Narrativestructurein3 d

��

�

��

��

��

��

�

��

��

�

�

�� !��"�#��#��$� ��#�%��&�'(��)(�� "�� #��*�#��+��$��#��#�'�� +��#��*�#�� ,#��)-��*�#�� &#.��/� ��.�� 0��$��

��

��

��.�1��$��#.�#�#.��#.�� $��2��3��$��1��#.�� #�� 1��2��#.��$��4��$�#�� #�� #.�#4#�� #.� �#��*�#��5�&#.��/� ��

� ��

�6��#� �� 2�� 3� #�� #.� 3�� #� #.� "�� #�5� ��5�2.��.�� 1 � �� #�� #��#� �� $�� #.��$��2��#� ��#.��#.��2��3�#��4# ��#.� 3�#��!� ##�"�#��#��.��#��#.�$� ��7.�� #.�� .�� #�� 1 � $�� #� �� #� .�� #� #.�+��1� � � �#�$.#�� *� �� #� #.�� .�� 1 � �� #��$�� #.�#�.��5��#��#�� #.��.#��$��#� �� #.�� #� #�� #.� 3� #.� �� #.�� #�� #5�2�#.��#�2.��#.��#.��2�� #�.��#�$�� #��2��$��3�#��#.� 3�� "��#5�2.��#.��#� �#��#��2��3�� #.��3��8$#�� 2��#� �� $.5� #.�� $�� #�� .�� 1 � �$#�� #�� *#� #.�� .��1 �2�$��2�#.� #.�� 2�� #�� .�� 2�� #.�� 3� #�� #.� 3� 9��3� �� :##��,#�� 1��#.��#�$.#�*�$.��5�!�� #�#8� �� ;��3��8 ��#.�*1�� *�#�� ,$.��$.#� ��#.�<��2��5��2��#.��#��#.�#��#�#.�� #�#�#�� #.��3� ��$�#�� 6��#.��$�� #�� #.��$��#� �� .5��2��3�#��4# ��#�#�� #�� #2�� #�� 3�� #.�#� .�� #��1��5� /�. ��/� �#.� �!��#��

��*$$�� #�� #.� $�� #�� $.��#� /�� =1�� )>� 2�#��$#��4�� $�� #��7.��.�2�2��1��#��#�� #�� .�2�2��3� ��2.�#�.�� ;. ��#� ��4.�1�#�� #��#.�� #��#��$#��#��3� ��#.�� #�� #� � �� $�� $�� #� �18$#� ��2��## �#4#�� #.��4�� $5� #.��#.��.�#.�4.�1�#�� $�2�#.� �*��#�5�� #�� #.��#��2.�$.�#��#��* ��#.��#��4�� $��$�� #��#.�#��1��.#�#��#.��1��$��#�� ?�# � ��#��#�� #.��$��$��#��5��2��1�$��#��#.�#�$� ��$��1�#.�#��$#��#.�� #�� #��#��#.�#�� $�� #��,�$.��$� �.��3� ��#.�� 2�� #��#��* �� 3� ��#�4.�1�#�� #.�� $� �.�� #�� #��$#�� #.�� 4.�1�#�� 1##�� 3� ��#.�$�� #��

1

INTRODUCTION 3

MOTIVATION 5 NARRATOLOGY & SEMIOTICS 7 PRELIMINARY RESEARCH 10 RESEARCH QUESTION 14 CHAPTER OUTLINE 15

1 THEORETICAL FRAME 16

1.1 A CROSS SECTION OF CROSSMEDIA 16 1.2 MUSEUMS AS NARRATIVE CROSSMEDIA SPACES 22 1.1 NARRATIVE: A COGNITIVE CONSTRUCT 24

2 CASE STUDY DESCRIPTION 29

2.1 ABORIGINAL ART MUSEUM 29 2.2 UTRECHT ARCHIVE 35 2.3 RAILWAY MUSEUM 43

3 CASE STUDY ANALYSES 53

3.1 NARRATIVE STRUCTURE 55 3.2 LAYERS OF CONTENT 60 3.3 NARRATIVE PROCESSES 63

4 DISCUSSION 67

4.1 EXHIBITION STRUCTURES 67 4.2 LEVELS OF NARRATIVITY 70 4.3 INTERACTION PROCESSES 75 4.4 FROM DESCRIPTION TO PRESCRIPTION 77

CONCLUSION 82

ARGUMENTATION 82 RESEARCH QUESTION 83 OUTCOMES 84 FURTHER RESEARCH 86

2

LITERATURE 88

WEBSITES 89

ILLUSTRATIONS 90

APPENDIX 1

APPENDIX 2

3

INTRODUCTION

In April 1938, the Stedelijk Museum in Amsterdam opened its

doors to an exhibition that was simply called Abstract Art. This

exhibition was curated by Willem Sandberg, the future managing

director of the museum from 1945 until 1962. Mart Stam

designed the exhibition. According to Sandberg and Stam, art

did not need a textual explanation. A view that is still used in

museums today, but is often regarded as somewhat elitist. The

current trend is towards inclusion of target groups that are less

experienced in viewing art. For those visitors, textual explanation

on the works of art and the artist, adds to the experience of a

visit. Sandberg and Stam designed their exhibition without such

explanatory additions. Instead, they used the museum space as a

meaningful medium. By placing the objects in certain relations to

one another, the objects explained themselves.1 And so the media

used to create this exhibition, were the paintings, the small labels

stating the title of the work and the name of the artist and finally

but perhaps most importantly the museum space. James

Bradburne described Sandberg’s views as follows:

‘Willem Sandburg(...) pioneered unjustified text (...), which he

believed challenged convention and had important social overtones.

Sandburg was among the first to recognize the importance of the

visitor’s as well as the museum’s voice, and to argue that they consist

of a dialogue, and not a ‘top-down’ lecture. Along with Marshall

Mcluhan, Sandburg was among the first to champion the ways in

1 J. Leering (1991) p. 53-54

4

which the museum had to transform itself – long before the

technology was able to do so.’2

In 1952, fourteen years after the Abstract Art exhibition, Sandberg

installed one of the world’s first audio tours to accompany visits

to the Stedelijk Museum. His views seem to have changed more

in favour of adding explanation to exhibitions. Judging by the

quote above, the texts on the audio tours will have had a

motivating nature, pressing the visitor to look at the objects and

form an opinion of their own. A technique that is still used today,

in the guided tours that the Stedelijk Museum organizes. Apart

from keeping Sandberg’s dialogue with the audience alive, the

Stedelijk Museum has also remained innovative. They are a

pioneer in the field of media usage in museums. For, as Sandberg

foresaw, museums have to keep transforming themselves. New

media generate new possibilities. And it is one of these

possibilities that form the centre of this research: the concept of

crossmedia storytelling.

The digital age brings more advanced possibilities for adding

information to an exhibition. It creates a whole new dimension of

communication and education. This evolution also has an effect

on how exhibitions are designed. The underlying structure of

exhibitions has become more complex. The curator does not only

place objects in a meaningful order but also decides where and

how additional information is needed and in what medium this

is provided. This research is aimed at providing more insight in

this underlying grammar of crossmedia narrations in the gallery

in space.

2 J. Bradburne (2008) p. x

5

MOTIVATION

The topic of this thesis came to me while taking the MA course

Crossmedia Storytelling, which is part of the Master program

Comparative Arts and Media Studies at the VU University in

Amsterdam. During the course we studied crossmedia products

such as the TV series Lost and the Matrix film sequence. We also

got familiar with new media theory. What struck me was that

this course was mainly focussed on new media and marketing.

To me however, crossmedia storytelling is not something that is

defined by an era: the digital age, or a purpose: marketing.

Instead of analysing a television series, we can also study a

renaissance church in Italy as a crossmedia concept, by taking

into account the architecture, the paintings, the sculptures, the

rituals, the music and the people that are all celebrating and

adding to the same theological narrative. And apart from being

used as a marketing tool, crossmedia concepts can be used for

other purposes, such as education, too. In chapter one this

extended view on crossmedia storytelling will be explained and

supported by a theoretical frame.

My views on crossmedia storytelling made me experience

museum exhibitions in another way. Although it’s possible to

look at each object in an exhibition separately, the museum

creates another layer of meaning by putting them together. This

Meta level is not only shaped by the choice of objects, but is also

expressed through architecture, the use of staging, exhibition

texts and new media such as audio tours, social media and films.

Museums combine these media to create broad, thematic

concepts. Both old and new media are put to use and museums

6

use this for the purpose of marketing, communication and

education. The gallery space becomes a crossmedia narrative.

Other researchers have taken up the idea of museums as

crossmedia platforms as well. This thesis is written in

collaboration with the Crossmedialab, a centre for applied

research in Utrecht. The lab has recently started a project on

crossmedia in a museological. The project is called

Museumkompas and will run for two years. Its aim is formulated

as follows:

...to support professionals working in museums in developing new

and robust crossmedia services. These professionals are increasingly

faced with changing expectations of the public, the increasing

influence of digitalization on the development of public services, and

the growing need for acquiring additional funding because

government funding is not guaranteed anymore. Heads of collections,

curators, managers education and presentation, project managers and

staff members new media must try to withstand these developments.

More so: they must embrace and shape them.3

Harry van Vliet, the managing director and founder of the

Crossmedialab, has agreed to take on an advisory role in the

writing process for this thesis. These insights from the

perspective of applied research will hopefully challenge and

sharpen the theoretical analysis presented here.

3 From the crossmedialab website:

www.crossmedialab.nl/work/project/26/museumkompas

7

NARRATOLOGY & SEMIOTICS

During this research three case study exhibitions are analysed on

their narrative merits. Before going into how the case study

selection has taken place and what method will be used to

analyse these cases, the basic principles and lexicon to talk about

the structure of crossmedia storytelling on a conceptual level are

introduced. The two fields of study that are described here,

narratology and semiotics, form the foundations of the theories

that will be presented in chapter one.

Narratology, the field of study that specializes in storytelling,

has changed recently under the influence of technological

advancement. Traditionally narratologists were literary scholars,

who focused on questions regarding the storyline of a novel.

Now, film and new media scholars produce work on this topic

as well. Narratology has become an interdisciplinary study and

this has affected the definition of what storytelling is.

In the introduction to ‘Narrativity across media’ (2004) Marie-

Laure Ryan, a narratologist who focuses on storytelling through

new media, defines a narrative by the following three

requirements:

• A narrative text must create a world and populate it with

characters and objects (…).

• The world referred to by the text must undergo changes of state

that are caused by non-habitual physical events (…).

• The text must allow the reconstruction of an interpretive

network of goals, plans, causal relations, and psychological

motivations around the narrated events (…).4

4 Ryan, M. (2004), p. 8-9

8

These requirements are medium-independent. According to

Ryan narrativity can take shape in both verbal and non-verbal

media.5 Although she does admit that each medium has its own

narrative qualities and that ‘of all semiotic codes language is the

best suited to storytelling.’6 For a crossmedia product this means

that special attention should be given to what information is

addressed through which medium. According to Ryan some

media have the properties to express a narrative while others only

have a certain amount of narrativity.7 This is an argument that

shall resurface in the first chapter, during the theoretical, in-

depth discussion on crossmedia concepting and narrativity.

Ryan starts her introduction by mentioning the different terms in

which narrative has been researched thus far; the existential, the

cognitive, the aesthetic, the sociological and the technical.8 The

articles in her book reflect this diversity of perspectives. For the

purpose at hand: researching the storyline of an exhibition in

combination with the media usage, the cognitive approach has

been selected. Because ultimately Ryan concludes that narrative

is ‘a cognitive construct or mental image, built by the interpreter

in response to text.’9 So the form of the text, its medium, and the

content are connected in the mind of the beholder. The visitor of

an exhibition brings the story together.

The triangular relation between medium, message and

interpreter forms the core idea of Charles Sanders Peirce’

5 Ibid, p. 15

6 Ibid, p. 10

7 Ibid, p. 9

8 Ibid, p. 2

9 Ibid, p. 8

9

semiotic theory, which was published between 1931 and 1936.

His work is recorded in eight volumes of collected papers.10

Figure 1 shows the Peircean semiotic model. Apart from this

model Peirce’ also made a well-known and often used

classification of signs. According to him there are three types of

signs that are defined by their relation to the object they refer to.

The first type of sign is the iconic sign. An iconic sign refers to its

object in a mimetic, direct way. An example of an icon is a

portrait. The painting refers to its sitter through a direct physical

resemblance. The second type of sign is the index. Indexical signs

share either a partly physical resemblance or a cause and effect

relation with the object. A road map is an example of a sign,

which only partly shares physical trades with the object it refers

to. Other indexes are footprints in the sand that refer to the

person that once stood there or smoke coming from a chimney,

indicating the fire burning in the hearth. The third and last types

of signs are symbols. Symbols do not relate to the objects, they are

arbitrary. Language systems are the most symbolic sign systems.

Throughout the theoretical discussion in chapter one the

Peircean model and sign classification forms the basis for new

cognitive theories on media.

10 Peirce, C.S. (1931-1936), p. 49-58

Fig. 1

Charles Sanders Peirce‘

semiotic model

10

The cognitive theory on narrativity, placed at the centre of this

research, is by Jerome Bruner. A cognitive psychologist, who

published his book called Acts of Meaning, in 1990. In this

academic work he states that human beings generate narratives

continuously.11 According to him narrativity forms and

structures the reality people experience around them. He says

that humans give meaning to their actions and experiences

through an interpretative mechanism. He describes this system

as ‘patterns inherent in the culture’s symbolic systems - its

language and discourse modes, the forms of logical and

narrative explication, and the patterns of mutually dependent

communal life.’12 This cognitive approach is highly relevant

within the context of museums as narrative spaces. Because,

following up on Bruner’s theory, when people experience an

exhibition space they impose these symbolic patterns upon the

display. In 1991 Bruner adds to this theory by publishing an

article called The Narrative Construction of Reality,13 in which he

sums up what he calls the ten features of narrative. My

preliminary research and review on the literature surrounding

this topic leads to the following research question.

PRELIMINARY RESEARCH

A preliminary research was used to find a relevant and

meaningful angle to the topic of crossmedia museum

exhibitions. The preliminary research design was not only aimed

at finding a perspective on the topic, but also at the selection of

11 Bruner, J. (1990), p.34

12 Ibid, p.34

13 Bruner, J. (1991)

11

relevant case studies. To make the selection of case studies less

biased a specified area was delineated: the city of Utrecht. All

the official museums in this area were part of the preliminary

scope, which created a very diverse selection. The following

thirteen museums in Utrecht were analysed at this stage.

- Aboriginal Art Museum (appendix 1.1)

- Centraal Museum (appendix 1.2)

- Money Museum (appendix 1.3)

- Dick Bruna House (appendix 1.4)

- Dom Tower (appendix 1.5)

- Utrecht Archive (appendix 1.6)

- Museum Saint Catherine’s Convent (appendix 1.7)

- Museum Speelklok (appendix 1.8)

- Sonnenborgh Observatory Museum (appendix 1.9)

- Dutch National Railway Museum (appendix 1.10)

- University Museum Utrecht (appendix 1.11)

- Wijk C working-class museum (appendix 1.12)

- Museum Maluku (appendix 1.13)

An inventory was made for each of these museums. These

inventories, to which the appendix numbers refer, contain a

description of the core content the museum wants to bring across

and list the media types that are used by the museums to

communicate with their visitors.14 These media were categorized

by using Robert Semper’s museum media chart as explained in

his study Designing Hybrid Environments: Integrating Media into

Exhibition Space (1998) (fig. 2).15 Semper’s model shows the

amount of interactivity that the medium allows in that specific

14 See: appendix 1 for the thirteen preliminary inventories.

15 Semper, R. (1998), p. 119-127

12

context and specifies which role these media play within the

exhibition.

A medium within Semper’s theory is regarded as a technological

device. Because crossmedia concepts do not only make use of

digital media, the analogue media that were encountered were

also placed in Semper’s model. Analogue media used in the

museums were labels, texts on the wall or on a room-sheet, a

hands-on spot and guided tours; in some cases the architecture

and design of the exhibit played a crucial role as well. In the

museums in Utrecht the following media types were used: audio

tours and pod catchers, smart phones, video and projections,

touch screens, interactive presentations and web based media

such as social media.

This preliminary research gave two important insights that

ultimately led to the research question for this study. First of all it

turned out that the media used in these exhibitions are hard to

Fig. 2

Robert Semper’s museum

media chart

13

compare to one another. Some devices can be used in a single

way, whilst others are more flexible. A hands-on table is used to

signify objects that can be touched by the visitor. This creates an

interaction between the visitor and the collection in another

modality: touch. Other media, such as the pod catcher, can be

used in more than one way. The pod catcher can function as an

audio guide, but also has the option to read out a quiz. The

visitor is then able to press the A, B or C button to answer the

questions. Media that can take on different medium specific

traits complicate the categorization process. Viewing media as a

type of device or object does not account for the wide array of

media possibilities. The device type is part of the medium

context instead of being the medium itself. Semper researches the

context of a medium and how a visitor is able to respond to it.

This is very useful when studying a crossmedia concept. It places

a single medium in the context of a larger plan. However, this

cannot lead to a prediction of how a medium will function in

another context. It does not profile the medium specificity itself.

Second of all, and for this research more importantly, Semper’s

model is unable to account for the relation between content and

structure. In order to research crossmediality the relation

between content, media type and structure is very important. In

a crossmedia platform the content of several media combine into

a storyline. Each medium adds something new to the story in its

own specific way. And all these media are placed in a certain

order. During the case study analyses this relevance between

storyline, medium specificity, structural ordering will be

addressed.

14

RESEARCH QUESTION

How can Bruner’s ten narrative features aid in creating a model,

of the structure underlying the narrativity in the crossmedia

concepts, museums in Utrecht have to offer?

Finding a common structure between crossmedia products is a

daunting task. Not only because of the diversity and multi

functionality of the media used, as was addressed in the section

on narrativity and semiotics, but also because the content of

crossmedia are so diverse. This is no different when limiting the

scope to museum concepts alone. Bruner’s narrative features

label the different tools and materials that are necessary to form

a storyline. By analysing the presence and relations between

these features in the case studies, a comparison can be made.

This comparison hopefully leads to a number of connections

between features, and perhaps other structural elements, these

case studies have in common.

Because it was impossible to look at all the museums in Utrecht

at the same time, three case studies were selected. These case

studies represent three ways of dealing with a crossmedia

exhibition. Because the aim is to compare between very diverse

concepts, the case studies are deliberately chosen to challenge

the method to the fullest. The selection consists out of the

following three cases: the Aboriginal Art Museum, the Utrecht

Archive and the Railway Museum.

15

CHAPTER OUTLINE

Before describing these case studies in detail, the theoretical

frame will be presented in the next chapter. The theoretical

frame will contain in-depth discussions on crossmedia,

narrativity in museums and of course on narratology in general

and Bruner’s psychological theory specifically. Chapter two will

then describe each case study in detail in by using both imagery

and words. After this, chapter three will provide analyses of the

application of Bruner’s features in the three case studies. These

analyses will amount into a discussion in chapter four. This is

where the relations between the structural elements that are

described in the previous chapters will be debated and

visualized. The research will come full circle in the conclusion,

which answers the research question.

16

1 THEORETICAL FRAME

1.1 A CROSS SECTION OF CROSSMEDIA

This section will answer two important questions: What is the

role of narrativity within a crossmedia concept? And when is an

exhibition a crossmedia concept? In order to define crossmedia

and the role of narrativity in such concepts, it is necessary to

introduce two key concepts right away.

In Basisboek Crossmedia Concepting (2009) Indira Reynaert,

proposes that there are two types of concepts the term

crossmedia can refer to.16 Reynaert proposes a distinction

between the transmedial, or autonomous concept (fig. 3) and the

dependent or integrated concept (fig. 4). According to her,

crossmedia products often incorporate elements from both

concept types. The theory of Reynaert forms the general

introduction to crossmedia concepting. Let’s take a look at how

these two types of crossmedia are defined.

Transmedia is a term that is not only used by Reynaert. In fact is

Convergence Culture (2006) by Henry Jenkins that has become the

standard work on the transmedial concept and on crossmedia in

general.17 Jenkins defines transmedia by the use of a multitude of

media that function independent of one another, but cover the

same concept.18 Each medium is an elaboration on the narrative

16 I. Reynaert (2009), p. 61-62

17 H. Jenkins (2006), p. 93

18 Ibid, p.93

17

that is broadcasted. Jenkins’ example of this concept is the Matrix

trilogy (1999, 2003 & 2003).19

The story of the Matrix was not only told by the trilogy of films,

but the narrative was extended by using other media such as the

Animatrix20 The Animatrix is a series of nine anime films that

featured additional Matrix stories. And so each animation

elaborates on the story of the Matrix trilogy. The video games

also added to the grant narrative by letting the gamers play out

additional subplots. By using more than one medium the

producer can tell a more elaborate story. But Jenkins doubts that

this is an advantage of transmedial storytelling. In his opinion

the Matrix narrative has become too dense and complex. The

users are unable to keep up with all the subplots that are added.

This affects the user friendliness in a negative way.

So why do producers use transmedial storytelling? From a

commercial point of view this is very understandable.

Transmedial storytelling ensures the producer, that new target

groups become familiar with the story. Gamers, who might not

go to cinemas often, are introduced to the same narrative concept

as film lovers and vice versa. This means users are able to

unravel the story through the media types they feel most

comfortable with. And if they are so hooked on the story that

they want to know more, they can start exploring other media as

well.

19 The trilogy sequence contains The Matrix (1999), The Matrix Reloaded (2003) and

The Matrix Revolutions 20

The Animatrix film The Second Renaissance (2003) featured on the DVD of the first

Matrix film.

18

The second type of crossmediality Reynaert defines is the

integrated concept. This type of crossmedia concepting is defined

by one plot that is broadcasted through a multitude of media

channels. Each medium has its own medium specific traits. In a

media concept these traits can either be regarded as strength or

weakness. An integrated crossmedia concept aims at putting

media together that bring out each others’ strengths and block

out each other’s weaknesses. By doing this each part of the story

is brought across in the medium most fitting and this makes the

story more powerful.

Both types of crossmedia concepts, integrated and transmedia,

share the idea of using more than one medium to bring the story

across. The difference is that in a transmedia concept the

different media can be experienced separately. The media in an

integrated concept cannot be taken in individually. The user then

needs all the media input to generate the storyline.

The cross relations between the media within a crossmedia

concept form an important part of how these concepts function.

Part of the conceptualization of crossmedia is therefore aimed at

accounting for the different relation types that are possible

Fig. 3 (left)

Reynaert’s transmedial

concept

Fig. 4 (right)

Reynaert’s integrated

concept

19

between media within a crossmedia concept. In other words:

How can the ‘cross’ in crossmedia be defined? Two theories on

crossing within crossmedia will be discussed in here. The first

theory focuses on the level on which the crossing takes place,

while in the second theory the relation between the media

content is conceptualized.

In her article Current State of Cross Media Storytelling: Preliminary

observations for future design (2004), Christa Dena defines the cross

relations between media by conceptualizing different levels of

crossing. The highest level of crossing is from one media channel

to another media channel. This level of crossing is called a cross-

channel relation. An inter-channel relation means that there is a

switch within a channel from the use of one modality to another.

The final level of crossing Dena defines is mono medial and

mono modal. This relation is called an intra-channel relation.21

In order to understand Dena’s levels of crossing, it is important

to know what she considers a channel. According to Dena, a

channel is not only the medium used, but also refers to the

environmental conditions in which this medium is placed. This

means that a film in the cinema is considered another channel,

than a film seen at home on DVD. To make Dena’s levels even

clearer table 1 is added. This table gives a concrete example for

level of crossing Dena has proposed.

21 C. Dena (2004), p. 3-5

20

Cross

channel

level

Crossing between channels From an

interview on

the TV screen

within an

exhibition to a

room sheet

Inter-

channel

level

Crossing within a channel

(single-channel), between

modes (multimodal)

From a radio

programme

online to a

website

Intra-

channel

level:

single-channel, mono-modal

crossing

From one film

in the cinema

to another

film

In Idola van de Crossmedia (2008), Harry van Vliet, who has

already been mentioned as the founder of the Crossmedialab, has

taken another approach. Instead of establishing on what level the

cross relation takes place, he has looked at the content relations

between the different media used. Van Vliet defines this content

relation between the signs, by using the semiotic sign

classification by Charles Sanders Peirce that was described in the

introduction. When the message of one medium is translated

directly into another medium, the medium relation is labelled

iconic. When the message directs the user to another medium, the

relation is defined as indexical. Sometimes there is no direct

relation between the content of the different. But the message in

each of the media adds something to an overlapping concept. In

this symbolic relation the link between media is made in a covert

Table 1

Dena’s cross relation types

21

way.22 In table 2 each of these relation types is paired with a

concrete example again.

Iconic

relation

Content is

translated

directly from

one medium into

the other

Audio tour text that is also

offered on a room sheet

Indexical

relation

Content that

directs the user

to another

medium

Television advertising that directs

a consumer to the website for

more info

Symbolic

relation

Content that

adds to the same

overlapping

concept in a

covert way

The Rijksmuseum brand is

brought across through products,

lectures and a magazine. The

Rijksmuseum name is the

overlapping concept. The media

are only covertly connected to

each other

These two relation typologies by Dena and van Vliet can be

taken into account when creating the visualization between the

different narrative elements analysed in chapter four. In the last

section of this chapter, Bruner’s features will be introduced.

During the description of these features, the insights presented

here will be tied to Bruner’s terminology. This terminology will

be used throughout the rest of this thesis.

22 H. van Vliet (2008), p. 6

Tabel 2

Van Vliet’s cross relation

types

22

1.2 MUSEUMS AS NARRATIVE CROSSMEDIA SPACES

...museum architecture moves from “showing” to “telling” and from

classification to narrative.23

In the field of museology, the term crossmedia has not quite

settled in yet. Instead, scholars make use of a broad scope of

terminology, when referring to crossmedia. Some scholars talk

about spaces for multimedial or interactive informal learning.24

Others call exhibitions narrative space.25 Flavia Sparacino is one of

these scholars. But before introducing her views on the ‘blending

of media design and architectural disciplines’26, a more general

introduction on the museologial concept of Space Syntax is

presented.

Two scholars who have worked on the study of architecture as a

narrative feature in museums are Bill Hillier and Kali Tzortzki.

Space Syntax they call it, a term derived from the field of civil

engineering. Syntax is a term used in linguistics to describe the

sets of rules that underlie the structure of phrases. Space Syntax

aims to offer a same set of rules to describe the ordering principle

behind exhibitions. In their article called ‘Space Syntax: The

Language of Museum Space’, published in 2010, these two

museologists study how the layout of a museum affects the

visitors view and action around objects.27 Hillier has been

studying space syntax since his first article on it in 198228 and

focuses on the layout of museum spaces. Tzorstki connects the

architectural layout to the level of curatorial strategy. In 2003 she

23 B. Hillier & K. Tzortski (2011), p. 293

24 G. Leinhardt et. al. (2002)

25 D. Dernie (2006)

26 F. Sparacino (2002), p. 2

27 B. Hillier & K. Tzortski (2011)

28 B. Hillier et. al. (1982)

23

published a study on the spatial arrangement of the Sainsbury

Wing of the National Gallery in London.29 Space Syntax was

already used by Sandberg and Stam in the thirties and is still

applied by exhibit designers today. But how is the arrangement

of objects, their order, combined with other media in a

crossmedia exhibition? Scholars in the field of space syntax do

not usually account for the information management.

Flavia Sparacino has researched this combination between media

and spatial context. She calls multimedial exhibitions body-driven

narrative spaces. Sparacino is a researcher for the Massachusetts

Institute of Technology (MIT). In 2004 she published the article

Scenographies of the past and museums of the future: from the

wunderkammer to body-driven interactive narrative spaces on an

exhibition called Puccini Set Designer, a 2003 exhibition by the

Ragghianti Foundation in Milan. She worked on this exhibition

herself as a multimedia curator.30 The article’s aim was to

evaluate the media usage throughout the exhibition. The concept

of medium specificity played an important role in the reasoning

behind the choice of a certain medium. The opera fan corner was

for example a place where opera lover could listen to opera by

Puccini. Instead of using earphones, the choice was made to

incorporate audio spotlights. Whereas earphones isolate the

visitor, the audio spotlights enabled the visitor to listen to the

music in a specific spot without internalizing. Other visitors

could enjoy the space around the audio spotlights without being

disturbed by constant background music, which would have

been the case with regular audio equipment.

29 K. Tzortski (2003)

30 F. Sparacino (2004)

24

In museology the concept of narrativity is often viewed in the

light of spatial ordering. Few scholars have linked these spatial

patterns to the other media used in exhibit. However, the

meaning that is ascribed to space syntax suggests that the spatial

context will have an important effect on the meaning of each

medium and the semantic relation between media. As was

pointed out in the previous section, ordering principles are the

foundation of any crossmedia platform.

1.1 NARRATIVE: A COGNITIVE CONSTRUCT

A narrative approach can shed new light on crossmedia concepts

in museums, by making both form and content of the narrative

core comparable. A narrative plot, a concept, is what binds the

different media in a crossmedia exhibit together. This narrative

creates the core of the visitors’ experience. Therefore, instead of

looking at narratives from the perspective of the writer, in this

research the perspective of the reader is centralized. This reader

perspective is clearly present in the theory by Jerome Bruner, as

will become clear in the rest of this section.

Jerome Bruner states that human beings generate narratives

continuously.31 According to him narrativity forms and

structures the reality people experience around them. He says

that humans give meaning to their actions and experiences

through an interpretative system. He describes this system as

‘patterns inherent in the culture’s symbolic systems - its language

and discourse modes, the forms of logical and narrative

explication, and the patterns of mutually dependent communal

31 J. Bruner (1990), p.34

25

life.’32 Bruner sums up ten features of a narrative. These features

differentiate between narrative and other types of discourse.

1. Narrative diachronicity

A narrative takes place within a certain time frame. This time

frame is generated by the sequentially of the narrative events. In

a narrative, time can speed up and slow down. The

conceptualized ‘imaginary’ time is different from the time frame

in which the story is read or experienced.

2. Genericness

Each narrative is both generic and particular. The genericness of

a narrative is created by the endless appropriation of specific

narrative types. The tragic love story is an example; two people

in love who cannot be together for some reason, define this type

of narrative.

3. Intentional state entailment

In a narrative the characters have certain beliefs, desires, theories

and values. The receiver of a narrative takes these into account

when interpreting the story.

4. Hermeneutic composability

It is the reader who interprets a narrative. And this reader has a

limited amount of life experience. This influences how he or she

attributes the intentions of the characters and to what extent the

details within a story are understood.

32 J. Bruner (1990), p.34

26

5. Canonicity and breach

Ryan states that a narrative needs ‘a change of state by non-

habitual events’.33 This idea corresponds to Bruner’s canonicity

and breach. The canon is a fixed state that is interrupted by a

breach. A narrative can start by a description of everyday life in a

certain city. All of a sudden something happens that breaks the

pattern. This structure is recognizable in the following sentence: I

was walking through the park, when suddenly....

6. Referentiality

A writer uses known places and people as a reference. Even

fantasy novels use certain references. For example, vampire

novels often refer back to Bram Stoker’s Dracula, which was

inspired by the knowledge of historic superstitions.

7. Particularity

This is the opposite of genericness. The generic part of a

narrative is filled up with specific data. This is why the story of

Romeo & Juliet is different from West Side Story. Although both

deal with a tragic love affair, the specifics of each story make

them different.

8. Normativeness

Because a breach takes place in a story, there is also a norm. The

canon is not only a fixed state; it also creates an expectation on

how a character should behave.

33 M. Ryan (2004), p.9

27

9. Context sensitivity and negotiability

When we listen to a story we take the context into account, for

instance how knowledgeable the storyteller is. We also take our

own knowledge on the topic into account. Narrativity allows for

a certain margin of error so to speak.

10. Narrative accrual

We construct narratives out of a large amount of data and

different versions of a certain narrative. In a crossmedia story the

reader creates this accrual. All the media elements accumulate to

a core narrative.

Some narrative spaces possess more narrativity than others. But

the visitors will always experience their visit through a cognitive

construct that imposes narrativity onto reality. They will add

their interpretative system onto the experience of an exhibition,

creating a personal narrative. Museums have started recognizing

this role of the visitor. Apart from core tasks such as collecting

and conserving, most museums have now treaded in the

footsteps of Sandberg and started a dialogue with their visitors.

This enables visitors to actively interact with the crossmedia

exhibitions that are on display.

The museum still plays a key role in the construction of narrative

space. Let’s not forget that visiting an exhibition is not an

experience of reality. By using space syntax and by adding

addition mediated information and narrative, the museum

shapes the experience of the visitor. The visitor and the museum

institute work together in creating personal narratives. In the

previous paragraphs the tools and materials these two parties

have at their disposal were presented.

28

Bruner states in Acts of Meaning (1990) that the function of the

cognitive structure human beings is ‘interpretive of “life in

action”.’ He continues by saying that it is then ‘a very complex

form of what C. S. Peirce long ago called the “interpretant”, a

symbolic schema for mediating between sign and ”world”. This

link between Bruner and Peirce is an important one. When

looking at the features, Bruner describes narrative as a complex

Peircean sign. An interpretant, a sender and objects construct this

sign. The interpretant, according to Bruner, mediates between

the sign and the world, between the narrative and reality. In a

museum it is the visitor who fulfils this role. The visitors create

links between the exhibition and their lives outside of the

museological setting. Other features are descriptive for the role

of the sender and the objects. Genericness is a feature that is

related to the objects and the order in which they are placed. The

sender, who in this case is the museum, applies the normativeness.

In the chapters three, four and five, Bruner’s features will be

applied on the three case studies. The roles of the different

parties that aid in the creation of a narrative shall be addressed

there too, for perhaps not all features are always distributed in

the same way.

29

2 CASE STUDY DESCRIPTION

The case studies that have been selected are: the Railway

Museum, the Aboriginal Art Museum and the Utrecht Archive.

All three museums are relatively new. The Aboriginal Art

Museum opened in March 2001, the Railway Museum reopened

its doors in 2005 and the Utrecht Archive exhibition has now been

presented for three years. This chapter will provide the reader

with a textual and visual representation of these case studies.

2.1 ABORIGINAL ART MUSEUM

The Aboriginal Art Museum shows both a temporary and a

permanent collection of Aboriginal art. Aboriginal art is

contemporary art, made by Aboriginal communities in Australia.

The aboriginals produce this contemporary art form for the

Western market. The first examples of modern Aboriginal art date

back to the beginning of the 1970’s. It became a new way of

communicating the traditions. The language of abstract shapes

used in these works, is a mixture of Western and Aboriginal

symbolism. By selling these products to the West, Aboriginal

communities gain the income to maintain their traditions.

The current exhibition at the Aboriginal Art Museum is called: Be

my guest. For the 10-year anniversary of the museum, ten guest

curators were invited to select two artworks: one work by an

Aboriginal artist and another work by a contemporary artist with

a different background. With this exhibition, the museum aims to

show that Aboriginal art is not merely anthropological, but a full-

30

fledged contemporary art form. The exhibition also shows the

parallels between cultures and art forms.34

The following media are used in combination with the works of

art. Each guest curator has produced an article on their own part

of the exhibit, the two works each picked. This article is published

in the catalogue of the exhibition. Each dialogue between art

works is accompanied by several texts on room sheets. These texts

include the article by the guest curator as well as general

information on the artists on display. In addition, the visitor

receives a small booklet when entering the museum. This booklet

shows the floor plan (fig. 5) and a concise, one page text, about

the choices of each curator. Short interviews shown are shown on

a TV screen. This allows the curators to explain the choices they

have made. One can find this television screen next to the pair of

works in room no. 8 on the floor plan (fig. 5). Last but not least,

the visitor can purchase an audio tour. Each section, or each

curator, is accompanied by one, two and sometimes three entries

on the tour. The entries are all between one and two minutes long

and two entries feature introductory music (no. 4 and 10 on the

exhibition plan in fig. 5).

34 These two aims were expressed by the curator of the Aboriginal Art Museum

Georges Petitjean in an interview on October 5th

2011

31

The routing of the exhibition is made clear by the numbering on

the floor plan. After buying a ticket, the visitors are encouraged to

visit the second floor first. This floor shows the permanent

exhibition. This collection contextualizes the temporary

exhibition. One can also choose an alternative routing through the

exhibition, because each segment of the narrative on display, each

dialogue between artworks, is shown in a separate space and can

be appreciated without knowledge of the other segments. Each

segment features the same contextualization of audio tour,

interview and written text. Two segments have been selected to

showcase the relationship between the media used.

Fig. 5

Floor plan of the Be My

Guest exhibition

(Aboriginal Art Museum)

32

The first dialogue that will be described is by guest curator Maria

Roosen and is indicated as no. 4 on the floor plan (fig. 5). Roosen

has selected an Aboriginal object that is called an Ilma (fig. 6).

Ilma’s are rare, ritual objects, used in dance ceremonies. Roy

Wiggan is a Bardi elder, a community situated in the Kimberley

region in Western Australia. Wiggan still produces ilma’s, a craft

that was passed on to him by his ancestors. This highly traditional

Aboriginal object is brought in relation with a modern Dutch

carpet by Hester Oerlemans (fig. 7). The symbols on the carpet are

icons used on computers. These are multiplied and organised in

abstract shapes. Take for example the on/off icons in the right

bottom corner of the picture in figure 9. These four orange

symbols are arranged in a way that creates a new shape, a sort of

formalised flower with four petals.

The article in the catalogue points out that Roossen connects these

two works through several relations. Oerlemans is a craftsman

who makes her work in public places. Apart from this parallel in

the process of making art, both works deal with communication35.

35 Aboriginal Art Museum (2011), p. 40

Fig. 6 (left)

Ilma (1997) by Roy Wiggan

Fig. 7 (right)

Draft for a work called The

Magic Carpet (2011) by

Hester Oerlemans

33

Aboriginal art is known to communicate in different layers.

Although we can see the physical representation of symbols, and

we sometimes know what these symbols mean separately, the

arrangement of symbols tells a specific story. This story is hidden

between the ‘words’ so to speak. This same quality is present in

Oerlemans’ work. By arranging the symbols in this way, their

meaning becomes more than the sum of its parts.

The communication surrounding these two objects is layered as

well. The audio tour adds a soundtrack into the mix. This

soundtrack is by Kraftwerk, a techno pop band that relates to the

computer language on the carpet. The audio tour continues with a

general introduction to the two works of art on display. The

narrator tells us that Oerlemans recognizes the relation between

her work and the Aboriginal work as well, and that she is

considering a donation of the carpet to an Aboriginal community.

This view by Oerlemans is only expressed on the audio tour. The

texts do not mention her opinion, only her work. However, the

catalogues article quotes Maria Roossen. Each text surrounding

the object expresses new clues about the works of art, the artists

and the curator who picked them. Each text overlaps the other,

but shares information from other points of view.

The other dialogue addressed here is indicated by no. 7 (fig 5).

Aboriginals have a spiritual connection with their surroundings.

Each year they travel the same routes and carry out the same

rituals. This connection to the land is also present in the musical

culture. So-called songlines are ritual songs that translate the

physical journey in song lyrics. In the exhibition a recording of a

songline is played. Its sounds increase while approaching the

alcove labelled no. 7. In the no. 7 photography is shown on the

wall. Pictures of Utrecht are combined with pictures of Australian

34

landscapes and Aboriginal people. The songline is the Aboriginal

work. But what dialogue is being expressed here? The curator of

this part of the exhibition is Arjan Dunnewind, the general

director at Impakt, a Media Arts Organisation. Multimedia artists

Marc Tuters and Ricarda Franzen have made a ritualised tour

through the centre of Utrecht using GPS technology. Visitors are

stimulated to download an app on their smartphone and continue

their visit outside the museum walls. The app guides them to

places with special meaning to inhabitants of Utrecht. The locals

share their memories through recordings and the visitor

encounters visual clues along the way. During the tour the visitor

uses all his senses and really experiences the environment that is

discussed on the recordings. As the software knows the GPS

location of the visitor, it can offer the right content at the right

time. The visitors do not have to start the audio clips themselves.

By participating in this new media artwork the visitors are able to

experience their environment in a symbolic way, like the

aboriginals do in their songlines.

The narrative concept of this exhibition revolves around the

artworks, the objects on display. When we enter the museum

space this is what we focus on. The artworks are hung in a

meaningful way. This is what Sandberg called a functional way of

hanging. Although the art can tell the stories on its own, extra

information is added. All texts are an addition to the narrativity

of the space and objects. The visitor can access this information in

the surroundings of the artwork. After the exhibition the visitor

can take a part of this information home as well, by buying the

catalogue.

35

2.2 UTRECHT ARCHIVE

The Utrecht Archive shows a temporary and a permanent

exhibition. The analysis given here is about the permanent

exhibition. There are two narratives that are told in the archive.

The first narrative is about the building. The old walls of the

monastery that once stood there, called St. Paul’s Abbey, have

been uncovered. And the usage as a court of law is shown in the

prison cells that are shown. The second narrative uncovers how

visitors are able to use the archive. By gathering archive material

and making a newspaper, visitors get an idea of what it’s like to

research documents. These two narratives are mixed together. In

the next paragraphs the different story elements will be discussed.

The story starts in front of a glass wall in the entrance hall. This

wall encapsulates four screens, each in combination with a camera

and a scanner (fig. 10). The scanner is for the barcode on the

museum ticket. This barcode is the key to the visitor account. The

visitor smiles to the camera, enters name and email address and is

off to discover the archive.

Fig. 8 (left)

Floor plan of the ground

floor at the Utrecht

Archive

Fig. 9 (right)

Floor plan of the

basement at the Utrecht

Archive

36

The first room on the right (indicated in dark blue on the map in

fig. 8) is the temporary exhibition room. Continuing down the hall

the visitor encounters the Auditorium. (Indicated in orange on the

map in fig. 8) The auditorium was used, as a refectory when it was

still in use as the St. Paul’s Abbey. One of the entrances to this

dining hall is still in situ (fig. 11). The room has a more theatrical

purpose now. Two films are on show here. In a rapid sequence,

the first film shows inhabitants of Utrecht throughout 200 years of

history. The second film is presented every whole hour and

explains the history of the building. A narrator tells the story. He

focuses on stories that give an idea of who wandered through

these halls tells the story. It also shows how law changes when

governments change. For example in the Second World War the

Germans spoke law here too. An interesting fact is that during

those years of war the resistance occupied the basements.

Fig. 10

Starting point of the

Utrecht Archive exhibition

37

The basement is where the visitor is going next. The first room

downstairs is called ‘Moments’ (fig. 12). The room is rather dark.

Within a large glass casing in the centre of the room, objects and

projections are on show. But what are these objects? And who are

the people that are projected?

Surrounding the glass casing are computers with scanner for the

barcode on the entrance ticket. By scanning the ticket, the visitor

Fig. 11

Auditorium of the Utrecht

Archive exhibition

Fig. 12

‘Moments’ at the Utrecht

Archive exhibition

38

gains access to their personal account. Now it is time to browse.

The screen shows a ring with two names on it. By clicking on a

name the visitor opens a document. The historical person in

question pops up on the screen and tells something about the

moment in history he or she was part of. After this introduction by

the character it is possible to flip through the file by clicking on the

tabs for information on ‘the whom’, ‘the what’, ‘the where’, ‘the

when’ and on what happened elsewhere. There are sixteen files in

total. Each document in each file can be stored on the visitor

account. These files will be put to use later.

This room also forms the entrance for a different storyline: the

wine cellar. The wine cellar is a narrow passage that opens u in a

larger space (see fig. 13). Stepping onto the stairs going down a

voice calls out. It is the ghost of a monk who once worked in the

cellar, projected on a screen. He tells us anecdotes about how

some of the monks were not as celibately as they pretended to be.

The visitor exits the cellar by continuing down the stairs. This

route leads directly back to the room that shows moments in the

history of Utrecht. After browsing through the files and meeting

the ghost the visitor continues the basement hallway.

39

In this hallway street names are shown on touch screens on a wall

on the far end of the hall (fig. 14). Pressing a name activates an old

picture of that particular street that merges into a current picture

taken from the same spot. The exhibition continues behind a set of

doors on the left side of the hall.

Behind the doors is an explanatory text on the wall. It introduces

the next part of the exhibition: the prison cells. These are four

small rooms with thick doors to close them. Each cell has its own

Fig. 13

Wine cellar at the Utrecht

Archive exhibition

Fig. 14

Interactive wall with street

names at the Utrecht

Archive exhibition

40

theme. Two of these themes will be addressed here. The first cell

shows pictures of couples on the wall. It is a white wedding

chapel with a TV screens as its centre piece. The words ‘just

married’ are illuminated above the screen (see fig. 15 and 16). It is

possible to press four buttons. The judge on the television explains

that one of the things people used the court for, was to get a

divorce. The visitor gets to pick a couple and decide if they are still

together or divorced. The judge than tells the couple’s story. The

final cell is very dark we see five small screens that show close-ups

of a prisoner. A young boy explains how he ended up in his cell.

The visitor has a very direct connection to this story because of the

surroundings. Imagine what it’s like to be locked up like this boy.

This cell triggers a very physical experience.

The room at the end of this hall is called ‘encounters’ and is

dedicated to all sorts of people that use the archive in this day and

age. The three showrooms this room contains generate its settings

(fig. 17 for an example of a show room). Each showroom has a TV

as the centre point. On these screens, three couples explain how

they made use of the archive and how they went about to find that

information. For example, one couple has traced back information

Fig. 15 (left)

‘Just married’ cell at the


Fig. 16 (right)

Detail of the ‘Just Married’

cell at the Utrecht Archive

exhibition

41

about their house to renovate it in a more accurate historical way.

Another used it to look up information on Morocco.

The final three rooms in the basement are all connected to each

other. They are located at the opposite side of the hallway. The

entrance is right across from the first cell. This room is full of large

touch screens with scanners on the right side of each of them. This

is the hub of the exhibition, where newspapers are made. On

either side of this room is a film room. The film room on the right

side shows a boat on the Vecht (fig. 18). The Vecht is Dutch branch

of the Rhine that meanders through the province of Utrecht. This

boat stops when the visitor presses a button. These stops show

short clips, which give an insight of the surroundings of Utrecht

and its current and historical inhabitants. One of the stops is

Zuylen Castle, home to the famous 18th century female writer,

Belle van Zuylen. Her story is shown and told by a narrator who

sometimes uses sentences Belle herself has written down. The film

room on the other side is a theatre. The visitor can select sixteen

Fig. 17

Showroom in the

‘Encounters’ section of the


42

different film clips that are part of the collection of the archive.

And which show Utrecht in black and white moving images.

.

But the central room is the “moment supreme” of the visit. A

search engine is installed on the computers in the middle of the

room. These engines can be used to track down more information

on a variety of themes. One of these themes is the big storm that

Utrecht endured in 1674. Information regarding this topic can be

stored on the visitor account. When the visitor has collected all the

data, it’s time to select the items for the newspaper. The program

generates a newspaper format and places the selected data in this

format. By pressing the publish button in the top-right corner, the

paper is sent to the visitor’s email address. The visitor can also

choose to print the newspaper A3 size at the service desk of the

museum.

Fig. 18

Boat trip at the Utrecht

Archive exhibition

43

2.3 RAILWAY MUSEUM

The slogan of the Railway museum expresses the aim of the

museum well: ‘The Railway Museum, something to experience’. In the

Master plan for the renovation in 2001 the museum specified its

aim as follows:

‘The Dutch Railway Museum is an attraction based on authenticity,

that offers the Modern consumer, education in the form of

entertainment on the topic of Railway history in general and the Dutch

situation specifically.’36

The layout of the map of the museum is in line with the aim (fig.

20). It looks like something handed out in a theme park. And just

like in a theme park different worlds are specified on it.

36 Meurs (2006), p.7

Fig. 19

Newspaper room at the


44

The visitor enters the museum through the former Maliebaan

Train Station. This old station is very atmospheric. Although the

station is freshly painted and is modernized, its decor still takes

the visitor back in time (fig. 21 and 22). The first and second-class

waiting rooms now function as a museum restaurant. In the

hallway old trunks and suitcases are piled up.37 Having explored

this area the visitor continues onto the train platform outside (fig.

23). An old royal train is displayed on the tracks. To enter the

main building the visitor walks around the train and crosses two

pairs of tracks. One track is for the old royal train and the other

track is for the modern shuttle train. This shuttle service takes

visitors from Utrecht Central station to the museum and back.

37 When peaking inside of these trunks the visitor sees small, filmic projections.

Fig. 20

Floor plan of the Railway

Museum

45

After showing the tickets at the main building visitors can start

their explorations. The first intake is slightly overwhelming: large,

old trains on the left, a cafe opposite of the entrance, and visitors

everywhere including on the bridges in-between worlds that give

access to the rooms on the second floor. Where to start? Probably,

most visitors will begin at world one, indicated by a large number

one on the corners of a grey building next to the cafe. While

standing in line for world one, headphones and locative media

devices are handed out. Visitors enter the world in groups of ten.

This is the amount of people that fits in the elevator that will lead

Fig. 21

Front entrance of the

Railway museum: the old

Maliebaan Train Station

Fig. 22 (left)

Decor of the former

Maliebaan Train Station

Fig. 23 (right)

Clock at the platform of

the former Maliebaan

Train Station

46

back in time to the 1800’s. The man on the audio tour speaks

Dutch with an English accent and introduces himself as John

Middlemiss. When we exit the elevator we are in English mine

shaft that leads into a mining village. Middlemiss explains that

this is where it all started. This is where the steam engine was

invented. Middlemiss explains how it works. After this he tells us

that he went to the Netherlands to ride the first Dutch steam

engine train called De Arendt (fig. 24). Because it was the first train

there were no Dutchmen who knew how to drive it. This

locomotive is the most prized object in the museum. It is the

centrepiece of world one, a theatrical setting (fig. 25) in which the

visitor plays a part as well. The narrator directly cues the visitor

by expressions such as: ‘Hey, hold on a minute’ and ‘I’ll see you

down at the party just down this street’. After viewing the train,

the visitor exits world one. The visitor needs to go through several

hallways with 19th century paintings of trains on the walls, to

reach the exit.

Fig. 24

‘De Arendt’ the centre

piece of world 1 of the

Railway Museum

47

World one is dedicated to the train itself. World two however,

shares a different perspective: that of the traveller. World two is a

theatre with three different performance areas: the platform, the

train and the theatre (fig. 26 and 27). There are six different plays

on show. All these shows are somehow connected to the luxurious

Orient Express. The timetable for these performances is shown on

a digital screen in front of the cafe. Most visitors will only pick one

play during their visit. In order to give the reader an idea of what

an experience in world two is like, the performance of Collette and

Fifi will be described here.

The plot of the performance is as follows. Collette is a cancan

dancer who was recruited by a captain to spy for the British

government. She must retrieve secret papers from someone

aboard the Orient Express. Her pink poodle Fifi helps her on this

quest. During the performance Collette seeks assistance in the

audience. Two children are asked to sit behind the control panels

on either side of the stage. By pushing the buttons, turning the

wheels and pulling the handles, these kids manage the decor on

Fig. 25

Dutch village scenery in

world 1 of the Railway

Museum

48

stage. The performance is mainly aimed at children between the

age of four and twelve.

World three shows the perspective of railway personnel. The line

is in a wooden room, filled with model trains and other railway

memorabilia. It turns out that we are in someone’s attic, someone

who has worked for the railways for his entire life. Previous

generations of his family have been in the trade as well. His

grandson Hans is interviewing him for a school paper on Dutch

Fig. 26

Platform between trains

at world 2 of the Railway

Museum

Fig. 27

Theatre at world 2 of the

Railway Museum

49

railway history. The dummies representing them are seated in the

attic (fig. 28), in-between the queue. While waiting we listen to the

grandfather sharing his stories. Some of the stories correspond

with objects in the room. An example of this is when the

grandfather talks about the 1939 celebration when the Dutch

railway was a 100 years old. In the attic we see objects with 1939

on it. These memorabilia bring the story to life. But world 3 is not

this popular amongst kids because of Hans’ grandfather. It is the

ride that makes this an attraction. In a cart that seats four people

the visitor discovers the world of ‘steal monsters’ (fig. 30).

Dummies represent the labourers cleaning the trains and working

the signposts. The driver of a passing train waves at us and there

is a party celebration for two members of staff who have been in

service for 60 years (fig. 29).

Fig. 28 (left)

Dummies of Hans and his

grandfather at world 3 of

the Railway Museum

Fig. 29 (right)

60 year anniversary at the

Railway celebration’ at

world 3 of the Railway

Museum

50

The last World changes continuously. World four consists of five

tracks on which several trains are displayed (fig. 31). Visitors can

get more information on these trains from museum staff giving

tours on the platforms. At the moment there is also an exhibition

on safety on the tracks (fig. 32). This exhibition is incorporated in

world 4. Bright yellow poles give information. These info kiosks

tell stories through small TV screens, audio fragments, games and

text (fig. 33).

Fig. 30

Cart passing one of the

‘steal monsters’ at world 3

of the Railway Museum

Fig. 31

World 4 of the Railway

Museum

51

The four worlds are indicated on the map in orange (fig. 20). But

the green areas also contain art, model trains, rooms with

requisites and more, too much to describe here. Therefore one of

the green areas has been selected: the outside area. The outside

area is a playground for the younger children (fig. 34). It is a place

to relax. It shows some more authentic material on the tracks (fig.

35), but there is no more information.

Fig. 32 (left)

Exhibition on safety on the

tracks, currently on show


Museum

Fig. 33 (right)

Visitors enjoying the

exhibition on safety on the

tracks, currently on show


Museum

Fig. 34

Playground at outside

area of the Railway

Museum

52

Fig. 35

Historic material at the

outside area of the

Railway Museum

53

3 CASE STUDY ANALYSES

Bruners ten narrative features mentioned in chapter one will

now be applied to three case studies. These features will be

applied to the three case studies in this chapter. Bruner delivers

his features in the form of a list, which might give the

impressioncause the idea that all features are equal to one

another. However, this view limits their functionality. For

instance, when studying the feature particularity38 in a case study,

it is possible to point out examples of particular elements of that

specific narrative but it is still impossible to show the value of

this feature in relation to another feature such as narrative

accrual39. By structuring the features, the outcome of the

analytical process presented in this chapter, can be explained in a

more meaningful way.

After reviewing Bruner’s ten narrative features, we can sort them

by their function. A feature can either descibe a part of the

content of a narrative, have a structural role or describe a process

that takes place between the reader and the writer of a given

narrative. These three roles of Bruner’s features all play their part

in what is essentially: the narrative (visualized in fig. 36). The

narrative body consists of the structural features and the content

features. A narrative cannot exist without one or the other. The

arrows in the visualization (fig. 36) show the processes of

creating, consuming and adding to the narrative content and

structure. When sharing a story the content and structure that the

writer has imposed on the narrative change slightly at the hands

38 The concept particularity was introduced and explained on p. 25

39 The concept narrative accrual was introduced and explained on p. 26

54

of the reader. The personal interpretation of a reader becomes

part of the narrative.

WriterReader

Narrative processes

Content

Structure

Narrative:

The model presented above (fig. 36) categorizes Bruner’s features

in the following three clusters: structural features, content features

and narrative processes. Thise visualization also shows the

relationship between these categories. Bruner labels the

structural elements as follows: diachronicity, canonicity & breach

and genericness.40 This structural form cannot be expressed

without content. And so the second group of features, are the

content related features. This group contains the intentional state

entailment, the norm, the particularity and the referentiality.41

Ultimately, Bruner also argues that narrativity is not merely the

narrative itself. A narrative is always part of a communication

40 For an introduction on diachronicity and genericness see p. 24, and for canonicity

& breach p. 25. 41

For an introduction on intentional state entailment see p. 24, for particularity,

normativeness and referentiality p. 25.

Fig. 36

Visualization of the three

narrative elements

55

process between a writer and a reader. Bruner captures this

communicative layer by adding the last three features to his

theory, which he labels: hermeneutic composability, narrative

accrual and context sensitivity & negotiability.42

3.1 Narrative structure

The narrative structure of a museum space can be analysed by

watching the visitors move through it. While the previous

chapter gives a description of the routing through each of the

case studies, this section presents the structure underlying the

exhibits, on the basis of those descriptions. This introduction to

the section focuses on the general spatial structure, the space

syntax, of each case study. After this general introduction,

Bruner’s three structural features, diachronicity, Canonicity &

breach and genericness are applied to each of the case studies.

Georges Petitjean, the head curator of the Be My Guest exhibition

at the Aboriginal Art Museum, has divided the museum space

into ten separate sections. Although some of these sections are in

an open plan environment, there are clear markers that indicate

the beginning of one section and the ending of another. This is

done by using separation walls, by using the differences in level

and by clustering objects together. In the Utrecht Archive the

exhibition rooms all have a different theme or function. A visitor

follows the hallway and enters each of the rooms. Within a room

objects and information are clustered together. Each cluster

42 For an introduction on hermeneutic composability see p. 24, for narrative accrual

and context sensitivity & negotiability see p. 26.

56

represents a deliniated part of the plot, or in narrative terms: a

sub plot. At the Railway Museum visitors are less obliged to

follow a route, although the different worlds are numbered.

Each world is a separate space with a separate atmosphere.

Objects are not clustered but placed, in order to represent reality.

The timeline, or diachronicity, at the Aboriginal Art Museum is

determined by the amount of time one stands before each of the

art dialogues. And this time span can increase by the number of

resources the visitor uses. By using the audio guide and

exhibition texts the visitor is able to elongate the time span of

each experience. The diachronicity is determined by the amount

of detail in the explanation. By using this method, the museum

places this feature in the hands of the visitor.

The Utrecht Archive uses another method to structure time. It

gives the visitor a spatial trail to follow. This trail has certain

stops. During these stops the visitor experiences audio visual

footage or gathers archive material at their own discretion. The

time span of the footage and the amount of material determines

the length of the stop. Although the visitor is able to forego a

stop and certain shortcuts are possible, this exhibition does not

allow the visitor to determine the diachronicity of the narrative

space. The visitor needs to follow the spatial trail to conclude the

story by making a newspaper.43

In the Railway Museum the timeline is also structured by spatial

elements. Each spatial area has a certain size and a contains

43 The newspaper is compiled out of achive material the visitor has selected and is

made during the visit. The paper can be printed or emailed. For a more detailed

description see p. 41.

Diachronicity

57

certain amount of objects. This determines how long one can

stop and linger. Some areas are so big it is impossible to see

everything. This gives of a strong incentive to visit the museum

again. World two and three also have a more pressing time

frame. The theatre performances in world two have a certain

duration and so does the ride in world three. But in all the other

spaces, visitors are able to wander about

The feature of canonicity & breach at the Aboriginal Art Museum

can be considered to be the main theme of the exhibition. Each

time an aboriginal artwork forms the canon it is contrasted with a

breach in the form of another contemporary artwork. The canon

clashes with the breach during each dialogue. The breach is

visualized instead of verbalized in this narrative space.

At the Utrecht archive the canon and breach are spatially

determined as well. Each space creates a canon for the next space.

And each time we enter the next space we experience a change

in state. Perhaps this breach of a canon is most clear when

entering the cells. Each cell is so specific, so different from the

neutral hallway space, that the visitor really experiences this

clash between then and now. These breaches are created by

isolating the spaces, using contrasts in lighting and using

contrasts in the themes on display.

At the Railway Musuem the canon and breach are spatially

marked in a clear way. Each world creates a canon that contrasts

with the other worlds. By moving from one world to another the

visitor experiences a breach. The breaches in the Railway Museum

resemble those at the Utrecht Archive. By setting the scene in a

Canonicity &

Breach

58

different way and by using themes the worlds compliment and

contrast one another.

Genericness was also mentioned as a structuring element in the

introduction to this chapter. This element structures the outline

of the narrative being told. An example of a generic narrative

type is the love story. A love story usually contains a description

of how the two main characters meet or have met and how they

feel about each other initially. After this initial setting something

happens to trigger the spark between them. This spark contrasts

with their previous view on the relationship between them. At

the end of the story the contrasts are resolved and the main

characters find their happy ever after. These generic elements to

a story create the format for each story type.

In the Aboriginal Art Museum the generic format can be

described as repetitions of contrasts. Each section in the

exhibition uses this format. It enables the visitor to compare two

distinctly different works. By comparing the works in each

section, the visitor unravels the story. Therefore this generic

format can be identified as the comparison.

The Utrecht Archive takes another approach on genericness.

Each section covers a certain theme. Some of the rooms are

dedicated to the archive itself while other rooms explain about

different periods and functions of the building. This thematically

generic narrative can cover a wide array of relations. Themes can

be by the same artist, in the same period, from the same

geographic location and so on.

Genericness

59

When visiting the Railway Museum it becomes clear that there is

another type of structure possible: the reconstruction. The

different worlds create groupings of objects, but these objects are

not compared by the visitor. Instead these worlds function like a

snapshot of a moment in time. The structure is purely spatial

and aimed at creating a realistic environment. The objects are

arranged to create a representation of a real place. In the

thematical format, space is used to place objects together that

share a certain relationship with one another. In the railway

museum this neutral thematical space becomes a meaningful

representation of place.

There is one common generic structure missing from this set of

case studies: the chronological generic narrative. This structure is

often used in exhibitions on one specific person or group. Each

work marks a specific moment in time. The genre that is

connected to this particular structure is the biographical

exhibition. These biographical exhibitions show the different

stages of the development of an artist or a group. Because each

stage can be regarded as a theme as well, the thematical

structure and the chronological structure sometimes overlap. In

the thematic structure of the Utrecht Archive this was not the

case. There the timeline of the theme’s were not of a

chronological nature. Instead, the visitor travels back and forth

time constantly during the exploration of the rooms.

During the visits for this research it became clear that these three

structural features are particularly interesting when researching

narrative space. Bruner mentions that the diachronicity is not the

physical time it takes for the reader to read a story, but that it is

the conceptual time in the narrative itself. This timeline can

60

either speed up or slow down depending on the amount of

detail that is used in describing the scenes. The museological

equivalent of being more detailed is by adding more space, more

objects or a more detailed explanation to a certain theme. The

canonicity & breach are related to this time concept. In narrative

space the breach does not only take place through text but also

through the spatial design. And also the genericness of each of the

narratives can be deducted from the spatial design. The analyses

of the case studies shows that the placement of objects and the

timeline are important tools to shape the narrative structure of

exhibitions. In chapter four, the relation between these two

elements in narrative space will be discussed in a broader

context.

3.2 Layers of content

A narrative consists of both structure and content. During the

preliminary analyses it became clear that museums often attach

more than one layer of content to an exhibition. The narrative

that is told through the audio tour might be really different in

tone and content than the text that can be read on the museum

wall. Apart from that, content can also be divided up in types.

Bruner mentioned that a narrative needs particularity, an

intentional state entailment, normativeness and referentiality. All

these features describe a perspective one can take on the

narrative content. The case study examples will now be viewed

in the light of these perspectives.

The particularity is the aspect in which exhibitions differ from

one another most of all. Although some exhibitions may be on

the same artist or the same period, they take on a different

approach and that changes the specifics. This is the only feature

Particularity

61

that is incomparable. In fact, this feature labels all the elements

of a narrative that do not fit into a box. One can consider the

description given in chapter two, as a report on the particularity

of the case study exhibitions.

The intentional state entailment is described by Bruner as beliefs,

theories, desires and values which are embedded in the story

world. The time in which the story is set and the characters that

are chosen determine the intentional state. A narrator expresses

them to the reader through his or her own voice or the voice of a

character. Often, museums do not use fictional characters to

express their voice. Instead they speak from the perspective of

the museum institute.

The Aboriginal Art Museum shows this use of voice. On the

audio tour and in the introduction text on the wall, the museum

expresses its expectations, its hope of what this exhibition might

accomplish. The museum wants to validate the claim that

Aboriginal Art belongs in the realm of modern art.

The Utrecht Archive does use the voice of characters in their

exhibition. Each character expresses its intentional state entailment

through introductory speeches in the ‘moments’ room. The

digital portraits tell the visitor about what has happened to them

and how they feel about that. After this state is expressed the

visitor browses the data of the event and reconstructs the story.

The intentionial state entailment at the Railway Museum is not

expressed through text or characters. Instead the visitor is

presented with the interior of the Maliebaan station. This interior

sets the scene for the rest of the visit. Although the interior of the

Intentional state

entailment

62

station may at first not present itself as narrative content as such,

within an exhibition space the design should actually be

regarded as such.

The norm of a story is inserted by the writer, or in these cases, the

museum. The institution decides how historical events are

interpreted and it validates the information that is presented.

Often, institutions have a clear perspective on how they view the

objects they have on display. The Aboriginal Art museum views

its collection as modern art and this determines how they put

their collection on display. The Utrecht Archive expresses to the

visitor, a part of how archive research is done. Which part they

communicate, was decided upon by the Archive institute, when

the exhibition was created. Finally, the Railway Museum wishes

to educate its visitors, on the history of train travel in the

Netherlands, by means of an entertaining environment. This

norm is the foundation for the exhibitions on display.

It is difficult to pinpoint the equivalent of Bruner’s referentiality

in a museum exhibition. Exhibitions refer to the themes they

cover. An exhibition on Alexander the Great refers to a specific

historical time and place. But the type of reference that is made,

differs from object to object. The Aboriginal Art Museum shows

paintings that refer to the world of contemporary art. Each work

refers back to its own history. This also means that each work is

important on its own merit. In the Railway Museum, this is often

the other way around. Most objects are placed together in order

to create a sum that is greater than its parts. In the Utrecht

Archive some objects are only represented digitally. There are

not a lot of real objects on display, but they are referred to

through a virtual copy. The aspect of referentiality in museums

Normativeness

Referentiality

63

is broader than the mere story world that is on display. Because

this reference is not only made through language, but also

through objects the matter of referentiality becomes more

complex. This discussion will be continued in the next chapter.

3.3 Narrative processes

Narrativity has always had a social aspect as well. Because

stories are expressed between people, certain discourse

processes take place. Bruner dubs these processes: hermeneutic

composability, context sensutivity & negotiability and narrative

accrual. All three of these processes take place between the writer

and the reader of a text.

In regular texts the boundaries and roles of both of these

participants are clear. The writer delivers a narrative that is

compliant with one of the narrative structure and the reader

interprets this narrative (hermeneutic composability). During the

interpretation process the reader adds to the story by piecing the

different story elements together and adding connections to his

own life experience (narrative accrual). The reader also treats the

background and knowledge of the writer with care and

compares this to his own knowledge on the topic (context

sensitivity and negotiability). But are the roles and boudaries

between the museum and its audience the same, or do these

processes differ when it comes to three dimensional narratives?

In the Aboriginal Art museum the visitor looks at the dialogues

between two works of art. Each visitor has his or her own life

experiences. Some visitors might have been to Australia and

seen some Aboriginal works there, while other visitors know

Narrative

accrual

64

much about contemporary art. The type and amount of

knowledge a visitor has will influence the narrative accrual. This

will influence the interpretation of the exhibition and the works

on display. It also influences the amount of background

information a visitor seeks out. For some visitors the catalogue

texts are a pleasant addition to the knowledge they already have.

For other visitors it is more interesting to get more general

information on the works of art, before focussing on more

detailed texts. In each of the museums this process takes place.

In the Utrecht Archive a visitor might come from Utrecht. This

will some parts of the exhibition more recognisable. At the

Railway Museum an former railway imployee will gather other

information than his grandchildren.

The visitor decides how much of what the museum offers is

consumated. This means that the visitor does not only create a

personal interpretation, but the psychological narrative

experienced between the museum walls can have a different

content entirely. When comparing these findings to the general

description of narrative accrual it bomes clear that this process is

more important in a three dimensional narrative than in its two

dimensional counterpart. Where in a regular text the author

decides on the content of a narrative, a three dimensional

narrative encourages readers to seek out the content they’re

interested in.

The information a reader seek out in the exhibition space is

placed there by the institution. In that sense the writer still

controls the content. The pocess of content placement is called:

hermeneutic composability. This composability feature is especially

apparent at the archive. When the visitor starts browsing articles

Hermeneutic

composability

65

for the newspaper he or she really esembles all the important

bits and pieces together. The visitor uses background

information and personal interest to compose relating material.

All this information is combined with the visitor’s historical

knowledge and the amount of ability he or she appropriates to

the institute. At the other museums this process is applied as

well, but without a physical, newspaper output.

The difference between content placement in regular texts and

three dimensional texts is the amount of information. A three

dimensional, multimedia text can store an endless amount of

content. By placing this content correctly the visitor will be

aware of how to access the information that is most interesting to

them. In the next chapter two different ways of placing content

will be discussed.

At the Railway Museum the visitor becomes and explorer of the

story world. Because the visitor explores for himself, he is less

aware that this experience is created by an author. The visitor is

less aware of the placement of the content. This can blur the

process of context sensitivity and negotiability. In the Aborignal Art

Museum and the Utrecht Archive the visitor is aware of the

knowledge of the institute. This can influence how they

experience an exhibition. If you do not know a lot about

contemporary art it can be encouraging to read the museum

texts. However, if you do know something about art and the text

in the booklet expresses another opinion, it can change your

view on other texts as well.

This negotiation and contextual sensitivity between the writer

and the reader is not much different from regular narrative texts.

Context

sensitivity &

negotiability

66

Each text is coloured by its author and each author is challanged

by the knowledge of his reader. In the same way a museum

institute colours its exhibitions and is challanged by the diversity

of its audience.

67

4 DISCUSSION

After highlighting the importance of narrativity within a

crossmedia concept in chapter one and presenting the narrativity

of the case studies in chapters two and three, it is now time to

come to terms with the underlying structure of these narratives.

There are two important goals in this chapter. Firstly to create a

model that visualizes the underlying structure revealed by the

case study analyses in chapter three. Secondly to show how this

model can be used in a museological context.

The first section of this chapter will present and elaborate on a

visual model that shows the space syntax of an exhibition. This

part of the model draws on Bruner’s structural features. The

second section goes beyond the structure and focuses on the

content. The model from section one will gain new layers,

showing how the content is connected to the structure. The third

and final section of this chapter focuses on an area that has

shown a large amount of variation in each case study: the

process level. This section presents a debate on the concept of

interactivity in museums and how this is connected to Bruner’s

process features.

4.1 Exhibition Structures

The case study descriptions in chapter two, elaborated on the

exhibitions through the eyes of the visitor and the coherent

structure of the exhibitions became clearer too. Describing a

museum visit as an experience through storytelling, gives insight

in the narrative rhythm. It shows the timeline the visitor

68

encounters during the visit and it shows which objects and

media are perceived as part of the same cluster. The tools used to

generate this crossmedia cluster structure of an exhibition are:

timing, space and object placement.44

These three tools were already researched by Hillier and

Tzorstki in their work on space syntax.45 They also focused on

the way the visitor moved through the exhibition spaces.

However, they did not connect the experience of these spatial

structures to narrativity. Space syntax chart which elements of

an exhibition are easy to reach for a visitor and which elements

are more difficult to find. Tzorstki also shows the clustering of

objects on the plan of the exhibition spaces. But in order to show

the narrativity of an exhibition it is more important to show the

rhythm of an exhibition instead of the precise placement of

objects. When we want to show the narrativity within the Be My

Guest exhibition, it is important to show each cluster is made up

out of the same elements and which clusters are in separate

rooms and which are not. It is less relevant to show the exact

positions on the museum plan. The rhythm enables one to see

the diachronicity and the canon and breach. It shows the

underlying narrative system.

We can visualize this narrative rhythm by making an abstract

visualization of the museum space, the clustering within that

space and the amount of objects within a clustering. The

following model shows such an abstract representation (fig. 37):

44 The case study analyses on the structural features was presented in chaper three

p. 54-59. 45

The research on space syntax was introduced in chaper one p. 21-22.

69

= Exhibition space

= Cluster

= Object

This model shows the clusters the visitor will distinguish when

following the routing through an exhibition. This routing

determines the diachronicty of a three dimensional museum

narrative. The model also shows an indication for the feature of

canon and breach: the placement of clusters in separate rooms.

All three case studies showed that the break of a room usually

creates a breach in the narrative as well. This breach effect is

strengthened when the design of a room contrasts with other

spaces in the exhibition. By using clashing colours or different

styles, the visitor becomes aware that he has entered another

part of the narrative. This method is used in the Railway

Museum, where each world has a clearly distinct style. In some

exhibitions the breach is made textually while the design of the

exhibit remains neutral. This type of breach is encountered in the

Aboriginal Art Museum. Here the breach takes place within the

cluster itself. The objects within the exhibition create the breach.

Fig. 37

Model for narrative

structure in crossmedia

museum spaces

70

In the Utrecht Archive the breach takes place in each change of

room, although the change of style is less dramatic than in the

Railway Museum.

However, before creating the cluster structure in a museum

gallery, one needs to know what generic strategy underlies the

narrative. Chapter three described four different generic forms.

The form of a narratives is determined by the type of relation

objects have within a cluster. In a thematic exhibition each

cluster represents a certain theme. While in a comparative

structure, like the Aboriginal Art Museum exhibition each

cluster compares a number of objects to one another. This shows

that these structural elements are tied to the content of the

exhibition as well. The next section will elaborate on the content

features Bruner sums up and will show the relationship between

the structural layer and the layers of content.

4.2 Levels of narrativity

Bruner describes the content of a narrative by the feature

particularity. Each museum picks a different set of objects and

explanations to show and tell the exhibition narrative. In the first

cluster of objects or in the first room of an exhibition, these

particularities create what Bruner calls the initial state entailment.

In this section of the narrative, the visitor warms up. The generic

type of the exhibition becomes clear and the setting creates a

certain atmosphere.

Bruner’s other two content features are not traceable as entities in

an exhibition. Both norm and referentiality seep through every

element in an exhibition. A museum makes choices by including

71

or excluding certain objects and explanatory material. These

choices communicate the vision the museum has on the objects on

display. During the analyses in chapter three it also became clear

that the referentiality feature in the museological context, is

specifically tied to a normative statement. Therefore the

relationship between these features will be discussed more

elaborately here.46

Each case study example uses its object in a different way. While

in the Aboriginal Art Museum the objects refer to themselves in a

l’art pour l’art setting, the Railway Museum aims at creating a

visitor experience with the objects. Finally, the Utrecht Archive

uses the objects to tell a story. The objects do not refer to

themselves or the experience of a visitor, instead they refer to the

narrative the archive wishes to share. This perspective on the

object creates a norm: it determines how the visitor must look at

the artefacts on display.

Each of the case studies has a level of content made up out of

objects. This layer of content is clustered as shown in the previous

section. This object layer can be regarded as the core story of an

exhibition. In addition to this story the visitor is able to use two

more types of content. The first type of content is the horizontal

content. This content stretches over the entire exhibition and comes

in a mobile form. The visitor receives this content at the beginning

of the museum visit and chooses when to use it. The other type of

content is the vertical content. This content is aimed at giving more

indepth information as an addition to the core narrative. This

content is related to one specific cluster. It can be regarded as a

subplot to a certain theme.

46 The case study analyses on the content features was presented in chaper three p.

59-62.

72

Figure 38 shows the layers of content in the Aboriginal Art

Museum. The image shows the objects as antennas that signal out

information. The written and spoken text is attached to the object.

To activate the audio tour a visitor needs to approach the signal

device near the object. And the texts are placed near each pair of

objects as well. The surroundings of these objects are information

hot spots. And because each of these hot spots is arranged in the

same way, the visitor knows what information is accessible. Each

visitor decides how much information is needed at what time. This

type of narrative space is object driven. The content is attached to

the object clusters and gives indepth information on each of the

object pairs. This museum mainly offers vertical content.

Object

Visitor

InformationZone

The Utrecht Archive did not focus on the objects, but on the

space in between the objects: the storyline. The visitor accesses

information by locating the narrative elements. The scanning

devices to access the visitor account specify locations that give

access to narratives. But not all narrative elements are part of the

Fig. 38

Visualization of an Object

driven space

73

newspaper plot. The other narrative locations are therefore

specified by signs along the way. The story driven narrative

space is visualised in figure 39. The objects in these types of

narrative spaces are placed near a narrative element. The object

functions as an inspiration for the narrative and as an illustration

to it. The archive mainly uses horizontal content to communicate

the narrative they want to share with the visitor.

DirectedNarrativeElement

SignalingNarrativeElement

Object

Visitor

There are three types of content in a museum space: the objects,

the horizontal content and the vertical content. Both horizontal

and vertical content can be expressed through an array of media.

These media can either be placed within the exhibition itself or

taken through the exhibition by a visitor. The first group of

media are the local media and the second group of media are the

mobile media. Because the local medium is often attached to a

cluster it lends itself well for vertical content. However, it is also

possible to present a local medium on its own, such as a video

Fig. 39

Visualization of a Story

driven space

74

presentation. In those cases the local medium contains horizontal

content. On the other hand mobile media lend themselves well

for generating horizontal content. However, when an audiotour

is used to add in-depth information on specific objects, this

mobile medium adds vertical information to an exhibit.

Flavia Sparacino47 has researched this combination between

media and spatial context. The case study in her research is used

to showcase new techniques and how their application enhances

the exhibition experience. Sparacino is a designer and this shows

in her approach to the research topic. She focuses on the form of

the media, instead of the content. By labeling the media used in

an exhibition as containing vertical or horizontal data, the form

and content of such a media can be analyzed in combination to

one another.

The visualization made in the previous section already shows

the first layer of content: the objects. In order to also visualize the

other two layers it is important to distinguish between the local

and mobile media. Figure 40 below, shows the abstract

visualization of these layers of content. In order to specify the

type of content it is possible to ad icons that represent the

medium type. By alligning these icons with the cluster structure

it becomes clear which connections there are between the

information and the time and place within the exhibition

structure. It is impossible to distinguish between horizontal and

vertical content with this model. In order to visualize the aim of

the information it is possible to create a visualization such as in

figure 37 and 38.

47 Sparacino’s theory was presented in chapter one p.

75

= Local media thread

= Audio fragment

= Text on location

= Mobile media thread

= Entry on a mobile device or text

= Audio tour

= Booklet

= Film display on location

4.3 Interaction Processes

The last section of chapter three discussed bruner’s three

narrative processes. It showed that museum narratives allow

more narrative accrual and this changes the way information

and plots are presented in a three dimensional, crossmedia

narrative.48 This type of narrative allows for its audience to

interact with it. But this interaction is guded by the creator of the

narrative. Within the space syntax certain liberties of the

audience are calculated into the masterplan.

This section will show this addition of interactivity onto the

model in figure 40. In order to do so it is important to discuss at

what moments interactivity takes place. The Railway Museum is

an interesting case in that aspect. It allows its audience a lot of

48 The case study analyses on the process features was presented in chaper three p.

62-.65.

Fig. 40

Model for narrative

structure and content in

crossmedia museum

spaces

76

freedom. However, when a visitor enters a world the museum

guides these visitors through by using all types of media. In

figure 41 an abstraction of this visitor driven museum space is

shown.

The green area in figure 41 represents the atmospheric

surrounding. This is the part of the exhibition where people can

wander freely. However, when a visitor enters a red zone, a

world, the visitors movements are controlled by the space syntax

and mediation of that space.

Object

Visitor

UncontrolledTheme

ControlledTheme

AtmosphericArea

And so it is the museum that determines the amount of

interactivity. Some exhibitions are more interactive then other.

For example, the Utrecht Archive motivates visitors to interact

with the digital version of their documents. But this interaction

is not continuous during the visit. Instead interaction can be

marked in the visual model that was used in the previous two

sections. If we add the path that the visitor takes, and show

Fig. 41

Visualization of a visitor

driven space

77

where this visitor is allowed to engage with the content, we

mark the interactivity. In figure 42 this addition to the model is

made. The red bar marks the moments of interactivity. The

connections between the markers to the laysers of content

specify the interaction further.

= Interaction marker

= Interactivity thread

= Interaction by local textual medium

= Interaction by entry mobile medium

4.4 From description to prescription

The previous discussion has demonstrated the descriptive power

of the model in figure 42. Bruner’s features have aided in the

creation of this model by supplying an analytical focus on

certain elements of narrativity. These elements have given

direction to the analyses of the case studies and have aided in

drawing comparisons between them.

Bruner’s features and the model derived from it also presents an

interesting way of dealing with the creation of an exhibit. It can

be used as a communicative tool between the designer of an

Fig. 42

Model for narrative

structure, content and

interactivity in crossmedia

museum spaces

78

exhibition and the people that determine the content. In smaller

museums this might be done by the same person. However, the

Utrecht Archive and the Railway Musuem have both used

designer agencies to help shape their exhibitions. Because the

model shows the information density and object density of

certain areas, it can aid in discussing the narrative layers that are

to be incorporated in the design. In order to create a narrative

design the following ten questions can be of help. Each question

is based on one of the narrative features. By answering all the

question, it is possible to describe and visualize the narrative

concept in detail.

The first questions three questions deal with the content the

creator wants to bring across. These particularities of a narrative

concept are determined by the objects and the information that is

presented. Therefore the first question is:

1. Which plots and subplots (or theme’s) do I want to bring

across?

The second question that needs to be asked is what norm shall

be communicated. Often an institute already has a specific view

on its content and objects. It is important to express this norm

when creating the narrative concept because the norm will

determine the overall feel of an exhibition.

2. What is the norm I want to set the visitor?

The third question regards the referentiality of the objects. In the

second section of this chapter it became clear that the norm and

referenciality are linked together in this museological context.

The view of the museum on its content and objects determines

how they use the objects on display. An object can refer to itself,

another time or place or can merely refer to another object just

79

like it. This last type of referentiality uses the object as a

requisite. This leads to the third question:

3. To what do the objects in this exhibition refer?

The last question witin the domain of content is on the initial

state. As a rule, the initial state entailment takes place in the first

clusters or in the first room. By determining what the first

impression of the visitor is, the first object, the first bit of

information and the first voice heard, the creator of the story sets

the scene. All these first experiences in an exhibition shape the

expectation of the visitor of what is to come. It is a very strong

tool that can not be omitted. Question number four covers all of

these aspects.

4. What is the point of departure?

When the content of the narrative concept is clear, the creator

needs to structure it. The following three questions will aid in

doing so. The structure of a crossmedia space is build up out of

clusters of objects that are related to generic story types. When

the style or topic changes between clusters, this is experienced as

a breach of the canon. In the generic comparative story type this

breach takes place within each of the clusters. Therefore the most

important first question on a structural level is:

5. What generic narrative type suits the content best?

After determining the narrative type the creator continues by

determining the placement of the content. It is imperative that

the creator takes into account what exhibition spaces are

available and than clusters the objects in material in a

meaningfull way. Question six stimulates the creator to do this:

80

6. How do the subplots and theme’s relate to one another and

how can I communicate these relations through space syntax?

The final structural question focuses on the canon and breach. By

determining which elements of the content contrast most, the

sense of tension within the narrative can be increased. Like the

intentional state entailment this feature really gives a narrative

its character.

7. What content qualifies as breach material and where can I

highlight these contrasts best?

The final three questions regard the narrative processes that take

place in an exhibition. The first question can be answered for

specific parts of the content separately. In order to stimulate

narrative accrual the creator of the narrative needs to keep in

mind who is adressed. Some parts of the content might be

focussed on one target group while other information is used for

another. This question is simply:

8. What are the target groups I’m adressing with this material?

This leads us further to the point of hermeneutic composability.

The creator wants to stimulate the visitor to explore certain parts

of the content. In order for the visitor to do so the creator places

the content. The model (fig. 42) shows that this process is related

to what type of content is dealt with and how this is presented to

the visitor. Some content is necessary for the baseline narrative,

the core of the story. These elements need to be expressed in the

object layer of the exhibition. The other elements can be

presented in the content layers. The question that is tied to this

discussion is:

81

9. Which narrative elements belong in the plot of the story and

can not be omitted by the visitor?

Ultimately the creator needs to ask oneself where interaction

within the narrative can take place. Are there parts of the

exhibition where negotiability between the audience and the

institute is stimulating or necessary? Because the reasons for

interaction in an exhibition differ, this question is simply put as

follows:

10. How and where does the visitor add to the exhibition?

82

CONCLUSION

Argumentation

Crossmedia storytelling in museums is a relevant topic in this

day and age. Museum visitors do not only come across art

objects or written texts during their museum experience, but are

also guided through the exhibition spaces with PDA systems,

audio tours and other multimedial aids which tell a story. The

visitor experiences a storyline that is brought to them by a

crossmedia platform.

Reynaert‘s theory was used to explain how crossmedia is

defined.49 She makes a distinction between two types of

crossmedia concepts: the integrated concept and the transmedial.

The latter term, transmedia, has become popular in the field of

crossmedia narrtology, because of Henry Jenkins work

Convergence Culture. Both types of concepts can be applied to a

museological setting. However due to restaints on the duration

of this MA research, only the integrated concept was applied on

each of the case studies.

Both Jenkins and Reynaert consider narrativity at the core of a

crossmedia concept. But neither of them conceptualize the

narrativity aspect of crossmedia further. The field of crossmedia

concepting seems to be more focussed on medium specificity

instead of narrativity. This can be illustrated by looking at the

research by Dena and van Vliet.50 Both researchers focus on the

relations between media from a semiotic point of view. Although

49 Reynaert’s theory was presented in chapter one p. 15-17.

50 Dena’s theory was presented on p. 18 and van Vliet’s theory on p. 19-20.

83

these are very valid explorations within the domain of

crossmediality, it does not explain the narrativity that is at the

heart of these conceptions. This thesis aimed at giving more

insight into crossmedia narrativity on a structural level.

The topic of narrativity in museums has already been researched

by designers such as Sparacino51 and researchers of space syntax

such as Hillier and Tzortzki.52 Sparacino focuses on the media

used within exhibitions. She shows the most modern

technologies and discusses the concept of medium specificity.

Hillier and Tzortski focus on the structure of exhibitions instead.

They analyse how visitors use the exhibition space by

monitoring their movements. In chapter four it became clear that

both of space syntax and Sparacino’s insights are very usefull.

However, the connection between these approaches is still

missing. Sparacino focuses on medium specificity and Hillier

and Tzortski focus on the structural elements of an exhibition.

The content of the exhibition, the narrative is not research is

these museological fields. This outcome was strengthened by the

results from the preliminary research. During this research

phase Semper’s medium chart was used to point out the various

medium uses in the museum’s in Utrecht. The lack of data

relating to the content of the media, made this model

inappropriate for the narratological research of this thesis.

Research question

Neither the crossmedia nor the museological specialists focus on

narrativity in their studies while it is this content that lies at the

51 As presented in chapter one p. 22.

52 As presented in chapter one p. 22-23.

84

core of an exhibition or crossmedia concept. In order to create a

model of narrativity Marie-Laure Ryan’s theory was used in the

introduction. Ryan is one of the narratologists who states that a

narrative concept can be expressed through a range of media,

instead of verbal media alone. In the introduction to her book

she defines a narrative and elaborates on the different appoaches

to narrativity. And one of the approaches she mentions is the

psychological approach. This is where Bruner comes into play.

When looking at narrativity from a pshychological point of view,

not only the writer is seen as a creator. The person who

experiences an event creates just as much and in the same way.

This approach is highly appropriate in the museological setting

because the narrative created in a museum experience is a joined

efford between the institute and the individual visitor. The

exploration through the literature has therefore lead to the

following research question:

How can Bruner’s ten narrative features aid in creating a model, of the

structure underlying the narrativity in the crossmedia concepts,

museums in Utrecht have to offer?

The hypothesis during this research was that by analyzing the

case studies by using Bruner’s narrative features, a relationship

between the content of an exhibition and its structure could be

made.

Outcomes

During the analytical phase it became clear that Bruner’s

features related to the three key elements of a narrative:

structure, content and the semiotic process between the writer

85

and the reader. Each of these elements is connected to one

another. And by connecting the ten features to this model, the

coherence between the features became more clear. It also made

it possible to show the relations between these features in a

visualized model. Because this model is the most important

outcome of this research it is placed in appendix number two

allong with another practical tool this research has delivered: the

prescriptive questions. The general outcomes of the analyses are

presented here, before zooming in on the prescriptive outcomes

of this research,

There was one feature that was particularly different from verbal

narrativity. This was the referentiality feature. The referent of a

spatial narrative is different from the referent of a written text.

Where written texts refer to fictional an non-fictional places,

objects refer to themselves or their place in the context of the

story. This also creates a norm. The visitor is influenced by this

view on the object.

The research also showed that there are two types of content, the

horizontal type and the vertical type. The horizontal type of

content creates a narrative baseline. The vertical type of content

is attached to that baseline. It creates depths to the story. A

visitor can either choose to ignore this information or take it in.

Further more content can either be presented in a mobile way or

in a local way. When presenting content in a mobile fashion, the

visitor is allowed to take the content with them throughout the

visit. When content is presented locally the visitor needs to

consume it at that specific time and place in the exhibition.

By making clusters of information and objects the museum

creates a structure. The museum can also pinpoint at which

places interaction with the visitor takes place. In this sense the

86

museum shapes the psychological narrative the visitor

generates. The exhibition structure gains power when narrative

features such as the intentional state entailment and the canon

and breach are taken into account. A structure that is connected

to these content features, creates a powerful mechanism to bring

the narrativity of an exhibit across.

In a narrative the structure influences content and vice versa.

This means that this research can be applied the other way

around as well. If a museum knows the particularity, the norm,

the intentional state they want to bring across and the

referentiality they want to make, the model can be used to

determine where they would need to express what. The

questions that were presented in the final section of chapter four

aim at guiding this production process.53

Further research

It might be interesting to follow up on this research from the

crossmedia perspective. In each type of crossmedia platform

information needs to be clustered. By analyzing case studies,

specific structures can be brought to light. This might lead to

other prescriptive models that can be used for the purpose of

improving crossmedia concepting.

During my internship at the Crossmedialab and in interviews

with the staff of several museums, it became clear that much

attention is given to the differentiation of content, for specific

target groups. In theory, this should provide each visitor with

53 Appendix two demonstrates the outcomes of this research.

87

the type of content needed. However, it is still unsure if this is

actually the case. When analyzing the succes of an exhibition,

museums mainly focus on marketing research instead of

measuring what content came across. The marketing data will

only reveal the relative succes of visitor numbers and perhaps

visitor numbers of specific target groups. It does not show the

intrinsic succes of the exhibit. Because of this lack of data, I was

unable to focus on the educational aspect of narrativity in

museums. Further research from an educational science point of

view, can provide museums with tools to measure the succes of

their narrative content.

88

LITERATURE

ABORIGNIAL ART MUSEUM (2011), Be My Geust, Exhibition Catalogue, Amsterdam, Aboriginal Art Museum

(AAMU)/Comuse.

BRADBURN, J. (2008), Foreword to the work of Tallon, L. Digital technologies & the museum experience; handheld

guides and other media, Plymouth, Altamira p. ix-xii.

BRUNER, J (1990), Acts of Meaning, London etc. Harvard University.

BRUNER, J. (1991), “The Narrative Construction of Reality”, from: The Critical Inquiry, v. 18 p. 1-21.

DENA, C. (2004), Current State of Cross Media Storytelling:Preliminary observations for future design,

http://www.Christydena.com/Docs/DENA_CrossMediaObservations.pdf (18-12-2011).

DERNIE, D (2006), Exhibition Design, London, Laurence King.

HILLIER, B. ET. AL.(1982), “National Gallery schemes Analyzed”, Architects’ Journal, v. 27 p. 38-40.

HILLIER, B & TZORTSKI, K. (2011), “Space Syntax; the language of museum space”, from Macdonald, S. (ed.) A

Companion to Museum Studies, Chichester, Wiley-Blackwell.

JENKINS, H (2006), Convergence Culture: where old and new media collide, New York, NY University Press. LEINHARDT, G ET. AL. (2002), Talking to Oneself: Diaries of Museum Visits, http://www.museumlearning.org/mlc-

04.pdf (18-12-2011).

MEURS, G. (2006), Op het Goede Spoor? Een kwntitatief onderzoek naar het imago en de tevredenheid bij

bezoekers van het Spoorwegmuseum, Unpublished MA thesis, Social & Cultural Studies University Tilburg.

PEIRCE, C.S. (1931-1936), “On A New List of Categories”, Collected Papers Volumes 1-6,Hartshorne, C. & Weiss, P

(eds.) Cambridge M.A., Harvard University.

REYNAERT, I (2009), Basisboek Crossmedia Concepting, Meppel, Boom.

RYAN, M. (2004), Narrative Across Media; The Languages of Storytelling, Nebraska, University of Nebraska.

SEMPER, J. (1998) “Designing Hybrid Environments: Integrating Media into Exhibition Space”, from

Thomas, S. & Mintz, A. (Eds.) The Virtual and the Real: Media in the Museum. Washington, American

Association of Museums p. 119-127.

SPARACINO, F. (2002), Narrative Spaces: bridging architecture and entertainment via interactive technology,

http://alumni.media.mit.edu/~flavia/Papers/NarrativeSpaces.pdf (18-12-2011)

TZORTSKI (2003), “An Approach to the Microstructure of the Gallery Space: the case of the Sainsbury Wing”,

from Proceedings of the fourth International Space Syntax Symposium, v. 2003 p. 67.1-67.16.

VLIET, H. VAN (2008), Idola van de Crossmedia, Utrecht, Kenniscentrum Communicatie & Journalistiek

Hogeschool Utrecht.

89

WEBSITES

- www.Crossmedialab.nl - www.Spoorwegmuseum.nl - www.HetUtrechtsArchief.nl - www.AAMU.nl

90

Illustrations

Fig. 1 Charles Sanders Peirce‘ semiotic model, Marlies Havenga, 2011

Fig. 2 Robert Semper’s museum media chart, Robert Semper, 1998

Fig. 3 Reynaert’s transmedial concept, Indira Reynaert, 2009

Fig. 4 Reynaert’s integrated concept, Indira Reynaert, 2009

Fig. 5 Floor plan of the Be My Guest exhibition, Aboriginal Art Museum, 2011

Fig. 6 Ilma (1997) by Roy Wiggan, Aboriginal Art Museum, 2011

Fig. 7 Draft for a work called The Magic Carpet (2011) by Hester Oerlemans, Aboriginal Art Museum, 2011

Fig. 8 Floor plan of the ground floor at the Utrecht Archive, Utrecht Archive, 2008

Fig. 9 Floor plan of the basement at the Utrecht Archives, Utrecht Archive, 2008

Fig. 10 Starting point of the Utrecht Archive exhibition Utrecht Archive, 2008

Fig. 11 Auditorium of the Utrecht Archive exhibition, Utrecht Archive, 2008

Fig. 12 Moments’ at the Utrecht Archive exhibition, Utrecht Archive, 2008

Fig. 13 Wine cellar at the Utrecht Archive exhibition, Utrecht Archive, 2008

Fig. 14 Interactive wall with street names at the Utrecht Archive exhibition, Utrecht Archive, 2008

Fig. 15 ‘Just married’ cell at the Utrecht Archive exhibition, Utrecht Archive, 2008

Fig. 16 Detail of the ‘Just Married’ cell at the Utrecht Archive exhibition, Utrecht Archive, 2008

Fig. 17 Showroom in the ‘Encounters’ section of the Utrecht Archive exhibition, Utrecht Archive, 2008

Fig. 18 Boat trip at the Utrecht Archive exhibition, Utrecht Archive, 2008

Fig. 19 Newspaper room at the Utrecht Archive exhibition, Utrecht Archive, 2008

Fig. 20 Floor plan of the Railway Museum, Railway Museum, 2011

Fig. 21 Front entrance of the Railway museum: the former Maliebaan Train Station, Railway Museum, 2006

Fig. 22 Decor of the Maliebaan Train Station, Railway Museum, 2006

Fig. 23 Clock at the platform of the Maliebaan Train Station, Railway Museum, 2006

Fig. 24 De Arendt’ the centre piece of world 1 of the Railway Museum, Railway Museum, 2006

Fig. 25 Dutch village scenery in world 1 of the Railway Museum, Railway Museum, 2006

Fig. 26 Platform between trains at world 2 of the Railway Museum, Railway Museum, 2006

Fig. 27 Theatre at world 2 of the Railway Museum, Railway Museum, 2006

Fig. 28 Dummies of Hans and his grandfather at world 3 of the Railway Museum, Railway Museum, 2006

Fig. 29 60 year anniversary at the Railway celebration’ at world 3 of the Railway Museum, Railway Museum,

2006

Fig. 30 Cart passing one of the ‘steal monsters’ at world 3 of the Railway Museum Railway Museum, 2006

Fig. 31 World 4 of the Railway Museum, Railway Museum, 2006

Fig. 32 Exhibition on safety on the tracks, currently on show at world 4 of the Railway, Museum Railway

Museum, 2011

Fig. 33 Visitors enjoying the exhibition on safety on the tracks, currently on show at world 4 of the Railway

Museum, Marieke Wijntjes, 2011

Fig. 34 Playground at outside area of the Railway Museum, Railway Museum, 2010

Fig. 35 Historic material at the outside area of the Railway Museum, Railway Museum, 2010

Fig. 36 Visualization of the three narrative elements, Marlies Havenga, 2011

Fig. 37 Model for narrative structure in crossmedia museum spaces, Marlies Havenga, 2011

Fig. 38 Visualization of an Object driven space, Marlies Havenga, 2011

Fig. 39 Visualization of a Story driven space, Marlies Havenga, 2011

Fig. 40 Model for narrative structure and content in crossmedia museum spaces, Marlies Havenga, 2011

Fig. 41 Visualization of a visitor driven space, Marlies Havenga, 2011

Fig. 42 Model for narrative structure, content and interactivity in crossmedia museum spaces, Marlies

Havenga, 2011

Appendix 1

��

��

��

� � ��

��

��

�� !�"��#$%&'(&$'��)��'*&'�&$'�$+�

�� ,��-��

�� "��

�� .��

�� "/��

0�� -�#��+�

� �� 1� �

�

��

��

�

��'��-��

��'�� 2��

��-��-��-��

��

�

��

�

�

��

��

��

� � ��

�� !��

��"�� #��

��$�� !��

�� %�� %��%��%�� %�

��$ �%�� $ ��!��$��

� ��!��"��

�� &� '�� !��

�� ( � ��

�� )��

�� &� '�� !��$!��

��!�� &� �

��

"��#�

�

*�� !��$�� !�$��$��#��"��

�� *�� !��!+��

��

�

�

��

�

��

��

��

� � ��

��

�� !�"��#��$!�$%��

�� &��

�� '� �

�� (��)��*��)� ��

�� *��

�� *��

��+��

� �� '� ��

*��,�

��

�

�

��!�

�

-��*��+�.�� *�� *� ��*��

��*� ��

�

�

�

�

��

�

�

��

��

��

� � ��

��

�� !��"��

�� #�� !��

�$� ��

�� %��

�� &� �

�� '��

� �

�� (�� !�� )��

�� "��

� �� &� �

��

�

�

��!�

�

*�� !��"� �� !��

��

�

�

��

�

��

��

��

� � ��

��

��

��

��

�� !�� "��

��

��

� ��

��

�

�

��!�

�

��

��

�

�

��

��

��

� � ��

��

�� !"��

�� #��

�� $%&'

%�'&%��&('�%'&%��)�

�� *��+��

�� ,� �

�� -��

�� !��

�� .��/��+��+��/��

� ��

��

��!�

�

0��#�� !�� !��#��

� �� !�� 1�� 0��

��!�� 1��

��

�

�

�

��

��

��

� � ��

��

��

� ��

��

��

��

��

� � ��

��

�� !��"�� "� ��

��

�� #�� $��

��

� �� % ��"�

��

��!�

�

��

� ��

�

�

��

�

��

��

��

� � ��

��

��

��

�� !"��#��$�

� ��

�� %� �

��

&�� '��

��

��

�� (��

��

� ��

��

��!�

�

��

��

�

�

�

�

��

��

��

� � ��

�� !�� "� ��#��

��$�� %��&��

�� '�� "�"��

�� (� �

�� )&�� &�� *�� " ��"��

�� +�� "��

��

�� +��"�� * �� "�

��

� �� (� �

��

��!�

�

�� ,� ��

��*�� "�� *��

& ��&��"�*��'��&��"��

�� *�*� �� &�� "��

��"�-��

�

�

��

�

�

��

��

��

� � ��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

�� !��

"��

"��

�� #�� !�� $��

$��%��

� �� $��!�& ��!�'��!�(��

��

��!�

�

�� $ ��%�(�$��

�� $�$��

�� $�� %��

)��

�

�

��

��

��

� � ��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

�� !��

� ��

��

�

��!�

�

"��

��

�

�

�

��

�

��

��

��

� � ��

�� !�"#�

��$�� %��

��

�� &� '��

�� (�� )��

�� $��

�� &� �

�� *�� %��

�� +��,� ��

� �� &� �

��

�

�

��!�

�

!� ��% ��!�"#��$��#��% ��

��%��

�

�

��

�

�

�

��

��

��

� � ��

��

��

�� !��"��

��

��

�� #��$��

�� %��

� ��

��

�

�

��!�

�

&�� '��

��

�

�

��

�

�

Appendix 2

= Local media thread

= Audio fragment

= Text on location

= Mobile media thread

= Entry on a mobile device or text

= Audio tour

= Booklet

= Film display on location

1. Which plots and subplots (or theme’s) do I want to bring across?

2. What is the norm I want to set the visitor?

3. To what do the objects in this exhibition refer? 4. What is the point of departure? 5. What generic narrative type suits the content best? 6. How do the subplots and theme’s relate to one another and how can I communicate these relations through space syntax? 7. What content qualifies as breach material and where can I highlight these contrasts best? 8. What are the target groups I’m adressing with this material? 9. Which narrative elements belong in the plot of the story and can not be omitted by the visitor? 10. How and where does the visitor add to the exhibition?

Narrativestructurein3 d

Education

fkolfkwlqj ri wkh

hwlwmhdq dqg

xvhxp dqg

uwv dqg

luvw ri doo

dyhqjd8qghu vxshuylvlrq

pvwhugdp wk ri dqxdu

1duudwlyh6wuxfwxuh lq