RBS 2003 Course Evaluation

John Buchtel and Mark Dimunation

51: History of the Book, 200-2000 [H-10]

14-18 July 2003

1)    How useful were the pre-course readings?

1: Very useful for familiarizing you with what is to be covered in the course, with terminology, &c., although much of it (esp. illustration techniques) is covered during class. A good reference list to refer back to, and certainly not an overwhelming list (a good break-down into Required, Recommended, and Browsing). I was especially surprised and pleased by the quality of the text in The British Library Guide to Printing (Michael Twyman). Elizabeth Eisenstein (The Printing Revolution in Early Modern Europe) was, of course, difficult, but good! 2: I could have gotten along well without the pre-course readings -- but they were very useful refreshers to many matters dim in my mind. 3: De Hamel was very helpful and very accessible. Well written. Reading the first half of Eisenstein was a real exercise in self-discipline without any great gain; however, part II was both helpful and interesting. A Short History of the Printed Word was good, too. 4: The de Hamel and Twyman gave excellent background. Chappell, A Short History of the Printed Word, seemed to become almost just a list of printers. Eisenstein I gave up after the first two chapters because she spent the preface and first two chapters endlessly saying what she wasn’t going to say. I’ve been reading on this week and the rest is very interesting. Should warn people to skip over to the third chapter. 5: I found the pre-course reading to be helpful as a basis for the rapid-fire pace of the classroom experience. 6: Excellent; I particularly enjoyed the Eisenstein and Printing and the Mind of Man, and thought they gave excellent background and preparation for the class. 7: The readings were excellent and were referred to often during the week. 8: Very good -- except one book was difficult to find, and Eisenstein is difficult to read -- recommend that she be replaced. 9: The readings were excellent -- Eisenstein changed my whole outlook on the world! 10: They were very useful, especially the British Library Guide to Printing. 11: The readings, especially the Eisenstein, were helpful in preparing me for the methodology and theory behind the course. 12: Very helpful. 13: John Carter’s ABC for Book Collectors could be required not merely recommended, but this is not a big deal. 14: Readings were appropriate and informative -- absolutely essential to do these -- a sound basis for the course.

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, quite useful. A more ambitious idea would be a list of all the books we saw in class and in Special Collections -- I was trying to get them all down in my notebook -- and why each was particularly important. That’s ambitious, and maybe not appropriate, but would be great. Further reading list is great. 2: Yes, the material handed out was both appropriate and will be useful to me after I return home. 3: They were helpful in class; given my career, I will not have much use for them at home. 4: Yes. 5: Most definitely -- and the notebook was a superflong idea for keeping it organized. 6: Yes, and the diagrams were especially helpful in explaining processes. 7: The class materials are good reference guides, but we didn’t use them in class. 8: Yes -- very clear and informative -- a very well-organized course. 9: Yes. 10: Yes. I could definitely use some of the diagrams as teaching tools in my printing office. 11: Yes. The diagrams of the press and printing tools were particularly helpful. Also, the deconstructed bindings were excellent! 12: Excellent. 13: Abundantly useful! 14: Generally yes -- the book history time line was only marginally helpful, and at times in error (e.g. date of founding of Oxford University).

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

1: Yes -- although sometimes questions at a deeper level got rather glossed over -- unavoidably in such a general course. But a very good level of depth, and surprisingly wonderful. 2: Yes. 3: Yes. The knowledge of each student seemed to vary a great deal -- JB and MD never talked only to the initiate or patronized the neophyte. 4: Yes. 5: Very much so. 6: Yes. 7: For the time allowed and the amount of materials we had to cover, it was an appropriate intellectual level. 8: Yes -- on many levels and from many different aspects. 9-11 Yes. 12: Very much so. There was a high standard, but fun, too. 13: Yes -- managed to establish comfort at all levels. 14: Yes -- the level was entirely appropriate.

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

1: Yes, though we were seeing so many books in the classroom, each place felt similar. I would have appreciated always hearing the date, title, author, &c., and publisher (if important) for each book shown -- sometimes that info was not declared at the beginning and I felt I had to ask. For me, at least, dating the book is important to remembering and placing it later. 2: Yes, the visit to the Library of Congress was wonderful -- the trip itself unfortunately less than wonderful: hot, cramped, and two hours too long!!! Nevertheless, I am glad to have made it as I seldom have gotten to visit LC -- and never have had the great opportunity of visiting and viewing some highlights from the Rosenwald Collection! 3: Yes. Our visits to Special Collections reinforced what we discussed in class by providing wonderful examples. 4: Trip to LC: Yes -- but for those from the D.C. area it would be more convenient to end the week there (and it might fit better as we covered books up through the c20 there). And visitors from other areas, if they know ahead of time, might like to stay a day or two in D.C. and tour -- also cheaper and easier to fly from there. 5: Seeing examples of the “treasures” of printing was both instructive and a delight. The trip to LC was well worth the long day and DC traffic. 6: Yes. I was very moved by the trip to the Library of Congress, which gave me a once-in-a-lifetime chance to see at close hand some of humanity’s most momentous artifacts. 7: The field trip to the Library of Congress was extraordinary. The Specials Collections classes were exceptionally well prepared and presented. 8: Yes -- LC -- a superb day! 9: Definitely. It was wonderful to see some of the holdings of LC and UVa’s Special Collections. 10: Definitely, although I would have liked to see some Ben Franklin examples. (He was the most famous American printer.) 11: Yes. The trip to the Library of Congress was particularly useful (. . . and astonishing). 12: Yes, yes, yes. 13: LC -- yes! Wish we had more time for this. 14: Yes.

5)   What did you like best about the course?

1: The unparalleled collections of RBS and UVa and the Library of Congress (LC) that we were privileged to see -- the proximity we had with the material -- the teaching tools, models, demos, the schedule (full immersion), and the energy, dedication, passion, and relative flexibility of JB and MD. Also, the other students. Great class size -- good idea to move seating around. 2: The simultaneity of great knowledge with great good humor -- and the eliciting of the views of the students; including me; 3: I very much needed the perspective on the development of the book and its effect on the culture it was a product of. 4: The JB and MD show. Riding in the car with MD on the field trip was an education in itself -- learning about Stan Patatory (a word that should be on the list) and all the other stuff. Too bad the whole class couldn’t go in the car. 5: In the hands of JB and MD the course never faltered or bogged down. The history of the book tied in with social commentary and cultural and societal elements presented a well-formed survey course. 6: I loved the trip to the Library of Congress, and also all of the teaching materials that were used to demonstrate various topics, e.g. stamps used to produce machine bindings along with the bindings themselves, superflong from the Linotype process, &c. 7: The best part of the course was the opportunity to see such a wide variety of material presented by two individuals who are obviously passionate about the subject. Their excitement was infectious! 8: Enthusiasm, effort, expertise of instructors. Humor. Variety of approaches. Contributions of class participants with varied backgrounds and interests. Most of all -- seeing the finest representative examples of the greatest intellectual and artistic creations of humankind. 9: 1) I loved the humor used. 2) The passion MD and JB had for the material was incredible. 3) The experiential part and kits taught me in a way that I finally understand some of the material I didn’t grasp before. 4) Using the hand press was fantastic. What’s not to like best? The whole course was wonderful. 10: The hands-on nature of the class was very helpful and was what I liked best. The teachers’ friendliness was also greatly appreciated. 11: The sheer amount of materials shown to the class allowed students to draw connections between the different periods in printing history. 12: 1) The amusing interplay between the instructors. 2) The visit to LC, and its fabulous books. 3) The Special Collections material from UVa. 4) MD as Bible salesman. 5) JB’s Jane Eyre survey. 13: Instructors’ pace, professionalism, humor, grace, sensitivity, and expertise. 14: The instructors: engaged, knowledgeable, tactful, and a great sense of humor. A clinic in good teaching!

6)   How could the course have been improved?

1: The opportunity to spend a little time with a period of particular personal interest or books of particular interest. I know we didn’t have time to do this at LC, but I think it’s a good idea -- makes the LC day feel a little different from Special Collections presentations at UVa. Also -- it would have been nice if our teachers were a bit more accessible for questions outside class -- though I would hardly want to expect more of them than what they gave, which was tremendous. 2: I don’t know. 3: Sometimes in speaking of literature, the literary significance of a work was overwhelmed by its discussion of its significance as a cultural artifact -- e.g. “You haven’t read Dickens if you haven’t read it in parts.” (Pardon my paraphrase.) 4: I would have liked a little more on how the printed word helped change history -- just a little on how the Reformation couldn’t have happened without printing was tantalizing. 5: Nothing that I can see. 6: I really can’t think of a way. This was one of the finest survey courses I have ever taken, and the instructors were excellent. 7: Try to keep the class size as small as possible. Fourteen is a little too large. 8: Could have touched on more prominent type designers (Bembo, Garamond, Bodoni, &c.). 9: The times we were told what we would be learning next were very helpful -- I would recommend using that technique regularly. 10: I wonder if it wouldn’t be useful to take a thematic approach to the centuries of the book, e.g., choose Monday to discuss how bindings changed over the years, Tuesday to discuss how printer’s ink changed, &c. (Just a suggestion.) 11: More time. 12: The balance between looking at books, and the commentary by the teachers, was excellent. Perhaps a bit less on printing methods, though it is a subject of interest. 13: I know how busy everyone is, but if there could be a running list of what is shown in class . . . maybe even pre-print a list and have us check off the possibilities as they come up in class. Lots of students kept asking about dates, &c. I know the material appears elsewhere, but it is hard to catch info while students are talking, asking questions, and material is being shown. 14: The course is solid for a survey course; I would have preferred more time on the c19 and c20.

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: Guidelines about how paper should or should not be handled / touched. 2: As far as I could tell the persons in class whom I observed handled the materials with great care. 3: JB and MD were very good in finding a balance between allowing us maximum access to the materials while protecting them. 4: People should be told not to touch when this is appropriate. 5: Handling of materials was done very professionally. 6: I thought the level of care taken with the materials was appropriate and the instructors were always careful to tell us how to handle the materials. 7: None. 8: Extraordinary access to materials. Materials are thorough and clearly labeled. A huge amount of work for RBS staff -- many thanks! 9: They were handled very respectfully and responsibly -- no improvements to suggest. 10: None. 11: While most students are adept at using Special Collections materials, I occasionally saw students mishandling materials passed around the class. Instruction on material handling might have been beneficial. 12: The instructors were, very properly, careful about the materials, and I did not mind that some things were not hands-on. 13: During Specials Collections presentations, please make a point of rotating rows so all can see. It is frustrating to have to depend on the kindness of others, especially when some students elect to homestead on the front row! 14: More teaching kits.

8)   If you attended the Sunday and/or Monday night lectures, were they worth attending?

1: Yes, well worth attending. But could Monday’s lecture be at 7:00, not 6:00, please? Social time on Sunday / Monday was very nice and appreciated -- it felt natural to lead into Bookseller’s on Tuesday (and the opportunity to eat downtown with new friends), once we learned our way around. The week was very nicely structured. I was on a high nearly the whole time, never weary. 2: Yes, very much so. 3: Frankly, Sunday’s lecture seemed more like a shareholder’s meeting than a history / overview of RBS / BAP. Monday’s talk was fun, but more of the nitty-gritty of design would have been good. 4: Monday night lecture was great -- Sunday night was extremely repetitious, rambling and a waste of time. 5: N/A. 6: Yes. 7: Yes to both. The introduction on Sunday night was excellent and Greer Allen’s talk was delightful. 8: Sunday no, Monday yes. 9: I found them a little boring -- I would have liked to have learned more. 10: N/A. 11: The Monday night lecture was well worth attending. 12: Did not attend Sunday. Enjoyed Monday lecture. 13: I was disappointed in the Sunday lecture -- expected it to set more of a tone of excitement and “community.” 14: Sunday, no; Monday, only moderately worthwhile.

9) If you attended Museum Night, was the time profitably spent?

1: N/A. 2: Field trip on Wednesday. 3: Yes. Printing Surfaces was very interesting, especially since we had been discussing many of these processes in class. 4: Attended Thursday night -- yes -- always good to see examples. 5: N/A. 6: Yes, I particularly enjoyed the music engraving demonstration. 7-8: N/A. 9: Did not attend -- field trip. 10: N/A. 11: Yes. 12: Did not attend, but it is a good idea. 13: Had to miss it because of the LC trip. I’m sure it’s beneficial. By Thursday I was too pooped to participate. 14: Did not attend.

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

1: Yes, I believe I got my money’s worth -- perhaps the only surprising thing to me was that we covered topics that had been in our advance readings -- I suppose with the thought that not everyone had done the readings. It would be nice for people who had, to go further -- but just handling the materials, as with engraving, was going further than the book’s explanation, and that was great. The atmosphere at RBS is truly unmatched -- a great chance to spend time with intelligent, thoughtful people of varied backgrounds. All in all, this has been the finest course I have ever taken. Please keep up the good work! 2: Yes, I got Strand’s money’s worth -- similar, I think, to an MD’s refresher up-date courses. Advice to others considering taking this course: 1) Prepare adequately, do the required reading, live as close to Alderman as possible so as to reduce time spent running around for meals, &c. 3: Attend. You cannot come away without having learned something valuable. In spite of the week’s intensity, our class was very worthwhile. 4: Yes. Take the course! 5: The course was recommended to me by a colleague who took it last year. She was very high in her praise and was not wrong. I will definitely recommend it to others. 6: Yes. 7: Yes! And for those taking the class in the future, I strongly recommend you read everything they recommend before you get here -- it significantly enhances the experience. 8: This is a unique and extraordinary program. Instructors at the highest level of expertise. Loved the “hands-on” approach -- the focus on objects and extraordinary access. A remarkable and unforgettable experience. Absolutely superb! 9: I definitely got my money’s worth. It was a fantastic experience: excellent, knowledgeable, passionate instructors; a staff that took great care of us and made us feel welcomed; terrific evening activities; and perfectly timed breaks. Thank you, thank you! 10: Definitely. I would like my co-workers to have the same experience. They would benefit a great deal. 11: Yes. 12: Yes! Will likely return. It was one of the best weeks of my life. 13: Yes! Please let MD and JB teach another course -- if they will -- they work well together. Maybe break the survey into two sessions or have an advanced version? 14: Yes.

Number of respondents: 14

Percentages

There were two full-time students (14%), one general librarian with some rare book duties, one teacher or professor, one antiquarian bookseller, one retiree, one book-collector, one attendee in the publishing industry, one indexer at the NLM, one special collections librarian, one printer and book artist, one park ranger who works in a c18-style printing office, one paraprofessional working in a special collections library, and one law librarian (7% each).

RBS Home