Rare Book School Summer 1998

James Mosley
No. 32: Type, Lettering, and Calligraphy, 1450-1830
27-31 July 1998

1)How useful were the pre-course readings?

1: Helpful, although the most useful are OP and somewhat difficult to find. 2: The cover letter of a long bibliography suggested a few musts, both general to the topic and easy to find. I did (I am so proud of myself), so was generally familiar with what was being discussed in fine detail. 3: Entirely useful. It was good of JM to send us the entire bibliography in advance. That way we could pick and choose among our wide interests. 4: Very useful, with an annotated bibliography (really a bibliography with commentary) that will last us well into the future. 5: Very useful, although some of the books are ungettable, e.g., Carter on typography. 6: Fairly useful. For future students taking the course, I would say that the most important primary text is Tschichold. An in-depth study of this text would be the most effective preparation for the course; if time permits, one could add the brief chronological overview of Gaskell, then that of Dowling. Oh - Warren Chappell is essential - perhaps the most important primary text - along with Tschichold. 7: Very useful, and the expanded bibliography will be especially useful in follow-up research. 8: Useful, although I will get much more out of them after taking this course. They were helpful for terminology, a general sense of how to look at type, and so forth. 9: The list of readings was far too long. It would have served better as a closing bibliography. A more succinct list of readily available materials would be useful. 10: Very useful. JM should mandate that students do everything possible to obtain and read Carter before the course begins.

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: Yes. 2: When I return home, review of the portion of the class discussion and bibliography most pertinent to the article in progress will come first, the rest to follow. The bibliography and syllabus will be most useful. 3: The workbook for this course is one of the best RBS publications I've encountered. 4: Yes, there was a course booklet with points pertinent to the lectures. 5: Yes, they form the basis of a want list for collecting a reference library. 6: The long syllabus is not helpful for beginning students; after the course it is well-nigh indispensable. The short syllabus was good, but I recommend offering a chronological order of readings next time. 7: Absolutely. 8: Yes. I think that the course materials, combined with my work, will be very helpful with future reading and study. 9: Yes. 10: We've used every page in the workbook, and the bibliography will be useful for any further work on type.

3)Was the intellectual level of the course content appropriate?

1: Yes, very high. 2: For me, yes. I can't speak for the class as a whole. 3: Yes. There is always the need for balance between too specific, too broad, etc. JM did a good job of achieving a coherent balance. 4: Yes - and the amount of ground covered (including detail) was extensive, yet larger trends and relationships were constantly emphasized. 5: Yes, but mostly talking at us. I would have liked more participation. My group was very bright and knew a lot. 6: Yes. JM is immensely erudite. He offers a vision of not only how to teach and research this material, but also of what a first-rate scholar should be. 7: Perfect. 8: Yes. I came in with a very limited knowledge of type and calligraphy, but was able to understand and keep up well. I did not perceive that others with a better background felt slowed down. 9-10: Yes.

4)If your course had field trips, were they effective?

1: Yes. 2: Every minute was well spent, and it was all the better that we were divided into two groups so we could see without handling. 3: Indeed. The examples we saw in Special Collections seemed chosen with care. JM worked hard to point out points of interest. 4: Yes, indeed: we examined several books, ranging from the incunable period, down to the early c19, and saw first-hand many of the features discussed in lectures and shown on slides and distributed by handouts or samples. 5: Yes. Special Collections was the zenith of the course, with the Gutenberg leaf. I wish we had done individual practice work there. 6-7: Yes. 8: Absolutely. Many thanks to the Special Collections staff for having everything pulled and set up. 9: Yes. 10: Yes - very well spent. It must be done in small groups, as we did, so that students can see the details in each book.

5)Did the actual course content correspond to its RBS brochure description and Expanded Course Description (ECD)? Did the course in general meet your expectations?

1-2: Yes. 3: In brief, yes. I hope no one thought (how could they?) that this was a type identification course - it isn't. 4: Yes. 5: Yes, exactly. 6: Yes. 7: Perfectly. 8-10: Yes.

6)What did you like best about the course?

1: JM's combination of expert knowledge and general cultural history. Also a sly sense of humor. 2: This is a hard question - but I can say that the cumulation of examples shown by slide and with paper copy leading to our examination of actual pages from BAP examples was a fun text. No matter that I failed parts of it! 3: JM does something rather special, combining a broad cultural-historical scope with a detailed grasp of specific practice and artefacts. This is a rare balance to maintain day after day; he also speaks English with agility. He clearly cares about the course topics and he communicates that care. 4: I liked the way JM drew together often bewilderingly divergent trends in typographical history and linked them to broader ideas and developments, as shown in related arts and technologies - specifically the relationship between typography and calligraphy was shown again and again. 5: The instructor's vast knowledge, explanatory skills, easy manner. He was totally approachable, and he welcomed even dumb questions. 6: Tough to say - it was all wonderful. What I liked best was seeing the differences in the different types beginning to appear before my eyes. 7: JM's lectures were astonishing; even when diverging slightly off the topic, the content was fascinating and ultimately very relevant. I would like to listen to JM talk about type for another week! My notebook is literally filled. 8: The instructor. The breadth and depth of his knowledge are tremendous. What he knew and would teach us went far beyond mere reading and book learning. This is one of the great advantages of RBS - access to people who really know their subject. 9: JM knows everything. 10: JM - his quiet wit, vast knowledge, and occasional assertion of authority with respect to other scholarship. The slides are also of a very high quality.

7)How could the course have been improved?

1: If JM wrote his own pre-course overview of printing history! 2: How about split screen with two carousels of slides running side by side to allow for constant visual comparison. Seriously, going back three slides is OK with me. 3: The video break was good. Despite our criticism of the older b/w Making of a Renaissance book, it was the better video - don't drop it. The quick series of slow pan shots were pure Orson Welles and the bells were a cinematic pun on Chimes at midnight. Slight improvement - more lab work with type and letterpress printing might be nice. 4: In no way. It was brilliantly conceived and communicated. Variation in pace was also tended to with foresight, and there was ample time to study notes or to read during the evening. 5: The last session, randomly looking at pages, should be integrated. When we talk about Aldus, we should handle Aldus. I also would have liked a Q & A at the very end. 6: C'est parfait. 7: It would be good to involve class members in discussions a bit more, yet, I would hate to have less valuable information available from JM. More handouts of type specimens might be helpful, too. 8: Hard to say since the course went so well as it was. 9: More hands-on, fewer slides. I'm sure the BAP collections would support that. When looking at so many slides, one loses track of whether it's 8-point or 48-point you're seeing. 10: Perhaps a bit more time with hands-on material such as we looked at today [Friday, the fifth and final day]. To use these would require that students arrive well-prepared, of course, since there are so many details to master.

8)We are always concerned about the physical well-being both of the BAP's 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?

2: I enjoyed handling the Aldus, but I wish it had a box. Doesn't have to be an expensive custom-fitted thing, just a sturdy box. 4: None: people were very careful with the materials and collections. 5: They were handled well. In fact, I wish we could have handled them more. 6: I very much enjoyed being able to handle actual pages commandeered from antique books. 9: Handling was good. 10: None.

9)Please comment on the quality/enjoyability of the various RBS activities in which you took part outside of class, eg Sunday afternoon tour, Sunday night dinner and videos, evening lectures, Bookseller Night, tour of the Alderman digital/electronic centers, etc.

1: Very full, very nice. 2: I enjoy everything, always, but here's one for you - how about a Sunday night video for this class (and others who might like to join) featuring The Name of the Rose. It would have some students dreaming of burning scriptoria, but that's OK. 3: All very good, per usual. 4: Sunday dinner and the lectures (particularly D W Krummel's - given my present work) were very enjoyable. I skipped the tour and videos, since I had participated in these last year. Bookseller Night I did not attend - except for search at bookstore, which was OK, but not Boston! 5: Evening talks were at a lower level than the class, with no interaction. I also liked the long breaks so we could use BAP materials. 6: Speakers: I particularly enjoyed the talk by DWK. 7: Sunday night dinners are great to introduce folks to one another; videos are less successful and a bit boring. Lectures are good and proper when they are focused on a particular item, such as the Bay Psalm book or St. Jerome's letters, but all were enjoyable. 8: All were very enjoyable, especially Sunday dinner, evening lectures, and the demonstration of handpress printing. 9: Bookseller Night was a disappointment. Very few dealers were open. The lectures were excellent.

10)Any final thoughts? Did you get your money's worth?

1: JM's skill in teaching and his passion for the subject should make this more than palatable to anyone - but the subject is inviting all by itself. 2: I got my money's worth. 3: See lots of letterforms, research (if you have not already) some aspect of your subject/interest in advance so you can bring JM's expertise to bear. JM is a splendid teacher (and, likely, a nice man). My only regret is that I cannot take this class for the first time, again. 4: I very much enjoyed our live demonstrations of typecasting and handpress printing. Of course I will come back - RBS deserves support from all who are interested seriously in books. 5: Anyone interested in books should take this course. Shef Rogers did a fine job shepherding JM and us, for which many thanks. 6: Yes, my money's worth - what I put in, at least. I think more people should take the time to learn about this fascinating topic. JM is one of a kind, and I would like to have more time to work with him in order to develop my skills in the field. 7: I absolutely got my money's worth. 8: Do all the readings ahead of time, but do not worry about knowing everything. Use the readings to prepare you to get the most out of the course. I absolutely got my money's worth. 9: RBS courses are always worth the money. This course is no exception. 10: Read Carter, Chappell, and Tschichold before coming.

Number of respondents: 10

PERCENTAGES
Leave Tuition Housing Travel
Institution gave me leave
70%
Institution paid tuition
60%
Institution paid housing
23%
Institution paid travel
33%
I took vacation time
0%
I paid tuition myself
30%
I paid for my own housing
47%
I paid for my own travel
47%
N/A: Self-employed, retired, or had time off
30%
N/A: Self-employed, retired, or exchange
10%
N/A: Stayed with friends or lived at home
30%
N/A: Lived nearby
20%

There were ten students: three (30%) were rare book librarians, two (20%) were general librarians with some rare book duties, and one each (10% each) was an archivist/manuscripts librarian, a consultant/author, a library director, a full-time student, and a teacher/professor.

[an error occurred while processing this directive]