Figuring out the dome

Abstract

The New Millennium Experience ‐ an exhibition on the theme of time sited in a fibre‐glass dome on the Greenwich Peninsula adjacent to the Prime Meridian ‐ was the centrepiece of Millennium celebrations in Britain. From its inception in the mid‐1990s ‘the Dome’ had been controversial for several reasons, not least of which was its financial viability were it not to prove very popular with the general public. Within weeks of opening, it emerged that the Dome was financially insecure to the point of possible bankruptcy. Largely funded by the National Lottery in the first place, four extra grants from that source were required in order to keep it open during the year 2000. The Dome was regarded widely as of dubious cultural value and a drain on public resources that might have been better spent elsewhere. This chapter of Cultural Trends does not, strictly speaking, set out to confirm or refute these common criticisms of the Dome. Instead, it aims to establish the facts and figures concerning various aspects of the project as precisely as possible. This in itself is difficult to do since, for instance, the exact value of corporate sponsorship is impossible to ascertain due to commercial confidentiality, although it was quite a small proportion of the actual funding ‐ less than 20 per cent. Further complicating matters is polling evidence of high visitor approval for the Dome which must be set against its general damnation in the media. In effect, the chapter traces a complex process whereby an ambitious cultural project was beset by a series of seemingly intractable problems from beginning to end, including eventual disposal and future use of the site. Whether the Dome is considered an abject failure or an under‐reported success, it certainly did not meet its official targets in terms of visiting, revenue and sponsorship.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 11 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.