I-20: Book Illustration Processes to 1900
16-20 June 2008
1) How useful were the pre-course readings?
1: Useful and essential. Without Gascoigne [How to Identify Prints], much of the organization makes no sense, and the introduction of concepts in Gascoigne is reasonably useful. 2: Gascoigne was particularly useful, given the structure of TB’s class. 3: Pre-course reading of Gascoigne is a must. 4: Gascoigne was extremely helpful. I constantly referred to it before I came to RBS and will continue to for years after. 5: The pre-course readings were indispensable. If I hadn’t read Gascoigne I would have been lost in class. Even when there were parts of Gascoigne I didn’t understand, it was still helpful to have the background I got from the book and the familiarity with it to use it as a reference tool. 6: Very useful, though hard to understand at times. 7: Very. 8: The pre-course reading was extremely valuable. Even though I didn’t fully understand the material until we went over it again in class, I don’t think I would have gotten as much from class without some prior exposure. 9: The pre-course reading was very useful. 10: The Gascoigne text is essential reading as it provides a framework for the processes discussed during the class. 11: Very useful, although it left a lot still to be clarified in class.
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: I found the course syllabus helpful and expect that it will be more so when I return to it later to track down the books and illustrations on my own. 2: Yes; the bibliographies and reference materials will be very valuable. 3: I anticipate using the course textbook as well as my lecture notes when attempting to identify prints/illustrations in the future. 4: Yes! Everything we examined was dead-on in showing us what we needed to learn. Again, everything was so well-organized that learning it all in such a short amount of time was a smooth process. 5: They were very useful. I especially am grateful for the bar-graph time chart of processes; that is not in Gascoigne and is an excellent reference. 6: Some lack of continuity in the syllabus. 7: Absolutely. 8: Yes, the bibliography of future reading [exit reading list] will be very helpful. 9: Yes; the materials distributed in class were very useful and will continue to be useful to me. 10: The plethora of examples provided for close study are priceless. 11: Very useful in class and will keep for future reference; 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 best for me was gaining confidence in understanding the broad historical outlines of the use of various processes, and deepening my grasp of individual process characteristics. The level was high and it seemed just right for what I wanted. Making an etching, a drypoint, and a lino cut was especially fun and useful to me. 2: The intellectual level of the course was high. The focus on the context of each and every example TB handed out made the material come alive. How to look at prints from not only a physical/material standpoint but by understanding the context of each was valuable. 3: Yes. Having the opportunity to examine original prints (rather than textbook reproductions) was enlightening. The lectures and workbook clarified muddy areas of the text. 4: Everything the course touched on was appropriate for what I’m working on presently. I see every illustration process at my job every day. Now I’ll be able to recognize them! And yes, the intellectual level of the course was very appropriate. 5: The pre-1820 processes were of the greatest relevance and interest for me. By the end of this class I was so saturated with information I wondered if I would benefit more from splitting the class into two weeks. 6: Identifying the processes used to make prints, i.e. relief, intaglio, and lithography; and how to identify the process. The level was appropriate. 7: It was all relevant or interesting, though not necessarily both at the same time. The intellectual level was fine. 8: I took this course for a general overview, so the wide range of time periods and techniques was helpful. 9: In general, all of the course content was interesting. The c19 processes were of particular relevance to my work. The intellectual level of the course was just right, and the course moved at a good pace. 10: Handling and examining the prints and examples. 11: The holistic view of the processes as well as the publishing industry at the time were particularly useful. Of course, the identification tools gained were, and will be directly useful at work and for personal interest.
4) What did you like best about the course?
1: Seeing so many wonderful things, and hearing them explained by such a delightful and knowledgeable teacher. This experience is unique – and thrilling. 2: The hands-on activities were very helpful in understanding why prints look the way they do. The instructor was very polished in his teaching which made the class move quickly, especially when making prints. The lectures were great. The access to the collection during breaks. 3: Examining original materials and actually performing the printing processes. 4: How hands-on it was. Physically doing many of the printing processes ourselves taught me what I couldn’t get just from reading or hearing about the processes. 5: The lectures and packets. The lectures were so informative and the packets were incredible in being able to see one example after another of the processes we were discussing. 6: Looking at real prints and having aspects of them explained. 7: The self-tests. 8: The opportunity to try one’s hand at some of the printing materials was quite revealing – it really helps one to understand why some techniques look the way they do in the final outcome. 9: I really appreciated the mix of class activities: both looking at the examples and trying out some of the processes were interesting and useful. 10: I liked everything about the course. I had a wonderful and informative experience. 11: The best part were the examples provided. The test at the beginning and end of the week provided a good learning opportunity – seeing examples side by side, to review from earlier in week. The hands-on exercises were also very useful for understanding the processes; information was presented well, clearly.
5) How could the course have been improved?
1: The room is small and moving around sometimes awkward, for example in the tests. 2: In some instances TB could come up with a better lexicon than Gasciogne for the materials. Some of the terminology is confusing. Also, perhaps a little more explanation of the photo techniques could be valuable for students. 3: A little more table space would have been appreciated. Four persons per table was cramped. 4: I can’t think of any way to improve it. 5: Having more room to spread out your notes, book, and the packets. Perhaps dividing the content in two: pre-photo processes and post-photo processes. 6: More discussion of lithography; I remain a little uncertain of its appearance. 7: We could have stuck to the schedule more. We were a period behind at one point. 9: It doesn’t need to be improved.
6) 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: Perhaps a brief introductory lesson on handling practices and the way that passing and collecting will work. 2: they were handled very methodically, which improved their safety. 3: Most of the people in this class work with special collections/archives and know how to handle them. I saw no danger to collection materials. 4: The only thing I could suggest is to have each person at a table be in charge of collecting the materials and then passing them on to the assistant. Because our classroom was somewhat crowded it made it somewhat more difficult for one person to get everything shoved at them safely at one time. 5: The handling seemed very careful and well-thought out. 6: Perhaps the number of prints in each mylar folder could be reduced in some cases, or two folders handed out. 9: No.
7) If you attended the Sunday and/or other evening lectures, were they worth attending?
1: Yes. I especially enjoyed the William Noel lecture [No. 507, Monday evening]. 2: Yes, definitely. 3: Sunday evening was not very enlightening. The Audubon lecture was wonderful. 4: Yes. I found both the Sunday and the Monday lectures extremely interesting. They each hit on different things. I was interested and I’m very glad I attended them. 5: The lectures and Sunday evening activities were very good. 6: The Wednesday lecture on type [No. 508 by Sumner Stone] was boring and confusing; others okay. 7: Yes. 8: The evening lectures were well worth attending. I particularly learned a lot from Monday night. 9: Yes. I particularly enjoyed the lecture on the Archimedes Project [No. 507]. 10: Yes. The talk about the Archimedes palimpsest was particularly fascinating. 11: Both guest lecturers were very interesting. The Sunday evening talk by TB was also informative.
8) 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: My deepest thanks to TB for allowing me to take this course and learn from him, which I did in many different ways. My advice? Don’t delay a minute in applying to take this course. 2: Yes! The course was great! Bravo! 3: Advice: if you’re staying in the dorms, bring shower shoes. I feel like the knowledge gained was well worth the effort and expense. 4: I definitely got my money’s worth and have no other advice. I can’t be extremely helpful, other than to say keep up the great work! 5: Absolutely, I got my money’s worth. The resources available to us to learn the material were incredible. My only advice is get enough sleep so you’re still sharp at the end of the week. 6: Yes; well worth it. I do not know where else one could go for this. I would recommend (for those who can) just looking at a number of (identified) prints of various types before coming. 7: Gascoigne is worth it, and the course is worth some sleep. 8: I strongly recommend RBS in general and this course in particular. I hope to be coming back for other classes in the future myself. 9: I really enjoyed the experience, and I’m very grateful for it. I would recommend that future students of this course carefully read the assigned text before arriving and come prepared to learn a lot of information in one week. 10: The course was well worth the time and money spent. I would recommend it in a heartbeat. 11: Yes.
Number of respondents: 11
PERCENTAGES
Leave Tuition Housing Travel
Institution Institution Institution Institution
gave me leave paid tuition paid housing paid travel
81% 45% 54% 36%
I took vaca- I paid tui- I paid for my I paid my own
tion time tion myself own housing travel
0% 10% 27% 54%
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
19% 45% 19% 10%
There were 3 full-time students (28%); 2 rare materials catalogers (18%); 2 teacher/professors (18%); 1 rare book librarian (9%); 1 archivist/manuscript librarian (9%); 1 conservator/preservation librarian (9%); and 1 retired (9%).