National Army Museum

Reviews about National Army Museum

•  

  Harry Maylam Review added: 2018.06.06

  ★ ★ ☆ ☆ ☆
  The NAM used to be - in my view - a better museum than the Imperial War Museum. It had fascinating displays with lots of information, in galleries based on the period. Its First World War gallery was truly excellent, as was its Napoleonic one. There were models, uniforms, weapons, equipment, paintings, people's accounts and experiences.
  
  Yes it was a bit aged but it conveyed but it had lots to tell about the Army's story. It was a museum run by people who were fascinated by the British Army and its history.
  
  Since the refurbishment it seems to be much more about concepts, lacking the substance of the older museum. The galleries are confused and one gets the impression that the management is embarrassed by the subject matter of the museum.
  
  The concepts are in some cases barely related to the history of the army. One of the galleries was all about the army's influence on civilian art, with edwardian biscuit tins and modern music posters with a military influence. In one of its more war-like galleries there was an artistic display of various weapons from the War. That is to say, they were arranged in a sort of sculpture.
  
  It begs the question, exactly who are they aiming the museum at? The old museum had an incredible exhibition on reconstructive surgery, and another where you walked down an Afghan alleyway, with hidden IEDs. They were thought provoking and brought a little something of the reality of the wars britain engaged in to civilians. Post revamp, there was an exhibition on Vivian Westwood's anti-war knitting.
  
  Somewhere along the lines they appear to have lost their way and the whole thing was a little disappointing.

Add review