H-15: The History of the Book in America
16-20 July 2007 in Charlottesville
1) How useful were the pre-course readings?
1: Very useful. 2: Very – they provided a useful background to the course, and American book history. 3: They were useful in that they gave me a sense how the course would unfold. They will serve as great reference sources in the future. 5: Very useful, though I didn’t quite make it through everything. I plan to finish reading and take the time to process everything. 6: They were useful – more useful than most of the material presented in class. 7: Very helpful to bring my preliminary knowledge up to speed with other class members. 8: Pre-course readings gave me a good background for the class. 9: I think the readings were very helpful – they covered many things that were not discussed in class, and provided good reference to the general history of each period. 10: Not useful at all. 11: The pre-course readings were very helpful and provided me with a strong framework throughout the week. This increased my understanding of class discussion and helped reinforce specific details that supported an overall continuity of the course content. 12: Essential. The pre-course readings provided the general background to the period, and class lectures assumed familiarity with them.
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: Yes. 2: Yes, I particularly appreciated the brief “publications lists” MW provided as they offer excellent points of reference for future research. 3: Yes. 4: Both appropriate and useful. 5: Yes, I plan to read some of the books listed for future reading. 6: Barely – this course was minimally organized and not well presented. 7: Yes, useful. I will definitely use the bibliography in my studies and writing. 8: Additional reading lists are excellent; they will keep me reading until I return next year! 9: Yes, the list of books given out will be very useful. 10: Not particularly. 11: Yes. 12: Yes. The recommended further reading list will be especially useful.
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: The course managed, successfully, to be both a broad overview of key topics in American book history and a focused series of case studies of particular issues and problems in the field. The [intellectual] level, I think was well pitched to a group with varied backgrounds and expertise. 2: I found the colonial to late 19th century classes most relevant for my own work, though I enjoyed learning about production and publication in our “internet age” as well. 3: The course provided the general survey of the history of the book in the United States that I need for background in my daily work. The intellectual level was most appropriate. 4: The whole course relevant, and the intellectual level both top class and appropriate. 5: I loved looking at the books in SC, and the examples in the classroom. I also enjoyed and learned from the slides. I got a lot from the lectures and anecdotes, especially early period as that meshes with our collection. 6: The course content (including the reading) served my purposes. 7: I was most interested in the emerging technologies throughout the time periods. The intellectual level was a good balance of comfort and challenge. 8: Wonderful survey of the history of the book in “America”, designed to encourage further study. 9: Absolutely. I had no previous background in American book history, and the course provided not just the “facts”, but plenty of anecdotes and examples. I learned a great deal! 10: (1) Copyright and distribution. (2) No; could have been far more rigorous and engaging. The caliber of students was great, but the pedagogy did not match the student base. 11: I acquired a general understanding of the entire historical period and will be able to build a working knowledge that I can develop with future readings. The intellectual level was appropriate. 12: I was pleased by the high intellectual level of the course. Discussions of the current state of research were especially relevant.
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: Two very useful and effective trips to SC, which added a very important dimension to the course. The press demonstration and showing of videos was also very valuable. 2: Yes. Seeing some of the Barrett collection was reason enough to come to Charlottesville. 3: Very much so. It was wonderful seeing real examples of the books discussed in class. 4: Seeing a large range of high-spots by no means easy to see elsewhere; very rewarding. 5: Yes; we looked at all the books pulled and talked about them fully or as much as possible given the time. 6: View books in SC was too minimal; better to have fewer books and really spend more time with each. 7: It was a privilege to spend time with these special items, and MW used the time well. 8: The time in SC was truly special; it was an honor to see the McGregor and Barrett collections. 9: Yes, we had two trips to SC. UVa’s collections are so rich for this topic, and we were able to see quite a lot of interesting items. 10: Absolutely! SC is always a treat. 11: Yes. We visited SC twice. Each time worked very well in relation to the sequence of what we covered in the course. 12: Our visits to SC were time very well spent. The materials were fantastic and well-explained.
5) What did you like best about the course?
1: The course has great breath and all managed to cover many topics in solid detail. The lecture-discussion format worked well, and the atmosphere was comfortable and collegial. Coverage of the early American period was particularly improved by the dialogue between MW and James Green. Green should have the opportunity to offer his own course on the early American book. The presentation of the economics of book publishing ans distribution in the 19th and 20th centuries was masterful. The instructor balanced lecture and anecdote effectively. 2: I thought that MW and James Green made an excellent teaching pair – our colonial day on the history of the book was full of lively and interesting conversations. I also enjoyed the interaction with my classmates – what we learned from one another’s comments and questions. 3: The instructor’s wide ranging knowledge on the subject as well as his many interesting side stories. It was also great having James Green sit in during the first two days. His knowledge of the colonial-age book was a great compliment to MW’s expertise on the book from the industrial age. RBS might consider asking Green to come back and teach a course that concentrates on the history of the book in the colonial and early national period of United States history. 4: The informality. 5: Most of it; books shown and anecdotes provided by MW and additional discussion by James Green. I loved learning about Ben Franklin; I had never read his work before – I plan to investigate him fully and am very excited. 6: The camaraderie. 7: I enjoyed the interaction we had with the materials, and being able to see all sorts of printed books from different historical periods. James Green’s comments and banter with MW were an extra bonus. 8: The diversity of the students and their interplay. The class contained librarians of varying backgrounds, publishers, book collectors, and students of English literature -- and it is all led and facilitated by a true book historian who is interested in the book as an object, an art form, a business, and a text. 9: The topics covered and the way in which MW presented them. Class was always lively and interesting, everyone who had questions got them answered, and we had fun as a class. 10: Copyright, students, visiting SC, co-teaching on Monday/Tuesday with James Green: RBS could improve this course dramatically by co-teaching. 11: The instructor’s expert knowledge about the topic; visiting SC; seeing plates and examples in class, and especially James Green’s class visits. 12: The daily variety of conversations. I found the sessions in which James Green contributed particularly helpful and enjoyable. The back-and-forth between MW and Green was one of the best features of the class.
6) How could the course have been improved?
3: A slightly bigger room. 4: Just a little more structure in presentation, particularly of the invaluable anecdotes. 5: Can’t think of much; could use more air circulation, but that’s the nature of this room – fitting space because of location and resources, so I wouldn’t trade it. 6: More meat, fewer non-apropos anecdotes. It would have helped to have James Green with us until we reached the 19th century. 7: I think if the students had been able to submit specific questions before class began, MW could be sure to answer questions methodically. 8: [Having a] team led with James Green, especially in the section on the Colonial book. 9: As a survey course covering five centuries, there are bound to be topics which are left out, but I felt the course didn’t need much improvement. 10: Would like to see the instructor more organized and keep on topic. Anecdotes were mostly applicable (though not necessarily appropriate), and there should have been fewer – far too gossipy. Also, if MW wants students to ask questions, “answer the question” would have liked to have seen the professor actually listen. 11: Have James Green co-teach the course. I learned a great deal from his contributions. 12: Perhaps more attempts to occasionally pull back for a broader view, but this is a small issue, and it would be unfortunate if the close attention to particular issues were lost.
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: Handling was managed with great care and proper rare book rules and procedures were followed at all times. A good balance between care and also allowing students to get close to materials. 3: N/A. 4: The handling was very effective; no suggestions for improvements. 5: I thought they were handled very respectfully. I actually feel the class could handle them more closely – I will follow up on this thought. 6: Try passing books in SC along a long table using place mats to slide each item in front of each student. This system works well at the Folger. 8: None – everyone was extremely careful and only the instructors handled SC materials. 9: I think that the more we get to handle, the better! It’s hard to put book people in rooms full of books and tell them not to touch anything, but security and preservation need to be taken into account. I enjoy seeing type, and plates, and books especially – its always better to see examples. 10: Nothing – perfect, especially Christopher Adams. 12: Materials were treated well. Classroom space was limited, so it might have been more convenient to have an area near the front of the class for storing/displaying items. A number of the example items were never displayed or discussed.
8) If you attended the Sunday and/or other evening lectures, were they worth attending?
1: Both evening lectures [by James Green and Ian Willison] were excellent and provocative. 2: Yes. 3: Yes. Green’s lecture on Benjamin Franklin the printer was a great complement to the material being discussed in the class. 4: Simply speaking, yes. 5: Yes, I really enjoyed James Green’s presentation, and was sorry to miss Ian Willison’s, and look forward to reading his book. 6: Yes. 7: James Green’s lecture was great fun, and Ian Willison’s lecture fascinating. Well worth attending. Any chance of video casting them in the future? 8: All the lectures were excellent. I only wish I could come back to hear the ones scheduled for next week. It was an honor to hear Ian Willison and to have him in our class. 9: I especially enjoyed James Green’s lecture, and it was excellent that he joined our class for several days. Listening to him share knowledge with MW was great fun, and it was wonderful to have another great resource in class with us. 10: Yes, particularly Ian Willison’s [lecture] – beautiful research. 11: All the events were well worth attending. 12: Absolutely.
9) Did you get your money’s worth? Any final or summary thoughts, or advice for other persons considering taking this course in a future year?
1: This course is both an excellent introduction to a very large field and a wonderful opportunity to learn from a teacher who has an unsurpassed knowledge of the book industry -- its economics and its history, particularly in the 19th and 20th centuries. 2: I would highly recommend this course and encourage future students to come with questions. If MW can’t answer a question on the book in America, I doubt anyone else can. 3: Yes. 4: Do read all the pre-course readings. 5: Yes. 6: Not really: too little meat and too much “wandering” – some self-promotion is okay, but we had too much. Other than James Green, we really did not see meat until Thursday of the week. A tighter, planned course structure would help. MW is knowledgeable – it is a matter of presentation! 7: Yes, I feel I got more than my money’s worth. 8: This course is priceless. The knowledge gained and interaction with colleagues truly cannot be measured in terms of dollars. RBS is my professional vacation, and I would rather be here than anywhere! 9: I absolutely got my money’s worth, and I greatly enjoyed this course. I have pages and pages of great notes, lots of good ideas for future research projects, and I look forward to the next course I can take with MW. 10: No – would not suggest this course. 11: Yes – I most highly recommend taking this course. 12: Yes, I got my money’s worth. This was a very useful and enjoyable course.
Number of respondents: 12
Percentages
Leave Tuition Housing Travel
Institution Institution Institution Institution
gave me leave paid tuition paid housing paid travel
50% 58% 50% 42%
I took vaca- I paid tui- I paid for my I paid my own
tion time tion myself own housing travel
42% 17% 33% 42%
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
8% 25% 17% 17%
There were 5 rare book librarians (42%); 2 general librarians with some rare book duties (17%); 1 teacher (8%); 1 full-time student (8%); 1 book collector (8%); 1 graduate student/part-time librarian (8%); and 1 publisher (8%).