13. Publishers' Bookbindings, 1830-1910
Sue Allen
(Evaluation of the RBS 1994 version of this course)
The study of publishers' bookbindings, chiefly in the United
States, but with frequent reference to England, and occasional
reference to Continental developments. Topics include: the rise
of
the edition binder; design styles and how they developed; new
techniques, machines, and materials introduced in the 19th
century; the
identification of rarities; the physical description of bindings;
the preservation of publishers' bindings. The course will make
extensive use of the Book Arts Press's notable collection of
19th-century binding exemplars.
1. How useful were the pre-course readings?
1: Pre-course readings were very helpful, although I was
unable to get every one. Copies of additional articles were
passed out during class and they were also good. 2: Good
background. There was one article on color identification
systems
for use in cataloging that was uninteresting. 3: The
readings were quite interesting in preparing for the course,
but
I think I will review, if not re-read, most of them now as I
will
have a richer understanding of their meaning. Although it was
not
necessary for the course, I particularly enjoyed the biography
of J. Fields. 4: Only read one that was copied for me by
one of last year's students. 5: Will use the list for
post-course reference. 6: The list was very useful, but
I could find very few of the readings. What I did read was
helpful. 7: Very -- I at least had a sense of
background and process in the abstract sense. 8:
Very useful. 9: Thought they were valuable to course, but
also
think if one reads only minimally from the list one can still
keep up with the pace of the course. SA is such a good teacher
that one does not need to rely on readings to
understand material. 10: Very useful. It was hard to
pick
selectively from an extensive list, but nevertheless it
provided
excellent background preparation. 11: Not necessary for
the course and that was as it should be. The instructor
eventually gave what was needed in class to apprehend the
material and its significance. I will now enjoy reading the
references after the course; indeed, I am eager to. 12:
Very good -- but I didn't really do all the preparation I
should
have. 13: Excellent -- I did not have the time to read
them
all, but I will continue reading until my next RBS course.
14: Pre-course readings were informative. I did not read
the selections on the mechanical processes -- these would have
provided additional understanding and depth but were not
necessary. 15: What I could get was good, although I
spent
time reading about paper and leather as much as about cloth.
This
was good for me, though, so I think I should just say
that
they were good.
2. Was your faculty member well-prepared to teach THIS
course?
1: This is the best instructor I have ever had in my
career. She was knowledgeable, interesting, entertaining, but
most importantly, she was inspiring. She has
given
me many ideas that I would like to pursue. 2: Yes. I
would
not have minded receiving more photocopied handouts, though.
For
future classes, the ``Dating 19th Century Cloth'' study guide
could be given out early in the week. I found it useful. Also,
I would like to see SA's writings readily available for all
students, and a list of new articles and publications to look out
for. I would hate to miss any! 3: Absolutely! The
presentation of the material by decades gave rational order to
what
otherwise might be an incomprehensible chaos of detail.
4:
Of course! 5: Yes -- very much so. 6: Yes. SA is
a
great teacher and well prepared to teach this course. 7:
Oh yes. Extremely! 8: Very well prepared. 9:
Exceptionally so. Lectures were so clearly thought out and so
carefully prepared -- full of vivid language and meticulously
researched and presented with easy enthusiasm. 10:
Absolutely!! 11: Absolutely yes. 12: Indeed,
superbly
prepared. 13: SA is one of the best instructors I have
ever had. Not only is she a noted authority on the subject, but
she has excellent teaching skills which allow her to
communicate
her knowledge and excitement to all levels of students.
14: Extremely. SA, along with her assistant Scott
Fennessey, covered a lot of material with seeming ease.
Occasionally, especially at the end of the day, we had to rush a
bit too
fast for the class to assimilate the material fully, but a
review
the following morning rectified that. 15:
Yes.
3. Was the intellectual level of the course content
appropriate?
1: The intellectual content was appropriate to the
subject
matter. The instructor's authority and expertise was very
apparent at all times. 2: Yes. 3: Yes, and I
greatly enjoyed the constant passing mentions of the history,
culture, literature, and commerce of the time. 4: Tops!
5: Yes. 6: Yes, very much. 7: Yes.
8:
Very appropriate. 9: Yes. SA combined history and
anecdote
and investigative reporting and show-and-tell and archeology in
a very stimulating way. She made us think what I
describe
as intellectual. Also, she made connections with architecture,
history, furniture, etc., and was very successful in this
interdisciplinary approach. Her final presentation on
preservation and social trends was very provocative. 10:
Most definitely so. 11: Yes. 12: Great. 13:
It was
appropriate to all levels and types of individuals. 14:
Yes, it was. 15: Yes. She is an excellent
instructor -- her interest in and awareness of the historical,
economic, and cultural events that influenced structure, style,
etc., was wonderful. So we learned the specific and the general
in a wonderfully integrated way.
4. If your course had field trips, were they effective?
1: Looking at books in both Special Collections and in
the
Rotunda made the course content more clear and illustrated the
different decades and physical features of the various books
and
designs. 2: Special Collections was interesting. I was
glad, though, that the director did not go on and on about the
manuscripts. He was good about limiting himself to 15
minutes -- our
visit was short and time spent with the collection's books was
appreciated. Especially great were our three Rotunda visits.
The
Dome Room would have been a perfect classroom all week
long. 3: Yes, very much so. The time in the Rotunda
might
have been spent more efficiently if a large group of books had
been pre-chosen and every student given a few to discuss.
(However, there was a thrill of discovery that would be lost
and
my suggestion would not be necessary if the class size were
smaller.) 4: Yes! 5: Absolutely. 6: Yes, our
class made use of Special Collections and I wish that we could
have had more time to see all of it. 7: Yes; the time in
Special Collections was perhaps too short, but otherwise
useful.
The three trips to the Dome Room were crucial to this
course -- there's nothing like free-ranging about in a large
collection and being able to ask questions on the spot. 8:
Several trips to the Rotunda were very useful. 9: Yes --
our
visits to the Rotunda and the opportunity to touch, see,
consider
the books in those cases was extremely beneficial to the
course.
10: Yes -- the sessions in the Rotunda gave us the
opportunity to test out our newly acquired knowledge. SA was
gracious with her kind compliments, congratulating us when we
did
well. 11: Absolutely yes. 12: Yes. It could have
had somewhat better cooperation from Special Collections as far
as the preparation of the room was concerned. 13: We had
an excellent introduction to the treasures of Special
Collections. It was an honor to see and hold first editions of so
many
American literary treasures. 14: Yes. Exposure to the
books in the Rotunda and our presentations on books we selected
provided real hands-on experience with identification of
bindings
of various decades and our facility with expressing our newly
gained knowledge. 15: It was fine -- the time in the
Rotunda
was excellent. Thanks, Terry, for accumulating such great
books!
5. Did the actual course content correspond to its RBS
brochure
description and Expanded Course Description? Did the course
in
general meet your expectations?
1: It more than met my expectations and was accurately
described in the brochure. 2: Yes. I left the class with
unanswered questions about the development of the earliest
cloth
case bindings and their identification, but this was clearly
not
in the scope of the course. 3: Yes -- I'm actually
happily
surprised to see that we were able to go into more depth on die
manufacturing practices than I expected. 4: More than
met
my expectations. 5: Yes! 6-7: Yes. 8:
Description corresponded well. Course exceeded expectations --
SA's
a terrific teacher. 9: Absolutely. Absolutely. I feel
comfortable identifying books from 1830-1910 decade by decade.
SA gets all credit for teaching me this. It's more than I had
hoped to be able to do. 10: Followed true to form. I was
uncertain beforehand that there would be enough that was
pertinent for me, but SA has given me a new pair of eyes to re-
examine my collections. 11: A) Yes. B) Yes. Would have
liked a more expanded view, however, of leather bindings and
English books in general as a background. 12: Yes. Yes.
13: The course content is accurately represented in all
of the mediums in which it was advertised. The course itself
greatly exceeded my expectations. I can't wait to come to RBS
again. 14: Yes. It exceeded my expectations. 15:
Yes. Yes. I've heard SA lecture twice before. She is organized,
thoughtful, prepared, cogent. It was great, and my expectations
were high.
6. What did you like best about the course?
1: The instructor's love and contagious enthusiasm for
the
subject. 2: Our time in the Rotunda identifying
examples
and describing them. Our class was on the large size
for
this exercise, though, but it was very interesting. 3:
The combination of the comprehensive view of the period with
small details that brought the history to life. I feel that
SA's greatest strength as an instructor, other than her
infec-
tious enthusiasm, is her ability to draw you back in time to
appreciate the innovations of the era. 4: SA's
personality, knowledge, examples. 5: The hands-on
approach -- the complete knowledge and experience of SA -- made
the
course delightful and very useful. 6: SA made us like
the c19 century book more than before we took the course.
7: The freedom to ask questions as they occurred --
especially when we looked at individual examples. 8:
Expert
focus on subject material. Lectures reinforced by many
examples. 9: SA's person; her slide presentation (kudos to
Greer & SA for such clear, vivid slides -- well presented in
color
contrast, position, etc.); her lectures; touching the books;
SA's generosity in sharing knowledge and opinions. Basically,
the entire course was fantastic. Wish it lasted longer than
five days. 10: SA's warmth and charming manner are
infectious! Selecting a ``model'' book from each decade offered
a very organized progression, giving a good
feel
for continuum and development. 11: The tactile,
laboratory nature of it and the sincere and dedicated guidance of
the
instructor. In every way the course was an eye opener. I am
glad to take away a new vision. 12: Personality and
enthusiasm of the instructor in dealing with material she
obviously knew thoroughly. 13: The instructor whose skills
and knowledge have already been detailed. 14: The
instructor. SA's warmth, humor, and enthusiasm imbued her
teaching with a rare sense of love of the material. In no
other
RBS course have I found all the qualities of the best
teachers
combined in a single individual. 15: SA. The avalanche
of material was amazing, too! Actually, the case histories
and
studies of individual designers were excellent.
7. How could the course have been improved?
2: The first two days of class were very intense
and exciting. The end of the week was a big change of gears:
time
was spent prepping slide carousels and the amount of
information
was much less. Maybe the early decades (1830-80) could be
spread
out over another day. I felt we spent too much time on the
signed
designer bindings of the 90s and later. 5: No
suggestions,
but perhaps some coverage of earlier processes of bindings as
an
overview leading towards the c19. 7: Perhaps more
``book-
end'' information -- what happened in binding before cloth was
introduced, what happened after 1910 (nothing elaborate -- 10
minutes
each? 20?); perhaps this could be compensated for by less of
Sarah Wyman Whitman and Walter Crane. 9: The only thing
was that the ``critiques'' of Rotunda books went on too long.
There should have been a limit of two books. We tended to
become
too rambling. 10: Put us in a larger room with more
space
for the instructor to bring the books around. 11: On the
assumption that anything can be improved, even though it
need not be, I would like to suggest that the checklist of
identifying characteristics given in the review at the end of the
course be introduced at the beginning. This could also be
prepared as a handout. 12: I would not structure it any
further nor cram any more material into it. It's just fine as
it
is. 13: The only suggestion I have deals with physical
arrangements -- all those stairs to use a limited number of pay
telephones. It would be nice if you could provide elevator
access
for people who truly needed this -- one man was in his 70s and
obviously had difficulty negotiating the stairways of Alderman
and the Rotunda. 14: It was nearly perfect! Pacing (as
mentioned above) could be adjusted, but really that is just
quibbling. 15: Had we been slightly fewer people it
might have been better. If the course had been
longer we could have covered even more material.
That's about all I can see. In some ways the Rotunda visits
were
chaotic since we were trying to listen to people describing and
looking at passed books at the same time. I see no way around
this though and really the sheer volume of the experience was
helpful.
8. Any final thoughts?
1: Bring photographs or rubbings of books in your
collec-
tion that you have questions about. 2: I was glad to
have
spent a few days preparing for this course by really taking a
close look at the books in our collection that I thought might
pertain to the class. The rubbings I made of books from our
collection, which I had questions about, were useful and
I referred to them throughout the week. I'm returning to our
collection with excitement and enthusiasm to see our c19 books
with
new eyes! 5: [Evening] guest lecturers should be chosen
for their known ability to give an interesting, amusing,
anecdotal talk without reading. They should be non-technical as
students have been at it all day. I would prefer slides and
interesting topics from a dynamic speaker. 6: Yes, I
would
advise others to take this course. 7: I would absolutely
recommend this course to anyone! You certainly learn
information
that's bibliographically essential, but you also learn an
aesthetic appreciation of c19 taste -- and I certainly have a
better
sense of the history of the book! 9: Take it soon.
10: Do as much of the advance reading as possible. Take
it!! It is a refreshing look at a beautiful age. 11: I
would have liked more individual time in Special Collections's
McGregor Room, approximately the same amount of time as we
spent
with the books in the Rotunda. The individual time spent with
the
Rotunda collection was immensely valuable in internalizing the
principles taught. 13: This is a wonderful course --
take it
and learn to appreciate truly the book as an art form.
14:
No. 15: No, I'm tired. Just tell them it's good.
Number of respondents: 15
Percentages
Leave Tuition Housing Travel
Institution Institution Institution Institution
gave me leave paid tuition paid housing paid travel
73% 50% 30% 30%
I took vaca- I paid tui- I paid for my I paid my own
tion time tion myself own housing travel
0% 23% 43% 43%
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
27% 27% 27% 27%
Five students (33%) were conservator/binder/preservation
librarians; three students (20%) were rare book librarians; two
students (13%) were antiquarian booksellers; two (13%) were
general librarians; and one student (7% each) directed a friends
of the library book sale, was a full-time student, or a
management consultant/antiquarian bookseller.