Google, on your phone?

Obviously if you have internet access on your phone, you can access google. But did you know you can call google and search it that way?
Try it for yourself - 800-GOOG-411 - Just say the business name/type and the city and it will give you results and will connect you automatically if you so wish.
Neato! (See, these are the things you can find out on TED!)

Twitter

Twitter came up in class the other day and I just ran across this talk by the co-founder about how the concept of instant updates came to be, and how it has evolved in such a short time.

Enjoy! And while you're on TED, check out some of the other talks!

Fairy Tales

O the stuff fairy tales are made of. Like many children, especially little girls, I grew up on stories of princesses being rescued by knights in shinning armor. The two would ride off into the sunset and live happily ever after. As a child, I never put much thought into exactly what that happily ever after might be. It’s interesting to see how Hollywood has portrayed the lives of princesses and how historical figures have been dealt with.

The film Marie Antoinette, starring Kirsten Dunst, is a good example of happily ever after – almost. Marie’s life was certainly one of opulence, parties, friends, and generally having a good time. Of course there were a few small difficulties associated with being the Queen of France – the traditions of morning dressing for instance at Versailles, or her troubles consummating her marriage with Louis XVI. Her life goes along fairly well in this movie, until of course the French Revolution takes place. Then things go down hill. But for a while, it looked like those fairy tales of my childhood might have actually taken place in history according to Hollywood.

Recently I watched Keira Knightley in The Duchess, and while her character Georgiana isn’t a princess, her lifestyle is certainly close enough. As the movie started, it was somewhat clear that Georgiana would later fall for a male character, Charles Gray, introduced in the opening sequences. At the same time, though, she was thrilled to become the Duchess of Devonshire and didn’t pout to her mother that she wanted to marry Gray instead. The film quickly devolves from the typical fairy tale to almost a horror story. Obviously there isn’t a monster or something after Georgiana, but her marriage quickly turns out to be a bit of a sham. Her husband isn’t overly interested in sexual activity, at least with her. He seems to have several mistresses, until he takes Georgiana’s best friend as his live-in mistress. Her joy for life quickly dissolves from there.

I don’t recall anything spectacular in the special features of the Marie Antoinette that dealt with the historical accuracy (or inaccuracies as the case may be) of the film. Meanwhile, I was pleasantly surprised by the special features for The Duchess.

Part of the special features was obviously devoted to costume development, but another section was an interview with Amanda Foreman, the author of Georgiana: Duchess of Devonshire. In this interview, Foreman discusses the collection of Georgiana’s letters that are available in the archives at the Cavendish family home in Chatsworth. In talking about these letters, Foreman reveals to the viewer the maturation of Georgiana – visible in her hand writing and in the topics she discusses. It’s also interesting, as Georgiana’s letters were censored by her friend (and her husband’s mistress) Bess Foster. Bess either scratched out or ripped out certain parts of letters and apparently only left select letters for future generations.

I was thoroughly impressed to see this section in the special features. It was a somewhat shameless plug for tourists to go to Chatsworth, but at the same time, it made archival history interesting and relevant to a movie viewer. How often do you really think about the evolution of a person through their handwriting and the subject matter of their letters?

Check out the movie if you’ve got a chance. It’s not too bad. Typical in many ways, but still a pretty good flick. If nothing else, the costumes are great!

Modern Soviet Dance?

I stumbled across this so-called modern Soviet dance video tonight.

It's an old recording of a group of Soviet dancers, likely propaganda of its time. What it amounts to, with the mix of more modern music, is basically a Soviet break dancing circle.

What an amazing way to mix old and new technologies, and keep the heritage of this Russian dancing alive.

Enjoy - There are some truly amazing dance moves!

Interactivity

Over the Thanksgiving weekend, I stayed with my sister and her family in Kanata. Given the proximity to Ottawa and Carp, my boyfriend Karl and I decided to take in a couple of tourist attractions while we were there.

On Saturday we visited in the War Museum. Wow. What a place! It's incredibly huge. We spent about 4.5 hours in there and still didn't see everything. I was impressed by the number of interactive activities available. Everything from being able to zoom in on models of First Nation's villages to understand the various roles of the members, to walking through a mock First World War trench and being able to see no man's land. Lots of computer activities and even some interaction with some artifacts, or at least reproduction artifacts.

My first encounter with the reproduced artifact was a man with a musket teaching mainly children about things like cleaning it and how to carry it. He did a really good job changing his message depending on his audience.
The 2nd encounter was a medical kit. This one made me a little nervous, as children were allowed to pick up items, including sharp, potentially poke-your-eye out type items. Despite that nervous factor (risk management anyone?) it again was pretty cool to have someone there to explain to patrons exactly what each item might be used for.

Along with all of these interactive displays, there were lots of static exhibits, but because of how much interaction was possible, I didn't see any kids running around or pounding on artifacts. The only area that didn’t have interactive exhibits was the room full of tanks, artillery pieces, and other vehicles. This room certainly lacked the child friendly atmosphere of the rest of the museum, but there still weren't any kids playing with the artifacts.

Sunday we decided to tackle the Diefenbunker. Again, I can say 'wow' but certainly not with the same connotations as before...

Our visit was basically a 90 minute guided tour. We were welcome to explore once the tour was over, but there was no map provided, nor were there any directional signs to help you find your way around. Plus, the air quality was TERRIBLE. I couldn't wait to get out.
Unlike the War Museum, there weren’t any exhibits with interaction. As a result, I saw children pound on artifacts to make their own fun. I certainly can't say I blame them, as there isn't much to see or do at the Diefenbunker. Trust me, the concept makes it sound really neat-o, but I was rather disappointed with what I saw and heard.

Our tour guide couldn't understand why the federal government wouldn't leave all of their materials behind when the bunker was decommissioned in the 1990s. She seemed absolutely surprised that they wouldn't consider leaving desks, beds, paperwork, etc. behind for the museum to use. Honestly, I think the Diefenbunker museum is lucky that the government didn't fill in the bunker with cement like they did with so many others. How can individuals honestly expect the government to leave all of their materials and equipment behind when they move? I can understand where my guide was coming from - certainly it would have been much easier to create a museum had all of the necessary artifacts been left behind. But at the same time, it doesn't make good sense for an operating government department to leave its equipment behind for the potential use in a museum. The public would certainly not have stood for this.

The key lesson learned from visiting these two very different museums was that the ability to interact with exhibits dramatically effects the behaviour of visitors. People instinctively want to touch and feel things, to be truly involved in the learning process - this is especially true with children. If a museum fails (like the Diefenbunker) to allow the opportunity for interaction, patrons will inevitably find a way to play with artifacts and potentially destroy physical history for all those who follow.