T-55: Type, Lettering, and Calligraphy 1830-2000
16-20 June 2008
1) How useful were the pre-course readings?
1: Great; really got me excited for the course. 2: As with the first part of this course, the readings were appropriately selected. 3: The readings were very helpful. 5: Useful to skim, though brought into more context during course. 6: Readings were helpful and necessary; they were most important for focusing on the course to come.
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: They were appropriate and will be useful for future reference and research. 3: Yes. The course packet and bibliography are excellent resources. 4: Yes. The extensive bibliography will be quite useful. 5: Absolutely. 6: Handouts were excellent and I expect them to become a basic reference for the future.
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: JM’s ability to weave a very complicated story into a fairly seamless narrative. 2: All content was interesting and relevant for me. Quite appropriate; superior intellectual level. 3: The history of type design and production is my main interest. JM did a great job of lecturing, and the images he had prepared to share with us were excellent. More class discussion would have been nice, as well as the opportunity to work through the quiz independently before discussing it as a group. 4: JM did a great job of placing type design in wider historical trends/periods. 5: c20 material; yes. 6: Field trips and demonstrations always have that extra excitement and fascination.
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: Absolutely. We visited SC, and his selections were wonderful. 2: Extremely so. 3: Yes. The time in SC was very well spent. Perhaps we could have gone a second time. Looking at books with JM was a real treat. 4-5: Yes. 6: Absolutely.
5) What did you like best about the course?
1: JM. It was a real honor to have thirty hours with someone that knew his history this well. [Guest lecturer] Sumner Stone, for a couple of hours, added a nice component to the digital story with which JM seemed a bit less confident. A special thanks to Ryan Roth for adding this component. 2: The entire course is packed with information and well-presented. 3: JM, all the books, and the very nice classroom facility. 4: I particularly liked the variety of JM’s presentations, which were a mixed bag of historical lecture, personal anecdote, detailed examination of slides, and practical demonstration. I also enjoyed the classroom discussions between JM and Sumner Stone. 5: The preparation of the instructor. 6: Enjoyed the interaction between JM and Sumner Stone – each one enlightening the class.
6) How could the course have been improved?
1: I could be smarter. Honestly, I’d like to take the same class in a year. 2: I have no suggestions at this time. 5: More time with RBS collections organized by day in context with lectures. 6: Not sure this is possible, but the attention of Sumner Stone in addition to JM was definitely special.
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: The selection of books we had in the classroom was great. Would be nice to have some things (like matrices, punch cutting tools) available to touch. The projection/sound system for the classroom was really professional quality. 2: Nothing at this time. 3: Excellent structure for classroom materials and Special Collections. Some book cradles in the classroom might be helpful. 4: I witnessed no incidents of biblio-abuse. 5: N/A. 6: None.
8) If you attended the Sunday and/or other evening lectures, were they worth attending?
1: Absolutely. I loved the Archimedes talk [Lecture no. 507 by William Noel] in ways I wouldn’t have imagined before. 2: Very much so. 3: The Monday and Wednesday lectures were very good, as was the Audubon video and demonstration by TB. The book dealers in New York City video was the low point of the week – poor quality and content. 4: I always enjoy TB’s lecture because it usually contains lots of good material to steal. 5: Yes. Noel and Sumner Stone [Lecture no. 508] were both interesting – good variety. 6: Definitely. On most of the evening lectures, they represented once-in-a-lifetime opportunities to see, hear, touch items or people that I wouldn’t have otherwise.
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: For anyone interested in typography JM is an astounding resource. It would be nice to kind of force the members of the group to interact. Several conversations with class members were nice times. 2: Yes, as always. 3: Yes. The more experience you have with type, the more you will learn from this class. 4: As always, the whole week is a treat. 5: Yes. 6: Yes!
Number of respondents: 6
PERCENTAGES
Leave Tuition Housing Travel
Institution Institution Institution Institution
gave me leave paid tuition paid housing paid travel
33% 50% 33% 33%
I took vaca- I paid tui- I paid for my I paid my own
tion time tion myself own housing travel
0% 17% 50% 50%
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
67% 33% 17% 17%
There were 1 rare book librarian (17%); 1 teacher/professor (17%); 1 antiquarian bookseller (17%), 1 retired (17%); 1 RBS staff (17%); 1 letterpress printer (17%).