Testing the museum’s audio interpretation
Two prototype audio guides for a single object. Same letter. Different ways of attending.
Put on headphones. View the object image. Listen to Type 1, then Type 2.
Take a moment between them.
Leave a response when you're ready.
-
Stay with the page. Don’t read yet.
Look for the horizontal lines. They divide the page into sections.
Count them.
[silence]
Move from one section to the next.
Notice how the page keeps starting over.
[silence]
Find a date. Then find another.
Same year. Different dates.
[silence]
Now find the word Pembroke.
[silence]
Find it again.
[silence]
Follow the letter across to the right page.
Find where it ends.
[silence]
Look at the last line.
[silence]
Hold the whole page.
Let the structure land first.Description text goes here
-
Mills : There is a letter here.
London, 1769. Dear Pembroke.
Copyist: Dear.
[silence]
Mills: I have read your letter of the 14th June —
it gives one infinite pleasure
to find you so happy
in my determinations.
Pembroke: 14th June.
[silence]
Mills: You may always expect this —
as long as you behave yourself well
and deserving of my protection,
you shall find me your friend.
Copyist: your friend.
[silence]
Mills: My disposition to be cruel and brutish —
I am afraid is too much the case
when a master is absent from his estates.
[silence]
Mills: I wish I had it in my power
to come and see you.
[silence]
Mills: I am much obliged to you
for your favour of the 24th of June.
Pembroke: 24th June.
[silence]
Mills: Dear Pembroke
I remain your sincere, indulging master.
Copyist: To Pembroke.
[silence]
Mills: Mills died.
Pembroke: Pembroke remained enslaved. Still-
What this is
These are two research prototypes, not finished audio guides.
Both respond to the same object: a letter written in London in 1769 by Thomas Mills, a plantation owner, addressed to an enslaved person named Pembroke. The letter survives. Pembroke's reply does not.
The prototypes test a single question: how much should an audio guide speak?
Type 1 — Framed Contemplation uses silence and structure to hold the object at the centre. The voice sets thresholds, then steps back. What you do with the space is yours.
Type 2 — Responsive Witness uses three voices — Mills, a copyist, and the silence where Pembroke's words would be. It redistributes interpretive authority without resolving the history.
Neither prototype tells you what to conclude.
Why
Museum audio guides have changed their technology repeatedly since 1952 — from shortwave receivers to smartphones — but the dominant form has stayed remarkably stable: one authoritative voice, stop-led commentary, information delivery.
This R&D asks a more foundational question: what is an audio guide at its core?
I am looking back at older forms of guided listening that held a different balance for centuries — oral storytelling, liturgical structure, the Greek chorus — and testing whether those principles can be translated into contemporary heritage contexts.
The research is developing a practical framework called Transparency Mapping: a decision-making tool for heritage audio creators addressing when to speak, when to stay silent, and how to hold interpretive authority without imposing singular meaning.