MRF museum observation

Museum observation through the web- 

 After reading about the classification of naturalia and artificialia, I tried to distinguish this mentally while viewing the imagery from the Museum. There is a definite distinction  in the two categories, and found that there were more naturalia objects or specimens then the other category, but  there was still a variety shown- especially relevant in the photos of the jewelry inspired by insects and beetles. The three that I chose were more related on reliefs picked up naturally from nature. The first is the Macroneuropteris scheuchzerii fossil that demonstrates insect feeding damage. The pinnule leaflet is what is shown, with its fine hairs. It surprised me because I thought it was a relief of a feather. The second image is that of a 3D stereolithograph of a skull that a French artist, Elisabeth Daynes, created to demonstrate a depiction of what the inside of a mummy might have looked like. Just as fossils preserved animals and plants, mummies preserved the bodies of those that were deceased.  I find it fascinating how the addition of technology was able to render what this person may have looked like just from the preservation of this mummy from thousands of years ago. In this way, artificialia was incorporated to naturalia.  Lastly, the last image is of a walking stick insect. The manner in which it is displayed aids the viewer for closer observation. I am always intrigued in how bugs are displayed in museums or in display cases, as there is close attention to where the pins are located to not hurt the object or animal being displayed. Perhaps this last image to the last two because there is an underlying theme of observing this specimen, but in a different manner, as it is the actual object. The first was a fossil, the second, a hypothetical sculpture, and the last, an actual specimen currently living. In this sense, it also touches on evolution, what has survived and remained intact, and what has not.