|
|
|
No. 14: Publishers' Bookbindings, 1830-1910 14-18 July 1997 |
|
1. How useful were the pre-course readings?
1: I did not get them before my arrival (but I read some during lunch and found them helpful). 2: Very helpful in preparing me for the course. Made me familiar in advance with dates and names and principles covered later in more detail. Helped to get me focused. 3: Very useful. 4: I had read much before and was abroad just before I came, so I did not read further. 5: I read SA's own articles, but had a hard time seeing the others they were older and not in my own library. The articles I did read were very helpful, though. 6: They were useful, but not necessary. 7: Relevant. Most of the material I could not get through my local library system, so I was not as prepared as I would like to have been. 8: Very useful. It didn't help as much to look at the grain descriptions until I was engaged in the course; it doesn't mean much without the hands-on portion. 9: Useful, but not absolutely necessary in order to follow the discussion. 10: Good introduction. Titles were frequently mentioned in class. 11: Very good, relevant, and useful, although some of the classic works on various aspects of the subject (e.g., cloth grain) weren't listed, nor was a significant publication by SA herself. 12: The pre-course literature was excellent and I gained much from the readings. Some of my classmates were unable to get all of the readings (some of mine came via ILL). |
|
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: 2: Very useful materials Class members also contributed handouts and items of interest. The course was enriched all the more because of the experience each member brought to it. 3: Materials were good and relevant, especially the bibliography which will be useful for future reference. 4: Yes to both. 5: Yes. 6: Yes, they will be useful and will be used in the future. 7: Yes. 8: Yes, I expect to go back and have a new appreciation for material that I glossed over the first time. 9: Some of the ad hoc photocopies provided by CO were not necessary. SA's timeline was very helpful. 10: Yes the timeline was quite helpful. I look forward to seeing the guide she is preparing for the Library of Congress. 11: Yes. CO was great about preparing materials for impromptu requests resulting from class discussions and student contributions. 12: Yes all useful and I will pursue this information in my job assignments. |
|
3. Was the intellectual level of the course content appropriate?
1: A course agenda would be helpful; material distributed was great and will be used immediately. 2: Very appropriate. Class members came from different disciplines and areas, but all were able to find and build on common ground. 3-5: Yes. 6: I think it was unnecessary to give much time to historical research techniques. The way that one might do historical research should be a given. 7: Yes. 8: It did a good job of encompassing all the perspectives brought to the course by the participants. 9: Yes. 10: When the week started, I knew nothing about this period of binding history but didn't feel overwhelmed. People who already were familiar with this period may have found the course a bit slow or repetitive. 11: Yes. 12: Yes wonderful knowledge and content given by the instructor. |
|
4. If your course had field trips, were they effective?
1: Yes very stimulating and creative presentation. 2: I especially enjoyed the visit to Special Collections. It was a thrill and a privilege to see American masters' work especially Leaves of grass. 3: Yes. 4: Yes. I could have spent longer looking at the Rotunda collection. 5: Yes. I was not entirely comfortable in Special Collections, however; not because of the staff, but because of the lack of it. Here we are, 12 students walking in with bags and passing around books. I was worried about security and preservation. They should have chaperoned each class and told us how to handle the materials. 6-7: Yes. 8: Definitely. The Rotunda was a special experience. 9: Yes, well spent. One of the best and most useful features of the course was the hands-on time. 10: Yes the collections in the Rotunda and Special Collections were quite illustrative of the period. 11: Yes. We visited the Rotunda three times and Alderman's Special Collections once to see more examples of bindings. 12: Yes well spent. Very informative. |
|
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: Yes excellent, loaded with vital information presented in various ways. 2: Yes the course and the program were all the more built up to me by colleagues who have participated previously. The whole week was inspiring! 3: Yes and yes. 4: Very much so. 5: Yes. Yes. Very thorough. 6: Yes, with the exception that I had expected to hear some discussion of leather bindings and there was very little. 7: Yes. The course more than met my expectations. The course content was completely covered as described. Her slides are professional and, along with her commentary, especially instructive. 8: Yes. It's given me much more confidence about the knowledge I had and whetted my appetite to practice the skills that I gained. 9-10: Yes. 11: Yes, on both counts. 12: Yes. |
|
6. What did you like best about the course?
1: One of the best RBS courses I've had! Everything! Interesting connecting techniques; examples; documenting evidence; social setting. In all aspects it was an excellent experience. Cal Otto was a great complement. 2: The hands-on there's nothing like passing around the materials so that we can experience them. 3: The detail slides and actual hands-on examples of styles, cloth grains, blind and gilt stamping, etc., were the most effective way to present the material. 4: The general atmosphere and the instructor. The clear and cogent summary on the last day. 5: Besides SA's wonderful disposition? Her expertise and great teaching abilities made the course an all-round delight as well as a great learning environment. 6: The division of binding types into decades, I think, was especially helpful for studying the subject. The historical contexts that were discussed were also very useful. 7: SA's generous sharing of her knowledge of information not available elsewhere. She also shared a few examples of her own professional work. 8: The direct dialogue with SA. 9: The instructor's organization of the material and her great charm in presenting it. Unlike some of the previous courses I have attended, the amount of information and the pace seemed just right. 10: SA and CO. CO really went out of his way to provide all the little extras that the class wanted. 11: The formal lectures with slides by SA, and then having specific examples of bindings passed around; the first few days seemed best organized and filled with information. 12: ALL of the information and many hands-on examples were very useful. Excellent slides; the instructor's knowledge is first rate. |
|
7. How could the course have been improved?
1: Almost perfect but labeling samples being passed in trays would help, since we are also listening to new information from the instructor; access to sample material after class. 2: A descriptive list of the materials being passed around would be helpful. The things whiz around while the instructor spoke and moved on to discussing the significance of other decorators; this was sometimes confusing. Overall, though, the course was well-managed. It helped that the group was flexible. 3: It is very hard to locate some articles or references; perhaps copies of these should be made available. 4: Some of the examples might have been more obviously typical of the period? The possibility of the pictorial chronological list is exciting and would be a distinct advantage in the future. 5: I might have liked a little more attention on the 1830s-60s, and maybe a little less on the 1890s, but this is not a necessary change. 6: More discussion of leather bindings and leather identification. 7: I wouldn't know. 8: Labels, perhaps, for materials passed around (could an intern be assigned to do this?). 9: There was a great deal of personal discussion between various students throughout the week. It became very distracting and sometimes made it hard to follow the instructor's comments. Perhaps in future the assistant could help keep things in line a little more. 10: The exercises in the Rotunda could have been tightened up a bit. Also, perhaps there should be general guidelines for handling books. This might apply to all classes. 11: It astounded me to see it in rare books people, but most of the students handled the books very badly. The first day should have included firm instructions 1) to support covers fully (not let them flop open at more than 180o angles, 2) not to hold pens or pencils in our hands while handling books, 3) not to lick fingers to turn pages, 4) not to pick them up unnecessarily (you can open to the titlepage while the book is on the tray), and 5) not to pull books from the shelves by the headcap. Students did all of these things, both in class and with the books in the Rotunda. 12: Our space was tight, so a larger room would have been nice. |
|
8. Please comment 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, evening lectures, Bookseller Night, tour of the Alderman digital/electronic centers, printing demonstrations, &c.
1: Peter Stallybrass was great. 2: I especially liked bookseller night and the chance to visit the local bookstores each day during lunch. The lectures were excellent and a useful supplement to the course content. 3: Bookseller night was good. PS was quite informative and enjoyable. 4: I skipped the Sunday afternoon tour, having already been here for a couple of days and having cased the joint thoroughly. Sunday night dinner was fine, getting to know a few people. Bookseller night was fine, but again, I had visited and bought during the previous Saturday. Two of the lectures were fine (one exceptional and memorable). 5: Everything went extremely well. I got around very well and enjoyed most all events. Tom Tanselle's lecture was the only low point. I know he is a god of bibliography, but I learned nothing from his talk and found him otherwise monotonous. Again, however, scheduling and breaks were nice please keep up the great work! 6: Very enjoyable. Keep them up. 7: Sunday night dinner was a chance to meet old friends. The lectures were informative and Booksellers night rewarding as usual. 8: Book buying night was great. 9: PS's lecture was the high point. 10: PS's lecture was a delight. I hope I am able to hear him speak again. 11: Very good relevant, fun, interesting. 12: The Sunday tour was helpful. The lectures could be improved. PS's lecture was most enjoyable. 13: 14: |
|
9. Any final thoughts? Did you get your money's worth?
1: Apply early! Yes, every penny! 2: A great program and one I hope to participate in again and again. It gave me a new perspective on books and launched a taste for building my own sample collection. I thoroughly enjoyed my time here and look forward to being a Close Friend of BAP. 3: It was very worthwhile. 4: Probably stay in Brown College. Make sure you take SA a delightful and knowledgeable enthusiast. Definitely worth every cent! Thank you. 5: Yes! 6: Yes, I got my money's worth! 7: Everyone would enjoy taking this course. I did get my money's worth. 8: Yes, more than expected. 9: Yes. 10: I would recommend this course without hesitation. 11: Do the readings. You'll save everyone else a lot of delay in class. RBS is worth every penny. 12: YES! Great school!! This is my third visit. |
| Number of respondents: 12 |
|
| There were twelve students; five rare book librarians (43%), three conservator/binder/preservation librarians (25%), two antiquarian booksellers (16%), one art librarian (8%), and one book collector (8%). |