41: Book Illustration Processes to 1890 [I-20]
14-18 June 2004
1) How useful were the pre-course readings?
1: How to Identify Prints was essential. Unfortunately, I was unable to get it until May 24. I advise anyone to start on it as early as possible. 3: Very useful. 5: Very useful. Necessary in fact. 6: Absolutely essential. Gascoigne was clear and highly readable but as he assumes knowledge of processes with which I had no familiarity, I supplemented with other readings, videos (e.g. intaglio processes) and internet sites (lithography). 7: How to Identify Prints is meant to be read as a reference book. It was quite a lot to digest before seeing the packets at RBS. I felt guilty that I did not read it completely before the start of the course. But learned well anyway. 8: Utterly necessary. 9: Very. 10: Immensely – though I hope to get more out of Gascoigne when I read it again after going through the course. 11: Gascoigne is a remarkable book, but not easy to read if one is unfamiliar with the processes. As was noted in class, he is not interested in the tools and equipment used so processes could be hard to visualize. It would have helped me to have reviewed a book that had pictures of how each process was done. 12: The pre-course readings were incredibly useful; I had already learned much before I ever came to class, and of course will keep the book as a reference.
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: Very thorough. 2: The list of processes is very helpful. I would suggest that students convert their class notes to a short-format crib sheet based on the list of processes at the beginning of the syllabus. 3: Yes. 5: Useful in class as a reference for later. Too much to absorb all at once. 6: Yes, very useful. 7: Excellent materials. I will definitely use them at home. 8: Can’t wait to use them. 9: Very. 10: Definitely of great help. 11: Materials were a useful guidepost for class activities. The bibliography is great, and is appreciated. 12: The syllabus and materials were absolutely appropriate. In addition to being some fun, our printmaking activities were illustrative and enlightening. The workbook is so thorough and complete as to be a supplementary text.
3) Was the intellectual level of the course content appropriate?
1: Very precise. 2-5: Yes. 6: Yes. Challenging, but that was to be expected. 7: Yes. 8: Absolutely. 9: Yes. An excellent course, most informative and entertaining. I felt that the level was such that both the beginner and someone further along the learning curve were well-served. 10: I felt this course was appropriate to my own level of knowledge of the subject area. 11: Yes. The course is demanding – so much is covered, and as said in class, a lot of this is difficult. 12: Yes.
5) What did you like best about the course?
1: The purpose was clear at the onset; the instructor devoted himself to it single-mindedly. 2: The amount of information crammed in. This should be a two-week course, though. 3: Opportunity to closely examine so many materials of a wide variety of types. 4: Seeing examples of different types of prints and having notable characteristics explained. 5: Hands-on contact with prints, not reproductions of reproductions. Also, getting to make prints was great. Really clarified the process. TB’s knowledge. 6: The packets were extremely helpful. The instructor’s broad knowledge and sense of humor. 7: The hands-on, non-precious approach meant that I got a good look at things for the first time. The Monday-Friday test is an excellent idea. Made me realize I’ve learned. The lab sessions – good fun and instructive. 8: The packets – unbelievable hours and effort spent making one of the best teaching collections I’ve ever seen. 9: The hands-on nature of the class, with enough prints available for all members of the class to examine a print while that process was being talked about. 10: Having actual prints to examine really made this course especially fun and improved my ability to relate to and absorb the material. 11: That it is so hands-on through the use of the packets. The range of materials that have been assembled is remarkable. TB is an excellent teacher, and I greatly enjoyed his sense of humor. I feel the course has been a valuable first step in learning much more about print illustration processes. 12: I don’t think I’ve ever learned so much in such a relatively brief time. The course is intensive without being intimidating, and the instructor is clearly an (if not the) expert in this field.
6) How could the course have been improved?
1: I don’t know. 3: More hours in the day. 5: Less time devoted to how materials acquired, so that more could be spent on processes/explanation. 6: N/A 7: More tabletop space. The second formation of the seating arrangement was a big improvement. 8: Perhaps give Nadeau or something else to read with Gascoigne for clarification – Something that gives pictures of techniques, supplies, etc. in action. It’s hard to visualize these things if you’ve never seen them before. (I would have liked to see a picture of a screen, for example.) 10: I’m not sure one could add anything to the course unless it were expanded to more than a week. 11: Fine as so. The pace seemed a bit whirlwind at times when reviewing prints, but obviously necessary to be able to cover everything. 12: I can’t think of anything.
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?
3: None. 5: Don’t let students use pens or have drinks in room. 6: No improvement needed. 7: None. 8: NO PENS!! NO DRINKS!! I saw many disasters waiting to happen, and I would hate for these great collections to be irrevocably damaged. 9: Thin ragboard backing for some of the larger prints to give them more support when being handed round. 10: I was amazed at the ability of the instructor and his assistant to keep all of the packets organized. Great work! 11: The handling could not have been improved. TB’s organization and structure for the physical management of the materials were astonishing. 12: TB is at pains, clearly, to protect this material; preservation vs. access is always the conflict, but in this course manipulating the material is imperative. I think an appropriate balance has been struck here.
8) If you attended the Sunday and/or Monday night lectures, were they worth attending?
1: Sunday was useful in welcoming this first-time student. I don’t know if it would benefit a returnee, unless time were made to introduce individual members of a particular class to each other and the instructor in a short break away session. 2-4: Yes. 5: No Monday lecture this week. 6: N/A 7: Yes; good introduction to the RBS and TB. 8: The history of RBS is useful, but I would have preferred a Monday night lecture on a particular topic – jazzes up the week a little. 9: Sunday night – yes. 10: Yes. 11: No Monday night lecture. 12: N/A
9) If you attended Museum Night, was the time profitably spent?
1: Very useful to examine objects in a more leisurely setting. 2: Museum nights were very educational. 3: Yes. 4: Yes – you have a fascinating collection – have you considered possibly creating an exhibit in special collections around your collection? 5: Yes. However, starting them earlier would make it possible to have dinner at a reasonable hour. (Five or 6 is too early to eat; 8 or 9 too late to eat if one is to get to sleep before midnight and be rested for the next day.) 6: Definitely. Very interesting and relevant to subject course matter. 7: Definitely, excellent evenings. However, I would have like more time to look at things: 6 - 8:30/9:00 pm perhaps. 8: Absolutely – the Printing Surfaces Museum is well-done and fascinating around every corner! 9: Yes – most interesting and well presented displays, with informative handouts.10: Mos def. 11: N/A 12: Yes. Museum Nights reinforced concepts learned in class and meant that we could spend additional time with the material.
10) Did you get your money’s worth? Any final thoughts?
1: I felt the class climate was a bit tense and pressured at times. The instructor may act a bit more the control freak than need be. I wonder whether a group class discussion after filling out these forms individually would be useful. 2: Definitely. 3: Yes. Highly recommended. 5: Yes. Do the reading before you get to the class. 6-7: Yes. 8: Yes, completely! This course will serve me well into the future. To people considering – don’t bother to come if you haven’t read Gascoigne, but don’t worry if you’ve read it and don’t understand it all! That reassurance needs to be made . . . 9: Yes. 10: Totally worth the time and money – I can’t wait to come back. I would advise reading the text before arriving as well as taking notice of the printed materials all around us in order to be able to relate the examples in the packets to one’s actual experience. 11: Yes – money well spent. Only advice – try to look at other books on subject in addition to Gascoigne. The suggested pre-reading in the History of Prints was not as helpful as some of the books on Bibliography appear to be. Thank you! 12: This is certainly money well spent. In addition to being the most informative rare books course I’ve had, I would not hesitate to rank it among the best classes I’ve ever taken, and to count TB among the greatest and most expert of instructors.
Number of respondents: 8
Percentages
Leave Tuition Housing Travel
Institution Institution Institution Institution
gave me leave paid tuition paid housing paid travel
42% 25% 42% 33%
I took vaca- I paid tui- I paid for my I paid my own
tion time tion myself own housing travel
16% 42% 50% 59%
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
42% 33% 8% 9%
There were two rare book librarians (18%), one archivist/manuscript librarian (8%), one general librarian with some rare book duties (8%), two full-time students (18%), three antiquarian booksellers (25%), one museum employee (8%), one book collector (8%), and one non-professional rare book technician.