Museum of Anthropology by Arthur Erickson - Essay Example

Museum of Anthropology by Arthur Erickson Introduction The Museum of Anthropology is situated at the of British Columbia on an area covering 66,000 square foot. The renowned Canadian architect, Arthur Erickson, designed the museum. Arthur Erickson, before designing the museum had been an architect in practice for a long duration of years, and for the most part concentrated his works in the Vancouver region. As a global architect, Arthur Erickson is commonly known for his passionate advocating of the cultural awareness, natural environment, and exploration of the human environment. The nature of the buildings that Arthur Erickson has built are an indication of his desire for cultural diversity, given that in all, he has sought to share a deep sense of respect for their context, grace and incomparable freshness. Subsequently, he has designed the buildings by the dramatic use of light and space; thus, bringing his work to the understanding of human community. Filtered through his fertile imaginations and insightful mind, it is easy to note dialogue by which the architecture by Arthur Erickson emerges with the realms of the world. By virtue of being a native from Vancouver and having studied at University of British Columbia, Arthur was able to culturally model the construction of Museum of Anthropology taking into consideration the cultural and artistic aspects of the building, all of which points to the climate and terrain architectural style adopted by the architect. Just as is the case of the magnificently built Museum of Anthropology, Arthur Erickson, who lived between 1924 and 2009, can be considered as having left a great landmark in the North American architecture. This is in the form of the Museum of Anthropology in the 20th Century’s second half, given the robust and astute selection of building materials that marked the design of the museum (Mayer & Shelton, 2009). Museum of Anthropology is situated on a cliff edge of Point Grey on University of British Columbia grounds and was established in the year 1947 at the Main Library basement at University of British Columbia, which was its initial location. For a long period, Audrey and Harry Hawthorn directed the museum. However, in 1976, the museum’s location was moved to where it is right now under the Directorship of Prof. Michael Ames. Culturally, the designing of this museum by Arthur Erickson was defined by the inspiration he received from the knowledge on the post and beam architecture that was widely practiced in the Northwest coast of First Nations. As such, it can be viewed from the architectural design of the museum that it displays a focus on the nature of building practiced by the First Nations in the BC. This is as represented by figure 1 below. Figure 1: Outside view of Museum of Anthropology Source:http://www.vancouversun.com/news/metro/Photos+Museum+Anthropology+opened+years/8452044/story.html The cultural perspectives of the museum as intended by Arthur Ericson in its designing, is supported by the content of the materials in the museum that all point to the cultural aspects (Alexander, Alexander & American Association for State and Local History, 2008). Supporting activities and purposes Museum of Anthropology has all along aimed at the achievement of one goal: the collection and preservation of native artifacts from the West Coast and other stunning architecture. Largely, Arthur lived to ensure the construction of the museum according to the model design as was designed in 1971 as shown in figure 2 below. Figure 2: Model representation of the building’s design Source: http://www.vancouversun.com/news/metro/Photos+Museum+Anthropology+opened+years/8452044/story.html The main purpose of the museum is as indicated in its design features that were laid out taking into consideration the harmonization of the contemporary architectural forms, as well as celebrating the setting and artifacts inside (Neuzil, 2008). With this aspect in mind, one can argue that the building of the museum architecturally is a poetic response to the climate and history of the region and not any other conventional museum. This is done with the aim of seeking to promote the cultural significance of the First Nations through the design’s engagement to the architecture of cultures spread out over geography and time. For instance, this museum architecture’s takes on the significance of the placement of traditional Haida post and beam structures, Acropolis on the Athens hills, and the tori commonly used in building shrine gates in the Shinto sanctuaries in Japan (Kaplan, 2006). The layout as was proposed by Erickson is such that it was based on the Haida waterfront village in which totems and houses were used to provide land and sea transitions. In this case, a small pond was built of the museum to act both as a reinforcement of the village concept and be a reflection pool. Responding to context Cultural anthropology as defined by the design of this building may be understood from the context of three main principles. These principles are cultural relativism, the positive impact of the indigenous people in the place where the museum is built, and fluid and dynamic nature of culture based on cognitive science. The museum is flamboyantly built, but not with the primary aim of disinterested contemplation. Instead, its architectural form was built in the sense of adopting classicism in the entire building. Considering the blend in art and architecture, it can be noted that the museum in seeking recognition for the exporting role of the innovative methodologies points to the role that multiculturalism has uniquely played. This is shown by the strong influence exerted by the architecture in preserving and assessing the cultural significance based on the nation-wide initiatives and strong federal funding influence. Furthermore, in the other context of principle, the design of the building calls attention to the impact that the museum had in the preservation of the culture of the indigenous people from Canada; thus, transforming their national institutions. This forced the designing and operation of the museum to be held in line with the principles of the culture of the indigenous people to an extent so as to portray the institutional transformation championed for by the architectural design of the building. In general, these principles draw out the extent of close observation of the institution’s practice, engagement to transformational exhibits, commitment to ethical partnerships with the indigenous communities, and the promotion of positive models towards the reformation of the museum. Establishment of longevity The building’s structure was designed in a manner that would enhance the longevity of its components based on the identification of the spatial dualities, in-between domain, and support for interaction and retreat. Spatially, the understanding into the building’s context indicates that the design considered the geoarchaeological and the paleoenvironmental characteristics in the determination of is functional activities. The beams are arranged/organized in a horizontal manner that allows for the remote sensing and interpretation of the imagery within, including the aerial photographs, as shown in figure 3 below. Figure 3: Arrangement of roof beams Source: https://www.google.com/search?q=museum+of+anthropology+by+arthur+erickson In the museum’s inner hall, there are concrete gates that rise upwards about 49 feet and shelter the totem poles. The totem poles range in height about 12 to 40 feet. A look into the thickness of the beams also indicates that they range from 40-80 feet long and of similar thickness. The building’s structure is actually supported by the second set of beams that span the opposite direction to those that are U-shaped. Consequently, the building’s design presents a gracious and distinctive room of serenity and calm full of natural light (Mayer, & Shelton, 2009). This is as represented in figure 4 below. Source: http://www.vancouversun.com/news/metro/Photos+Museum+Anthropology+opened+years/8452044/story.html Achieving clarity and wholeness The unifying strategy in the case of the museum is its communication that is unified and labelled; thus, enabling the encompassing of the required architectural information (Bouquet, 2012). The communication coupled with the current business sense enable the building to experience change in dynamic areas including its form, capacity and grasping of the neo-classical style to help in the building of capacity and extension of geographical reach. References Alexander, E. P., Alexander, M., & American Association for State and Local History. (2008). Museums in motion: An introduction to the history and functions of museums. Lanham: AltaMira Press. Bouquet, M. (2012). Museums: A visual anthropology. London: Berg. Kaplan, Flora E.S. (2006). Making and Remaking National Identities. In Sharon Macdonald, eds. A Companion to Museum Studies. Blackwell, Oxford, 152-169. Mayer, C. E., & Shelton, A. (2009). The Museum of Anthropology at the University of British Columbia. Vancouver [B.C.: Douglas & MacIntyre. Neuzil, A. A. (2008). In the aftermath of migration: Renegotiating ancient identity in southeastern Arizona. Tucson: University of Arizona Press. Read More