No. 13: Printing Design and Publication

Greer Allen
No. 13: Printing Design and Publication
15-19 July 1996

1. How useful were the pre-course readings?

1: Very useful. 2: Very useful background information. Not excessive, thus I did all the reading. GA kindly sent us Xeroxed copies of many articles, plus a nice personal letter welcoming us to the course. 3: Very useful. The pocket pal will be used (and useful) for many years after this course has ended, and the other readings conveyed the tone and the arguments of the course well. 4: Excellent. I really got in the spirit ahead of time through reading Binghurst's book. It was especially helpful to have the required readings sent to us and kept short

a great relief not to have to chase around to find them. Thanks, GA! 5: They were useful as they gave an important frame of reference

discussion of different type, spacing, etc. 6: Very useful. 7: Useful

they sent the tone and prepared us mentally for the course content. They can be used for post-course reading also (where they may be more meaningful). 8-9: Very useful.

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. 2: Very useful

I'm sure I will refer to them often. However, perhaps the text provided too much of the lecture. Might be useful to highlight more the salient points and principles. 3: Absolutely. I now have enough paper samples to do my bathroom. Wonderful stuff. 4: Yes! Look forward to rereading and digesting. Will also turn to materials for help with specific design problems. 5: Yes, I believe they will come in handy in my work. Good for reference. Learning about how illustrations are used for different types of materials, which fonts are most readable, importance of page layout, etc. 6: Yes, but I want to review everything! 7: The bound volume of notes and outlines helped to organize the lectures and will provide good reminders afterward. 8: Yes. 9: Materials were very useful. Appreciated having a spiral bound set of materials to keep things together and make it much more likely that I'll use them later on.

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

1-3: Yes. 4: Highly appropriate. 5: Very. Not only what the instructor provided through lectures and materials, but hearing and learning from other classmates' experiences. 6-8: Yes. 9: Very much so.

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

1: Yes. 2: I came away with even more about the principles of graphic designs than I expected. All of the concrete examples that were provided illustrated clearly these principles and will exercise a considerable influence on the design choices I will be making in the future. 3: Yes, although I was a little disappointed that so few people were designing their own documents; most seemed to be middle- or upper-management types who were going to be overseeing designers. 4: Course exceeded my already high expectations. Level was more sophisticated than Expanded Course Description indicated because it was tailored to the class's high level of sophistication and experience. 5: Yes. 6: Yes. Very useful for my job. 7: 1) Yes. 2) Yes, although I was hoping for more emphasis on computer use in design and publication. 8: Exceeded expectations. 9: Yes on both counts.

5. What did you like best about the course?

1: The opportunity to discuss ideas with the class and critique each other's project was helpful. I thought open discussions regarding design principles and applications gave the class a foundation to build on. 2: GA's enthusiasm and love for the subject, as well as the inspiring examples of graphic design with which we were presented. Also, the detailed information on the component parts (type, paper, illustrations, etc.), and how they come together to form a harmonious whole. 3: Examples, examples, examples, all filtered through GA's remarkable sensibility. He brought a very human dimension to his materials which (I think) reminded the class that all these documents are ultimately human constructs. 4: The instructor. GA shared his lifetime of experience in an organized way, leavened by humor, vivid examples, and images. His talent for miming (e.g., the sequence of actions in papermaking in a modern mill or the activity of a web press) illuminated the diagrams. GA modeled ways of relating to printers, clients, and committees. He showed us as well as told us many things. 5: The wide range of museum publications that were discussed, start to finish. Enormous amounts of materials that were used as examples by the instructor, and by the students, to develop an eye for good and bad design. 6: What I found most useful was the comparative analysis of how things worked and what didn't work. Class discussions of issues and elements were very useful. 7: 1) The opportunity to learn from the experiences of GA. 2) The opportunity we had to discuss our own work and get evaluations from GA. 8: I received specific information that can have an immediate effect on the work I do. 9: Instructor first and foremost. Vast number of examples we viewed. Number and nature of my fellow students. Convivial atmosphere. GA has an interesting teaching style that brings the group along toward examining and understanding broad issues without seeming to push. Good approach for adult learners.

6. How could the course have been improved?

2: Though I'm not sure our limited time here would have allowed it, I wished I could have gained more information on how to put the principles of graphic design into practice with the medium most of us have available: the computer. 3: 1) In general, more praxis examples and less theory

or perhaps let the theory grow out of praxis, rather than the abstraction first, examples later. GA, by his own lights, is better suited to the explanation of an example than theorizing, and this resulted in a slow start to the course. 2) GA plays "what's in my pocket" overmuch. I know he's trying to generate class response when he asks questions, but too many of them are over-general, so the exercise becomes a test of clairvoyance. 3) Given how little time was given to case bindings, the dual session with S. Allen's class was unnecessary, and seemed more fun for them than for us. 4: Better room darkening facilities so slides and the one movie should be shown better. 6: A printed bibliography organized by subject would have been useful. A guest speaker on current technology would have been useful. A block of free time in midweek would have helped to break the intensity of the course. 7: I would like to see this course expanded to include computer design and publication. 8: Could relate a bit more to current technologies (computer & Web pages), i.e., how to carry principles of classic tradition into current demands of changing expectations and technologies. 9: I would have enjoyed having a printer spend an hour or two with the group to round out the program. We heard a lot of "tell your printer...," "ask your printer...," "your printer will...." Having a printer in at some point would have been a valuable experience as a reality check.

7. Please comment at will on the quality/enjoyability of the various RBS activities in which you took part outside of class, e.g. Sunday afternoon tour, Sunday night dinner and videos, Bookseller Night, tour of the Etext Center or Electronic Classroom, printing demonstrations, evening lectures, &c.

1: The evening lectures were of high quality and consistency. However, some speakers' topics were more interesting and useful. 2: All stimulating and provocative. 3: T. Tanselle's lecture was particularly embarrassing this year

both in its self-aggrandizement and puffery. Is anyone buying what he's selling? TB's speech was the best it's been in years

encourage him to keep thinking about and commenting on the field. 4: Like the Dome Room as a site. Six pm is a good choice of time

after a long, full day, one wants to have finished with this receiving phase by 7pm. A lively speaker is welcome when the audience is justifiably weary. 5: Very good. TT's speech was interesting and valuable. KR's was full of spice and charisma, and TB's was a forthright evaluation of rare book librarianship today. 6: Excellent and enjoyable. 7: They were enjoyable, not only because of the speakers and their subjects, but also because they were in the Rotunda. 8: Fine. 9: KR ---- (out of four stars). TB --* ½ (out of four stars). Both were provocative, interesting, and horizon broadening.

8. Any final thoughts?

1: Anyone who looks at publications as more than a device to transmit information, who sees the object as a vehicle of design to enhance the access to that information, would benefit. GA is insightful and experienced in bringing design elements alive. This course is immediately applicable to my work and life. Of all the courses at RBS I have taken (eight), this course will effect me in everything I look at for the rest of my life. It will help me to see and to evaluate so I can communicate more effectively. 2: You might mention that the disadvantage of the Best Western is that it's noisy. 3: RBS continues to impress in the quality of its instruction and its variety. TB's speech seemed to signal a distinct direction for RBS, too, in its specific affinity with SHARP, a group that contains a significant number of humanities academics in history and English literature. I'd like to see more courses specifically designed for that market. 5: It is very valuable. I would encourage a student to take it. One of the most important parts of the whole week was being with other professionals in the field. It was helpful having input from them. Of course, GA was marvelous; it was a real privilege to be in his class. 6: Do it! 7: No. 8: Highly recommend the course for anyone who has any responsibility for publications. 9: You need to have some basic design/print experience. In my case, having worked with designers on creating marketing materials stood me in good stead. Thanks, GA! Thanks TB and crew!

Number of respondents: 9

PERCENTAGES

Leave	Tuition	Housing	Travel
Institution gave me leave	Institution paid tuition	Institution paid housing	Institution paid travel
78%	44%	33%	33%
I took vac- tion time	I paid tui- tion myself	I paid for my own housing	I paid my own travel
0%	22%	11%	11%
N/A: self- employed, re- tired, or had summers off	N/A: self employed, retired, or exchange	N/A: stayed with friends or lived at home	N/A: lived nearby
22%	33%	56%	56%

There were nine students, two were general librarians with no rare book duties (22%) and one each was an antiquarian bookseller, a conservator/binder/preservation librarian, a designer of printed matter, a developer of academic programs, an independent scholar, a museum employee, and retired (11% each).