61: Introduction to the History of Bookbinding [B-10]
12-16 July 2004
1) How useful were the pre-course readings?
1: Very useful as a “beginner” in the field. 2: I read a few of the items on the list, but not all. I had a hard time getting access (due to where I live) to libraries that even had them to ILL. Cost was prohibitive, but I understand that my collection of books will take time to grow. Glad I looked at the ones I did get and read before class. 3: Very useful, all very important to the field of bookbinding history. 4: They were useful, but at the time a little over my head. I now will be able to go back on and reread them, and put more items into context. 5: They were very useful. My first RBS class where every book was used in the course. 6: Very useful. I particularly enjoyed examining illustrations of actual bindings in the exhibition catalogs. 8: Very useful, and will be consulted in the future. 9: Very useful. Nice mix of readings and web sites. 10: Useful, but hearing the teacher and seeing the example in reality or on slide was better. 11: Very good, but no prior reading prepares you for the intensity and quality of the course and the encounter with real artifacts. 12: Very useful. 13: Very good preparatory readings.
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. Handouts reinforce the preliminary readings and class work in a more concise way. 2: Very much so. 3: Very useful. The handouts are extremely helpful, and are very good resources to take home with me. 4: We received them on day one and used them every day. 5: Yes. JSvL’s bibliography has pointed out some lapses in our collection. And his introduction will be a good reference in coming years. 6: Yes, very helpful. JSvL gave us plenty of suggestions that will assist everyone’s individual needs. 7: Material very helpful; will be useful after the class. However, schedule could be a little more specific as to the general topics addressed during each session; fewer abbreviations. 8: Useful in the conduct of the class and will be consulted in the future. 9: Yes! 10: They will be useful.12-13: Yes.
3) What aspects of the course content were of the greatest interest or relevance for your purposes? Was the intellectual level of the course appropriate?
1: Contextualizing the bindings in a historical sense and learning descriptive terms in order to identify bindings. 2: General overview nice! Intellectual level very good, of which I was very pleased! Level should remain high. 3: Learning the key elements of particular styles and their time periods, as well as the typical materials used in each time period, was very enlightening. The intellectual level was appropriate. 4: This course gave me great background for my job. The books in our collection do not go as far back as the course teaches, but it gives me the foundation to build on to understand my collection and aid me in my cataloging. 5: The 1500-1750 period discussions were most relevant to my own work. Very high intellectual level. 6: Actually seeing bindings (real and in slides) was the best way to illustrate techniques we need to recognize. 7: Seeing the models and actual bindings in person. Specific characteristics for each period and location – the earmarks. Yes. 8: Learning how to see and describe is most relevant. Being given research/reference resources also key – most interesting was time in Special Collections. Made interesting because of viewing of slides beforehand. Intellectual level just fine. Enjoyed identifying “fakes.” 9: General survey of bookbindings. Examples session in Alderman Special Collections was great on Thursday. Intellectual level was perfect. 10: The course was of great interest to me. I learned how to place a binding in a time period! 11: Intellectual level was totally in accord with my needs, and all aspects were of great interest and relevance. 12: The earlier bindings were of greatest interest; the later were more relevant at this time. Intellectual level was perfect. 13: History of styles and description exercise. Yes.
4) If your course had field trips, were they effective?
1: Yes. Visual contact with Special Collections (SC) materials was invaluable. 2: Yes. Wish we could have sat closer to him, because I couldn’t see very well. But I am glad I got to see more than the teaching collection. Very, very helpful. 3: This time was essential and a lot of fun. 4: Yes. 5: Yes! 6: Our day in SC was particularly useful. We were able to guess binding periods on our own, and then we were given detailed and interesting explanations. 7: The examples in SC helped make the connection from the slides to reality. Many things became clearer in person with the book. 8: Yes! 9: Instructor’s knowledge and pleasant teaching style. 10: Yes. 11: It was excellently spent. A very tightly focused field trip. 12-13: Yes.
5) What did you like best about the course?
1: Seeing and learning to describe the actual books. 2: Piqued my interest even more in bindings. Such a wealth of knowledge and so much I don’t know. And meeting very neat people. 3: It is so good to have such an expert draw from his own studies, as well as the studies of others, and place it into a clear, concise package. I feel that I can leave with much new knowledge. 4: JSvL and the slides. I am a visual learner. I worried the course would be a dry lecture, but it was the exact opposite. 5: JSvL’s teaching style is engaging, challenging, and just plain fun. 6: JSvL’s enthusiasm for the subject matter. 7: Seeing the “real” examples. Much more helpful than illustrations in books or slides. 8: The teacher and the art historical/visual approach to encountering the subject matter. 10: The knowledge of JSvL and the discussion we had among the classmates. 11: The meetings with my professional peers and the enjoyment of a solid grounding in a subject of which I had only fragmentary knowledge by a delightful and professional instructor. 12: The instructor’s true love and knowledge of the subject. Thank you, JSvL. 13: JSvL was great, slide shows were effective, visit to Special Collections also very good.
6) How could the course have been improved?
3: No suggestions. 4: Handouts with more color descriptions, or a website to go to for reference. 5: Less slides, more personal stories. 6: I can’t think of an improving suggestion. I believe we were able to get through almost all of the material JSvL had intended to present. 7: Overall very good, interesting, and useful. Demonstrations of the Royal Library database not that helpful. Maybe use the time for something else. 8: More time. 9: One or two more hands-on exercises earlier in the week. 10: By a field trip to an institution in the area. 11: It is already excellent. 12: Handouts emailed before the class started. 13: The review of reference works could be replaced by a more annotated handout bibliography, with the books available for browsing. That class period could then be used for other purposes.
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?
2: Everyone was a professional and treated the books with utmost care. Preservation was always in the forefront of our minds. 3: Everything was handled with care. 6: JSvL always handled (and encouraged handling when relevant) the materials carefully. 8: No suggestions. 9: Distribute or have pencils available to all students. Some pens slipped in here and there. 10: I understand you are concerned about the materials, but when you are working in a bookstore or antiquarian book store, and you get to handle the material daily, it is frustrating that you are not allowed to touch them here. 11: None. It’s already tactfully handled. 12: I believe they were handled in a professional manner. 13: No.
8) If you attended the Sunday and/or Monday night lectures, were they worth attending?
1-2: Yes. 3: Mirjam Foot’s lecture was a very special treat, and very relevant to the course. 5: Yes – it was an honor to hear MF speak. 6: Yes, especially MF’s lecture! 7: Monday night particularly helpful and interesting since directly related to course. 8: Absolutely critical for augmenting the subject matter of this course. 9: Both lectures were excellent. TB’s lecture is very useful in learning the history of RBS and what’s new. MF’s lecture was especially useful for our class. 10: Yes, learned several new things. 11: Yes. 12: Very definitely. 13: Yes. TB entertaining as always, and MF very relevant to our class.
9) If you attended Museum Night, was the time profitably spent?
1-2: Yes. 3: Very informative and a lot of fun. 5: Yes – thanks to the hard working staff who set them up. 6: The Linotype discussion was interesting on Wednesday. Printing materials on Thursday were fun to examine. 8-13: Yes.
10) Did you get your money’s worth? Any final thoughts?
1: This was an invaluable course for anyone who needs to learn binding description and identification. I highly recommend it. 2: I now want to take them all. I definitely want to come back. 3: Well worth the time and money spent. 4: Yes. 5: Sign up for this class – it’s a great one. 6: RBS is well worth the cost. 7: RBS is the best professional training that I have received since entering the profession. I will be back! 8: Take this course! 9. Yes, course was well my money’s worth. 11: Am 100% satisfied of the value for money of this course, and will strongly recommend it to my colleagues. 12: Yes – not to be missed if one has an interest in bookbindings. 13: Yes. Great instructor. Well-organized course.
Number of respondents: 13
Percentages
Leave Tuition Housing Travel
Institution Institution Institution Institution
gave me leave paid tuition paid housing paid travel
77% 77% 54% 54%
I took vaca- I paid tui- I paid for my I paid my own
tion time tion myself own housing travel
0% 23% 38% 38%
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
23% 0% 8% 8%
There were four rare book librarians (30%), one general librarian with no rare book duties (8%), one full-time student (8%), two antiquarian booksellers (15%), two museum employees (15%), one curator of special collections/archives (8%), one book appraiser (8%), and one special collections librarian (8%).