Generally, I think the change from object-centered to user-centered methodology is a welcome change to museums, as it has been in other areas - notably the tech industry with the advent of human/user centered design. It makes museums more accessible, hopefully making it easier to spread knowledge to, and spark interest among, the general population.

By subsequently moving beyond what Kreps suggests, and into the realm of Macalik’s ideas of the museum as a discursive space, it is also possible to engage the audience further by facilitating debates between both different external persons, and between the public and the museum itself. This, however, is a move I view as more risky, as it requires a more educated audience than simply a narrative exhibition. It also assumes audiences want to participate in a discussion, something that I would consider far from given. It is a very interesting directioin for museums to go in, though, and I would be excited to see what sort of experiences strategies like that can result in.

Finally, I also want to express how important I think it is that this new direction expands upon, not replaces, museums’ roles as specimen colletions and time capsules. The fact that interactivity and discussion can make knowledge more accessible, doesn’t mean the origins of the knowledge are no longer important. (Though I am not too concerned about this.)