No. 13: Lithography: The Popularization of Printing in the C19

12-16 July 1999

1) How useful were the pre-course readings?

1: Very, very useful - I was very glad to actually have read much of the material I had intended to for years! The manuals (especially Senefelder) was/were/are very helpful for a step-by-step understanding of the processes. 2: They were very useful for me. 3: Very thorough and useful. 4: Very. 5: Useful and extensive, serving as a bibliography for future book collecting. 6: Very good reading list. Some books were difficult to purchase, but most are available through interlibrary loan. 7: Excellent list which will be kept as a reference tool for years to come. I already had some knowledge (or had read some of the items beforehand). 8: Reading list was extraordinarily useful. A really good introductory bibliography. 9: The readings were exactly on target. A useful bibliography for future study. 10: Readings were important for getting the most out of classroom lectures. 11: Useful. 12: Very good background for the course; 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: I wish there would have been more materials distributed in class. 3: Yes. Good bibliography for further reading. 4-6: Yes. 7: Yes (see response above). 9: Excellent. 10-11: Yes.

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

1: Yes. I was fairly familiar with a good part of the material beforehand, in perhaps a scattered manner. MT’s concentrated presentation was very helpful and deepened my knowledge, both in detail and overview. 2: It was very intensive and good. 3-4: Yes. 5: More than appropriate - excellent! 6: Yes. 7: Superb. 8: Yes. It did not leave anyone behind, but covered an enormous amount of difficult subject matter. 9: The class was certainly appropriate for my level, and I think MT made it appropriate for all in the class. 10: Yes. 11: The intellectual level was appropriate. 12: Yes.

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

1: The field trip to the lithographic studio was good (well-organized so as not take too much time). 2: Yes. 4: Yes; essential and interesting. 5: They were well-spent, seeing a physical demonstration of a complicated process which is difficult to explain. 6: Yes. 7: Materials brought to class from Special Collections were very useful to complement class content and slides. MT’s own collection of samples were excellent. 8: Yes. The demonstration of lithographic printing at Bayly was very helpful. 9-12: 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. 2: I think so. 3-12: Yes.

6) What did you like best about the course?

1: The opportunity to question MT closely about things he talked about (and thus deepen my understanding), the incredible range of his knowledge and the visual materials he presented, and the examination of original materials (in books and illustration packets). 2: MT’s scholarship and his enthusiasm for lithography and my classmates’ keenness to the subject. The slides, books, and prints prepared for every day’s class were splendid. 3: Workshop/hands-on study of Book Arts Press examples related to lectures - more would have been even better. Impressive wealth of information conveyed, and the main points were repeated. 4: Lively, challenging, and very informative content, beautifully presented. Practical examination of original materials extremely helpful, especially with such patient, expert guidance. 5: MT is an excellent instructor with well-organized slides to accompany his very interesting lectures. His enthusiasm made every day a pleasure. The physical examples from the BAP and his private collection created quite a museum of lithography. 6: The examination of a broad range of materials that were produced using lithography. My experience prior to the course had primarily been with lithographic works of art. I was not aware of the production of correspondence and similar items that were produced in multiples for distribution. The class introduced me to these and many other types of materials, such as ephemera, forms, maps, &c. that I previously thought of in terms of intaglio and relief processes. MT is an excellent communicator, and presented a complex subject in a very well organized, clear manner. 7: MT’s fantastic knowledge of the field, his enthusiasm, his wonderful delivery, and his sharing of all he has acquired over his teaching career. In all, a perfect balance. 8: MT is an experienced teacher with great enthusiasm for, and knowledge of, the subject. Strong mixture of lecture, use of slides, and the examination of actual examples. Keen sense of humor. 9: He clarified a complicated, complex, and difficult subject. His lectures were always interesting and his supporting materials were perfect. He was very good at getting class participation and answering questions. 11: The two lithographic demonstrations, the hands-on experience, and the class discussions of specific problems. 12: The slides, the hands-on examples, the lecturer - obviously, the entire course!

7) How could the course have been improved?

1: Better lighting to examine the original prints and perhaps more time with the original works - but then that would take time away from lectures! 3: Discussion of music was important, but could have been shortened - level of detail not completely necessary. Slight favoritism with certain students a bit annoying. Sometimes spoke too rapidly and changed slides too fast. 4: Personally, I would have liked more on color lithography, but the course presented a well-balanced survey of the subject, including practical demonstrations. 5: It could not have been improved, just extended. 6: Perhaps a two week (ideally year long!) course. 7: Another week of looking at and identifying samples. 8: Only more time to do even more. 9: More time. 11: More practical, introductory-level, hands-on work would have been more relevant to my job, although the lectures were enjoyable. Also, more discussion of U.S. materials, and more work with distinguishing lithographs from engravings. 12: More hands-on examination of materials and slightly shorter slide presentations.

8) We are always concerned about the physical well-being both of the BAP’s teaching collections and of materials owned by UVa’s Special Collections. If relevant, what suggestions do you have for the improved classroom handling of such materials used in your course this week?

1: Perhaps a cradle or two to rest the books on - we were piling reference books under the covers. 3: Class handled them appropriately, but some of the UVa Special Collections materials need conservation attention before further handling. 4: Fragile materials might be conserved before further handling. Provide cradles for large items. 5: Some minor repair of items are needed for stability before much more use. 6: Materials were handled carefully by almost everyone in the course. 7: Does Special Collections have a conservator? A few items could stand minor repairs, just to prevent the loss of pieces or further tearing. 8: Materials were treated with great care and respect by all. 9: I think foam cradles for the larger books would have been good. 10: Maybe some foam wedges for the books with loose boards. The large format items needed support. 11: None.

9) 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, &c.

1: Pretty darn-well organized - it will be nice when you get a less cramped space than a corridor and your own study room in which to have receptions, but that’s a small matter. I went to all the events, except the after-lecture receptions. Loved the campus - very conducive to study. 2: Sunday Afternoon Walking Tour: please be more extensive when showing the Corner. Sunday Night Dinner: please be more enjoyable. Evening Lectures: nice. 3: Sue Allen’s lecture, as always, was superb and thorough. Her research was presented with passion and poetry. The Rotunda exhibit was interesting - I like encouraging undergraduate curatorship. 4: An excellent course, which also covered a great deal of general background to the period, despite the apparent specialist nature of the topic. 5: I enjoyed them. 6: Excellent lectures and receptions. 7: Where’s the good cheese of yore? 8: I enjoyed Sue Allen’s lecture. In general, the evening events are a good way to meet students from different classes. 9: I enjoyed them. I always appreciate the morning coffee, bagels, &c. The evening receptions offer a good opportunity to chat with people from other classes. 10: 11: Fairly enjoyable. 12: G. Thomas Tanselle’s talk was extremely well-done.

10) Any final thoughts? Did you get your money's worth?

1: I’ve wanted to take MT’s course for several years, and I’m very glad I finally made the time to do it. 2: I want to know more about lithography in color. Yes, certainly [money’s worth]. 3: Always great! 5: Anyone interested in the subject would benefit from this course, and should be encouraged to attend. 6: Definitely worth the investment.7: Loved it as usual - thank you MT and Terry. Absolutely got my money’s worth. 8: Highly recommended. Well worth the time and money. 9: Money’s worth: absolutely. The course will continue to pay off in future years as I examine lithographs in my collections. 10: Be sure to have some experience with printed materials from this time period. 12: The course is highly recommended. Definitely worth the money, time, and energy!

Number of respondents: 12

There were five rare book/special collections librarians (42%), two general librarians with some rare book duties (17%), one full-time student (8%), two conservator/binder/preservation librarians (17%), and two graphic art/print curators (17%).