[Mini] Visual Ethnography

As a graduate student in the Media Literacy and Digital Culture program at Sacred Heart University, the purpose of what I’m offering is to compare and contrast two sites with intense visual displays, a mall and a museum. The first place I visited was The Stamford Museum and Nature Center and the second place I visited was The Westfield Trumbull Shopping Mall. The above picture reveals my personal opinion, “Everything looks better in a museum,” which was displayed in a large size by the exhibiting artist himself, Steve Gerberich. Although I have personal biases regarding visual displays to watch out for because I am an art teacher, it is clear to me that the differences outweigh the similarities when comparing the museum and the mall. The museum exhibit, “Springs Sprockets & Pulleys: The Mechanical Sculptures of Steve Gerbich” is an exhibition which requires you to reflect on what you see. The decorations and advertisements at the mall require you to constantly glance at one sale and another.

Lets look at the two photos below. Even the parking lots show the differences of both places. The museum parking lot has only three cars in it with no intense or suggestive visual displays besides one sign about the exhibition. The mall parking lot has a giant gift box in bright lights asking shoppers to do most of their holiday spending there. Which place offers a more peaceful experience? I suppose it depends on what is more desirable to the consumer, spending money or a thoughtful experience.

Museum:

Mall:

Even though I, as an art teacher, have always appreciated my museum experiences more than my mall experiences, it is important to note the similarities between both places. There is a strong chance you will leave with something at both places. You may leave with something you chose to buy at the mall. You may leave with new knowledge, a memorable catalogue, or a keepsake from an artist’s museum exhibit. Although seemingly different, both places seem to want consumers to become a members in one way or another. Evident in the below photographs, museums ask you to sign a catalogue and peruse small gift areas, while malls ask you to participate by buying as much as possible through sale promotions.

Museum:

Mall:

Both places require specific types of lighting. The museum requires spot lighting in order to emphasize a piece of art being looked at and this may differ from one exhibiting artist to the next. The mall utilizes big and bright lighting which causes many areas of the mall to look the same. This is where the similarities start to disappear because I start to wonder, what is special about the ability to change lighting for an exhibits purpose? What is special about the constant bright mall lighting? I believe there is a difference between reflecting about lighting and how viewers will be affected by thought provoking art and making sure bright lights are keeping shoppers engaged and seeing the copious amount of advertisements and sale posters. A major difference is that the museum offers an experience that makes it easier to walk away without spending money. The intent of the show is to spend time appreciating the art, while the mall offers an experience that is solely design to help shoppers spend money.

Lets look at some photographs & videos from the museum experience:

Lets look at some photographs from the mall experience:

Which group of images requires more critical thinking or questioning? It is important to discuss the major differences between what is offered at the museum and the mall. Gerberich’s exhibit asks viewers to interact by pressing a button, while the mall asks you to interact by seeing an overwhelming amount of items and hopefully purchasing them. Gerberich’s art asks viewers to refrain from touching, which encourages a deeper and thoughtful experience. The mall asks viewers to move from one store to the next, one sale sign to the next, and one advertisement to the next. The interesting factor about the mall is that there does not seem to be any order to what is being offered. One minute you can be viewing and advertisement completely unrelated to the store you are approaching.

It is important to note that people respond differently to the visual displays designed by the museum and the mall. Lets look at the photograph below of the museum experience where my friend Jeanette is seemingly enjoying what she is seeing and slowing down to do so.

Lets look at the photograph below of the mall experience where shoppers are walking with shopping bags in hand and simply moving from one store to the next.

The photograph of Jeanette in the museum subtly reveals some of the themes discussed by John Berger in “Ways Of Seeing.” For example, looking and seeing is a choice, sight is within reach (although not always physically,) we use words to analyze images, ways of seeing are personal, cameras have their own narrative, context is everything, and everything is a reference point (pages 1-23). In other words, Jeanette is choosing to look at Gerberich’s art differently. The art work itself is available through sight, yet not with touch in that specific photograph. She can understand better what is in front of her because there are captions provided to help her analysis. Her way of looking is going to be different than my way of looking because of our own personal biases. My camera suggests the context of what happened in real life, but it still creates its own narrative and only from my reference point. Although controversial, these themes and ideas suggest that the sophisticated nature of viewing art has its complexities and are even slightly more difficult to understand.

On the other hand, Malcolm Gladwell's "The Science of Shopping” suggests that the shopping experience is complex, but not in the same way viewing art is. Shopping experiences are specifically designed to get consumers to behave the way business and store owners want them to behave, which in most cases is to spend money. Gladwell points out, “One of the fundamental anxieties of the American consumer, after all, has always been that beneath the pleasure and the frivolity of the shopping experience runs an undercurrent of manipulation, and that anxiety has rarely seemed more justified than today” (7). This is because of surveillance and studies that reveal our behaviors in places like malls. “The Decompression Zone” for example is a zone where merchandise is not likely placed because shoppers need time to acclimate to the store after high speed walking (2). With all of these opportunities for manipulation, it is now easy to understand why I have always preferred the acceptable stroll through a museum, as opposed to the brisk mall walk-through. Visiting both places as a researcher as opposed to a casual visitor allowed me to validate my feelings about both places that I could never quite explain without deep comparison and reflection.

After noticing the obvious differences between the museum and the mall, it is worth mentioning the subtle differences of both locations. One subtle difference is the purpose of the typical cell phone at both places. My cell phone was used to capture images at the museum and the mall for the purpose of writing this blog post. However, lets look at the photo below. There is an entire station at the mall dedicated to mall for cell phone charging. Considering most people are not at the mall to document the difference between museums and malls, what is the purpose of needing to have a charged phone at the mall? So significant others can be entertained while their loved ones peruse the sale sections of the overwhelming amount of stores? So they can play games or text their friends? Or maybe so they could avoid the amount of advertisement-related visual displays around them?

Although there are what seems like an endless amount of topics to discuss when comparing two places with intense visual displays, Berger bluntly reinforces the specific idea that society has some work to do. For example, “We are accused of being obsessed by property. The truth is the other way around. It is the society and culture in question which is so obsessed. Yet to an obsessive his obsession always seems to be of the nature of things and so is not recognized for what it is” (103). In my interpretation, Berger is trying to reveal that no matter what we are trying to possess, whether it be fine art or miscellaneous mall items, the nature of the obsession is what should be questioned. Next time you are at the mall or at a museum, stop to think how many ways something you are looking at can be interpreted and why. With that being said, I would like to conclude with a single image which can be interpreted many different ways, but never the same way I interpreted it when I was at The Stamford Museum & Nature Center, in real space and time. It may make you feel like you are looking at things differently or sideways.