Hobbits’ attitude toward nice food, and being care-free about money helped to smoothen out my thoughts about budgeting in London. I’ll try not to spend too much, but I’ll still have all the fun I planned on. I will also use my WF card more, just to make sure I don’t end up over charging my BoA card.
Act 2 opened with Gollum climbing down the tree branches that covered the front of the stage, and then going around and mumbling “My precious…” The second two acts continued like the first, having some “normal” musical songs, such as a love song between Aragorn and Arwen, and a song about the legends that would be told about them, sung by Frodo and Sam. The battle scenes were impressively intricate dances, spurred on, mostly by the tympani. Galadriel kept coming back, far more than in the movie, and I’ll bet more then in the books as well. However, she fulfilled the role of the diva, very similarly to Spamalot. She sang through many of the battle, and other significant scenes, often while on ropes or on the highest platform.
The stage had an intricate set of rotating and rising platforms, which were used extremely well. The rotation enhanced the choreographed fight scenes, and emphasized the significance of the journey.
The end did, however, prove to drag on. The climax, when Gollum falls into the fire of Mordor, was resolved with the return of Gandalf, and the re-uniting of everyone, but they just had to go back to the Shire, and clean it up, dance while they planted fires, and then have a prolonged good-bye when Frodo left again. However, the show got an instant standing ovation, and the show ended with a whirlwind of happy confetti, just like the first act had ended. (I got some of that too, although I had to pick it up on my way out, because the wind wasn’t on, so it didn’t blow all the way back to row N.
Buddy-The Buddy Holly Story
The programs were $12. I didn’t want to drop that much. The ushers wouldn’t let us find our own seats. “G12 – that’s in the middle of the 7th row.” “Yes, I know, Thanks.” He also told me to go in the other door, because then, I woudn’t have to pass as many people. He was wrong. From the door he pointed to, I had to pass the only person sitting in the row. My seat was next to his, and he whistled to the country music playing before the curtain opened. He better not whistle during the show!
I thought I had remembered Buddy Holly as an oldies singer I liked, but I had doubts with the country before the show, and during the first scene. But then, I understood. The show is a story of the life of Buddy Holly, as he emerged from a country singer to a rock star. Good, it was what I remembered – I take-off on Elvis. The cast was awesome – almost everyone reminded me of someone I know. The country radio host reminded me of Bob Calla, the drummer was a combination between DJ and Jason Teiken, Buddy was a combination between Dan Radcliffe and Dan in Scared Scriptless. There was no pit – everything was played onstage, which was impressive. I was surprised when a sax came onstage. I would have been so much better. Granted, I can’t act, especially not a black singer, but I could have played a way better sax. Also, there were two people who were supposed to be black, but the actors were white. Ugh. It confuses me though – how could his music have sounded black? He sounds so much like Elvis! It’s good, but it’s definitely white stuff. Here’s a question though: Why was I born in 1988? Why not 1950? Be a kid with Elvis, grow up with sock hops, in a time where brass and saxes are mainstream, and then go through hippie music, harder, but still danceable rock, and finally, fun 80’s stuff. Past the 80’s, there really hasn’t been much good music – discos are sex, and concerts are mosh pits. Sure, it can be fun – but like Chicago says, “Got no class.”
The second act was basically just a concert in Iowa. They did a perfect job at imitating Midwesterners. It wasn’t so strong Midwestern, but America nowhere-ville with bad weather. However, they portrayed it perfectly – I completely forgot I was in the UK when they sang the Star Spangled Banner. They did a bad job at it, but that was called for; it was supposed to be sung by the town’s beauty pageant winner, and in small-town Iowa, they aren’t very good. The concert was awesome too. True to the American style…if only you could get 50’s rock today at real good concerts and clubs! The show was simply awesome. They played a couple tunes I didn’t know, but I knew a good handful. My hands surprisingly didn’t get very sore from clapping through the whole time. The woman in front of me though, couldn’t keep the beat at all…I don’t understand how people just clap, but not on beat at all. The guy next to me, pulled out his video camera for certain songs. Do you realize that’s super illegal there?
Cabaret
Like all shows here, the acting was very realistic and personable. In some cases, this is good, but I found it strange that the MC part was not at all overacted. The costuming was insane, but the acting was…normal.
Sally was very good. The accents were, at first though, bad, but then I realized it was almost perfect Berlin accents. Cliff had a perfect American accent too. I don’t think I would place it as Pennsylvania – more OR or San Francisco, but I really think there must be a good amount of American actors in London. The show was MUCH more risqué than our version. Cliff was gay, there were people streaking onstage (I don’t think they were wearing body suits, at least for the most part), and there were massive numbers of fake penises. It would be funny to see the prop & costume rooms. In “Two Ladies” when they said “but nothing beats threes,” they weren’t referring to people, but to breasts. She “had 3”. Since I know the show well, I knew what to expect, but everyone laughed when we saw that such a big deal was being made about a pineapple.
The people behind me were talking about the show during intermission. They found the Nazi song(Tomorrow Belongs to Me) “chilling”, and one of them vaguely remembered the monkey song. I confirmed that she remembered it correctly – that I was in the show a few years ago. She asked if I was in a professional production. I explained how our version was very toned down, because some people were as young as 13.
The second act was serious. The song “Cabaret” was well performed, but still had a huge hint of “something’s wrong”-ness. The MC reminded me of the King of Saiam. I should look up who that actor is and see if he’s ever played that role. In the second act, he had no make-up, and it really reminded me of that.
They sang “money makes the world go ‘round, but not the telephone song. Why was our version different??? The violinist, bari/clarinetist, and a trumpet player were doubles in the orchestra, and actors. The orchestra was onstage, but most of the time, it was hidden by sets.
The play ended, not by a melancholy Nazi march, like our version, but with every one of the Cabaret dancers, including the MC, lining up facing the back of the stage, stripping, and then having rain/gas fall from the celing above them. The bows were happier, but it still left you feeling completely cold. I was shivering all the way back.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)