73: Japanese Printmaking, 1615-1868 [I-80]
4-8 August 2003
1) How useful were the pre-course readings?
1: Quite useful -- I read five books without which I would not have had a proper background framework. 2: These readings were altogether unreplaceable as background for the course. Having completed the readings myself, I found the illuminations received during class sessions equally due to the preparations as to the instructor’s framing of the material -- the other element absolutely necessary to new understanding. 3: One book in particular (Lane) proved very helpful. 4: The readings were very helpful. The major problem was most were out-of-print. 5: Very useful.
2) Were the course syllabus and other materials distributed in class useful (or will they be so in the future, after you return home)?
1: Yes, I think so (but haven’t actually had time to read any of it yet!!). 2: Even though I received the packet of lectures at the beginning of the class, I elected to go to the classes only with the preparations provided in the reading: I preferred to make the connections in class during the active learning SK practices. 3: Definitely -- am looking forward to reading it in its entirety upon returning home. 4: The course booklet will serve as an excellent reference source in the future. 5: YES. 6: Definitely.
3) Was the intellectual level of the course content appropriate?
1: Yes -- SK is fantastic and very intellectually stimulating. I learned an enormous amount from him. 2: Very appropriate: challenging, but accessible. 3: Appropriate for majority of class, who had considerable background in subject matter. 4: Yes. It was much higher than expected. 5: YES. 6: Wonderful -- good for all levels, while yet being very challenging.
4) If your course had field trips, were they effective?
1: Very well spent in University Art Museum. They were very generous in letting us view dozens of prints close up. 2: Very well spent indeed, and obligatory for the development of skills of connoisseurship. 3: Definitely! 4: Yes. The access to UVa’s print collection was quite a treat and added tremendously to the course. 5: Very much. 6: The connoisseurship section of the course was an excellent complement to the lectures.
5) What did you like best about the course?
1: See above. SK’s anthropological approach to viewing the art in the context of the culture. 2: The active learning prompted by the instructor, followed closely by the Bayly experience. 3: Enthusiasm of instructor, plus the use of projected images in the classroom, as well as appreciating prints up close in the art museum. 4: SK’s art historical approach was provoking and certainly refreshing. The mixture of art theory, history, and connoisseurship was fantastic. 5: The course instructor -- SK -- and his depth of knowledge. 6: The instructor is fabulous. He’s very knowledgeable, quite lucid in his lectures, and a great deal of fun! He also clearly loves Rare Book School and this collection. You, as well as we, are lucky to have him.
6) How could the course have been improved?
1: Add a session on the technical aspects of woodblock print production (cutting and printing). 2: I don’t see how. 3: N/A. 4: RBS should consider adding a second half to course to focus on Japanese prints from 1865 onward. 5: Very little improvement needed. 6: By being longer! It’s really excellent for what time most of us have.
7) We are always concerned about the physical well-being both of the RBS teaching collections and of materials owned by UVa’s Special Collections. If relevant, what suggestions do you have for the improved classroom handling of such materials used in your course this week?
1: The books in our classroom were quite safe since the room was locked at all times when we weren’t there. 2: No advice. 3: None -- instructor watched carefully to be sure materials were handled with care. 4: Great print collections. Please buy more! 5: Our classroom was close to our materials -- worked out very well. 6: No.
8) If you attended the Sunday and/or Monday night lectures, were they worth attending?
1: Enjoyed TB’s Sunday lecture on history of RBS. Monday’s lecture on printer as author was out of my field of interest. 2: Yes. 3: Yes -- “Printer as Author” was well presented, with humor. 4: Yes. Leon Jackson’s lecture was excellent. 5: Monday -- lecture was worthwhile. 6: I thought Monday was fascinating, but it is not my interest!
9) If you attended Museum Night, was the time profitably spent?
1: Enjoyed the Jane Eyre exhibit! 2-5: N/A.
10) Did you get your money’s worth? Any final thoughts?
1: Yes! Looking forward to taking “Printed Ephemera,” “Book Illustration,” and, perhaps, “Lithography.” 2: Oh yes. 3: It was time well spent, if not spent in a rather expensive manner. 4: Yes! Take the course. One of the best I’ve taken. 5: YES. 6: Without a doubt. I would urge anyone interested in Japanese prints to take it. And to take anything SK teaches. And Terry, you’ve set quite a standard of excellence and quality here. Bravo -- and thanks.
Number of respondents: 06
Percentages
Leave Tuition Housing Travel
Institution Institution Institution Institution
gave me leave paid tuition paid housing paid travel
17% 17% 17% 17%
I took vaca- I paid tui- I paid for my I paid my own
tion time tion myself own housing travel
33% 83% 83% 66%
N/A: self- N/A: Self- N/A: stayed N/A: lived
employed, re- employed, with friends nearby
tired, or had retired, or or lived at
summers off exchange home
50% 0% 0% 17%
There were three retirees (49%), one archivist/manuscript librarian (17%), one teacher/professor (17%), and one book-collector (17%).