Martin Antonetti
No. 22: History of the Printed Book in the West (II)
21-25 July 1997


1. How useful were the pre-course readings?

1: Good. 2: Excellent ­ very useful. 3: They are useful for understanding and following the lectures. 4: Good. 5: The readings were fascinating and useful, and I will reread them after the course. 6: Great. 7: Very. 8: Very helpful. 9: Excellent! I would have liked to have had the opportunity to photocopy (or buy) a collection of key essays. 10: Excellent pre-course readings, too bad I didn't absorb them better. 11: Very useful. I think, after examination, that Gaskell's A new introduction to bibliography might provide more information than Chappell. Since the latter is OP and hard to find, this might be considered. 12: Excellent. Please always send them when you do. It was enough time to get started on some and through the others. Good feature.



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: Yes and yes. 3: Yes. Besides the schedule, there was some useful information, as well. 4: Good. 5: The syllabus was magnificently developed and followed. Materials were relevant. 6-9: Yes. 10: Yes, but I'd like an addition to MA's busy class preparation materials ­ a list of the items we saw in the Rare Book Room, where we didn't take notes. 11: Yes. One handout which sadly did not appear was a list of the rare books we examined in Special Collections. These were beautiful, but it would have been easier to keep track of them if we had a subsequent list. 12: Very useful, extremely relevant, I'll use again and again. Slides were excellent for making points. All the museums were fantastic.


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

1: Yes. 2: As promised. 3: Yes. 4: Excellent. 5: Outstanding. 6-9: Yes. 10: Yes, the best was brought out in me and I proved, surprisingly, to have contributions to make, even with little prior experience in rare books. 11: Yes. MA was always willing to explain concepts, though often the questions asked would have been answered if the readings had been done. 12: Yes! Excellent, well-pitched to include more seasoned rare books professionals, but also inclusive of those with less knowledge.


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

1: Absolutely. 2-4: Yes. 5: The daily Special Collections visit was a very meaningful part of my learning. I appreciate MA's knowledge. 6-7: Yes. 8: Yes, the trips to Special Collections were very interesting. 9: Very well spent. I especially enjoyed the Special Collection sessions. 10: Oh, yes! We saw treasures that illustrated all MA's points and more! Thanks and thanks to the Rare Books staff for letting us in! 11: Yes. 12: The Special Collections visits were a highlight. MA is an excellent teacher in any forum, but most particularly in this one.


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. 2: Yes and yes. 3-4: Yes. 5: The course more than met my expectations. 6: The course was fabulous ­ it exceeded my expectations. It has changed my own scholarship for the better. 7-9: Yes. 10: Well enough. 11: This was a splendid experience, professionally and personally. 12: Yes. Absolutely.


6. What did you like best about the course?

1: Special Collections sessions and MA's lectures. 2: MA's intense enthusiasm for the field, i.e., history of the book, and its prospects. 3: Actually showing us examples of what was taught in the lectures, for example, showing us the books printed in medieval times and explaining the bibliographical features. 4: Using original books to identify Carter definitions ­ exhibits of specimens in class. 5: The professionalism of the instructor. 6: The talented instructor. 7: The instructor listened to the class and responded to our confused expressions. His deadpan enthusiasm made the topic come alive in an intense but unintimidating way. The combination of experiences the students brought to the classroom was also valuable. 8: The trips to Special Collections and the slides. 9: 1) MA and lectures!!!!! 2) Special Collections sessions. 3) Class exercise on individual books (student presentations). 10: MA's excellent teaching style. The well-planned hands-on exhibits created by RBS. The rare books department. 11: The lectures ­ often witty, always informed. 12: That it truly was an introduction and touched on so much. It only made me want to come back and take other courses in more depth.


7. How could the course have been improved?

1: List of rare books to be shown in Special Collections. 2: I wished, often, that all students had read the pre-course readings thoroughly ­ we wasted much time going over things people should already have known something about. But you tried to do this! 3: More hands-on and more examples. 4: Keep on time. 5: In academic content, the course supplied more than could have bene expected in five long days. 6: Class did tend to run on. Perhaps a little less time on papermaking and type? Or, perhaps a little less time devoted to videos so that when we did run over, it would be resented less. I hate to suggest shortening anything, but I found myself getting very antsy at 3:15 if our class hadn't yet adjourned for a break. 7: I wonder if the course should be broken into two sections, hand press and machine press in consecutive weeks? The book project on Friday was excellent fun, but I sensed that some people were initially intimidated and over-compensated with long hours in Alderman. Could it be done in pairs so that no one is left feeling inept? 8: Instead of the course being offered twice, how about offering it in two parts covering different time periods. 9: More time! Actually, I think the museums would be more valuable than the videos, and it was difficult to look at the museums (around the room) while the videos were playing. 10: Two weeks of this course. 11: Note comment on #2, above. 12: An extra three hours a day!!


8. Please comment 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, evening lectures, Bookseller Night, tour of the Alderman digital/electronic centers, printing demonstrations, &c.

2: The evening lectures were not my sort of thing at all ­ much too "onside baseball"! Could they be topics of more general interest? 3: Generally good. 4: Too many films of second-rate quality; need more Special Collections sessions instead. 5: 1) Bookseller Night was well-constructed. 2) Sunday night dinner was a disappointment ­ no congeniality. 3) Evening lectures were interesting. 6: Some of the booksellers made me feel that I was unwelcome. "Obviously not a buyer," they seemed to assess and, suddenly, I was not welcome to the little wine and cheese things. 7: Excellent, if a bit too rigidly enforced. Lectures in the evening were a bit too clubby ­ names are an integral part of the history, but name-dropping is not. Also, Tuesday night cocktails at bookstores ­ the owners were very condescending to the younger crowd (i.e., less than 40 years old). 9: The outside-of-class activities (and I went to almost all) were often a bit uncomfortable. I sensed the haves and have-nots effect of some folks being in the in crowd and some not. 10: Evening lectures were a bit heavy in the name-dropping and history. I'd like one of them to have been a vision of the future. 11: I appreciated the wonderful fruit salads in the mornings. The lectures all opened a window into a world in which I play a very small part. The Thursday lecture missed an opportunity to talk about the future of rare books. The details (i.e., "in 1975 we moved to Room 601, former home of the ROTC," seemed extraneous. 12: I arrived too late for Sunday dinner and videos and regret this very much. I wish I could have had a tour of Alderman. All other activities were excellent.


9. Any final thoughts? Did you get your money's worth?

2: Yes, to the last question. I found it useful to discover how little people know about, e.g., the Renaissance and how much one has to fill in to tell coherent "stories" about early books. 3: We need discussion about the future or usefulness of the courses to our careers. 4: Yes ­ excellent course. I learned a great deal that could not be obtained just from reading. 5: I did get my money's worth. I want to come back. Please consider rethinking logistics: opportunities should be found to make daily life easier and thus permit learning to be first. The scholarship of the instructor was superb and should not be shadowed. 6: Consider scholarship funds ­ that would be a way to make true BAP friends.7: Definitely money well spent. 8: By breaking the course into two parts, students could view videos during class time instead of using lunch periods and periods before evening lectures. This would give students a chance to absorb the information. 9: Yes, I very much got my money's worth. I had an intellectually exciting time with a grand group of people who I look forward to seeing again over the years. 11: Without question. 12: Absolutely.


Number of respondents: 12


PERCENTAGES


Leave Tuition Housing Travel
Institution gave me leave Institution paid tuition Institution paid housing Institution paid travel
50% 62% 54% 33%
I took vacation time I paid tuition myself I paid for my own housing I paid my own travel
0% 30% 29% 59%
N/A: self-employed, retired, or had summers off N/A: self-employed, retired, or exchange N/A: stayed with friends or lived at home N/A: lived nearby
50% 8% 17% 8%


There were 12 students: three rare book librarians (26%), two general librarians with some rare book duties (18%), and one each an antiquarian bookseller, conservator/binder/preservation librarian, general librarian with no rare book duties, school librarian, student, teacher/professor, and other [no details] (8% each).