Big model, or BIG mistake??

ummm, for some reason the pics arent showing up? Could be just me.

  Sorry, they may be blocked in some locations outside the US, but I don't have access to another server to post from.

Depends on the history of the piece, If the museum bought it for a display then NO, if donated then it's OK. I see it as a work of art an not all art work is 100 percent perfec. If it conveys the grandness of a US naval vessal then I feel it's doing it's job.

Oh, the joys of defining "Museum Quality" in a model where we don't have any info on the builder or the context in which the model was built.    Was this model built by a group of veterans? Perhabs they were rehabbing from war injuries?  Was it a project of a vocational school class? 

Sailor built models that are hundreds of years old look crude compared to builders models produced by some yards and naval engineering firms (Gibbs & Cox). 

I've had several of my models displayed by maritime museums, but those musuems also had information that provided some context of the display.  The first time was in 1990, when the Customhouse Maritime Museum in Newburyport, MA held a USCG Bicentennial Model Boat Contest.  There were over 100 entries, some models were built by civilians; at the time I was still serving in the USCG - as were several other builders with models on display.    In 1994, several of my models were part of a display at South Street Seaport Museum in NYC.  There exhibit was called "12  Ties to Tradition, Ship Modeling in New York:.  As one of 12 modelers with "artifacts" on loan, I was the only sailor and I ran the Buoy Yard on Governors Island in NYC; so my models were listed as "sailor built".  One of my friends was a jeweler and had several models in the same exhibit; his display showed how his profession and his hobby were similar. 

Should that model be on public display?  Yes - even if it isn't a very good example.

The stern says South Dakota and sure looks squared off. That thing sure is huge. I'm going to google it for more info.

  According to the display, it was built by one person over a period of ten years. It also notes that he couldn't decide which changes were made when so he "encorporated all of them". It implied (but didn't state) that he has since passed away, and made no mention of his being a veteran of any kind, or having any connection with the Lexington. It was donated to the museum by his "family".
  If it's "art" why not put it in an "art" museum? This museum is about history, not art.

Gene

Gotta give the builder credit for effort.

Another possibility may be because of when it was built.  If the builder started it 40 years ago when there was no Internet to supply all the details we have available today, then he may have thought he was doing it right.  He was definitely ambitious!  He must have had a very large workshop to build it in, also.  He may have served on one or more cruisers and never saw a Battleship in person, so he just built what he knew.  We will probably never know the true story, but completing this model was quite a feat, especially alone.  I tip my hat to him!

P.S.  Maybe this was his "What If"  modification of the SouthDakota to add a fifth screw to make it faster?

GeneK

 My question is this, should something this bad be displayed aboard a museum ship like the Lexington?

 

It absolutely should be displayed and i'll tell you why.

First of all... how many 35th scale ships do you think they had to choose from??? If any thinks they can build it better, do it... I'm sure they'd love to have a corrected one. It is a VERY impressive piece regardless and makes a huge statement when people enter the museum. 99.7% of people that see that model will have no clue that there is something wrong with it. They'll gaze at every little detail and might actually learn something or gain an interest in history in the process.

Another thing is that museums typically don't pay for those displays thus they take what they can get (with-in) reason. The model club I belong to here in Arkansas (Central Arkansas Scale Modelers) has almost 40 models on display at the Lexington museum, both aircraft and ships. The museum provides the models but the modelers are not paid. I have spoken to Mr. Barnes who is in charge of finding models and modelers on several occasion. They almost literally have to beg borrow and steal to get what they get. Seriously, show a little appreciation...

A model is only a representation. Not an artifact.

I think its fine how it is. Its there to generate interest, which I'm sure it does as it is indeed impressive.

OK, yes it's "impressive" and may even generate interest, but to me it's like a "Natural History Museum" displaying a "Jackalope" or a "Unicorn". It might generate interest, but it isn't real. They have a very large collection of models, and are asking for more (they sell the excess in the gift shop), but they are at least fair representations of real aircraft and ships. I'm sure the guy who built this thing put his heart into it, and I would never fault him, but this is a museum centered on one of the most historical aircraft carriers that has been preserved, and they have a duty to present history, not fantasy, or just "art". It isn't about the builder, it's about preserving history.

K-dawg

If any thinks they can build it better, do it... I'm sure they'd love to have a corrected one. It is a VERY impressive piece regardless and makes a huge statement when people enter the museum. 99.7% of people that see that model will have no clue that there is something wrong with it. They'll gaze at every little detail and might actually learn something or gain an interest in history in the process.

 

You sound like the Diorama Judges at almost every model show on the planet who gives first to the biggest dio no matter how crappy it is just because its big...

GeneK

OK, yes it's "impressive" and may even generate interest, but to me it's like a "Natural History Museum" displaying a "Jackalope" or a "Unicorn". It might generate interest, but it isn't real. They have a very large collection of models, and are asking for more (they sell the excess in the gift shop), but they are at least fair representations of real aircraft and ships. I'm sure the guy who built this thing put his heart into it, and I would never fault him, but this is a museum centered on one of the most historical aircraft carriers that has been preserved, and they have a duty to present history, not fantasy, or just "art". It isn't about the builder, it's about preserving history.

Now, if the ship model was the USS Lexington, it would be a different story.

I see your grievance, but I just don't think its a big deal. It isn't deceiving the public, or some how rewriting history. They would do themselves good, however, if they displayed photographs of the actual ship along side the model so at the very least the inaccuracies could be seen if the public were inclined to be so detail oriented...I, for one, wouldn't know the difference.

Speaking of inaccuracies, if the museum has a very large collection of models as you say and are asking for more, imagine how much time it would take to ensure the quality and accuracy of each subject. Probably better to take the model for what it is, at face value. Judging by the photos I googled, it looks like a fair representation. 

I certainly wouldn't call it fantasy. Art isn't a bad word for it...but as long as the model's history and origin are outlined, then again, its up to the viewer to take it at face value. If the build was commissioned by the museum, then there is a problem.

GeneK

OK, yes it's "impressive" and may even generate interest, but to me it's like a "Natural History Museum" displaying a "Jackalope" or a "Unicorn". It might generate interest, but it isn't real. They have a very large collection of models, and are asking for more (they sell the excess in the gift shop), but they are at least fair representations of real aircraft and ships. I'm sure the guy who built this thing put his heart into it, and I would never fault him, but this is a museum centered on one of the most historical aircraft carriers that has been preserved, and they have a duty to present history, not fantasy, or just "art". It isn't about the builder, it's about preserving history.

Well it sure sounds like this was your point all along. Perhaps you were looking for others here to validate your point of view? I would hardly equate this with a Jackalope of Unicorn, but rather with a display figure of some apelike ancestor of man. According to current science we know that they existed, but have only found partial skeletons and not an intact one or several. USS South Dakota did exist, but not as depicted here. However the builder put forth a massive effort to recreate this ship, incorrect as it is. Considering the general lack of knowledge in the general public about history in general and knowledge of naval subjects and history in particular, if this one incorrect beast can inspire one child to a future as naval history buff, or better (we all have to have a start somewhere) it is good. I cant see it turning off a kid. Yes those in the know can chuckle and point at the goofs that they know and see, like we can do at most any museum in where we have above average knowledge. (You mean the Japanese did not really fly converted T-6 and Vultee trainers at Pearl Harbor or all over the South Pacific? Or the AVG did not have P-40Ns?)

Not at all, I despise the bigger is better idea. You have completely missed my point. Simply put, the errors WILL NOT be notice by the vast majority of visitors thus there is no reason on earth to let such an otherwise nice display go to waste.

On another note: Manny, Are you coming to AMPS?

At first glance I thought the thing was made out of Legos.

Gotta give the builder an "A" for effort, but size isn't always everything.

Mark

BIG MISTAKE,

I visited the Lex in july of 2011.  I have over 680 models in 1/700 and the South Dakota is one of my favorites. When I first saw her I was very excitied, but that mood was soon changed when I saw all the mistakes. ( note the 20 5inch guns when she only had 16,the funnel is way to short,should be 1 crane on the stern,etc. ).

I think it's great that he made attempt,but I'm sure if he did any homework the Dakota would of looked alot better.

If you don't like that model, offer to build them a better one. I think that except for the stern it's pretty decent. In particular the bow looks like a fast battleship.

It's pretty decent, and certainly gets chops for effort.

It is kind of a movie prop type of deal, but the Lexington isn't exactly a museum either.

I'd put it in the great tradition of ivory or toothpick models of ships and let it go....

bondoman

If you don't like that model, offer to build them a better one.

Oh, that sounds so sophmoric---"If you don't like it build a better one yourself". 

Is that your philosophy on everything?  Don't like the new kit from Company X?, make your own mouldings. Don't like your current President?, run for the office yourself?  Don't like the service at your local Dept. Store?, open one yourself?....

So unless you are going to "build a better mousetrap" don't critique?

bondoman

It is kind of a movie prop type of deal, but the Lexington isn't exactly a museum either.

 The "Lexington Museum on the Bay" is very definitely a museum. It deals with history, not Hollywood fiction.

I don't think people are going to come away from the exhibit with some incorrect view of history because some model had the wrong number of deck guns or screws....the model isn't the be all end all of the experience there, it's just a side show....like the bearded lady......I would write it off as weird but it wouldn't change my perception.

This musuem is looking for a lot of models. Looks like they have a nice room full of models and are looking for about 50 more.  Link:

http://www.usslexington.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=275&Itemid=333

I would really like to do this, but shipping a finished kit would be a challange.

iraqiwildman

This musuem is looking for a lot of models. Looks like they have a nice room full of models and are looking for about 50 more.  Link:

http://www.usslexington.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=275&Itemid=333

I would really like to do this, but shipping a finished kit would be a challange.

Interesting they do not list, as far as I could see, the South Dakota in their inventory, nor in their priority list. 

FWIW, there actually is a mil spec for "museum models" issued by the Curator of Navy Ship Models that applies to all models procured for Navy-owned museums.

Interesting summary here:  http://www.navsea.navy.mil/nswc/carderock/pub/cnsm/tech/spec_01.aspx

However, the Lexington is a museum ship run by a non-profit foundation.  They're dependent on donations and it's their call as to what they display. 

As others have stated, the general public probably isn't as discrimating as folks here and have no idea of how accurate the subject model is.  It does look like a battleship after all.

I've seen a lot worse examples in other museums and in movies (the horrible models used in the final battle scene of In Harm's Way come to mind).

Mark

Manstein's revenge

 

bondoman:

 

If you don't like that model, offer to build them a better one.

 

Oh, that sounds so sophmoric---"If you don't like it build a better one yourself". 

Is that your philosophy on everything?  Don't like the new kit from Company X?, make your own mouldings. Don't like your current President?, run for the office yourself?  Don't like the service at your local Dept. Store?, open one yourself?....

So unless you are going to "build a better mousetrap" don't critique?

Another old, badly built musuem ship model is the USS Missouri in the Missouri State Capitol building. This ship is at least 40 years old, the seams are opening on it, the rope for the US Flag is broken and hanging down almost to the deck., the decals are lifting off, gun mounts broken, etc. Really in bad shape for being in a beautiful state capitol building.

But they now have a 18 foot long brass model of the ship that was built during WWII for the Navy to test antenna and radar placement. That is one big model.

I agree with Bondoman; there was no call for a personal attack here.  Everyone of us is entitled to a personal opinion without risk of any attack.  I believe that the model in question is a poor representation of the real ship.  If I had the resources, I would offer to build a better one for the museum.  Where's the problem with that?

Bill

No personal attack---I like Bondo...

I just don't think the answer to every critique is: "It should stay/you shouldn't criticize, unless you can/are willing [to] make one better yourself"...