No. 22: Type, Lettering, and Calligraphy, 1450-1830

19-23 July 1999

1) How useful were the pre-course readings?

1: I liked the pre-course reading list. It was fairly brief, but ranged from general surveys to more specific works that students could choose from as need, interest, and experience dictated. 2: Pre-course readings provided an excellent background for the course. Updike was an entertaining read. I found Carter dry, but I know now to approach that book with more respect, and I’ll try it again. 3: Very useful, although difficult to find if you don’t work in an academic library. Perhaps a few easy-to-find volumes could be added to the list? 4: Certainly appropriate to the class content, and absolutely necessary. 5: Carter provided the best narrative, and Dowding provided a good illustration of developments. The chapter on printing types in Gaskell was not included, but this sets out a very useful schema for the relationship between, and development of, types. This should be added to the preliminary reading list. 6: Good variety with different levels of detail. The reproductions in books are not always clear. 7: Good. 8: Very useful. 9: Very useful - the more that can be read, the better. 10: Yes. 11: The ones I managed to read were very useful. 12: Very useful as an introduction to the subjects covered.

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: Our workbook was useful both in class (eg name and slide lists), as well as outside class. It included bibliographic suggestions at length, for reading well into the next millennium. 2: The course packet is very valuable. I will keep it at my desk, and I expect I will turn to it often. 3: Very, very useful. 4: The syllabus, and especially the bibliographies and essays it contained, was exceptional. I’ll keep it handy long after RBS. 5: Course bibliography is extremely useful. Provides a critical evaluation. 6: The bibliography essay is very useful. It would have been nice to have been able to read it beforehand, but it is long. Nevertheless, it offers a fine overview of the course. 7: Useful in the course, and of continuing value. 8: Yes. 9: Yes to both. 10: Yes, but I would have liked more handouts containing specific examples of all the names mentioned in class, and the types attributed to them. 11: Yes, yes. 12: Yes, very appropriate and useful. They will be helpful in the future, particularly the bibliography and list of leading characters.

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

1: Thoroughly. JM is a scholar and a teacher, a storehouse and a guide, and he was able to supply numerous levels of supporting details when appropriate. 2: Yes. 3: Absolutely. 4: Yes. 5: Highly intelligent. Not simply a survey, but an attempt to demonstrate lines of development. Presents an argument. 6: Points were well made. 7-10: Yes. 11: Yes, basic when necessary, but also reaching great depth when appropriate. 12: Yes.

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

1: One visit to UVa’s Special Collections enriched our slide tour through letterform history, with examples of what had been seen in slides, or what had been discussed. It also provided the advantage of getting a sense of the whole printed book, often large and cumbersome. 3: Extremely. I wish we had a little more time to do so. 4: Very well done. The small group, 90-minute session, was perfect, as was the 90-minute study period. 5: Yes. 6: Useful to see the actual types used in printing. 7-9: Yes. 11: Yes. I enjoyed our visit to Special Collections greatly. 12: Yes.

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: Closely, overall, but so fast - a canter. 2: Yes. 3: The description, yes, but not the title of the course - the course emphasized calligraphy, but concentrated on typography. 4-12: Yes.

6) What did you like best about the course?

1: JM - his expertise, organization, preparation, and apparent unhurried manner (the canter, notwithstanding). 2: JM’s lecture style - very engaging. His slides are beautiful. They really do convey the beauty of type. 3: The lecturer. He is obviously one of the most knowledgeable scholars in this field on the face of the planet, and he has a very lively style (quietly lively) of presenting the information - little bits of suspense sprinkled throughout, just to keep you looking forward to the next fact. 4: The instructor’s willingness to share his expertise and encyclopedic knowledge. 6: Fascinating material. The subject is more complex than I could have imagined. Instructor’s learning is impressive, and he brings a wide range of material to bear on the subject. 7: The instructor’s preparation, and his wide knowledge of the subject. 8: The professor is very knowledgeable and comical. He did a first-rate job. 9: The instructor’s extraordinary ability to present large areas of knowledge in readily comprehensible - and always entertaining - forms. 10: The hands-on examination of work of the individual printers and typefounders. JM has an incredible encyclopedic knowledge of the subject and material, and he was a delight to listen to. 11: The incredible knowledge of JM, and his subtle way of teaching. 12: JM was an excellent tutor, and the pace was just right. A lot of material was covered - and covered very well.

7) How could the course have been improved?

1: I would like to have had more access to the BAP examples during the discussion of them. More student interaction seems desireable, but it would’ve been hard to incorporate. 2: The props kept failing, ie the slide projector, remote, and laser pointer. We managed to get them to work, or we improvised, when necessary. 3: I wouldn’t have minded a bit more concentration on calligraphy, with some viewing of primary resources (ie, manuscripts) demonstrating the appropriate time periods. I would have also liked a few more copies of contemporary letterform examples - the printed page is harder to identify than an alphabet. 5: A set of examples of the major typefaces covered in the course would be a useful addition to the course packet. 6: More reproductions based on the instructor’s slides would help the analysis sink in. There were four examples in the workbook. If time and finances permit, more should be included. 7: I don’t think it could have been. 8: Perhaps a little more time in Special Collections would have been nice. 9: Only by lasting longer, I suppose. 10: More handouts with examples of each type. 11: The RBS classroom is not physically ideal. 12: No suggestions.

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?

1: No problem for us. 2: Since we depended largely on slides, I cannot really say. 3: Materials were generally well-handled during our visit to Special Collections. 4: None. 7: Can’t think of improvements. 11: We didn’t do much handling of these materials.

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, &c.

1: Well organized and convivial. 2: I ate too many peanuts. Somebody stop me. The dinner and wines were all delicious. 3: I missed a few of the above, but enjoyed all of the events I attended. I wonder if the booksellers cared about us - the one I visited wasn’t too terribly friendly. Something I said? Exhibits were great. 4: The lectures were particularly good this year. Please revise the Vade Mecum to warn about police citations for jaywalking. Very good lawn culture this week - a pleasure to be joined by faculty after hours for talk, beer, and wine. 7: The ones I (selectively) attended were quite good. 9: The booksellers tended to close at 8:00, even though the Antiquarian Bookhunting in Charlottesville brochure indicated that one would be open past 9:00. 10: I enjoyed having dinner with other people I had met outside of class, sitting on rocking chairs on the lawn, and talking with them late into the night. 11: I attended all of the events, except Bookseller Night. I enjoyed them all. Perhaps the Electronic Text Center open house should be called a "demonstration" instead. 12: Very well organized.

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

1: Advice? Observe closely and read. An excellent value, to be sure. 2: One rarely gets to meet someone with such a passion for this relatively esoteric subject, and one with such a broad knowledge of the art, architecture, and history that provides a context for it. My advice to people considering this course is to take the course without further consideration. 3: Absolutely worth the money, and then some. 4: Read the pre-course readings, and perhaps glance at a world history review. 6: A worthwhile course - almost an education in European history. 7: I will continue to benefit. The course helped to develop a more ordered overview of previously unconnected thoughts and readings. I cannot imagine anyone with an interest in the subject who would not be delighted to participate. 8: A fine course. Yes [got my money’s worth]. 9: Yes, I got my money’s worth. 10: This was a great course. I thoroughly enjoyed it, and I wish it had been for two weeks. 11: Be prepared for a dark room with slides, so get plenty of sleep beforehand. Definitely a wealth of information to be absorbed and enjoyed. 12: Very worthwhile - an excellent course.

Number of respondents: 11

There were twelve students in the class, and eleven evaluation responses: four rare book librarians (36%), one archivist/manuscript librarian (9%), one teacher/professor (9%), one antiquarian bookseller (9%), one conservator/binder/preservation librarian (9%), one physician with an interest in rare books (9%), one arts librarian (9%), and one staff member from an auction house, specializing in rare books (9%).