No. 24: The American Book in the Industrial Era, 1820-1940

19-23 July 1999

1) How useful were the pre-course readings?

1: Very useful. 2: Very useful. These are works I anticipate consulting regularly. 3: Excellent. Highly relevant and interesting. It might be good to add a note or two recommending ones for ownership. 4: Fairly useful. We did not discuss them in class. 5: Very useful - books I should have read years ago. 6: The readings were good. The Lehmann-Haupt book was right on target. 7: Copies of the entire bibliography that MW gave out in class would have been useful as some items on the pre-course reading list were unavailable to me, and some on the entire bibliography were. 8: Excellent, although I found the secondary readings more useful than the primary ones. 9: Very useful and comprehensive. 10: Very useful. 11: Very good.

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 expect I will read and consult many of the items on the bibliography. I’m glad to have this list. 3: The bibliography is outstanding. It (or lots of it) will be incorporated into my want list. 4: Syllabus was not useful - it was very general, although we mainly stuck to it. The bibliography handed out in class (as well as the mentioning of other readings during class) will likely be useful in the future. 5: Yes. 6: The bibliography will be a good reference source and shopping list. 7: Yes, very much. 8-10: Yes. 11: Yes. The course followed and covered the syllabus.

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

1: Yes. 2: Yes. Complex issues were simplified without a condescending or "dumbing-down" manner. 3: Yes. Right on the mark. 4: It was a bit too elementary and amorphous. I think the class could have handled a more rigorous, intellectual approach. Many issues were dismissed or oversimplified because the reality was "too complicated." 5: Yes. 6: Very appropriate for the mixture of students. 7-11: Yes.

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

1: It was a good change of pace, and I was glad to learn a bit about these collections. 2: Absolutely. The visit to Special Collections was fantastic - a useful walk through an important book. Many thanks to the Special Collections staff. 3: The visit to Special Collections was time well spent, although a broader range of books to view would have been good as well (indeed, we had much on display for use in the classroom, which reduced the need to see them in Special Collections). 4: Pretty much. We spent most of our time in Special Collections listening to MW talk about history, and looking at the books from a distance. I would have preferred to spend the time in Special Collections examining the books close-up. We didn’t get through all of the books he pulled. 5: Yes. 6: Definitely. Showing the Whitman volumes helped bring some classroom points into context. 7: Yes. 8: Absolutely. 9: Yes. It was a marvelous opportunity to see a group of Whitmans all at once. 10: Yes. 11: A wonderful time was spent examining Whitman materials to illuminate concepts discussed in class sessions.

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: More or less. I expected a bit more time on publishing and distribution, and a bit less on paper and printing. 2: Yes. 3: Yes. We covered the period pretty well, in broad strokes. 4: I though we would have spent more time talking about the book trade than we did, based on the course descriptions. We only spent one day talking about the trade, and spent three days talking about the parts of the book (descriptive bibliography). 5-9: Yes. 10: As best as it could. 11: Yes.

6) What did you like best about the course?

1: The discussion of publishing, distribution, authorship, vending, and copyright. Benefiting from MW’s years of research and teaching - he brings so much knowledge and experience to the classroom. 2: Hearing about this material from a working bibliographer. MW gives excellent, practical advice on how to identify useful evidence - and non-useful evidence. 3: The instructor, I think. His knowledge is phenomenal. We could have gone twice as long, and would still be learning. 4: Seeing examples of binding and printing over a hundred and twenty years, together in one place, gave a great sense of change and development. I liked looking at the printer’s records and having MW reconstruct how he made certain determinations and discoveries. 5: The depth of MW’s knowledge was impressive, and his enthusiasm was contagious. 6: MW’s informal style, while still making it through the syllabus. 7: The case studies MW gave applied to my particular collection. 8: The instructor’s personal research experiences and examples. 9: Flexible in delivering content. Tailored to interests of attendees. 10: The knowledge of the instructor. 11: It gave me lots of new information, and new ways of approaching materials in the library collection I handle.

7) How could the course have been improved?

3: If I have to put something down, I’d say less emphasis on c19 literary authors, and more on the less well-known folks. But this is minor. 4: Move more quickly - cover more details and case studies within the period, or shorten the period, and cover more details within a narrower slice of history. Spend less time on the basics of book production. 9: A bit more briskness in treatment.

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: None. 3: MW was very conscious of our handling of materials, and he was concerned that it should be done appropriately. 4: None - they were treated well. 9: It was fine.

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: 1. Sunday Afternoon Walking Tour: missed it. 2. Sunday Night Dinner: good. 3. Evening lectures: excellent. 4. Bookseller Night: excellent. 5. Electronic Text Center open house: excellent. 2: The lectures were delightful, as usual. 3: All enjoyable. But, of course, it makes for a long day. 4: OK. 5: Lectures were informative and provocative. Videos were wonderful. 6: The lectures were quite good. 8: Most enjoyable: Daniel Traister’s lecture and the Electronic Text Center open house. Espresso in the Alderman café. 9: Videos were excellent supplements. 11: I appreciated the number of activities. They were also opportunities to meet and socialize with other RBS students, teachers, and visitors so that no one would feel left out.

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

1: I hope to return in future years, if possible. Yes, I got my money’s worth. 2: Anyone working with American books ought to take this course. 3: This is a great second course for someone who’s taken a history of the printed book course. It goes on from where they all stop. What I learned will be very helpful in developing my personal collection, and my library’s collection. Definitely got my money’s worth. 4: I would have liked to simply learn more of what we did cover. I also would have enjoyed the course more if there was a focused lesson plan for the week. Although the instructor does work from notes and a course plan, he basically talked off the top of his head, which gave the course a flexible and slippery structure. It’s a very passive course and learning environment for the student. Not much hands-on experience. 5: Well worth the money. 6: I did get my money’s worth. 7: Yes [got my money’s worth]. 8: Yes, yes, yes. 9: Do your preliminary readings. 10: This is a great program. Every course I’ve taken is top notch, meeting my needs, and always more than I expect. 11: I would recommend this course to any person who works with American publications in their collections. Definitely got my money’s worth.

Number of respondents: 11

There were four rare book librarians (36%), two general librarians with some rare book duties (18%), two booksellers (18%), two students with a general interest in rare books and their history (18%), and one teacher/professor (9%).