Eric Holzenberg

H-40: The Printed Book in the West since 1800

 

7-11 January 2008

 

 

1)    How useful were the pre-course readings?

 

1: Very useful. It would have been a lot of information to absorb without having completed the readings all prior to class. 2: Very helpful; a great preparation for getting the most out of the class. 3: Gaskell's A New Introduction to Bibliography was incredibly helpful. I didn't have a chance to read the other two, but they were mentioned during discussion; I'll have to go back and read them. 4: Very, very useful. 5: Extremely helpful. 6: Very useful; the books complemented one another beautifully. 7: Very good. Since we're reading parts of some books, a glossary of printing terms would be very helpful. 8: They gave a good introduction, and supplemented the course content. 9: Essential. 10: Very useful. 11: All excellent, especially Rota's Apart from the Text. 12: The pre-course readings provided and excellent overview. The technological aspects of printing that were sometimes difficult to grasp through the reading became clear in class through the demonstrations.

 

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: Excellent handout. I really appreciated the images in the workbook for explaining techniques. 2: Very useful; a good overview of the reading material—a ready reference for class in the future. 3: The course packet was immensely helpful, and will be an advantage when I put together a version of this topic for a class. 4: Yes, very. 5: Yes. 6: Yes. I do wish there had been more "homework,"—noteworthy articles in the fields of information studies, archives, collecting, dealing, &c. 7: Yes. 8: Yes—very good pictorial handout. 9: Yes. 10: Yes, clear. 11-12: Yes.

 

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: While I came in with specific interests, I found every day extremely interesting and intellectually engaging. Yes, the level was appropriate. 2: Nothing was irrelevant, even difficult. The technical aspects of the machinery was useful in understanding the history of the book. The most important aspect was seeing the physical material—the books and printing examples themselves. 3: The history from 1800-1860 was the most helpful with my scholarly project. Being able to handle materials described in Gaskell was extremely beneficial. Also, having an expert like EH to answer questions only furthered my knowledge. 4: The intellectual level was appropriate. The course content covering illustration, readership, and the general construction of the book will be the most relevant to my work and future studies. 5: The show-and-tell of the books helped me to really understand what I had been exposed to via the readings. 6: For my scholarly purposes, hands-on work (identifying illustration processes, comparing bindings, &c.) were very helpful. The more time spent working with books, the better! Would have liked harder work! 7: Yes. The greatest interest for me was the part of the course relating to the period 1800-1920. 8: The intellectual level was ideal. My own interest was greatest in the aspects of binding, aesthetics, and readership. 9: History of the technology—level was appropriate. 10: Being able to see the examples discussed in the course made the week worthwhile. 11: The intellectual level was appropriate. I think that the students in the class were exceptionally well chosen. Many were experts in their own right; their comments were valuable and their interests steered the class in fascinating directions. 12: My previous course in book history had focused on the product of the printing press—the book. I found the focus on development of printing technologies extremely useful; particularly since I'm most interested in American books and printing post-1840s.

 

4)    N/A

 

5)    What did you like best about the course?

 

1: EH was an incredibly knowledgeable, lively, and good-humored presenter. I liked seeing examples of materials, e.g., fine press books, and components, e.g., Linotype matrices, &c. 2: The diverse group of students, the presentation by Peter Strauss of his livres d'artistes, and the video on Vincent Fitzgerald. 3: The materials of the Grolier Club were the best. 4: The deep knowledge of the instructor. Real examples. 5: The show-and-tell of the books. The class would have been completely different without the employment of the visual aids. 6: Eclectic peer group, knowledgeable teacher, great environment. 7: Being able to see and in some cases to hold examples of actual objects being discussed. 8: I loved getting to touch and see illustrative examples of what we were discussing. 9: Everything. 10: The interaction with instructor and other students. 11: The fact that what EH is presenting to the class is just the tip of the iceberg of his vast knowledge. Consequently, if he is asked a question about anything in this course, he is able to give a substantive answer that goes far beyond what he had planned to talk about. I loved the attention paid to book illustration; it make me eager to take other RBS courses on that topic. 12: The focus on explaining the technology of printing, seeing the examples of Linotype and Monotype equipment, printing plates, and so on.

 

6)    How could the course have been improved?

 

1: With the field trips (to Bowne & Co.) that I believe has been typical in previous years. However, even saying that, this was a completely wonderful course. 2: A field trip to see printing presses, &c., for hands-on experience. 3: Using actual printing materials and presses would have been better to become familiar with processes. 4: Field trip; more time with books individually. 5: I see no need for improvement. 6: More readings, more hands-on activities. Book cradles for every pair of students. 7: Instead of having the instructor read from his notes (in some cases extensive passages), I would rather see a Power Point style presentation with bullets. 8: N/A. 9: More hands-on. On the last day, it would have been nice to show an actual artists' book, such as Tom Phillips' Humument. 12: I sometimes felt a bit rushed for time to look at books or other items when they were being passed around in class.

 

7)    We are always concerned about the physical well-being both of the RBS teaching collections and of materials owned by the Grolier Club. If relevant, what suggestions do you have for the improved classroom handling of such materials used in your course this week?

 

1: By providing a foam book cradle for each pair of students? This would have made it easier to handle materials. 2: Materials and collections were well handled. 3: None. 4: An assistant to 'repackage' materials. 5: None. 6: Book cradles! 7: No opinion. 8: N/A.

 

8)    If you attended the Tuesday night lecture, was it worth attending?

 

1: Sadly, I wasn't feeling well, and had to leave. 2: Definitely. Frank Turner's lecture was very informative and thought provoking. 3-4: N/A. 5: It was certainly worth attending. FT's discussion of digitization and it's impact on rare books and manuscripts collections resonated with me in a profound way. 6: Yes—terrific! 7: Yes, excellent. 8: Definitely. 9: Absolutely. 11: Yes; it dovetailed nicely with the topic of our Friday class, i.e., the future of the book. 12: Yes—I enjoyed hearing the perspective of [Yale's] Beinecke library director, especially on the topic of directions for contemporary collecting.

 

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: Definitely. I am now looking forward to taking future RBS courses. I couldn't recommend this highly enough. Advice: do all the reading beforehand. 2: Absolutely. This was a wonderful experience, in a wonderful environment. 3: Yes, I got my money's worth, especially with being in NYC! 4: Fantastic experience; I will certainly attend future sessions. Thank you! 5: Yes. It was an honor to be selected to attend Rare Book School, and to have been selected for a RBS scholarship. 6: Yes! A very good course. 7: Yes! The presentation by Mr. Peter Strauss was also excellent and a real treat. I feel like that was a once-in-lifetime opportunity to be in such close contact with beautiful books. 8: This course was a very nice distillation of concepts related to changes in the printing, binding, publication, and reception of the book in the years from 1800 to the present day. 9: Yes. Pencil sharpener in the classroom, and telling people ahead to bring pencils. 10: Yes—I liked the fact that the class was made up of people of varying levels of knowledge and experience; it was helpful in discussions to have librarians, booksellers, and collectors give differing views. 12: Most definitely!

 

Number of respondents: 12

Percentages

 

Leave                        Tuition                      Housing                    Travel

Institution                 Institution                 Institution                 Institution
gave me leave            paid tuition               paid housing              paid travel

17%                             8%                              17%                             17%

I took vaca-                I paid tui-                   I paid for my              I paid my own
tion time                    tion myself                 own housing              travel

42%                             33%                               33%                             33%

 

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

42%                               58%                             50%                               17%

 

There were 4 full-time students (33%); 2 general librarians with some rare book duties (17%); 2 teachers (17%); 1 archivist/manuscript librarian (8%); 1 general librarian (8%); 1 antiquarian bookseller (8%); and 1 retired (8%).