Terry Belanger

73: Seminar in Book Illustration Processes [I-30]

18-22 July 2005


 

1)   How useful were the pre-course readings?


1: A reminder to re-read Bamber Gascoigne’s How to Identify Prints would have helped. 2: There were no pre-course readings -- but I clearly needed to re-read Gascoigne. 4: N/A -- just re-read Gascoigne, which is invaluable!

 

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: The exit reading list is of great use. No syllabus. 2: The exit list will be very useful. 3: Yes, especially the bibliography. 4: Total spot-on. A fantastic range of materials, many pulled on the spot from other areas as discussions progressed in class.

 

3)   What aspects of the course content were of the greatest interest or relevance for your purposes? Was the intellectual level of the course appropriate?


1: Having five people look at and talk through the same examples was very helpful. The intellectual level was appropriate, and listening to TB a joy. 2: The opportunity to examine prints closely, with instruction and discussion. The intellectual level was completely appropriate. 3: All was interesting, all was relevant. The intellectual level was appropriate. 4: I was in a class of very experienced and talented professionals, so I struggled to keep up with the pace/level. Course content was excellent and relevant to my wanting a good overview and refresher.

 

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


1: Yes. One afternoon in SC was very focused and productive. 2: One brief trip to SC to see materials was time well spent. 3: Yes (one trip to SC). 4: Brilliant session at SC -- time very well-spent.

 

5)   What did you like best about the course?


1: Hands-on looking at lots of prints, with a loupe and 30x magnifier (and the ProScope). 2: First, the opportunity to look closely at numerous prints; second, TB’s encyclopedic knowledge; and third, the opportunity to review and discuss print technique. 3: The small class size and seminar format followed by the wealth of examples. 4: The multiplicity of print examples to look at, SC, access to TB’s wonderful expertise, lots of crisp humor. I also learned a lot from my classmates; the small class size was advantageous.

 

6)   How could the course have been improved?


1: Better light and motion control for the laptop/ProScope/projector combination, e.g. an external mouse, dimmer lights (instead of all off or on), and a camera mount for the scope. 2: Perhaps there could be some time in class for extended, individual study of the prints we have reviewed. 3: Place the ProScope on a camera mount with vernier control. (A lot of time was spent futzing, getting the right image.) 4: Excellent as is.

 

7)   We are always concerned about the physical well-being both of the RBS 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?


2: For this course, no suggestions. 4: Nothing to suggest; materials were well-kept.

 

8)   If you attended the Sunday and/or Monday night lectures, were they worth attending?


1: Yes! Both were excellent. David Whitesell’s talk was especially relevant for a week when most classes are doing type and images. 2: Yes (both). 3: Yes. 4: I always attend all evening functions. They were excellent, as always.


9) If you attended Museum Night, was the time profitably spent?


1: Yes. 2: Yes (Tuesday night). 4: As above -- great!

 

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


1: Excellent course; money’s worth and more. 2: Yes. Advice: re-read all of Gascoigne before the class. 3: Absolutely. Final thought: take this course sooner rather than later, i.e. don’t wait! 4: Very highly recommended -- a unique course essential for the study of this area, and great fun.


Number of respondents: 4


Percentages


Leave                       Tuition                    Housing                   Travel


Institution                 Institution                 Institution                 Institution

gave me leave            paid tuition               paid housing              paid travel


50%                            25%                            50%                            50%


I took vaca-                I paid tui-                  I paid for my              I paid my own

tion time                    tion myself                 own housing              travel


0%                              50%                            50%                            50%


N/A: self-                   N/A: Self-                   N/A: stayed                N/A: lived

employed, re-             employed,                  with friends               nearby

tired, or had              retired, or                  or lived at

summers off              exchange                   home


50%                            25%                            0%                              0%



There were two antiquarian booksellers (50%), one rare book librarian (25%), and one book collector (25%).


RBS Home