Victoria and Albert (What the happy couple)

I believe this logo accurately captures the Victoria and Albert. The contrast between the thick and thin lines in the V and the ampersand. The serif's add an element of history and class to the logo which feels right because most of the artwork is historical rather than modern. If the museum was more full of modern exhibits, a font without serif's life helvetica would seem more appropriate. The consistency between the left branch of the V and the right branch of the A is very nice. In a way, the logo feels symmetrical, although it isn't. This symmetrical or patterned feel of the logo is reminiscent of the iron gates in the museum. Each had a distinct number of cells that were repeated, and the logo gives off the feeling of two cells where one has rotated and flipped over. It is a strong move to remind visitors of an exhibit while planning a logo, especially as this does it subtly rather than blatantly.

The cast courts were grand in every sense of the word. One large tomb was overshadowed by a larger tomb which was overshadowed by an archway which was overshadowed by the facade of a building. I felt like I was in Charles Foster Kane's storage unit in the end of Citizen Kane. Everything looked expensive and I was in awe. 

As for educational purposes, obviously the exhibit must be noted for its amazing detail, as plaster can capture those small details. Understanding the specific architecture is worth studying, however, that element was completely overshadowed by the grandness of the whole exhibit. I just wanted to stare at the big things rather than think. 

The isotype symbols certainly have more personality than the international symbols, but with more personality comes more detail, more to look at, and more to distinguish from other isotypes. The international symbols are simple only, but isotypes started the movement towards simplicity. What I was most impressed by was the use of graphs with isotypes. I found out that before isotypes, pictographs were uncommon. In this respect, isotypes took a very simple line or bar graph and made it more detailed while adding a new and understandable layer. So many maps, politically or geographically, that one sees on TV include graphics, or half graphics to represent half a quantity. Basically, coming up with the idea that a graphic can represent a quantity is genius, because I can see that Russia has more cheeseburgers than England, so therefor Russia has more of the cheeseburger fact I want to know about. Also, isotypes were clearly the inspiration for the international symbols, creating a movement that pushed away from only text, or text at all. It felt odd in the museum at first, but as a key inspiration to the international symbols which are everywhere, it certainly cemented it as a decorative art.

                             

These two patterns represent a more traditional cell versus a modern cell. The carpeting has bright colors, and each cell has a not-perfectly shaped football with a circle outside of it. The iron gate has a circle with an x inside and outside it. Obviously the iron gate is only black. Also, the carpeting has each cell repeating through the window of the other layer, as in they are off one to each other, while the iron gate repeats in a row and column perfectly. They seem different, but the sense of repeating cells, and in this case, circular cells, shows new inspiring old and artwork taking each other into account. It's almost as thought the two completely different types of art are speaking to each other.

 The London Underground has much more personality in the logo than Madison's Metro. For one, the underground tells people exactly what it is. It is a tunnel underground. The perfect O shape in the font is repeated as the logo as well. There is perfect contrast and simplicity to the logo, as it is also very recognizable. The color scheme works well together. I am a Chicago Cubs fan so nothing beats blue and red. The Madison Metro logo does not explain what it is like the tube. It is italicized with three different colors and white text. No where does it infer a transportation system like a picture of a bus. The London logo, while also not having a picture, allows one to infer that anything underground is probably transportation, and Metro does not necessarily mean transport.

The Madison Bus routes are very cluttered with geography. While this may be helpful to some, it distracts from the actual routes and how and where they intersect. No one is looking at a Madison map and specifically pointing at an area and saying, "I need to get there." Basically London's tube map forgets correct map scale but accurately shows how to get from one stop to another. London's whole transport system is much more thought out than Madison's.

This chandelier was my favorite piece in the museum. Unfortunately it didn't belong to any collection besides the lobby, but I stood and looked at it for a large amount of time and from many different angles. I also liked the Wisconsin connection from the artist. I marvel at the amount of preparation that went into planning this piece. Did the artist sketch every piece individually or improvise as he went along? I would certainly visit the V and A again just to get every detail and every angle of this beautiful work of art.