Eric Holzenberg

53: The Printed Book in the West since 1800 [H-40]

14-18 July 2003

1)   How useful were the pre-course readings?

1: They were very good. Somewhat repetitive of each other; but it was not excessive reading, and it was good to read different authors. 2: Course readings were very helpful to give an overview of what was covered in class; re-reading some chapters after a class session helped to make sense of some confusing areas in the readings, or reinforced what had been taught. A book on illustration technique may be helpful to add to the reading list. 3: The readings were a good introduction to the broad theme of the course. I reread portions during the course. 4: They were good -- although there was a lot of repetition of the information in class. On the other hand, it seemed new to many students, so it may have been useful to them to hear it again. 5: Very useful and totally relevant to the subjects covered by the course. 6: Good. Because Philip Gaskell’s New Introduction to Bibliography is somewhat repetitive of the Anthony Rota, Apart From the Text, but more technical, Gaskell may not be necessary. Or, it might be useful to assign sections of Gaskell for reading during the week, when the level of detail is more helpful. Rota is an excellent introductory text. 7: Excellent. 8: The readings were relevant. 9: I found the pre-course readings essential for my appreciation of the course offering and if everyone had read them we’d have covered even more. 10: Very useful, though I didn’t have time to finish Rota. 11: Very useful, but repetitive and too much British. Need more American.

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 -- print examples as well as tool examples. Loup was very good to have. 2: Course syllabus helpful to keep students and teacher on track. No surprises. The handbook EH created has been prepared with much care and thought to the course, and it helped to illustrate (literally) some at-times-complex descriptions of printing / publishing techniques. 3: The course syllabus / workbook was excellent, containing many illustrations and pictures to help us understand the technologies. 4: Handout was very good -- relevant, well-produced. It could use a table of contents. 5: Yes -- quite useful. 6: Yes. Course book with schematics, drawings, &c. is very useful. 7: Very appropriate, and will be very useful in the future. 8: Yes -- relevant and useful. 9: Definitely useful in class and will be especially useful later. 10: Both appropriate and potentially, as they have been really, useful. 11: Very good.

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

1: Yes. 2: Yes. It was taught at a level that made one want to learn more. The class was not pandered to, and he made us think. 3: It was at least as high as the level of the five other RBS classes I’ve taken. This was a survey course and covered a lot of printing developments. It would not have been possible for time reasons to go into more depth. 4: I found it a little light much of the time -- I think I am not in the majority there though. 5: Absolutely. Material was sufficiently challenging and very well presented by EH. 6: Yes. 7: Yes -- entirely, the level was very high. 8-11: Yes.

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

1: Very much so. 2: Extremely. Actually to see what had been discussed in class or illustrated in books firsthand was a great experience and one of the best teaching methods. Though one and a half hours spent in each Special Collections visit, it never seemed long enough. Also at times hard to see items with everyone crowded around an object. 3: This was highly enriching. The examples shown to us were appropriate and stimulating. 4: Yes -- visited Special Collections and was glad to see the books. 5: Yes. The Special Collections visits were a highlight of this course. 6: Yes -- visits to Alderman Special Collections were very good. 7: Yes -- time very well planned and used. I believe we got the most out of our time. 8-11: Yes.

5)   What did you like best about the course?

1: So many original examples to compare. Practicing orally evaluating a book to the class was helpful for comprehension and retention of information. 2: EH’s enthusiasm and knowledge of the topic. Questions from the class. Film on Linotype and Arion fine press. The breakdown of each day’s topic into decades. 3: The instructor was completely focused on his material and seemed fully knowledgeable about all aspects of printing and book illustration. 4: 1) Good hands-on exercises with EH adding commentary to student work. 2) Emphasis on print technologies. 3) Introduction to typography, which was new to me. 5: The caliber of the teaching. EH is an excellent instructor -- explains thing very well, always patient with questions. The scope and range of the classroom materials. I was extremely impressed with the materials made available to illustrate and instruct each segment of the course. Also impressive how well-organized the materials were and how carefully handled they were. 6: Expertise of the instructor; contact with other students; ability to focus on one course / topic for a concentrated period of time (meaning the one week of class time). 7: Examination of books. Hands-on approach to learning. The films. 8: The hands-on exercises which applied the information presented in the lecture. 9: The mixture of workbook, hands-on and lecture / discussion was so well-balanced. Of course, a week is not long enough. 10: I liked the atmosphere EH created. He made a point of speaking to class members at the Sunday evening event, and maintained a friendly, though very businesslike, manner throughout. There are many ways to convey course information; EH made this course pleasant without in any way debasing the material. 11: Discussions, descriptions of the various machine printing and illustration processes.

6)   How could the course have been improved?

1: Would be great to use the ProScope to print out examples of type and illustration processes for side by side magnified evaluation. 2: It’s fine. Would like to take it again! 3: I can’t think of any way. 4: EH is stronger on c19 technology than some of the earlier material, which made drawn-out run up to 1800 weak. 5: The facility was not ideal, mainly because of the lighting. 6: The hands-on exercises were a highlight -- although it may not be able to increase the amount of class time devoted to them, they’re definitely worth emphasizing. 8: More time in class. The length of the breaks are unnecessarily long. 9: Make it last longer! 10: Perhaps a little more on the social context of the technology discussed -- the causes and effects of mass culture. 11: Very difficult or impossible to do I realize but demonstrations of the processes would greatly add to the course (e.g. demonstration of lithography).

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: No big suggestions except for an assistant in each class to monitor people’s handling. 2: EH reiterated several times to the class how to handle books. Not all listened. 3: None. 4: Although EH repeatedly requested books be handled carefully in the classroom several members of the class did not comply. It’s hard to see what else could have been done about delinquents unless someone spoke up every time books were flattened, waved around with covers flapping, &c. 5: Please see answer to number five. I was impressed by how materials were handled. I hated having to use pencils, but appreciate the reasons for it, by the way. 7: I think everyone respected the material -- students were well guided. 8: The materials are well cared for and most useful in the classroom. Seeing Linotype and Monotype and how they work makes a big difference in understanding what had been described in pre-course readings. 9: We did our best. 10: None (excluding perhaps better and safer floor lamps). 11: The instructor really needs to keep an eye on everyone when handling material and if need be, single out a student as an example of what not to do. Maybe the students would be sufficiently shamed. Maybe not!

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

1: Yes, especially as I’m new to this “scene” it helped to hear the state of things. 2: Yes. Monday night quite enjoyable. The speaker was so passionate about his topic. 3: Yes. The RBS lectures are always worth attending and are an integral part of the experience. 4: Attend both. Sunday was informative, as usual. Malkin lecture was a great pleasure. 5: The Sunday orientation tour was very useful. Sunday’s lecture was all right but not that enlightening. The Monday lecture was quite enjoyable, albeit a bit too heavily focused on horses at the expense of books. 6: Yes. 7: Yes -- very good and germane. 8: Yes. 9: Both lectures well worth attending. 10: N/A this year. (I heard Greer Allen’s talk last year.) 11: Only Monday night.

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

1: Absolutely. I could have spent more time. Both Museum nights were equal to the time in class in my learning the material. 2: Indeed! 4: Went on Wednesday and Thursday. Learned something new on both occasions. 5: Did not attend. 6-8: Yes. 9: Again, not enough time to see and play with all the offerings. I especially appreciated the index booklet [i.e. the printed index of the RBS collections] from which other materials could be ordered up [on the spot] for examination. 10: Yes.

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

1: (Even though I didn’t pay for it; my job did) I feel the value of the week exceeded the tuition. Especially because it’s a level of information you can’t get anywhere else. Advice -- go to Museum Night. 2: Yes. 3: This course surprised me in how interesting the subject became as the lectures progressed. I thought I was generally knowledgeable about printing, but I was amazed by how much I didn’t know (particularly on book illustration) and how much I learned. 4: A good overview, especially for people with little background in the field. I would spend more time on exercises and less on information one should have got from the reading. 5: I definitely feel that the course was worth the money. The opportunity to hear an expert in the field is so valuable. The wonderful opportunity to see and touch the books, materials, and “machinery” are invaluable. I would highly recommend this course. 6: A very good value for the money. My kudos to EH! 7: The organization of the subject was excellent, especially considering the number of units covered. The preliminary readings were well clarified in class (for me they needed to be). I felt EH struck just the right balance as a serious instructor with enthusiasm for the subject while maintaining an enjoyable atmosphere which in the end contributed to the learning process. 8: Yes, I was satisfied. There was in a few cases a large difference in the preparation or experience of some students. Selecting students with an equal level of experience or knowledge would be desirable. 9: Absolutely a bargain. I am starting to figure RBS out, after four courses. TB gets the best people on earth to teach here, and the students’ job is to squeeze them dry. EH is a star! He, without breaking a sweat, laid two centuries of bookmaking at our feet. His shirts are great, too. 10: Definitely (though it wasn’t entirely my money, in the proprietary sense). I do think this course probably works best if preceded by the course on the book in the handpress period, assuming, of course, the need for such a course. 11: Yes, do the readings.

Number of respondents: 11

Percentages

There were three rare book librarians (28%), one archivist or manuscript librarian (9%), one general librarian with some rare book duties (9%), one teacher or professor (9%), one antiquarian bookseller (9%), one conservator, binder, or preservation librarian (9%), one book-collector (9%), one cataloger (9%), and one book appraiser (9%).

RBS Home