🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <jonnCu0pFp.H22@netcom.com> jonn@netcom.com (Jon Nadelberg) writes:
>Not to burst anyone's bubble, but I went to the Exploratorium a
>couple of months ago and found it pretty bad.
>
>Many of the exhibits were broken, the layout appears haphazard and
>ill thought out, and the exhibits themselves are so static and 
>separate from its surroundings that the educational value derived
>from them is very difficult to digest.  
>
>It was extremely disapointing, to say the least.




The Exploratorium has explicitly chosen a rough feel to it
rather than a polished plastic feel.  Yes, some of the exhibits break.
This in fact was documented by Nova in the Early 1980s.
Personally, I do think that some of the exhibits have gone down hill some
what with the loss of Frank Oppenheimer its founder, this because
of its chosen desire to try and combine the arts as well as science.
There is an emphasis on low cost because it has to fund itself.



>The Griffith Park Observatory has better exhibits and are much
>more interesting.  It's also free, as opposed to the Exploritorium,
>which cost (I think) $8 a person.  The museum of Science and Industry
>in Exposition Park in LA blows it away, as far as I'm concerned.
>
>If you want to go to a science museum in San Francisco, I suggest the
>Academy of Science in Golden Gate Park.  It houses a planetarium,
>and an aquarium amongst a bunch of pretty nicely laid out stuff.
>
>The Exploratorium is good if you have some kids that you wish to let
>run around to hysterically bang on their exhibits until they drop.
>
>Otherwise, it's a waste of time.

That's your opinion.  And you are entitled to it.
The Exploratorium really isn't a museum that's why it called the Exploratorium.
I grew up with both Griffith and MSI.  Griffith is fine if you want to
go into physics and astronomy and weak in other fields.  MSI is a
typical polished plastic museum.  Okay to look, but don't touch (it's better
now, you can touch somewhat because of Oppenheimer).  Science is very hands-on.
Personally I dislike the cost, but that's another issue.  What the
Exploratorium lacks is a critical, hard line look at each new project proposed
like Oppenheimer did.  It is a tad touchy feelie (both good and bad)
with some thought. The Exploratorium is really closer to a workshop, and
that's where it excells.  The Tech Museum in San Jose is trying but not
succeeding in some of this.  It's very hard.  And it too lacks.
I have met people who work at all these locations, know workers at
three of them particularly well.  You should convey your dislikes to them,
and they can act or dismiss them as they chose (but they rarely simply
just dismiss the, but they have hear most of it before).  Tough times
economically.

The likes and dislikes can also be easily pointed to the differences
between the N and S portions of the State.

--eugene miya, NASA Ames Research Center, eugene@orville.nas.nasa.gov
  Resident Cynic, Rock of Ages Home for Retired Hackers
  {uunet,mailrus,other gateways}!ames!eugene
My 3rd favorite use of a flame thrower is "Fahrenheit 451."
A Ref: Uncommon Sense, Alan Cromer, Oxford Univ. Press, 1993.