I do not find museums all that interesting.

Yes, the merit and value of ancient artifacts are considerable to the curious mind, but what of minds less inquisitive of the past, like mine?

Don’t get me wrong. I do enjoy learning journeys to places like the Ancient Civilizations museum. But what I find caught my eye was a particular article in Today:

“In a bid to reach "couch potatoes" and get more people to visit museums,
Singaporeans and people abroad can access some 6,000 images with Singapore's
first online collection of national artifacts and artworks at http://www.sgcool.sg/.”

Evidently, the National Heritage Board is trying hard to, “-to let people know that museums are not sleepy, dusty and old-fashioned."

In this age of technology, the museums themselves are gradually becoming the very things they house: relics of the past. As reliance on the Internet for information grows, the rather conspicuous truth is that museums will and are dying out.

But they will not go gentle into that good night. Dr Lee Boon Yang, Minister for Information, Communication and the Arts, recently urged the NHB to, instead "leverage on the power of the Internet to reach out to even more people".


Hence the initiative allowing visitors to, “-after getting a taste of the artifacts online… visit the museums and experience the real thing,” paving the way for more convenient access to the museum’s library of knowledge while generating awareness at the same time.

Yet, I do not share sentiments of any one having his interest aroused through browsing these pictures, which, to exacerbate matters, are “of a low resolution to avoid copyright issues.”

Only enthusiasts would likely be surfing on the waves of information pictorial. He who is planning to visiting the museum but wants more information would find his time well spent here. The average person, however, middle-age or teen, would simply not bother. He would be drowned in a most boring fashion by this online flood of knowledge, which effectively puts out any sparks of interest he might harbour.

Appealing to those who do not frequent museums would be a better course of action. To stimulate the teenager’s curiousity, perhaps revolutionizing the museum as a hip, cool place would be effective. Personally, this is a rather novel notion. I wouldn’t mind paying a visit.

The same goes for the average adult much too busy for a museum visit. Launch specific programs and exhibits which pertain especially to them.

But all these are easier said than done. My point is that currently they are appealing to the wrong audience.

I do not frequent museums. It is not somewhere I deem “fun”. Educational, yes, but not in an enjoyable sense. Like school. Like an online collection of pictures of ancient manuscripts or precious vases.

I applaud their bid to reach a wider audience, but they will have to adopt more effective practices. The National Heritage Board will likely find that the online collection leaves visitors bored, and that only aficionados need apply.

Link to the article:
http://www.blogger.com/post-edit.g?blogID=38862421&postID=6527520203491978288

Wednesday, May 16, 2007

I read with considerable interest an article recently featured on the front page of the “Home” section of The Straits Times. “Drink Driving,” the heading read simply.

Apparently, The Straits Times “-joined the police at two road blocks–”, one in Tampines the other at Outram Road. The latter checkpoint was just outside the Health Sciences Authority, which also happens to be where the bodies of road accident victimss are taken. It was not mentioned if the latter location was deliberately chosen for any particular reason whatsoever.

Now, what stirs me, is not merely the fact that these people are breaking the law. Granted, that is something worth griping over, but what stirred me to blog was this paragraph:

“The Straits Times observed during the road blocks that the drink drivers’ primary worry appeared to be that they would get caught - and concerns about posing a danger to other road users were far from their minds.”

I find it disgusting that these drivers can stoop to such a low level. It’s unbelievable that there exist people who possess such apathy for other people. Do they not know that drink driving is not just about them?

I understand that being fined or jailed is definitely not a nice ordeal. I also understand that breaking the law holds severe repercussions and affects your future greatly. But I also understand that these preventive measures serve as a deterrent to potential law-breakers. In this context, they are there to avert drivers from drinking. They are there to remind drivers: drink driving shatters lives.

But back to reality. We still see drivers failing breath-analyzer tests. We still see people swapping seats in a bid to evade punishment. We still see lives, innocent lives, lost in road accidents.

More often than not, drivers are indignant about having to pull over. I quote from the paper:

“-one driver asked to stop and wind down the window, did so with the utmost reluctance. He refused to make eye contact with a police officer who asked him questions-“

Why do they do it? Alcohol impairs one’s judgment. The driver assumes a false sense of confidence about his driving ability, hence “-making it harder to persuade him not to get behind the wheel.”

Yet, I still feel a twinge in my chest. I cannot help but wonder if things could be different, had the same driver who staggered precariously into his vehicle understood better the life-changing effects caused by one, just one more drink, please. Perhaps if the authorities had emphasized more that drink driving kills, not just you.

"So why do people do it, knowing that it ruins lives?
But now the pain is cutting me like a hundred stabbing knives.
Someone should have taught him that it’s wrong to drink and drive.
Maybe if his mom and dad had, I’d still be alive."

-Somebody Should Have Taught Him, retold by Jane Watkins

Drink driving shatters lives. I feel sorry in particular, for the innocent ones.