No. 41: European Decorative Bookbinding

31 July - 4 August 1995

An historical survey of decorative bookbinding in England and on the European Continent, concentrating on the period 1500-1800, but with examples drawn from the late c7 - late c20. Topics include: the emergence and development of various decorative techniques and styles; readership and collecting; the history of bookbinding in a wider historical context; the pitfalls and possibilities of binding research. Enrollment limited to those who have already taken Nicholas Pickwoad's RBS course (see below, nos. 42 and 53).

1. How useful were the pre-course readings?

1: I only read the essential ones, but on the whole they provided useful background. Almost everything I read was reiterated during class lectures. 2: Very good. 3: Important and useful. 4: Very useful. 6: Very helpful. A few general surveys would also be helpful. 7: Some `essential' pre-course reading was very expensive and difficult to obtain. It was not read by me or many of my fellow students. 8: Very useful. 9: Very good reading list. I had, over the years, done a lot for other courses and for my own interest. 10: Very helpful. Had already read a few, and ILL brought in some others.

2. Did your instructor prepare sufficiently to teach THIS course? Were the course syllabus and other materials distributed in class useful?

1: Meticulous and complete preparation, especially for field trips and visits to Special Collections. 3: Very well prepared. 4: Yes, absolutely tops! 5: Yes. 6: Yes. Incredibly well prepared. Her use of primary sources and her own experiences contributed greatly to the lectures. 7: Yes, but a printed outline would have been useful. A printed list of binders, dates, and country would have been useful for ready reference during class. 8: The instructor was very well prepared. I wish there had been more in the way of handouts -- bibliographies, time lines, charts, diagrams -- to aid in following the complex subject matter. 9: Yes, superb knowledge and preparation. But we could use more handouts to lighten up some of the burden of note-taking. See no. 7, below. 10: Yes.

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

1: Yes. 2: Wonderfully detailed, but a handout with dates and names would have helped. Writing and taking notes in a darkened room was difficult. 3-6: Yes. 7: Yes. Right on target for me, at least. Student questions and comments were also helpful. 8: Appropriately high. 9: Superb and wonderful interaction in class from questions and discussions between student and instructor. In fact, this provided a well-needed occasional break of pace in a very densely packed presentation. 10: Yes.

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

1: Yes, excellent, especially the trip to the Folger. 2: Very good, with wonderful examples. Trip to the Folger Library was on target! 3: Yes. 4: Yes. Both UVa Special Collections and the visit to the Folger were extremely helpful, indeed essential, to the course. 5: Yes. 6: Yes. Both the field trip to Special Collections, the dos-á-dos with NP's class and the trip to the Folger added to the course. After seeing the slides, being able to see actual books was very helpful. 7: Folger -- verymuch so. Highlight of the course. Special Collections -- also important. Very important seeing actual work. 8: Yes, after viewing so many slides, it was a break, a treat, a necessity to see the three-dimensional objects. It is a pity, however, that Washington is such a long way away. The Folger's collection made the journey worthwhile. 9: Glorious! What a treat it was to have our own private rare book exhibition at the Folger. 10: Yes.

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

1: Yes. 2: Yes -- I would not have missed it. 3: Yes. 4: Yes, fully. 5: Yes. 6: Yes. Yes. 7: Yes. 8: Yes, the descriptions corresponded and the course met my expectations. I am very pleased. Perhaps the only thing I thought lacking was a more systematic use and definition of the bookbinding description terminology. That is, how one would consistently and succinctly apply terms to a catalog description. 9: Yes, although I would have liked more on actual design history and its parallels in decorative arts, architecture, and painting, and perhaps less on political events, dates, &c., in relationship with decorative bindings. 10: Yes.

6. What did you like best about the course?

1: The energy and enthusiasm of the instructor, combined with her expertise; the field trips to Special Collections and the Folger, where we had the privilege of handling and examining some extraordinary bindings. I also liked the digressions and impromptu discussions generated by questions asked during the class. Liked the joint session with NP's class as a reminder of structural and aesthetic details covered in his course, which I took several years ago. 2: A privilege to attend. 3: Our instructor's level of passion for and knowledge of her subject. 4: I especially admired MF's outstanding knowledge of her subject, the clarity and precision of her lectures, and the way she integrated her exacting methodology into the classroom presentation. Her openness to questions and the easygoing atmosphere she imparted to the class were also big pluses, and the slides were wonderful. 5: Beautifully prepared and delivered. 6: 1) Lectures using primary sources and slides. 2) Field trips. 3) Incredible expansive, encyclopedic knowledge of the instructor. 7: Looking at bindings and slides of bindings. 8: The enthusiasm, dedication, and passion of the instructor. 9: Wonderful slides and a very good delivery.

7. How could the course have been improved?

1: The joint session with NP's class could have been longer, so we could have seen more books. I got the feeling that both instructors had more in mind that there was time to cover -- and certain aspects of structure covered in NP's course are also part of the visual aspect of the book and it is fun/interesting to consider these along with the tooling and other decoration. 2: The handout would have been useful. 3: By instituting a more general and basic course in binding design and history as a prerequisite. 4: This course included many names and dates. An outline list with the major names and dates that could be referred to by students during the lectures would be very helpful. 5: Excellent as is. Some of the slides were difficult to see. 6: If at all possible, more time for question and answer and discussion. 7: Organization and reasons for organization could have been better explained at the start and emphasized by a printed outline. 8: Many references -- stylistically -- are made to motifs found in other decorative objects, architectural features, paintings, and sculpture. It would be wonderful if the instructor had a collection of slides to show along with these frequent comparisons, both to underline her points and for the visual interest value. In addition, another slide projector and screen would make the visual comparisons easier and show more than one binding example at a time. 9: Handouts, outlines, maybe even a timeline of names and lists of binders and dates. All this, on handouts, wouldhave made notetaking (in the dark, mostly!) much less difficult and stressful. Also, some slides of decoration/decorative arts in parallel to the slides of bindings. Two projectors, perhaps?

8. Any final thoughts?

1: This was a wonderful course, with a wonderful instructor and participants. I have to admit to having a near meltdown midweek due to the quantity and complexity of the information presented. However, this is par for an RBS course, and by the end of the week things began to fall into place. Thanks again for a stimulating introduction to a monumental topic! 3: Read more before you come. 5: Highly recommended. 6: Thanks to RBS staff for great support services and organization. To future students: take this course and read as much as possible ahead of time. 7: Recommended. 8: Read as much as you can.

Number of respondents: 10