I-10: Introduction to the History of Illustration
4-8 June 2007 in Charlottesville
1) How useful were the pre-course readings?
1: Placed the subject matter in focus; raised questions to put to the instructor. Useful to set the stage for the week. 2: Late acceptance meant I didn’t read all the texts; but I read John Harthan’s The history of the illustrated book, and it was quite appropriate. 3: Very useful; for both an overview of the history of book illustration, and the history of print-making processes. 4: Very helpful! 5: Very useful; provided an excellent framework. 6: Wasn’t able to do more than skim, but was already familiar with the books, and they are relevant.
2) Were the course syllabus and other materials distributed in class appropriate and useful (or will they be so in the future, after you return home)?
1: As always, the notes and hand-outs were apropos and will become part of my reference library. I will be using these in my work. 2: Yes; generally a good balance between time periods, and styles, and special illustrations. Some more time on the 20th century would have been nice. 3: Yes. 4: Yes. I found the timeline very helpful. It was great to have the list of special collections materials so that we could really concentrate on looking at the books. 5: Most definitely. 6: Yes, although fairly minimal in scope.
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: Gave me information: names, dates, facts and figures that are characteristics of value for appraising illustrated books. Showing the best of the best, and some of the rest is exactly what I need when approaching a book collection to be evaluated, and an individual book to be described. Yes. 2: Provided illustrations within a historical context; both the technique and styles. Very helpful for instruction sessions to undergraduates, as my institution has many of the books discussed. The intellectual level was appropriate for such a broad ranging introductory class. 3: The things-in-themselves; the intellectual level was just right for an introductory course. 4: Yes. Going to special collections and looking at the materials discussed in lecture was extremely helpful. 5: Everything was useful. The class will help me immensely: in completing two upcoming projects, and in the future in general. 6: Seeing a broad range of original materials, although that was also an inherent limitation; so much to see in such a short time! Depth suffered perforce; would have enjoyed more art-historical analysis than time allowed.
4) If your course left its classroom to visit Special Collections (SC) or to make other field trips away from your classroom, was the time devoted to this purpose well spent?
1: Very well spent. 2: Yes, one session per day in special collections was a nice balance. It provided a break from the classroom, and meant that we weren’t overwhelmed with original books. 3: Absolutely. 4: Yes. The selection of materials was excellent. 5: Yes, the course could not have been successful without the special collections time. 6: Yes; time in SC was essential and very valuable.
5) What did you like best about the course?
1: The instructor! Secondly, the opportunity to look at lots of pictures set in an RBS context. EB worked collaboratively, and was immediately responsive to requests to see more of an illustrator’s work or more illustrations whenever possible. She brought answers back to us after breaks in reply to issues raised in class. 2: I liked how well structured the class was. EB had clearly spent a great deal of time planning the class to provide the perfect balance. We were never rushed, so we could absorb all the information that was being aimed at us. Its nice to have time to contemplate the images in an illustration class. 3: The books, and many of the Power Point illuminations. It was good to have ample time to fix our collective gaze upon excellent examples of both “high” and “low” book illustrations. 5: Bibliorama. 6: Looking at original materials! It was somewhat frustrating not to be able to do more hands-on examination of SC items.
6) How could the course have been improved?
1: Less uncomfortable chairs in the classroom; they became pointed wooden traps by the end of the day as we tried to more around the room looking at books. 2: As noted in my answer to question 2, I’d have liked more time on the 20th century, and maybe a little less on the 18th and 19th; a minor quibble. 3: In addition to the printed bibliographical list of books from Special Collections and the captioned bibliographical information given in the Power Point presentations, I would have liked having a “master” printed list of all the examples presented during the week for ready reference. 5: More side-by-side comparisons to reinforce the ideas of changing styles, and artists. 6: Offer in two parts, i.e., early-medieval to 18th century; and then 19th - 20th centuries? It was really too broad an overview for the time allotted, but that may be my prejudice, as I tend to enjoy more rather than less details or a narrower-deeper focus.
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?
1: Everything almost obsessively well cared for. 3: It was very important, pedagogically speaking, to be able to handle RBS materials. I am delighted to see that RBS collections keep growing. Would that we could have gotten “a feel” every now and then, of a piece of the books displayed at Special Collections! And yet, EB was a perfect “docent”; she gave us all sensual pleasure in Special Collections. 5: None. 6: All materials were presented and handled professionally and respectfully by faculty, staff, and students.
8) If you attended the Sunday and/or other evening lectures, were they worth attending?
1: Yes, the Banks’ Florilegium film and TB’s lecture on Audubon were superior. The Monday lecture on The Pattern Book of Samuel Dodd was impressive as it took an idea of Sue Allen’s and turned it into a nine-month research project. 2: The Monday lecture was interesting. 3: Yes, TB’s Audubon soars above Valhalla! 4: Yes! I learned a lot about other topics not covered by the course. 5: Most definitely. The lecture on Monday, The Pattern Book of Samuel Dodd, was very well done; TB’s lecture on Audubon was excellent; the opportunity to meet local dealers was nice. All opportunities were well thought out and helped round out the classes. 6: TB’s talks are always informative and entertaining; Beare’s lecture was impressive as to the persistence and scope of his scholarly quest, but it was more focused on the details of his pursuit than on the actual content of his research.
9) Did you get your money’s worth? Any final thoughts?
1: Absolutely worth the price. Would recommend this to anyone interested in any aspect of the history of the book, as well as art history where it intersects with book work. 2: Yes, definitely. The class is best suited to a new librarian or one with relatively little experience with rare books. More experienced rare book librarians might be better off reading the course reading list and taking a more advanced class. Can we have more advanced illustration classes? 3: Yes. EB occasionally betrays a distinct democratic bias; be prepared to defend the Old Masters, and Old Times! 4: Yes! I would recommend this class. 5: Absolutely. It’s an excellent introduction to book illustration, and will help novices, and the most skilled alike. 6: My first RBS class was a very rewarding experience, and I look forward to more such opportunities. I regret not taking time to read carefully in advance of the class; it would have added greater dimension to my experience of the course.
Number of respondents: 6
Percentages
Leave Tuition Housing Travel
Institution Institution Institution Institution
gave me leave paid tuition paid housing paid travel
83% 17% 50% 50%
I took vaca- I paid tui- I paid for my I paid my own
tion time tion myself own housing travel
0% 17% 17% 17%
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 scholarship home
17% 67% 33% 33%
There were: 2 general librarians with some rare book duties (33%); 2 RBS staff members (33%); 1 rare book librarian (17%); and 1 book collector (17%).