博物館體驗之形塑與意涵－以利物浦之城市遺產博物館為例

全文

(1)國立臺灣師範大學國際與僑教學院歐洲文化與觀光研究所碩士論文 Graduate Institute of European Cultures and Tourism College of International Studies and Education for Oversea Chinese. National Taiwan Normal University Master Thesis. 博物館體驗之形塑與意涵－以利物浦之城市遺產博物館為例 The Shaping and Implications of Museum Experiences: A Multiple Case Study of Heritage Museums in Liverpool. 陳乃瑜 CHEN, Nai-Yu. 指導教授：劉以德. 博士. Adviser: Dr. Yi-De LIU. 中華民國一零三年五月 May, 2014.

(2) Acknowledgement For the accomplishment of this thesis, I’d like to extend my heartfelt gratitude to the tremendous support and generosity offered by the people below: Prof. Yi-De Liu: thank you so much for your constant encouragement and invaluable guidance throughout my master study. Attributed to you, I could expand my academic horizon abroad and thereby greatly develop both my research capability and self-awareness. Without you and our institute, I wouldn’t have reached to this stage, finding a brand-new aspect of me. Prof. Ying-Ying Lai and Chia-Ling Lai: it was very kind of you to taking your precious time for my thesis review. I truly appreciate your instructive comments which allow me to understand where I shall further work towards a quality paper. Claire Lee: I feel so grateful for your warm companion and assistance during my final intense phase of thesis work. I treasure the moments we shared our ups and downs as well as the observations of life. 我最親愛的家人: 非常謝謝您們一直以來的溫暖關懷與無限包容，因為有您們的鼓勵與支持，我得以於漫長的求學之路上昂首闊步、無後顧之憂。特別感謝大哥、大嫂在我生命困頓之時伸出援手，不僅慷慨接納、照顧我，還給予我諸多學業與人生的寶貴建議，也謝謝活潑可愛的小姪女，為我慘澹煩悶的閉關苦讀生活帶來快樂的色彩。 Paja: my missing piece, nothing could fully express my sincere appreciation for your all-time support, attentive care, and those morale-boosting jokes ever since I embarked on thesis writing. I am so blessed to have you in my life. To speak of the thesis itself, there is clearly room for improvement, yet I hope it could still serve as a helpful threshold for future studies. i.

(3) 摘要本研究欲立基於後現代體驗經濟、休閒市場與體驗文化觀光之脈絡下，探索不同類型博物館所塑造之體驗本質及其作為一休閒選擇之競爭力，並由此宏觀審視該類型博物館體驗與當代文化、社會和觀光重要議題之有機聯繫與相關意涵，以作為相關從業人員與政府單位之借鏡和後續類似研究之參考。有鑑於此研究目標，本研究以素為博物館政策與實務先驅之英國為標的，挑選近期成功以文化導向都市再生的典型後工業城利物浦為多重個案研究背景，運用直接觀察、館方與遊客訪談、文獻分析，來研究三間位置鄰近、皆聚焦於城市文化遺產、但經營使命、展覽主題與詮釋手法各異的博物館－默西賽德海事博物館(Merseyside Maritime Museum)、利物浦博物館(Museum of Liverpool)與披頭四故事館（Beatles Story），希冀以其相關實務現況回答如下三項研究議題： . 博物館形塑之體驗為何？又博物館作為休閒選擇之遊客認知為何？. . 博物館體驗如何體現寓教於樂的概念？. . 博物館體驗如何影響文化認同和目的地意象？本研究發現，博物館體驗之調性、價值與意涵乃共同取決於博物館之本質、. 定位、使命與遊客之背景、興趣、動機。由休閒角度來看，遊客對博物館之心態乃奠定於博物館需兼具休憩與教育意義之隱含期望下，而個人認知之成本與效益將影響博物館參訪之成行和滿意與否，並與個人因素、休閒行程規劃及博物館聲譽相關；廣義而言，博物館現仍非首要休閒偏好。從供需立場出發，博物館體驗則可歸類為人性化、傳統性、感官性供給，及情感性、中間性、休閒性需求；其中以人性化供給最能因應不同類型體驗需求、達致寓教於樂之平衡、並最具文化認同與目的地意象之影響力，從而最積極發揮文化、社會與觀光之正面外溢效應。關鍵字：博物館、體驗、休閒、寓教於樂、文化認同、目的地意象 ii.

(4) Abstract Founded on the contexts of the postmodern experience economy, leisure market and experiential cultural tourism, this research firstly probes into the essence of experiences shaped in different types of museums and their competitiveness as a leisure option, thereby holistically clarifying the organic connections between them and contemporary issues in the fields of culture, society and tourism.. It targets at the. post-industrial city Liverpool in light of its unique urban evolution and rapid tourism growth, picking out three critical cases—the Merseyside Maritime Museum, the Museum of Liverpool and the Beatles Story which all center on urban heritage, yet offer distinct experiences in close proximity, hence allowing an empirical insight into the research questions below: What kinds of museum experiences are shaped, and how are they perceived as a leisure option? How does the concept of “edutainment” manifest in such experiences? How do such experiences affect cultural identity and destination image? The findings suggest that a museum experience hinges on the essence of both an experience delivery and its receipt, and museums are still not perceived as top leisure priorities.. Museum visitors implicitly hold an expectation of “educative leisure”, and. their perceived cost and benefits affect the decision and satisfaction of a museum visit. Moreover, three types of museum experience supply and demand are recognized in the case study: Traditional, Sensational and Humanist Supply as well as Emotional, In-between and Recreational Demand.. The Humanist Supply appears to best satisfy. various demands and create the optimal cultural, social and tourism impacts. Keywords: Museum; Experience; Leisure; Edutainment; Cultural Identity; Destination Image iii.

(5) Contents. Acknowledgement ............................................................................................................. i 摘要 .................................................................................................................................. ii Abstract............................................................................................................................ iii 1. 2. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................. 1 1.1. RESEARCH MOTIVATION AND AIM ................................................................. 1. 1.2. RESEARCH CASES .......................................................................................... 4. 1.3. EXPECTED RESEARCH CONTRIBUTIONS ......................................................... 8. LITERATURE REVIEW .................................................................................... 10 2.1. 3. 4. RESEARCH CONTEXT ................................................................................... 10. 2.1.1. Experience Economy, Experiential Cultural Tourism and Museums ......... 10. 2.1.2. Museums in the Postmodern Leisure Market ............................................. 12. 2.1.3. Museum Interpretation and Presentation ................................................... 14. 2.2. MUSEUM EXPERIENCES ............................................................................... 18. 2.3. EDUCATION AND ENTERTAINMENT IN MUSEUMS ......................................... 24. 2.4. MUSEUMS’ FORMATION OF CULTURAL IDENTITY AND DESTINATION IMAGE 29. 2.5. RESEARCH RATIONALE ................................................................................ 33. METHODOLOGY ............................................................................................... 38 3.1. RESEARCH APPROACH ................................................................................. 38. 3.2. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS .............................................................. 39. 3.3. RESEARCH LIMITATIONS .............................................................................. 45. RESEARCH FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS ................................................ 47 iv.

(6) 4.1. THE SHAPING OF THE MUSEUM EXPERIENCES ............................................. 47. 4.2. THE MUSEUMS AS A LEISURE OPTION ......................................................... 56. 4.3. THE MANIFESTATION OF “EDUTAINMENT” IN THE MUSEUMS ...................... 60. 4.4. THE MUSEUMS’ EFFECTS ON CULTURAL IDENTITY ...................................... 72. 4.5. THE MUSEUM’S EFFECTS ON DESTINATION IMAGE...................................... 83. 5. RESEARCH CONCLUSIONS............................................................................ 95 5.1. THE RESEARCH HIGHLIGHTS ....................................................................... 95. 5.1.1. The Shaping of Museum Experiences ......................................................... 95. 5.1.2. Museums as a Leisure Option..................................................................... 97. 5.1.3. The Manifestation of “Edutainment” in Museums ..................................... 98. 5.1.4. Museums’ Effects on Cultural Identity........................................................ 99. 5.1.5. Museums’ Effects on Destination Image................................................... 100. 5.2. THE THEORETICAL IMPLICATIONS.............................................................. 102. 5.3. THE EMPIRICAL IMPLICATIONS .................................................................. 107. 5.4. RESEARCH SUGGESTIONS ........................................................................... 111. References ..................................................................................................................... 112 Appendix .......................................................................................................................120 I.. Liverpool and its People ................................................................................. 120. II.. The Museums on the Waterfront .................................................................... 122. III.. National Museums Liverpool ......................................................................... 123. IV.. The Exhibitions of the Cases during the Study .............................................. 125. V.. The Ticket Options of BS during the Study ................................................... 128. v.

(7) Figures. FIG. 1.1 THE RESEARCH CONCEPTUAL MAP ........................................................................ 3 FIG. 1.2 THE MERSEYSIDE MARITIME MUSEUM ................................................................ 5 FIG. 1.3 THE MUSEUM OF LIVERPOOL ............................................................................... 6 FIG. 1.4 THE BEATLES STORY ALBERT DOCK (LEFT) AND PIER HEAD (RIGHT) ................... 6 FIG. 2.1 THE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS OF INTERPRETATION .............................................. 15 FIG. 2.2 THE EXPERIENTIAL REALMS................................................................................ 20 FIG. 2.3 THE MUSEUM EXPERIENCE DOMAINS AS A CONTINUUM ...................................... 21 FIG. 2.4 THE DEGREE OF DESIGN OF A MUSEUM EXPERIENCE ........................................... 23 FIG. 4.1 THE EXHIBITIONS OF MM ................................................................................... 47 FIG. 4.2 THE EXHIBITIONS OF BS ..................................................................................... 48 FIG. 4.3 THE AUDIENCE AS SPECTATORS GAZING AT THE EXHIBITS IN BS .......................... 50 FIG. 4.4 THE EXHIBITIONS OF ML .................................................................................... 51 FIG. 4.5 THE HANDS-ON FACILITIES IN MM ..................................................................... 60 FIG. 4.6 THE INTERACTIVE GAME IN MM......................................................................... 61 FIG. 4.7 THE DISCOVERY ZONE OF BS ............................................................................. 63 FIG. 4.8 THE INTERACTIVE FACILITIES IN ML .................................................................. 64 FIG. 4.9 THE INTERPRETIVE FACILITIES FOR CHILDREN IN ML ......................................... 65 FIG. 4.10 THE EXHIBITORY TECHNIQUES OF ML .............................................................. 66 FIG. 4.11 THE SIMULATED LIVERPOOL OVERHEAD RAILWAY ........................................... 70 FIG. 4.12 MM’S ATTEMPTS TO ENGAGE VISITORS............................................................. 73 FIG. 4.13 THE LIVERPOOL TAPESTRY IN ML .................................................................... 75 FIG. 4.14 THE INVITATION OF COMMENTS IN ML ............................................................. 75 FIG. 4.15 THE OFFICIAL ACKNOWLEDGEMENT AND GRATITUDE IN ML ............................ 76 vi.

(8) FIG. 4.16 BS’ CUSTOMER SURVEY AND APPEAL FOR RATING ON TRIPADVISER ................... 78 FIG. 4.17 THE MAP OF LIVERPOOL CENTER AND THE RIVERSIDE ...................................... 88 FIG. 4.18 ML (TOP) AND BS PIER HEAD (BOTTOM).......................................................... 90 FIG. 4.19 DIFFERENT VIEWING ANGLES OF ML AND THE THREE GRACES ........................ 91 FIG. 4.20 THE EXPRESSIONS OF ENJOYMENT IN MM (TOP) AND ML (BOTTOM) ............... 93 FIG. 5.1 THE CORRELATION BETWEEN MUSEUM SUPPLY AND DEMAND ............................. 97 FIG. 5.2 THE SHAPING OF A MUSEUM EXPERIENCE ......................................................... 103. vii.

(9) Tables. TABLE 2.1 DIDACTIC AND CONSTRUCTIVIST PRESENTATION............................................ 16 TABLE 2.2 THE TYPES OF MUSEUM LEARNERS ................................................................. 25 TABLE 2.3 THE EXPLORATION OF THE FIRST RESEARCH ISSUE .......................................... 33 TABLE 2.4 THE EXPLORATION OF THE SECOND RESEARCH ISSUE ...................................... 35 TABLE 2.5 THE EXPLORATION OF THE THIRD RESEARCH ISSUE ......................................... 37 TABLE 3.1 THE INTERVIEW GUIDE FOR VISITORS .............................................................. 40 TABLE 3.2 THE INTERVIEW GUIDE FOR MANAGERS .......................................................... 40 TABLE 3.3 THE VISITOR INTERVIEWEE TABLE BASED ON THE INTERVIEW ORDER.............. 42 TABLE 3.4 THE MANAGERIAL INTERVIEWEE TABLE .......................................................... 43 TABLE 4.1 THE SHAPING OF EXPERIENCES IN THE CASES .................................................. 55 TABLE 4.2 THE PACING AND ANCILLARY SERVICES OF THE CASES .................................... 56 TABLE 4.3 THE INTERVIEWEES’ MOTIVES TO VISIT THE CASES .......................................... 57 TABLE 4.4 THE MANIFESTATION OF “EDUTAINMENT” IN THE CASES ................................. 71 TABLE 4.5 THE CASES’ EFFECT ON CULTURAL IDENTITY................................................... 82 TABLE 4.6 THE CASES’ EFFECT ON THE DESTINATION IMAGE ............................................ 94 TABLE 5.1 THE RECOGNIZED TYPES OF MUSEUM EXPERIENCE SUPPLY ............................. 95 TABLE 5.2 THE RECOGNIZED TYPES OF MUSEUM EXPERIENCE DEMAND ........................... 96. viii.

(10) 1. 1.1. Introduction. Research Motivation and Aim. Due to the historical development and traditional responsibilities, museums have been implicitly preconceived as elitist and exclusive institutions that academically preserve and statically display artistic, scientific, cultural or historic objects, and therefore are more physically and intellectually accessible to the middle and upper classes.. Such preconception still generally exist, even though museums have. attempted to open their doors to the public by means of a series of revolutions, such as the symbolic democratization through the establishment of the Louvre Museum in the late 18th -century France (Henning 2006) as well as the proliferation of public museums for social management in the late 19th and early 20th centuries (Hill 2005). Up to date, according to the International Council of Museums (2007), museums have come to be expected as “a non-profit, permanent institution in the service of society and its development, open to the public, which acquires, conserves, researches, communicates and exhibits the tangible and intangible heritage of humanity and its environment for the purposes of education, study and enjoyment”. Such statement connotes a much greater potential that museums may realize beyond their conventional roles, for example, a unique cultural mentor who passes down the significance of heritage for generations or an open community center which facilitates social interaction and cohesion. From the angle of tourism, owing to the inclination of the postmodern experience economy, museums’ innate position of creating a spiritual experience readily enjoys a distinctive position in the current tourism market, particularly in consideration of the 1.

(11) emerging experiential cultural tourism which embraces objected-centered appreciation as consumption and insight-gaining (Prentice 2001).. In addition, the growing. recreational tendency in contemporary society has started gearing many museums from traditional cabinets of curiosities toward attractive open space blended with interactivity, high technology, and eye-catching aesthetics in the hope of more national and international audience.. This transformation is critically substantial in terms of. museums’ competitiveness in the fierce competition for tourists between various leisure options, especially in a time that tourism has become a major source of economic income for cities. The existence of impressive museums can not only enhance the cultural aura of a city as a tourism destination but also diversify the traditional tourist product offer, thereby providing a golden opportunity for increased tourist influx. In short, under the current circumstances, museums may greatly benefit the tourism sector and thus the economy of a place, besides accomplishing their cultural and social missions; however, whether they could achieve these results relies first and foremost on their capability of offering an engaging experience through their contents. In view of such, this research decides to focus on museum experiences, starting from an in-depth clarification on how they are shaped through cognitive dialogues between different types of museums and their visitors, then proceeding to a further evaluation of relevant implications for the important issues in the realms of culture, society and tourism.. The exploration basically divides into three major research questions as. below for the sake of an empirical insight into the related effects of a museum experience (for the research conceptual map, see Fig. 1.1): . What kinds of museum experiences are shaped, and how are they perceived as a leisure option?. . How does the concept of ‘edutainment’ manifest in such experiences? 2.

(12) . How do such experiences affect cultural identity and destination image?. Fig. 1.1 The research conceptual map. 3.

(13) 1.2. Research Cases. In order to probe into the dynamics of museum experiences in real-life settings through closely describing and interpreting the related events (Simons 2009), this research targets at the United Kingdom since it has been internationally recognized as one of the pioneering countries in the museum practice, establishing many innovative measures, such as the free entry of public museums and galleries since 2001 for social inclusion as well as the arm’s-length management of public cultural institutions.. To. look further, Liverpool is particularly worth attention by virtue of the fact that it is a typical post-industrial city suffering long from serious social and economic decline and now has gradually transformed into one of the chief tourism destinations in the UK because of its culture-led urban regeneration schemes (see Appendix I).. It has been. inscribed on the World Heritage List by the UNESCO since 2004 due to its unique position and unparalleled achievements in the British maritime history, and the museum complex (see Appendix II), located on its revitalized Albert Dock, has become one of the principal tourism attractions, drawing a large number of local, national and international visitors which can serve as a useful resource for museum audience studies. Given that the purpose of this study is to acquire an essential understanding into the formation of museum experiences, their status in the leisure market and influences on edutainment, cultural identity and destination image, the Merseyside Maritime Museum, the Museum of Liverpool and the Beatles Story are selected to satisfy such research need, because they are all situated in the historic dockland and distinctively represent Liverpool’s cultural heritage with their permanent exhibitions —the first illustrates Liverpool’s peculiar maritime history from the 19th century (see Fig. 1.2); the second reflects the city’s global significance through its geography, history, culture and people 4.

(14) (see Fig. 1.3); and the last chronologically tells the story of the renowned native rock legend and operates at two sites of the Liverpool waterfront (see Fig. 1.4).. Though all. founded upon the significant cultural assets of the city, these three museums respectively signify three types of museum operation attributed to their exhibitory themes, ownership, missions, and approaches of presentation and interpretation which altogether result in a provision of three kinds of museum experiences.. Fig. 1.2 The Merseyside Maritime Museum. 5.

(15) Fig. 1.3 The Museum of Liverpool. Fig. 1.4 The Beatles Story Albert Dock (left) and Pier Head (right). 6.

(16) As for the rest of the museums in the cluster, they are by contrast less place-specific and thus less eligible for the research objective: the Tate Liverpool focuses on the contemporary artworks across the globe; though both nested in the building of the maritime museum, the International Slavery Museum holistically explores the evolution of transatlantic slavery, its profound impacts to relevant people and regions, and current issues of human rights while the UK Border Agency National Museum centers on the role of the British customs and tax department. In sum, the characteristics of the chosen cases allow an in-depth investigation into various layers of correspondences between museums and their visitors in generating museum experience and therefore are able to bring out key findings for the research aim.. 7.

(17) 1.3. Expected Research Contributions. Generally speaking, museum-based research tends to highlight the centrality of learning to the motivations behind a museum visit while tourism-related one emphasizes more on the social and recreational dimensions of the “day out”. This study, different from most academic investigations going deep into a single realm, attempts to put an interdisciplinary effort into both contemporary museum practices and cultural tourism concepts in the hope of a more contextual panorama of a museum experience. It conducts unusual parallel explorations into museums and their audiences mainly based on interviews and direct observation, rather than utilizing a single perspective or second-handed data common in existing studies which in turn generate relatively limited or non-immediate results (e.g. Chang 2007, Chhabra 2008, Tsai 2008, McIntyre 2009, Morgan et al. 2009, Wang 2009, Liu 2010). As such, it would comprehensively distinguish a typology of museum experiences from the three critical cases in order to build a reasonable understanding of the flows in the interactive mechanism of experience creation. Based on this typology, it would holistically assess the competitiveness of museums in the leisure market and the connections between museum experiences and edutainment, cultural identity and destination image so as to identify relevant causality. The results may work as inspiring references for the public authorities and museum practitioners to know better how to effectively deliver a museum experience to the target audience as well as how to broaden and diversify museum value in order to positively make more profound impacts on society, culture and tourism of a city. To speak of the selected cases, the historical and cultural richness of Liverpool allows this research to empirically address the proposed issues by investigating three 8.

(18) distinct types of museums which all center on important urban heritage yet offer divergent experiences in close proximity.. Moreover, such proximity extends the. possibility to find interviewees who have visited at least two of the three cases, and Liverpool’s position as a major international tourist city in the UK also facilitates the search for visitors of diverse backgrounds.. These features together decrease the. external variables and conceptually help this study to make necessary comparisons on a common ground, which may result in a more reliable contribution to relevant knowledge and theory enrichment for the birth of meaningful museum experiences.. 9.

(19) 2. 2.1. Literature Review. Research Context. 2.1.1 Experience Economy, Experiential Cultural Tourism and Museums Since the early 20th century, the evolution of the social, cultural, political and economic climates have gradually transformed the nature of the economy from a base of industrialized mass production, to a focus on service and information, and currently to an emphasis of staging intangible experience as the main ground of value creation (Pine & Gilmore 1999, Timothy 2011). This so-called experience economy aims to engage consumers to establish a personal memorable event in order to satisfy the “experience hunger” which marks the postmodern mentality eager for “expanding its repertoire of experiences” (MacCannell 1976). In virtue of its potential in adding diversity and uniqueness, culture has been recognized as the most essential raw material for experience generation while entertainment and tourism have stood at the forefront of the development of the experience economy. As such, the motivation of experiencing novelty and difference has driven the increased growth in cultural tourism as an option of leisure activities. To service providers and site managers, the key lies in the creation of an absorbing “story” attached to an attraction for the sake of “enchantment of the consumer”, a diversion from reality, and thereby a satisfactory experience which could capture the spending power of the mobile consumer (Richards 2001a). From the stance of public governance, the provision of cultural experience has become one of the critical regional development strategies, especially in reduced circumstances of declining 10.

(20) traditional income sources (Richards & Wilson 2006). That being said, experiential cultural tourism has emerged accordingly and become increasingly popular among tourists and tourism operators. It centers on providing authentic, emotional and spiritual experiences, which allows a cultural understanding as an insight rather than a fragmentary accumulation of cultural objects in traditional mass tourism (Hinch et al. 1999, Chhabra 2008). On the other side, this tourism form also corresponds to the postmodern desire which wishes to inform meaning as well as illustrate social tastes and lifestyle choices by means of the collection of experiences as an expression of personal identities (Hughes 1998, Prentice 2001). If one looks at museums from the tourism perspective, there emerges interesting correlations between these two distinct practices: museums have long served as surrogates for inaccessible places because of their function as a sort of time-space travel through the past, present and future by exhibiting original and authentic collections, which to some extent echoes to the concept of tourism as another sort of time-space travel occurring in a specific venue at a specific moment for experiencing something original and authentic. From the museological point of view, tourism today actually attempts to create a new cultural geography based on what one wishes to see and to make a place into a bounded one with a vast typology of things to appreciate.. Experience, in the. aforementioned context of the experience economy, has become a ubiquitous term in both tourism and museum marketing, which connotes an engagement of the senses, emotion and imagination. In reality, museums need visitors, and the tourism industry, better than any other sector of the economy, can spontaneously deliver a multitude to their doors. Moreover, the number of visitors determines the total disposable income of a museum, and tourists generally bring much more revenues than a relatively small proportion of repeat or local visitors (Kirchenblatt-Gimblett 1998). 11.

(21) Considering these circumstances, this research, different from conventional museum studies, would like to examine museum experiences on the premise of experiential cultural tourism in the experience economy in order to establish an interdisciplinary theoretical contribution in the fields of both tourism and museology.. 2.1.2 Museums in the Postmodern Leisure Market. Globalization has resulted in a de-differentiation of culture, tourism and leisure. Tourists are turned into eclectic consumers who can accommodate a wide variety of holiday patterns, and cultural attractions now have to compete with theme parks, cinemas, and shopping centers (Richards 2001a). On the other hand, as Timothy (2011) argues, the characteristic “time squeeze” of postmodern societies has made people dedicate most of their time to work, study and other life responsibilities, leaving little space for leisure pursuits. Consequently, nowadays people favor face-paced recreational activities rather than slow ones. The investment of time and money as well as the importance attached to the activity has become two important considerations in leisure-time decision-making (Falk & Dierking 1992). In other words, tourist experiences are increasingly transient owing to the impulse to see “everything” in limited time (Prentice 2001), particularly with an implicit calculation of the costs and benefits from any given leisure choice. Museums, stereotyped as cathedrals of culture that require time and effort into the contemplation of their collections, have therefore fallen back in people’s leisure priorities in many cases. In fact, a survey conducted by Boomerang! (1998 cited in Black 2005, p. 80) indicates the top three external activities participated most frequently are going to restaurants and cafes (66%); exercising and playing sport (64%); shopping for pleasure (59%) whereas visiting museums only makes up 5%. To look into the behaviors of the 12.

(22) museum audience today, except serious cultural enthusiasts, many visitors only rush around the exhibitions or simply look at the displays which interest them most. In some destinations, a museum visit even works only as a symbolic act for tourists to demonstrate their “conquest” of a must-visit venue or their implicit cultural capital (Timothy 2011). According to PLB Consulting (2001), the key barriers to museum visiting are among a perception of irrelevance; a lack of time, awareness or specific facilities; poor physical access to and/or at the site; a lack of intellectual, social and/or cultural access; a sense of cultural exclusion; feeling unwelcome; and costs of entry. However, in comparison to the general “depthless” leisure experiences which are short of an intellectual commitment due to their adaptable responses to the rapid change and rejection in contemporary society (Rojek 1995), museums distinctly offer the public rich, multidimensional, sensory experiences with rare, authentic objects, along with their professional research, knowledge, and interpretation behind (Kotler et al. 2008).. They possess innate. educational, social and cultural value in enhancing people’s lives as well as in an understanding of unfamiliar cultures and viewpoints (Resource 2001).. Museums. therefore could present themselves as quality leisure destinations by emphasizing that they “add value” to an outing through these positive attributes which differentiate museums from other forms of leisure outing (Black 2005). As a matter of fact, in response to the increased leisured lifestyle, many museums have shifted their positioning from authoritarian “factories of meaning” (Rooijakkers 1999) which only produce one-dimensional, uncontested and grand narratives, toward empathetic workshops which assist the keen audience to enjoy museum experiences by attempting to cater for their pursuit of variety during a leisure outing (Richards 2001b, Black 2005). The hope is to meet the postmodern longing for an escape from the ennui and stress of everyday routines, de-authentication of lifestyles and loss of a meaningful 13.

(23) self-existence (Brown 1995, McIntyre 2007). Given that museums must compete for their audience and resources against other leisure activities, particularly in a time when there are also too many museums and heritage attractions with new ones still opening (Black 2005), not to mention that the majority of museum visitors come during weekends and vacations (Falk & Dierking 1992), this research cannot evaluate museum experiences without a necessary touch to the context of the leisure market; therefore, it also examines museums’ perceived status as a leisure option in its field investigation.. 2.1.3 Museum Interpretation and Presentation. As museum interpretation and presentation are highly associated with museum missions and objectives as well as influential to visitors’ perceptions of experiences, a substantial awareness of these two aspects could enable this study to concretely infer the characters of the cases and provide more in-depth feedback to the research aim. To start with the former, according to the International Council on Monuments and Sites (2007), interpretation denotes “the full range of potential activities intended to heighten public awareness and enhance understanding of cultural heritage site”. It is an educational practice which aims to reveal and communicate the meanings of cultural heritage in their broader historical, political and socio-economic context (Tilden 1977, Ivanovic 2008). To put it otherwise, it organizes a particular set of relations between visitors and the exhibited in such a way that the latter serves as a route for the former to reach the invisible significance worth passing onto generations yet to come (Bennett 1995, ICOMOS 2007). Moreover, in consideration of the increasing visitor orientation among museums today, Black (2005) proposes an alternative approach to defining interpretation based on an 14.

(24) equal partnership between a museum and its visitors, and here a museum visit is regarded as a journey where three-way conversations between the museum, audience and collections occur. Interpretation in this sense seeks to elicit a response through the following methods: direct visitor contact and involvement; a mix of the senses and emotions; building on previous experience, skills and knowledge; encouraging questions and extrapolations of meanings from fragments; and visitors’ construction of personal meanings. This sort of interpretation offers visitors opportunities to explore exhibits for themselves and reach their own decisions, which is in turn more likely to present various points of view, rather than single arguments and simplified facts which do not allow an individual perspective.. To speak of the development process of interpretation, every. stage is contributory to the overall effect that an exhibition can reach as shown in Fig.2.1. Fig. 2.1 The development process of interpretation (Black 2005). On the other hand, presentation signifies “the carefully planned communication of interpretation content through the arrangement of interpretive information, physical access, and interpretive infrastructure at a cultural heritage” (ICOMOS 2007).. It. includes the frontline staff, accessibility, external and interior design of a site, how the exhibited objects are themed, selected and categorized as a representation of cultural heritage, relevant interpretive media, and so on (Timothy 2011). Traditionally speaking, 15.

(25) many long-established museums adopt a didactic presentation (see Table 2.1) where curators break the conveyed information into digestible fragments arranged in a logical order, and visitors unquestioningly absorb them in the intended manner (Black 2005). Even integrating modern display media, this sort of design is often mono-experiential and unable to meet the diverse learning styles of visitors. The information it contains is normally closed and hard to encourage deeper reflections. In view of such shortcoming, Hein (1995) suggests a constructivist approach by which visitors are provided a palette of interpretive methods reflecting various learning preferences and opportunities to construct knowledge and their own meanings, regardless of whether they match the intended results promoted by the curator staff (see Table 2.1). The subject matter presented in this design is about concepts instead of facts. The reason behind is to help visitors build new meanings based on existing experiences; they will be required an understanding of the whole as well as of parts, and parts must be understood in the context of the whole (Black 2005).. Table 2.1 Didactic and Constructivist Presentation (Black 2005) Presentation. Didactic. Features . A direct visitor route, with a clear beginning, defined sequence and specific end. . A breaking down of content into a logical order, delivered in “bite-sized” pieces. . A hierarchy of content. . A didactic provision of information. . Structured educational use based around an on-site “classroom” and worksheets seeking written answers to specific questions. Constructivist. . Many entry points, no specific path, and no beginning and end. . A wide range of active learning modes. . A juxtaposition of multiple viewpoints. . Visitors can connect with objects (and ideas) through a range of activities and experiences that utilize their life experiences. 16.

(26) From the visitor’s perspective, it has been observed that the majority of visitors actually do not follow the exhibition content step-by-step, detail-by-detail, in the systematic manner encouraged by the layout. They prefer to create their own personal, exploratory routes, stopping at what interests them and continuing when they feel ready (Black 2005). Under such circumstances, a constructivist presentation seems to work much better than a didactic one. However, this approach sometimes turns out to require visitors’ hard work as it may fail to make clear how to proceed and use it, which is not something necessarily expected by those who are on a leisurely social outing. The didactic design, on the contrary, provides a fixed and hierarchical layout which at least allows visitors to have a physical and conceptual orientation in mind and from which they can select at will. Besides, another phenomenon in need of attention is that most visitors to museums come in social groups (Falk & Dierking 1992). Their responses to exhibits and experiences are frequently reflected in their interaction with each other, such as sharing, discussing, and showing. Therefore, museum presentation also has to recognize such need, rather than presuming the contents would be utilized on an individual basis. To conclude, interpretation and presentation are crucial in attracting and retaining non-captive audiences who freely decide which exhibits to look and how much time, attention and involvement to put into them (Ham & Krumpe 1996). For museums, the key of success lies on the displaying of cultural heritage in such a manner that optimizes visitors’ thinking, learning and emotional connection so as to create a meaningful and satisfactory experience (Tilden 1977).. Meanwhile, since different visitors bring. different levels of interest, motivation, prior skills and knowledge with them (Falk & Dierking 1992, Doering 1999, Black 2005), it is also important that the contents of museum exhibitions are layered to reflect such, present different entry levels that visitors can select from, and provide depth for them to follow up at will. 17.

(27) 2.2. Museum Experiences. Pine and Gilmore (1999, p. 11-12) in their classic work of The Experience Economy contend that “while commodities are fungible, goods tangible, and services intangible, experiences are memorable…all prior economic offerings remain at arms-length, outside the buyer, while experiences are inherently personal. They actually occur within any individual who has been engaged on an emotional, physical, intellectual, or even spiritual level. Each experience derives from the interaction between the staged event and the individual’s prior state of mind and being.” From the museum stance, it may refer to the performance of personal reflection and imagination evoked by the exhibited objects and spaces which conceptually go across the past, present and future. To certain extent, a visitor is becoming a “time and space-dreamer” during the visiting process and in need of an immersive, enabling and supporting environment which is capable of building such experience (McIntyre 2009). To put the concept of experience in the leisure context, it is not only a subjective, emotional status laden with symbolic meanings (Hirschman & Holbrook 1982), but also a kind of consumption with hedonic, functional and utilitarian motives (Morgan et al. 2009). According to Boomerang! (1998 cited in Black 2005, p. 80), an ideal leisure experience is “fun, entertaining, exciting, relaxing, a place where one could take friends; a place where one could get lost in another world and which was value for money.” For museums, the display of collections is no longer the primary feature and means to engage their audience. To reflect the postmodern mentality which seeks to fill the free time with a variety of activities and experiences, museums now need to be multi-tasking, providing a palette of choices—i.e. an integrated leisure experience that can provide all requirements in one stop, such as exhibitions, shopping, eating and an animated social 18.

(28) space (Black 2005, Kotler et al. 2008). From the visitor’s perspective, Falk and Dierking (1992) identify three major categories of motivations for a museum experience: social recreation reasons (being with people, feeling comfortable and ease), educational reasons (learning as the result of curiosity and the urge to explore), and reverential reasons (a place of “peace and fantasy” where visitors can escape the mundane world). This suggests that most of the museum audience is in a recreational frame of mind, seeking positive activities to fill their leisure time. They wish to discover new things but not have to work too hard at it.. Kotler et al.. (2008) even indicates that museum visitors typically spend significant time browsing in museum shops, dining in the restaurants and making use of restroom facilities, compared to the relatively less time at an exhibition. On the other side, in terms of the orchestration of an experience, Pine and Gilmore (1999) recommend four realms of experiential values to be added to a practice in the experience economy. The scale of these realms varies based on customers’ active or passive participation and on their absorption or immersion in the experience. Active-passive participation refers to the level of customer involvement in creation of the experience. Absorption is “occupying customers’ attention by bringing the experience into the mind” while immersion is “becoming physically or virtually a part of the experience itself” (p. 31).. As to these four realms, they are basically defined as below. (see Fig. 2.2): . Education which enhances a customer’s skills and knowledge through active participation in an experience.. . Esthetics which provides an enriched, unique physical design where a customer enjoys passively appreciating or “just being in a setting”.. . Escapism which requires a customer to actively participate in the events of a real or 19.

(29) virtual environment; the customer shapes or contributes to the experience and in turn develops a new persona. . Entertainment which entails watching the activities or performances of others; a customer is not actively involved in the creation of the entertainment but the mind is actively engaged during appreciation of the event.. Fig.2.2 The experiential realms (Pine & Gilmore 1999) The authors believe these attributes are mutually compatible and can be fused to create a unique customer experience. Therefore, such experiential framework may function as a guideline for service providers and site mangers to optimize a staged experience. However, Kotler et al. (2008) bring up another configuration adapted from this theory (see Fig. 2.3), which wishes to truly reflect the museum practice and believes museums provide at least six experiences as below, regardless of their types (p. 303):. 20.

(30) Fig. 2.3 The museum experience domains as a continuum (Kotler et al. 2008). . Recreation which includes enjoyment of free, relaxed, unstructured time and activity; playful and diversionary activity; activity that can refresh body and spirit.. . Sociability which includes meeting with or participating with others; looking at and being together with others; taking part in shared, public activity.. . Learning experience which includes gathering and acquiring new information; perceiving patterns; exercising curiosity and a sense of discovery; understanding concepts and ideas; contemplating and reflecting; practicing cognitive skills.. . Aesthetic experience which includes engaging in the qualities of experience that are inherent within the experience itself and to which one responds through the senses; engaging in an intensive focused activity responding to sensory qualities such as color, pattern, texture; the sense of delight, euphoria and in some conditions a sense of disquiet evoked by qualities inherent in natural or created objects or events; 21.

(31) focusing on objects for their beauty, rather than their utility. . Celebrative experience which includes observing and honoring a leader, event, group, or organization; sharing in and extolling achievements; connecting with the past, the historic record, and continuity through history and time; encountering standards that refine sensibility, enlarge thought, and shape aspiration.. . Issue-oriented experience which includes encountering and engaging in contemporary public issues and concerns that can affect a local community. This model considers that museums may engage visitors on a number of experiential. domains, which varies along a continuum from immersive to integrative experience and active to passive participation. The immersive and integrative dimensions are cognitive and aesthetic whereas the participatory ones are kinesthetic, involving physical actions. Different from Pine and Gilmore’s (1999) ridged grid, Kotler et al.’s (2008) argument, as illustrated in Fig 2.3, shows the outer domains of visitor involvement function like satellites revolving around the inner circle of various experiential types, which implies more flexibility and possibilities in a museum experience, and such experience is not immutable and frozen. From the angle of the degree of design and formation of a museum experience, Kotler et al. (2008) also advises a conceptual map where the horizontal axis presents the potential types of museum experiences and the vertical one highlights the ways that visitors engage with museum offerings (see Fig. 2.4). As seen from this figure, a series of elements, rather than a single exhibition or service, together constitute a museum experience. As to the quality of an overall museum experience which arises from a combination of individual reactions to each element of it, Doering (1999) argues the key determinant would be the “entrance narrative” which entails a basic framework that individuals fundamentally construe and contemplate the world; the information about a subject 22.

(32) matter according to such framework; and personal experiences, emotions and memories that verify and support the related understanding. Based on 12 years of visitor research at the Smithsonian Institutions in the US, Doering (1999) concludes that “the museums or exhibitions visitors find most satisfying are those resonate with their entrance narrative and confirm and enrich their existing view of the world” (p. 81).. Fig. 2.4 The Degree of design of a museum experience (Kotler et al. 2008). In short, the meanings of an experience in the leisure market and the experience economy, the features of the museum audience, and the theories in creating museum experiences would altogether serve as a solid theoretic foundation for this research to illuminate the types of experiences embodied in the cases through relevant inferences.. 23.

(33) 2.3. Education and Entertainment in Museums. The learning process at cultural heritage sites can occur as informal or formal education (Light 1991, Prentice et al. 1998). The former is undertaken outside the formalized educational curriculum; visitors gain new knowledge and understanding through participating in an interpretive program or viewing interpretive media. It is a sort of self-motivated, voluntary, exploratory learning during a cultural visit, and the main objective is to establish the personal capacity to understand and appreciate culture and heritage in an experience (Ivanovic 2008, Timothy 2011). Tourists’ cultural capital, visit motivations, personal interests and uses of interpretive media may affect their level of learning, yet at the very least, some learning will still take place (Light 1991). As for formal education, it is part of a formal school curriculum where the learning is required for a passing grade, and the place being visited becomes an important teaching instrument. This sort of experiential learning is effective in helping upcoming generations make connections and retain what have learned through hands-on field interpretation which goes beyond static knowledge from textbooks and classrooms (Ivanovic 2008, Timothy 2011). To discuss museums’ role in this realm, Martin (2002 cited in Black 2005, p. 123) considers museums as “educational powerhouses” based on the fact that museums have been deemed as the most trustworthy sources of information in the US, attributed to their all-time professional image in education, research and collections. In contrast to the disciplinary, academic and competitive ambience in schools, there is no sense of competition in a museum exhibition or activity, as it is all relaxed and unstructured and visitors can freely arrange their visits (Black 2005).. To speak of the nature of. information assimilated in the learning process, according to Falk and Dierking (1992), 24.

(34) there are three types of learning information as follows (p. 98-100): . Learning cognitive information which entails facts and concept and relates to remembering, combing as well as synthesizing information.. . Learning affective information which involves attitudes, beliefs, feelings and emotions and can be distinguished from how the learning cognitive information is interpreted and described.. . Learning psychomotor information which is functional and concerned with muscular skills, manipulation and coordination On the other hand, in the aspect of the nature of museum learners, Serrell (1996). classifies the following four types according to related works in past 30 years (see Table 2.2):. Table 2.2 The types of museum learners (Serrell 1996) Types Analytical. Learning Style. Preferred Interpretation. Thinking and watching. Providing facts and sequential ideas, sound logical theories to consider for intellectual comprehension.. learners (Traditional) Imaginative. Feeling and watching,. Encouraging social interaction, giving chances to observe,. learners. listening and sharing. gather a wide range of information, and look for personal. ideas. meaning.. Thinking and doing. Offering opportunities to try out theories and look for. Common-sense. solutions to problems.. learners Experiential learners. Feeling and doing. Allowing the enjoyment of imaginative trial and error, hands-on experiences and a search for hidden meaning.. From the above table, it is obvious that the traditional museums that interpret their exhibitions along the highly passive didactic lines as “illustrated lectures” (Black 2005) only caters to the learning needs of analytical learners who are normally the 25.

(35) well-educated middle classes self-motivated to learn and seek learning outcomes for their leisure activities (Hanquinet & Savage 2012). As such, though the museum approach as a sort of informal education supports the basic human inclination toward curiosity, it is problematic for those dry and pompous museums to effectively respond to various learning styles, not to mention that humans’ attention is usually selective and dissipates with time and effort. In light of the above issue and post-tourists’ growing needs for leisure and entertainment in this pleasure-oriented, media-saturated society (Venkatesh 1992, McIntyre 2009), many museums have started adopting the concept of “edutainment”, combining education with a necessary entertaining framework inspired by the popular appeal of amusement parks (Van Aalst & Boogaarts 2002, Addis 2005). The purpose is to detach from their stereotyped image by presenting themselves as a desirable leisure choice so as to draw in visitors from a wider social milieu, evoke and retain their appetite for knowledge and enhance museums’ competitiveness in the intensified leisure market, particularly at a time of economic recession with scarce public and private funds. After all, museums need audiences to get financial support as well as public legitimacy. Museum curators and mangers today are also beginning to acknowledge that “even the most entertaining interpretive approaches have an educational value, and learning can be indeed fun” (Timothy 2011, p. 234). They believe that the audience want to have fun and will learn more if enjoying themselves. Museums in this line of thought have confidence in their capability of being educative and pleasurable places where visitors feel at ease. Therefore, in this increasing orientation toward entertainment, the extent of interactivity which involves the five senses and the use of innovative exhibitory techniques, such as light shows, animation and virtual reality, are central to the 26.

(36) entertaining experience within a museum environment and can lead to the perceptions of fun, liveliness or fantasies (Wight & Lennon 2007).. From the stance of learning. facilitation, they could play a significant role in allowing education to be dialogical. Just as the Department for Education and Skills of the UK (2005) indicates, the blend of Information and Communication Technology (ICT) and education enables a transformation of teaching and learning, a provision of more motivating ways of learning and an improvement in personalized support and choice. Furthermore, given that digital media have become part of everyday life, more and more museum visitors have subconsciously expected these media inside museums (Kotler et al. 2008), and the above two approaches may offer them a unique opportunity to combine the authentic learning from objects with the rich accessibility of e-information (Munley et al. 2007). However, the extended popularity of “edutainment” has also posted a major challenge to museums, requiring a cautious balance between education and entertainment, so not to lose sight of their sacrosanct missions and values by an overwhelming emphasis on “the spectacular, the popular, the pleasurable and the immediately accessible” (Featherstone 1991, p. 96). A pure entertaining design may reduce museums’ civic role to a shallow pleaser catering to hedonic consumerism, which creates only short-term surface value and leads to a relatively superficial learning process (Richards 2001a, McIntyre 2009). In fact, some research has shown that museums are still mainly educative in the mind of visitors (e.g. Bourdieu & Darbel 1969, Prince 1985, Vaughan 2001), and the enjoyment associated with museums seems to first and foremost originate from self-development and self-fulfillment. In this sense, entertainment shall be a medium for learning rather an end in itself, and the real ambition is to engage the visitor’s mind, to encourage a sense of discovery—which is now referred to as “mind-on” learning—rather than blindly pushing buttons but no substantial learning results (Black 27.

(37) 2005, Kotler et al. 2008). To summarize, the emergence of “edutainment” is conceptually an evolutionary compromise between museums’ educational responsibilities, postmodern recreational trends, and related social perceptions. It is one of the critical turning points for museums’ innate competitiveness in the leisure market, as visitors from various socio-demographic backgrounds generally consider their appreciation of museums as a kind of “educative leisure”, different from other commercial forms of leisure (Hanquinet & Savage 2012). That is to say, the educative aspect is essential to museums if they wish to compete with other leisure activities.. If such aspect is submerged by the new commercial and. entertaining orientations, museums will lose their distinct identity and thereby their usual and potential audiences. Therefore, it is worth an exploration into the ratios of education and entertainment in the cases and their audiences’ feedback so as to get pragmatic reflections on this issue.. 28.

(38) 2.4. Museums’ Formation of Cultural Identity and Destination Image. Cultural identity is a sort of shared culture, a collective sense of true self. It is socially situated with respect to people’s ongoing membership in specific communities of practice, and continuously takes shape over time by means of a variety of cultural building materials, such as history, geography and religion (Hall 1996, Castells 1997, Wenger 1998). Although people construct and contest identities through what they do and say, such development and negotiation may be influenced by power relationships among related communities and institutions (Ellenbogen et al. 2007). As it entails endowing places with meanings, cultural identity is also a socio-spatial phenomenon where the representational space is heavily loaded with symbols (Liggett 1995). Museums in this line act as a bridge connecting the past, present and future. They are capable of manipulating material things, establish relationships and associations to build or affirm identities, according to the surrounding social, economic and political contexts (Barthes 1977, Hooper-Greenhill 1992, Ellenbogen et al. 2007). In another word, this process of interpretation involves what to preserve, how to preserve it, and how to present it to the public (ICOMOS 2007), and power relationships have tended to decide the objects to go or stay, since museums can function as a place of enculturation conveying charged symbolic significance (Pearce 1994, Hanquinet & Savage 2012). In consequence, museums have been utilized as an effective intermediary by many city leaders to build civic pride and consensus, a shared sense of identity, and support for local heritage properties, particularly when there are problems of socio-cultural inclusion and cohesion (Miles 2005). Politics from this perspective can exert a considerable influence in museums’ attitudes, standards and levels of services, which may pose a challenge to historical objectivity and deviate from the personal or collective memory (Lang et al. 29.

(39) 2006, Chhabra 2008, Ivanovic 2008). In some cases, this has turned museums into a battleground of disputation involving various agendas, state ideologies, and globally significant issues (Message 2006). From the audience stance, due to the uncertainty and fragmentation of postmodern life, museum narratives actually provide the means for individuals “to piece these discrete fragments of experience together into a coherent story that says something about who they are”, underpinning individual as well as collective identities (Richards & Wilson 2006, p. 1214). In addition, because the nation-state has been gradually displaced by the urban region which has become an increasingly fundamental political, social and economic unit, museums on cities may provide rootedness, a sense of community through a diverse range of experiences which juxtapose various aspects of the exhibited themes and therefore allow self-authentication or communal celebration of unique traditions and figures endemic to the area (Miles 2005,Orloff 2008, Morgan et al. 2009, Timothy 2011). Therefore, it is important that museums are emotionally accessible in addition to their offer of sensory involvement and intellectual understanding. Meanwhile, to look the other way around, the sociocultural identity of a visitor also seems to largely determine what one perceives during an experience and what will be ultimately recalled afterwards (Anderson 2003). Audiences may even contribute to the production and stabilization of shared meanings by active engagement such as repeated performances and enactments (Hanquinet & Savage 2012). In brief, museums may implicitly yet significantly affect cultural identity at both individual and collective levels, and in turn be influenced by community engagement and institutional forces. This research considers museums’ efforts in this realm are highly relevant to their extent of connections to the local society, manifestation of cultural democracy and future sustainability backed up by communal support. 30. Therefore, its.

(40) investigation into the cases includes this important dimension. On the other hand, to look into the aspect of destination image, Shaprio and Varian (1999) notice a responding emergence of “economics of attention” where institutions make every conceivable attempt to attract the attention of customers. As the number of alternative attractions and leisure facilities is increasing sharply today, there are growing competitions for media coverage and tourists who have only a limited amount of time and are easily distracted.. In order to compete for tourists, a location must become a. destination, and to compete with one another, destinations must be distinguishable, which can be termed as “distinctive placeness”, a major factor of catching public’s eye (Kirchenblatt-Gimblett 1998, Van Aalst & Boogaarts 2002, Cohen 2008). To put it otherwise, tourism needs destinations, and museums are one of the ways through which locations become destinations, a way of producing “hereness”. As museums possess a significant symbolic power to make a powerful statement about a place, they could function as a visible identifier to the public by representing the aesthetic and cultural amenities of that place and transforming the inherited cultural elements into assets with a higher sign value (Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development 2009). Therefore, in addition to their role as unique nodes in forming the tourism geography of a region, they may also help such region reinforce positive images or correct negative ones, which can be arguably regarded as a part of the destination branding strategy aiming at drawing in tourists, investors, potential residents and international attention, since nowadays the global city competition rely largely on their images (Kirchenblatt-Gimblett 1998, Prévélakis 2008, Timothy 2011). Moreover, a museum with the magnitude and reputation can exert significant appeal on its own accord and even function as a representative image of tourism destination product, since tourists have a tendency to associate certain destinations with 31.

(41) local iconic landmarks and make their travel decisions accordingly (Timothy 2011). This can be proved by the case of the Guggenheim Bilbao which has brought a huge influx of tourist to the originally unknown Basque city since its establishment. However, such case also reveals a potential issue: though it has successfully drawn in many visitors, that success is only on a temporary basis. In the course of time, its appeal, mainly originating from its avant-garde architecture, has seemed largely dissolved (Van Aalst & Boogaarts 2002, Granville 2012).. This suggests that museum experiences do not. constantly add value to tourists’ stay and increase the probability of a return visit to both a museum itself and the place it is situated. The depth and breadth of the software it can present to the public as well as the nature of its relationship with the place matter a lot to the quality and continuality of the destination image. Besides the individual charm a museum has, when clustered with similar attractions, it may form an engaging setting from the perspective of a leisure outing and esthetic environment and therefore have the potential to attract more visitors and higher level of expenditures (Timothy 2011). In this regard, this research would then like to unearth the effect each case casts on the city’s image and whether these effects complement or collide with each other.. 32.

(42) 2.5. Research Rationale. This research aims to explore how museum experiences take shapes between different types of museums and their audiences and therefrom evaluate their effects on leisure-decision making, edutainment, cultural identity and destination image in the hope of establishing referential paradigms of the museum experience design.. In order. to keep the subsequent investigation in focus, it devises the following three research questions based on the suitable theories extracted from the above literature review:. . What kinds of museum experiences are shaped, and how are they perceived as a leisure option? Basically, the relevant exploration proceeds in such a way below (see Table 2.3):. Table 2.3 The exploration of the first research issue Research Findings on. Checkpoints . Theoretical References. Their evolution, exhibitory focus,. . The constructivist and. collection features and approaches. didactic styles proposed. of interpretation and presentation.. by Hein (1995) and. The museums’ characters. Black (2005) . The. most. obvious. types. of. . experiences in the museums.. The experiential model proposed by Kolter et al. (2008). Visitors’ perceptions of the. The. “entrance. narrative”. Their related feedback museum experiences. proposed by Doering (1999) . Their perceived costs and benefits. . Their spatial design and ancillary. The. facilities. making proposed by Falk and. Visitors’ motives and comparisons. Dierking (1992). leisure-time. decision. The museums as a leisure option. . with other leisure options. 33.

(43) In order to have a clear picture of how the three cases differentiate from each other in nature, this study firstly examines their evolution, exhibitory focus, collection features and approaches of interpretation and presentation with reference to the constructivist and didactic styles proposed respectively by Hein (1995) and Black (2005). Then it uses Kolter et al.’s (2008) experiential configuration to grasp the most outstanding types of experiences in each museum. As such, the characters of the cases are delineated, which can serve as a fundamental basis for following inquiries into the implications of their experiential offers. On the other side, this research also probes into visitors’ comments on their museum experiences so as to determine how these experiences are negotiated, if a causal relationship exists between both sides and if the perceived quality of experience conforms to the concept of “entrance narrative” argued by Doering (1999). At this point, it further investigates museums’ status in the leisure market from the angle of leisure-time decision-making discussed by Falk and Dierking (1992), comparing the perceived costs and benefits, spatial design and ancillary facilities between the cases in order to understand how these museums function as a general leisure experience. Meanwhile, the look into the visitors’ motives and perceptions of the museum visits in comparison to other leisure options allows this study to recognize their underlying definitions and expectations for such experiences and how these experiences are positioned in their mind as a leisure outing.. 34.

(44) . How does the concept of ‘edutainment’ manifest in such experiences? Given that the vast majority of museum visitors are in fact engaging in a leisure. activity, the study here concentrates on museums’ informal education rather than formal one. As indicated in Table 2.4 below, the related inquiry starts with an examination of the types of learning information and the corresponding types of learners based on the theories of Falk and Dierking (1992) and Serrell (1996). Then with this understanding of the educational nature of the museums, the research continues to evaluate their entertaining aspect by checking their extent of interactivity and uses of innovative exhibitory techniques, as mentioned by Wright and Lennon (2007), in order to know how they practice the concept of “learning through enjoyment”.. Finally, visitors’. feedback on their learning process and perceived personal growth would shed light on the effects of these different combinations of education and entertainment, which are further analyzed through various arguments made by Black (2005) , Kotler et al. (2008), Richards (2001a) , McIntyre (2009), and Hanquinet and Savage (2012).. Table 2.4 The exploration of the second research issue Research Findings on. Checkpoints . Their. offers. Theoretical References. of. learning. . information. The. types. information. of of. learning Falk. and. Informal education Dierking (1992) in museums. . The corresponding learning. . styles Entertainment in. The types of museum learners of Serrell (1996). . Their extent of interactivity. The determinants of an entertaining. . Their adoption of innovative. experience proposed by Wright and. exhibitory techniques. Lennon (2007). the museums  Visitors’. comments. on. Entertainment’s. role. as. a. their. The perceived value. learning. tool. proposed. by. learning process and perceived of related combinations. Black (2005) and Kotler et al. personal growth (2008) 35.

(45) . The risks of a pure entertaining design mentioned by Richards (2001a) and McIntyre (2009). . Museums. as. a. kind. of. “educative leisure” proposed by Hanquinet and Savage (2012). . How do museum experiences affect cultural identity and destination image? As shown in Table 2.5 below, in the aspect of cultural identity, since the cases all. base on important heritage of Liverpool, this research would like to clarify the connections between residents and the museums by looking into the local dimension of their exhibitory contents and their extent of community engagement, referring to the process of interpretation discussed by Black (2005) and ICOMOS (2007).. The. purpose here is to know who holds the right to speak for these cultural assets of significance and whether local society has the chance to define their own heritage and thereby retain their cultural identity.. In the meantime, this study also distinguishes the. degree of local identification with the museums, through the exploration into the nature of local identity and local attitudes toward the museums’ effects on their affections for Liverpool, in order to know if the museum interpretation can reinforce local identity and thus obtain the local support.. It would evaluate the social function of museums in. terms of underpinning cultural identity, as discussed by Miles (2005), Orloff (2008), Morgan et al. (2009) and Timothy (2011). In the realm of destination image (also see Table 2.5), this research examines the correspondences between Liverpool and the museums by identifying the image attributes of Liverpool presented in the museum contents as well as their functional and physical integrity with the surroundings.. Meanwhile, it investigates visitors’. impressions of Liverpool before and after the museum visits in order to know if there is 36.

(46) any change in the perception of Liverpool, thereby verifying the capability of the museums to rebrand the city’s destination image.. The views of OECD (2009),. Kirchenblatt-Gimblett (1998), Prévélakis (2008) and Timothy (2011) on cultural attractions’ function in shaping destination image would be referred during the related assessment.. Table 2.5 The exploration of the third research issue Research Findings on. Checkpoints. Theoretical References. < Local Cultural Identity> . The local dimension of the. The connections. The. process. of. interpretation. museum contents between locals and. . proposed. by. Black. (2005). and. The extent of community. the museums. discussed by ICOMOS (2007) engagement of each museum . The degree of local identification with the. . museums. The nature of local cultural. The social function of museums in. identity. terms. Local attitudes toward the. identity discussed by Miles (2005),. museums’ effects on their. Orloff (2008), Morgan et al. (2009). affections for Liverpool. and Timothy (2011). of. underpinning. cultural. < External Destination Image> . The. image. attributes. of. Liverpool in the museum The correspondences. Cultural attractions’ function as a contents. between Liverpool. . visible identifier of a place discussed The functional and physical. and the museums. by OECD (2009) integrity of the museums with the surroundings Cultural. The change in. attractions’. function. in. shaping destination image discussed Visitors’ impressions of Liverpool. Liverpool’s overall. by. Kirchenblatt-Gimblett. (1998),. before and after the museum visits image. Prévélakis (2011). 37. (2008). and. Timothy.

(47) 3. 3.1. Methodology. Research Approach. The aim of this research is to substantially explore the shaping of museum experiences as well as related cultural, social and tourism implications contributed by different types of museum-visitor relationships.. Hence, it adopts the multiple case. study method to explain the contemporary phenomenon rooted in a real context and thereby obtain an in-depth awareness of relevant social constructions (Yin 2003). To speak of the selection of the cases, as discussed in the section 1.2, it targets at the post-industrial British city Liverpool in light of its uniqueness in the historical evolution, long-term urban regeneration and recent rapid tourism development.. It then further. picks out three distinct museums—the Merseyside Maritime Museum, the Museum of Liverpool and the Beatles Story, given that they can offer a scarce comparative ground, in terms of their different natures yet similar focuses on urban heritage, for this research to conform, interrogate or extend to the theoretical propositions mentioned in Chapter 2. Through the theoretical replication procedures and rival interpretations of the three critical cases (Yin 2003), the resulted research discovery may provide an essential insight into the dynamics of museum experience creation.. 38.