No. 21: European Bookbinding, 1500-1800

Nicholas Pickwoad
No. 21: European Bookbinding, 1500-1800
22-26 July 1996

1. How useful were the pre-course readings?

1: They were good. But the literature in this field is not good. 3: Very useful. 4: As useful as can be, given the dearth of material available. 5: Pre-course readings were relevant and helpful in understanding terminology and examples with lectures. About four of them were unobtainable, found only in Special Collections. 6: Very. 7: They were very usefulI had very little other introductory knowledge for this course, and the readings gave me a necessary grounding. Their focus on England, however, didn't do justice to the course. 8: These readings were very important and made the course more worthwhile. 9: I was familiar with 50-70%; the rest was very useful. I don't know how much the other members read. 10: Good refresherby requiring only a few, it seemed that most of the class could be expected to do the reading, but from the questions, those who should have read it hadn't. 11: The pre-course readings were good, although I found they weren't referred to or absolutely necessary. I absolutely could not find an edition of Middleton's book from the decade NP citedand I'm no schlump [you are mistaken: Bernard Middleton's History of English Craft Bookbinding, described on NP's advance reading list as "London, 1978 (or any subsequent edition)'', is very easy to find. -Ed.]. 12: Useful, I think. I read much of the literature very briefly, but it feels like the list can work as a good reference guide in the future.

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, the syllabus will be used along with notes. 2: Spiral-bound photocopies useful, especially diagrams. Pre-course reading list will prove valuable. 3: Course syllabus was adequate, handout booklet is quite helpful. 4: Yes, definitely

as will be my copious notes. 5: Very good handouts and outline, so you knew ahead of time what would be covered. 6-7: Yes. 8: They are very useful and I anticipate that the syllabus will serve as a reference tool. 10: Yes. 11: Yes; I might have preferred more handouts considering the amount of material we went over. 12: Yes, now and in the future.

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

1: Excellent. Some of the technical material was more detailed than I need, but I enjoyed it. 2: Yes. 3: Yes, although the lightening speed with which some areas were covered was disappointing. 4: Yes! 5-6: Yes. 7: Yes. NP provided many levels of content at once

general information and technical data for binders managed to coexist easily. 8: Very! 9: Yes. 10: YES. 11-12: Yes.

4. If your course had field trips, were they effective? [The course went to Special Collections in Alderman Library.]

1: Very well spent. The bindings were a delight to see. 2: Yes; every minute filled, and with significant show-and-tell. 3: The trip to Special Collections was quite worthwhile though it was frustrating being unable to look and absorb at a slower pace. It's unfortunate that NP does not use the lined baskets for passing around less fragile items. 4: Yes. 5: Visit to Special Collections was helpful to illustrate the examples we saw on slides. 6-7: Yes. 8: Yes, very well spent. 9-11: Yes. 12: I guess we could have been there some weeks more.

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

1-3: Yes. 4: Yes! Yes!!! 5-10: Yes. 11: Yes. It covered bookbinding in even deeper detail than I expected. 12: Yes, it did.

6. What did you like best about the course?

1: The instructor, the visit to Special Collections, the discussion of binding/casing materials. 2: The range of aspects of bookbinding (all of them?) to which we were (thoroughly) introduced. The keen historical sense of the instructor. The instructor's habits of thought, marked by caution, discrimination, and imagination. 3: The enormous range of material covered, the depth and breadth of NP's knowledge, his sense of humor. 4: NP

and all the information he was able to impart to us so quickly and concisely. The slides and discussions of particular books were invaluable. 5: The content: very informative to take back and apply to my collection. 6: Lots of time for questions and discussion with others. 7: The attention to detail and the demonstration of a very solid methodology. 8: I enjoyed the slides and the Special Collections tour. 9: Concise, clear explication. 10: Clarity of explanation without oversimplification. 11: Very no-nonsense. I was given far too much information for me to absorb, but I didn't mind because it was presented well and I feel I will recall a lot of it on the job. Very well organized, with great slides. NP is a great speaker, in addition to everything else, so things were kept very lively, even when the subject matter flagged (not his fault). 12: NP could show anything, a one-fold stitched pamphlet or a complicated binding structure, it really didn't matter, and make me understand that

no matter what its format

it might conceal thousands of signs or clues.

7. How could the course have been improved?

1: Hard to imagine. Could use a Leica projector which leaves no black interval on the screen. 2: Perhaps a handout for everyone of the forms the instructor uses in his own research (though the description of the forms was in itself valuable). 3: In his effort to cover the enormous amount of material he's seen, NP is sometimes slightly impatient with interruptions for questions and observations. For the same reason, students aren't allowed to handle any of the books during class. Covering slightly less material and including exercises where students handle books and try to identify on their own would greatly enhance the learning experience, I believe. 4: Another week would be nice. 5: More time. 6: No idea. Loved it. Very satisfactory course and very helpful. 7: Open the back door to the room more often. 8: It is already superb! 9: Smaller, or perhaps just for binders. More! 10: [Two months instead of two weeks?] Perhaps a glossary list of basic terms so the class would not be stalled by questions like What's leather (from a person who had not done the required reading). 11: At the very beginning, I wish he had taken 10 minutes for everyone to introduce him- or herself, giving a brief word on the person's experience, training, and interests in the course

it would have helped me to connect with the others much better, and I think it's an important part of RBS. NP himself did not give us any information on his own background

he just fell out of the sky with great expertise and recommendations. All this could have been taken care of in 15 minutes.12: One course for librarians, one for conservators/bookbinders.

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

1: I think these could have shown more energy. TB needs a little more optimism!! 2: Fine. Greer Allen's passion and personal connection with his subject made his especially delightful. 3: I heard Kenneth Rendell, GA, and Michael Winship and thought all were excellent. 4: Very good. 5: I enjoyed all of the evening lectures. I attended them all, even though the classroom time was exhausting. I love Bookseller Night. 6: Sound in the Rotunda very poor. Otherwise OK. 7: TB's was much better this year. 8: They were very enjoyable. 9: Perhaps topics more in line with courses being offered that particular week. 10: Very accessible. 11: MW's talk was boring (sorry!). TB's address was great

short, sweet, and entertaining. (Sorry to sound so vapid, but that's what I wanted after six hours of non-stop lecture by NP.) 12: I was very pleased.

9. Any final thoughts?

1: Name of cheapest, most convenient car rental agency should be provided. Budget drops at CHO [Charlottesville-Albemarle Airport]!! (A $20 taxi back.) 2: Have at least a general sense of bookbinding in advance; the instructor is remarkably patient and deft in handling questions, but the course proceeds rapidly and the unprepared will quickly be left behind

or at least not get as much out of the course as they might have wished. 4: Well worth taking if you are at all interested in European bookbinding of this period. 5: I would highly recommend it, but as always, it is never a restful week. The price you pay for knowledge. 6: Be sure to read as much in advance as possible. 7: No. 8: I'd recommend this course to anyone! 10: If you took it a few years ago, consider taking it again. It helps to have one's own recollections to (mentally) put on the screen with the slides. Every time I hear NP, I understand a little more of what he's saying (even though I've heard it before).

Number of respondents: 12

PERCENTAGES

Leave	Tuition	Housing	Travel
Institution gave me leave	Institution paid tuition	Institution paid housing	Institution paid travel
75%	58%*	50%*	42%*
I took vac- tion time	I paid tui- tion myself	I paid for my own housing	I paid my own travel
0%	15%	25%	33%
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
25%	17%	25%	25%

*Includes one student (8%) funded by a grant.

There were twelve students: five were conservator/binder/preservation librarians (42%), two were general librarians with some rare book duties (17%), two were rare book librarians (17%), one was a rare book/archivist/manuscript librarian, one was a full-time student, and one was a teacher/professor (8% each).