1) How useful were the pre-course readings?

1: Very useful. 2: Very useful. I enjoyed the literary texts specified, and context was provided by the preliminary readings. 3: The reading list was very helpful -- but working full time and trying to get ALL the reading done became very pressure related for me to complete. 4: Very useful. 5: They were very useful, particularly the novels. It would have been useful to know beforehand that the novels were going to be closely examined and used in class so that I could have brought my copies with me. 6: Very useful survey. 7: SE's reading list was enormously helpful as a preparation to the course. Furthermore, the material he presented elaborated and built upon the books which he had requested us to read. 8: Extremely useful -- especially the annotations and chapter suggestions for the recommended list. 9: Very useful, especially Altick. 10: The pre-course readings were REALLY RELEVANT and very good, well-selected, &c. The novels were great. But -- he said they were "optional" reading. While we weren't expected to have read them, I now wish I had (I only had read three of them in recent years). I'll now go back and read them. 11: An excellent reading list, especially Altick. 12: They were very useful. They provided a good background for our discussions.

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. 2: Yes -- But it would be nice to have a bibliography of the sources used -- and of some of the major references (perhaps even locations ... e.g. provide as a document for us. 3: Very useful to my job as rare book cataloger. 4: Yes, especially given that this was a course not previously taught here, which meant inevitably there would be some variation from original plan. 5: The course packet was useful both to explain and structure the class sessions. The maps, statistics and other information will also be of future use. 7: The guide that SE distributed acted as a helpful outline to guide our studies -- further material (charts, graphs, &c.) will be useful in further studies on this topic. 8: Yes. 9: Yes -- were and will continue to be useful. 10: Absolutely great syllabus, will be extremely useful in the future. His whole approach -- I think informed by the Annales school -- is to talk about social change, technology, &c. as related to the book. His syllabus and lectures reflected that. 11: Yes. 12: The syllabus was a good outline of topics covered during the entire course. But on a day-to-day basis, we digressed from it.

3) Was the intellectual level of the course content appropriate?

1: Very much so. 2: Excellent -- Very high energy and very dense. But at an appropriate pace and with a strong sense of social/cultural/historical and literary issues. 3-4: Yes. 5: The intellectual level of the course was high and fast moving, but the instructor did a good job of providing context for everything and lots of clear explanations and slides and overheads where appropriate. 6: Absolutely. SE is a wonderful professor who teaches with grace and wit. His knowledge of the period (1770-1919) is simply extraordinary. His scholarship is superb. 7: Yes! The course was further enhanced by the fact that there was an interesting student "mix" in the classroom (archivists, librarians, academics, and book dealers). 8-9: Yes. 10: Absolutely. At least, it was for me, and seemed to be for the rest of the class. We had time to ask questions if we wanted to get into more depth. I have so many books I noted to read in the future, and ideas for future research. 11-12: Yes.

4) If your course had field trips, were they effective?

1: Building noise interfered but still worth it. Too bad second visit was canceled -- we could have had better luck. 2: Yes. Although some of the materials could have been viewed in class as well (as we often did!). It might have been nice to engage some of the apparatus discussed in class, if possible -- e.g. a Stanhope. But this is mere quibbling! 3: Very interesting visit, except the workmen in the same area made it hard to hear what was said. 4: Yes, except for the construction which was unpredictable. 5: The time was well spent looking at the first editions. However because of construction noise we left early and did not get to spend a great deal of time with the materials. 6: Yes. 7: One visit was made to the Special Collections room to look at a number of interesting first editions -- the visit to such a lovely rare book room was a treat in itself! 8-9: Yes. 10: Yes. We went to the Special Collections library. But -- the jack hammering was very distressing!!! Not SE's fault. 11: There was construction work going on in Special Collections, so it was too noisy to hear. But if it had been quiet, I would have liked to make more use of Special Collections. 12: For me, I knew what a triple decker was and what a novel in parts looked like, so I felt that some of the items could have been brought to class. But perhaps Special Collections would not allow it.

5) Did the actual course content correspond to its RBS brochure description and Expanded Course Description (ECD)? Did the course in general meet your expectations?

1: Yes, Yes. 2: Yes. 3-4: Yes. 5: Yes, it did fairly closely. 6: YES AND MORE! 7: Yes. 8: Yes. The only area we didn't really cover was the "and its Empire" part -- we really stayed within England the whole time. 9: Yes -- it varied slightly from the initial description, but this is understandable -- expected actually -- in a course being taught for the first time. 10: Yes, it was exactly as described and what I expected. I do wish we had had a bit more time to talk about publishing in the Empire, though we did touch on it. 11-12: Yes.

6) What did you like best about the course?

1: Instructor. Made it all (or almost all) very interesting, fascinating; learned lots new. SE is a great reader! 2: SE. Needless to say he's a wonderful teacher who brings with his knowledge of printing history a wonderful teaching style and easy manner. But more significant is his absolute insistence on interdisciplinary thinking! We all need to be reminded of the fact that printing history -- intellectual history -- is deeply bound to a wide variety of approaches taken together! (To say nothing of material culture, which is too frequently ignored!.) 3: I really enjoyed SE's British view of the subject matter. He was very willing to take time to listen to the comments and answer our questions. His knowledge and understanding of the subject were great! 4: So many interesting ideas and new information presented well, so one could pursue them from here on one's own. Also interaction with classmates was useful. The whole thing was exhilarating. 5: I very much enjoyed looking closely at the novels for examples of "book history" -- lighting sources, examples of mass culture, looking at what characters read, technological innovations and so forth. It wonderfully brought together the lectures and the readings. 6: The scope: by using a material history approach, SE opened new doors and triggered a vast array of videos. 7: For me, SE's knowledge, enthusiasm and skill in presenting the material was by far the most rewarding part of the course. I also enjoyed making the acquaintance of other colleagues from around the US. 8: The way many different ideas of study were able to be synthesized into one (mostly) understandable whole -- in other words we looked at so many different ideas of communication which collectively turned into a history of reading, publishing, and consuming texts. 9: The instructor did a masterly job of bringing c18 and c19 England to life, and of placing publishing and reading practices in the larger contexts of technological, cultural, and social change. 10: See question two. I like his approach -- to put publishing history in a very grand social context. I liked him as a professor -- approachable, VERY KNOWLEDGEABLE. I liked his background in the economics of publishing, pricing of books, the impact of various forms of lighting, transportation, class system, &c. 11: The instructor is a natural storyteller, and his lectures were excellent, especially when he was riding one of his hobbyhorses (Hotten, Besant, domestic lighting, &c.). 12: a) SE's enthusiasm and knowledge. b) The opportunity to see "book history" from the economic, social, cultural, and intellectual viewpoints, i.e. the context of c19 British history.

7) How could the course have been improved?

1: Not certain outline of course conveyed content clearly, but this was not serious. 2: Perhaps a bit more give and take on issues of interest to individuals -- but there's so little time as it is. 3: Perhaps more visual materials. 4: I haven't thought of anything. 5: Again it would have been useful to know to bring the novels. 7: Because of the extreme heat, the classroom was somewhat stuffy -- however these conditions are understandably outside the control of the organizers. 8: I would hope more examples from the RBS collections could be incorporated. I think many of us expected the "case studies" to be in publishing history -- and hence did not bring our copies of the books. Had we been asked to bring them because we'd be looking at specific passages in the text, we could have. 9: My only suggestion would be to include a slide or overhead with a detailed street map of London, especially the St. Paul's Churchyard area. 10: I just loved the course and the only thing I'd suggest is that SE could have given us assignments so that he could take a break. He must be exhausted! 11: At the end of each day, the instructor turned to a literary text, which would have been a good opportunity for more extensive discussion. Also, we might have used the RBS collection more often. 12: a) Distribute the syllabus as part of the pre-course readings. b) Ask us to actually bring our copies of the novels.

8) 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?

2: None. 3: Since the class size was small, it was easy to move the materials quickly and safely. It is great to see the materials used as the "teaching collections." 4: Things were handled carefully. I might have asked that pens not be handled simultaneously, but it didn't prove to be a problem, and was involving the instructor's own materials. 7: Materials well and carefully handled. 10: I thought everyone, including the teacher, "got it," in terms of handling materials. 12: Everything went well.

9) Please comment on the quality/enjoyability of the various RBS activities in which you took part outside of class (e.g. Sunday afternoon tour, Sunday night dinner, evening lectures, Bookseller Night, Video Night, Study Night, tour of the Alderman digital/electronic centers, printing demonstrations, &c.).

1: Enjoyed Sunday night dinner -- a great start; also Study Night. 2: I participated in all of them and enjoyed them all. It might be nice to have a social event on Thursday night (i.e. when we know each other better). 3: I enjoyed the Sunday night dinner and loved meeting the instructors and class members beforehand. I always enjoy the Bookseller Night but didn't go this year to it. 4: I could not attend any night or weekend functions. I was very impressed, however, at how well the staff handled everything needed -- breaks, class setup, special requests. 5: I very much enjoyed the Wednesday Study Night. It was great to see the materials used in other courses. 7: Attended only the Sunday dinner -- extremely enjoyable -- and the lecture. The student staff did an admirable job in organizing and facilitating our stay (tour, breakfasts, acted as guides, &c.) 8: Study Night was excellent and should be continued in the future -- it's great to see how the collections are growing and changing and how things are being added, as well as all sorts of examples. 9: All enjoyable and worthwhile. (Tuesday's hailstorm was an unexpected novelty!) 10: Everything fine, though I was too exhausted to do all of it. 12: These activities are always enjoyable and add to our experience.

10) Did you get your money's worth? Any final thoughts?

1: Yes. 2: Absolutely. This came out of my own (shallow) pockets entirely, and I'm very happy. SE is a remarkable individual! (Leave it at that!) 3: I always feel my time and money is well spent at RBS, but it is indeed getting expensive for my institution to send too many people each year. 4: Yes. 5: Yes. I learned a great deal, got a wonderful introduction to c19 British reading, printing, and publishing and some helpful ideas for future reading and study. 6: IT was a wonderful experience, and I do hope to come back. The participants and the instructors and the staff were very pleasant. Final thought: a bit of free time to do research. 7: Absolutely! I hope to come back at some point in the future. 8: Absolutely. Bring the five case study texts with you, and mark passages for discussion! 9: Yes, very much. Strongly urge future students to be diligent about doing the prerequisite reading -- you'll get much more out of the class. 10: Absolutely got my money's worth. Had book history been presented in this way when I was in doctoral studies, my subject might have taken a different path. 11: Absolutely -- it's a terrific course. 12: Certainly. I hope SE has the opportunity to continue to teach this course at RBS. Suggest to future students to take a look at all kinds of printed material (c19) from their own collections before they come.

Number of respondents: 12

There were six rare book librarians (50%), four teachers or professors (34%), one archivist or manuscript librarian, and one retired book dealer (8%).

RBS Home