|
|
No. 42: European Bookbinding, 1500-1800. 4 August - 8 August 1997 |
|
1. How useful were the pre-course readings?
1: Required readings were absolutely necessary. 2: Very useful ranging from the general to the particular, from the comprehensive to the arcane. 3: Very much so, especially the Pollard. 4: Useful, on the whole, but I had some trouble locating some of the titles. 5: Perfect beginning. I was unable to get to more than the basic ones. The whole list would have been an excellent introduction to the course. The basics I read were a very helpful lead-in. 6: Pre-course readings were very helpful, and good for re-reading after the course. 7: Didn't read anything and felt comfortable with the course. 8: Very. 9: Cockerell was somewhat confusing to a person with no binding experience, although much of the book came into focus as the course progressed. 10: Essential reading was excellent, especially Pollard and Middleton. Didn't have time to do the suggested reading. 11: Very useful (probably essential). 12: Excellent. |
|
2. Were the course syllabus and other materials distributed in class useful (or will they be so in the future, after you return home)?
1: They were useful I could always use more. 2: Yes (but see no.7, below). 3: Yes. Indeed, they have already been photocopied by colleagues not in this course but in related fields. 4: Yes. 5: More drawings with captions. 6: Yes, quite. 7: Yes, I will give them to my husband for his reference collection. 8: Yes and yes. 9: Yes. 10: A course outline would have been useful. 11: Yes. 12: Yes, drawings in the syllabus were particularly good. |
|
3. Was the intellectual level of the course content appropriate?
1: Yes. 2: Yes challenging, sharp, exciting. 3-7: Yes. 8: Yes, a few of us are binders, the rest not we all drew, I think, a great deal from the course. 9-12: Yes. |
|
4. If your course had field trips, were they effective?
1: Yes. 2: Yes visit to Special Collections. 3: Yes. 4: Yes, we saw a lot of interesting books pertinent to what we were discussing in class. 5: Yes. 6: N/A. 7: Yes. 8: The time in Special Collections was my favorite. 9-10: Very well spent. 11-12: Yes. |
|
5. Did the actual course content correspond to its RBS bro chure description and Expanded Course Description (ECD)? Did the course in general meet your expecta tions?
1: Very much. 2: Yes, and yes. 3: Yes. 4: Surpassed my expectations learned a lot about a subject I had never really investigated. 5-7: Yes. 8: Yes yes. 9: Yes beyond expectations. 10: Yes, very much so. 11-12: Yes. |
|
6. What did you like best about the course?
1: In-depth analysis of binding structures (or lack of) on particular books. 2: The quality and focus of NP's mind lucid, coherent, and brimful with information not second-hand, but first-hand information about the book structures. Seemingly every generalization was based upon direct, empirical examination of the physical objects themselves. He raised fascinating questions (on a theoretical level) about evidentiary knowledge. 3: I quite liked the separation of lecture on book structure and material (i.e., focus on individuals) and then seeing books with all the features applied (i.e., the coming together of scattered parts). 4: Lots of intriguing and thought-provok ing new material. Back on the job I'm sure to look at all the c16-c18 books that go through my hands with a new awareness of how they were put together. 5: Su perb lecture delivery. Given the necessity for so many slides, the potential for disaster was great. The opposite occurred. 6: The breadth of knowledge of the instructor, his enthusiasm, and his amusing delivery. 7: NP: he was well prepared. Slides were great and the RBS materials very helpful. Great chairs. 8: The trip to Special Collections and the instructor's expertise and enthusiasm. 9: Nice balance between slides and in-house examples and just downright interesting. 10: The instructor NP is a superb teacher. 11: Enormous range and depth of the instructor's knowledge and his ability to communicate. 12: Latest information about the history of book structure NP incorporated information about his recent visit to Wolfenbüttel. |
|
7. How could the course have been improved?
1: I would have liked an outline on Monday indicating all the general areas to be covered an overview of where we were starting, going, finishing. 2: NP's method of instruction is lecture. Since he has such a wealth of information to impart in such a tight framework of time, this is perhaps the best, the only method. I would do nothing to interfere with whatever pedagogical method he chooses, with which he is most at ease, with whatever method most effectively draws him out. So, sotto voce, I quietly suggest (1) hand out a clear outline of all major topics to be covered (it can be a general one); (2) talk more slowly; (3) less is more go for the representative illustrative example, rather than attempting inclusive coverage, 4) Allow more time for questions and answers it is very difficult simultaneously to listen, write, reflect and re spond. To summarize: I feel NP's delivery could be far less exhausting to him if he attempted to do less. He has nothing to lose. He is a world authority. Take it easy. We're on your side! 3: I know there must be limitations, but being able to handle the books would be quite helpful. Developing a "feel" is, I think, immensely important to this area of study. Is there too much material covered? 4: Can't think of a thing. 5: A book, with many drawings with captions, photographs (copies of most of the slides, etc.) written by the instructor and published soon enough for me to use it. Hurry! 6: By being longer. 7: Hands-on with the materials, ie the books. 8: No idea. 9: Brief sewing demonstration by the instructor, perhaps? 11: Don't change anything. 12: A brief summary of highlights at the end of each day or theme; perhaps a brief timetable in the syllabus for major structural changes |
|
8. Please comment on the quality/enjoyability of the var ious RBS activities in which you took part outside of class, e.g. Sunday afternoon tour, Sunday night dinner and videos, evening lectures, Bookseller Night, tour of the Alderman digital/electronic centers, printing demonstra tions, &c.
1: I enjoyed my stay on the Lawn no better place to be. TB's lecture was a good synopsis for me of the history of RBS. Booksellers Night was a bit disappointing not many materials on bookbinding, but the wine was good. The tour was satisfactory, but I wanted more history. 2: Everything was enjoyable. 3: I originally thought there were perhaps too many things in the evening, but I am glad I attended them and think they are a good part of the atmosphere (I now know what was meant by intensive). 4: Food is always excellent, Booksellers Night I've done a few times. Rotunda exhibit was great. 5: Fabulous assortment. Also enjoyed all the informal get togethers with fellow students. Great mix of people professions and personalities. 6: Had a very good time. Lectures were good. 7: Enjoyed the talks from Roger Stoddard, Brett Charbeneau, and TB. Sunday dinners are always a nice way to get started. 8: RS was a disappointment as a lecturer. BC was an absolute delight. 9: I was usually too knackered at the end of the day. 10: I enjoyed the Sunday dinner, breaks, etc., as opportunities to get to know the other students. 11: BC was a real treat. 12: The Sunday afternoon tour was helpful for learning where buildings are and some history; the first evening lecture was hard to connect with, BC was just delightful; the printing demonstration was really great. |
|
9. Any final thoughts? Did you get your money's worth?
1: Yes, I thought it was well worth any $ I spent. Advice get lots of rest before coming come early and stay late. 2: It has been a pleasure and privilege to have participated again (first and only time was in 1989). As I'd hoped, my epiphany came on the last day when NP revealed the existence of a particular collection of books in England which will meet certain research needs I have this year (in which I'm on sabbatical leave). And thank you, TB, and all your staff. 3: Most certainly I got my money's worth (which I shall remind myself in skimpy months to come!). It is an excellent course. Expect a whirlwind of information, do the reading, and get enough sleep are my recommendations. Make these evaluations available (the form that is) on the web or to be mailed in, so there is a bit of time to reflect. 4: I would suggest to anyone interested in the subjects taught at RBS that these courses are well worth the time and money. Print a copy of the evaluation form in the Vade mecum so stu dents can give some thought to how to phrase their re sponses. [ Excellent idea: I'll do it! -Ed.] 5: Do it. 6: Yes, it's a great course, as good for people who know a lot as for those who know a little. Don't try to take down all the information, there's too much. Decide what kinds of things you want to remem ber. 7: Yes. Happy 25th; hurray for Michael Winship! 8: No advice, but I absolutely got my money's worth. 9: Well worth the money. The in structor is enough of an entertainer to keep things from becoming too dry. 10: This is a wonderful course, well worth the money and time! I could relate many things covered in the course to books in my own library's collection and look forward to further exploration. 11: Read Middleton and Cockerell cover to cover. I got my money's worth. 12: There's a nearly overwhelming amount of information, even for information junkies, but clearly and thoughtfully or ganized. It's a fabulous course with a world-class expert with a Monty Python sense of humor. |
| Number of respondents: 12 |
|
| There were twelve students: five rare book librarians (43%), two teacher/professors (17%), and one each a book collector, a con servator/binder/preservation librarian, a general librarian with some rare book duties, a retiree, and a student (8% each). |