|
|
No. 33: Type, Lettering, and Calligraphy, 1450-1830 28 July - 1 August 1997 |
|
1. How useful were the pre-course readings?
1: Very useful. 2: Very useful and of continuing value. 3: Quite helpful, if not overwhelming. 4: Very. I read Carter first, but wish I'd started with Updike. 5: Very useful. 6: Fairly useful, although the list was so long and the selection left up to each individual, so it didn't affect the class as a whole. 7: Very useful. 8: Quite useful, though formidable. Particularly useful in my case were the general introductory books which gave me an angle of attack on a subject with which I was not at all familiar. 9: Extremely. 10: Very useful. Somewhat difficult to pick blindly from such a large list, but helpful in getting at least some introduction to major names. 11: Very helpful, although having such an extensive bibliography made it difficult to choose which were the most essential. |
|
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: Superb, absolutely useful for a long time to come. 2: They will be of great use to me in the future. 3: They were useful, but more handouts of type examples would have allowed for further study/identification. 4-5: Yes. 6: Yes. Lists of names, slides shown, and further bibliography saved class time and will help in the future, reviewing course content and moving on. 7: Yes. 8: They were useful in the context of the course and will continue to be so. In fact, my class notes consist of nearly half a notebook. These I shall transcribe into a more usable form when I return home and shall use (for several different projects) as reference material. 9: Yes. They were excellent and will keep me busy for years. The handouts were extravagantly generous, it seemed to me. 10: Yes, they were appropriate. 11: Extremely useful. The bibliographies are an invaluable resource, and the type samples will also be a helpful reference. |
|
3. Was the intellectual level of the course content appropriate?
1: Yes. 2: Outstanding. 3: Yes. 4: Yes. Very broad ranging, but usually didn't assume too much. 5-6: Yes. 7: Yes, very. 8: Absolutely. 9: Yes. 10: Yes, but I couldn't help but feel overwhelmed by the total history, total culture amount of information. JM's quantity of knowledge is nearly staggering. A tremendous amount for me to re-digest and sort out over time, but extremely enjoyable. 11: Very much so. JM knew just where to pitch and the class remained engaged throughout. |
|
4. If your course had field trips, were they effective?
1: Yes. 2: Yes. 3: It was well spent, but too short. 4: The Special Collections visit was largely devoted to admiring the books; could the real live examples have been organized better for pedagogical purposes? 5-6: Yes. 7: Yes, very. 8: Yes. It was nice to see books in person after looking at slides for so many days: it was a little like a trip to the zoo after looking at lithographs of zebras and tapirs for a few days. 9: Yes. 10: Yes, it gave a chance to see real examples. Slides are good media, but not really a substitute for the real thing. 11: Yes. |
|
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, way beyond my expectation: detailed, rich, inspiring. 2: The expanded description gave an indication of the cultural wealth of this course. The class, however, went well beyond my expectations. 3: Yes. 4: Very much so. 5-7: Yes. 8: Yes, perfectly. 9: The course surpassed my expectations. 10: Yes, in every respect. 11: Yes. It far exceeded my expectations. I am extremely satisfied with the information I will take away from the course. |
|
6. What did you like best about the course?
1: The instructor showing clearly the importance of thinking about history, economics, architecture, painting in relation to writing and typography, a general instead of too specialized understanding of why forms evolved. The slides were the best I have ever had the privilege to see the many closeups what a treat! 2: The historical structure and rich cultural depth. 3: The opportunity to take it. The examples shown via slides. The handouts supporting the course. 4: The juxtaposition of letterforms with contemporary architecture, art, politics, and religion. 5: 1) Very steep learning curve. 2) I very much liked the emphasis on physical type. 6: JM himself, and his encyclopedic knowledge of his subjects, which allows him effortlessly to intertwine strands of handwriting, type, politics, and art history. 7: Breadth and depth of the instructor's knowledge, the interesting and amusing manner with which it was delivered. Very impressive! 8: The fact that JM pointed out so many possibilities for further study. 9: The fact that the subject (which might have lent itself to a rather narrow focus) was presented in such a broad historical and artistic context; and that the instructor spoke so clearly and evocatively, with an exquisite sense of pacing and even drama. It is rare to find someone who can speak more or less continuously for five days without ever resorting to a facile statement or (horrors!) a cliché. 10: JM's ability to draw parallels with other disciplines, like architecture, art, literature, etc. It made it possible to link typographical developments with cultural and temporal backgrounds, as another form of artistic expression. 11: JM's astounding expertise: he is truly a living resource for typographic material. His slides were beautiful and exceptionally helpful. His complete command of the material, combined with his low-key and humorous presentation of it. The connections he made between letterforms, art, architecture, and broader cultural trends were alone worth the price of admission. |
|
7. How could the course have been improved?
1: It could not possibly "have been improved." 2: More handouts that captured the information presented through the slides. 3: Although impossible to do, a more detailed and lengthy course seems appropriate to the subject. It felt too much like skating over the top of the topic. As said before, more handouts of the specimens seen on the screen. A genealogical chart of type history to use as a quick reference. 4: It would be great to see more typography packets to illustrate things JM already talks about, like the illustration packets for TB's course, so we can see things in their natural size and habitat. It would be great to attempt a system (as a handout or even as a book) for letterforms like Bamber Gascoigne's for prints. 5: Better preparation on my part, by more close examination of type faces, rather than reading Updike's text. 6: A little more chronological framework, or reference sheets (a timeline?). 7: Not qualified to comment. 8: I can't imagine how. 10: At times, he strayed a bit from the syllabus. But he knows so much, it's obviously hard for him not to wander down related paths. 11: Individual student questions sometimes led to diversions. JM is best when he presents his lectures as prepared, rather than providing more casual, open-ended remarks; I know he wanted to vary the intensity, but there were moments one wished for greater focus. JM may want to consider stressing more the parallels between handwriting and type in later centuries he emphasized this in early periods and it was very useful. |
|
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.
1: I enjoyed the videos, the marvelous lectures (wished they could be funded to be printed), the Rotunda exhibition, the walks through the gardens, the romantic atmosphere of the Lawn (I'll miss it). 2: Very enjoyable. An excellent way to make a new student feel part of the culture of RBS. 3: I think that all these events are wonderful to offer and for a participant to pick and choose from as wished. 4: Great, as always. Fun to have typefounding demonstrated live. 5: The evening lectures were better (more serious, intellectually interesting, on average) than 1995. 7: Good. 8: I attended all RBS activities and enjoyed them all. 10: All were very well planned. Bookseller Night is a refreshing break away for something a little different. 11: The videos are wonderful and Bookseller Night was enjoyable for students and a great way to bridge the town/gown gap. |
|
9. Any final thoughts? Did you get your money's worth?
1: I took home infinitely more than the money could possibly cover and am determined to promote RBS to everyone I know in the book, lettering, and type field to support it with donations and participation in courses. Of all organizations I have belonged to, this is the most serious one for all ages, but especially to inspire the young to carry on. 2: My thoughts for others before you come, get plenty of rest. This was an educational experience that will enrich my life and my work for many years to come. My institution got far more than its money's worth. 3: Preparation is important. Find the time to read from the syllabus to familiarize yourself with the material. Even a little knowledge goes a long way to understanding course content. It is worth the cost because of the enrichment it affords to one, personally and professionally. 4: Very worthwhile. Graphic arts and communications people would find this course as worthwhile and accessible as bibliographers would. 5: 1) Concentrate on type specimens/details of type differences, rather than try to absorb Updike. 2) Yes. 6: The more general background reading you can do, the more of the subtleties of JM's presentation you can appreciate. 7: The entire experience was excellent. More chocolate chip cookies! 8: Certainly this course was worth the considerable cost of my attending it (I am losing a week's pay to come here) and I hope to come back regularly. As a graduate student in an English literature program, book studies is a tremendous supplement to cultural criticism. My experience, in addition, has been a fascinating foray into the work of the librarian, a strange and unusual creature, indeed. 9: It goes without saying that I got my money's worth. 10: This is an excellent course conducted by a supreme (and most congenial) authority. Do try to get at least some of the advance readings. Be prepared for an extensive, thorough exposure! Highly enjoyable. I do hope to make actual use of some points discussed here. Well worth the money. 11: Take this course! I absolutely got my money's worth. |
| Number of respondents: 11 |
|
| There were 11 students: three rare book librarians (27%), three students (27%), and one each conservator/binder/preservation librarian, editor, retiree, special collections non-professional, and teacher/professor (9% each). |