Paul Needham

No. 42: The Use of Physical Evidence in Early Printed Books

2-6 August 1999

1) How useful were the pre-course readings?

1: Very useful, although some were hard to obtain, and I was not able to get a couple. 2: Assigned readings were good. 3: Readings were useful; however, I had a rather difficult time procuring some. 4: Very useful. I was under the impression, however, that all readings would be available on the RBS website, so by the time I had found out otherwise, I had little time to obtain them via interlibrary loan. 5: Very useful, but some of them were confusing until they were discussed in class. 6: Though the readings were all referred to in class and hence made useful there, they were somewhat mystifying when originally read. Often the point the instructor wished to make with them was not the point of the articles in and of themselves. A lack of context made them difficult to use. 7: The readings provided good background, but in some cases the full point of the reading was clear only after additional information had been imparted in class. Some of the readings were difficult to secure, even through ILL. 8: Useful. 9: Very useful. 10: Moderately useful. Some may be more useful as post-course reading.

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1: The course packet with its many illustrations was a bit out of date, as PN admitted, but I did not consider this a serious flaw. 2: It would be helpful if the contents list of the examples were less abbreviated. The examples were extremely helpful during lecture. 3: Yes. However, in discussion with PN, I think he saw the need for a more updated version of the workbook, with better reproductions. 4: The course workbook was useful after a fashion, but more explanatory text would have greatly improved it. It also needs an up-to-date bibliography of essential readings on the topics covered. 5: Yes, the workbook we received will be very useful. 6: There was no course syllabus (there should have been). We made use of just about half of the workbook distributed in class. Because there was no syllabus, I could not tell if it included superfluous material or whether the instructor did not cover what he had hoped. 7: No real syllabus was distributed, so it was difficult to have an overall sense of what we would be covering. The series of "examples" distributed was somewhat randomly arranged. Not all items were covered, so it remains unclear what some of them were meant to demonstrate. 8: Yes. 9: Yes. I think an electronic version would be an enormous improvement. 10: Need a bibliography!! (PN noted that the syllabus needs an extensive revision.) Perhaps the bibliography, if provided for future classes, could be put on the RBS website.

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

1: Very much so - listening to PN's elegant arguments and demonstrations was a great pleasure. 2-5: Yes. 6: A great deal of time was spent the first two days on elementary aspects, particularly of format. I would have preferred to move directly to the special problems incunables present. 7: Absolutely. 8: Yes - almost too theoretical. 9: I enjoyed the course immensely, mostly because it was a pleasure to listen to someone at the top of his field speak. 10: Yes. PN provided a high level of information.

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

1: Yes, I believe so, though regrettably we could not personally handle the incunabula on display. It was often awkward trying to get a close look at them - perhaps a better system of display could be devised. 2: Yes. 3: Time was very well spent as the class made several visits to Special Collections. All materials were useful. 4: Yes. Both Special Collections and the electronic media room (in Clemons Library) were used to good effect. 5: Yes - we spent time in Special Collections looking at books. I wish there were more time to spend with them! 6: I enjoyed the session on provenance in Special Collections. Some of the earlier sessions were frustrating because the points being presented really required handling the books, something the class as a whole could not do. 7: Yes. In fact, the course would have been enhanced if it were possible to teach it at Special Collections, so we could see examples at the time we were discussing each section. 8: Yes, but the instructor was not always prepared as to details he wanted to cover. 9-10: 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: I don't recall all of the details of the ECD, but for the most part there was truth in advertisement. I certainly got plenty out of the course. Perhaps more could have been taught about bookbinding, which was very summarily treated compared to other topics like paper size and collation. 2: Yes, but it is up to the student to think through applications beyond incunables. The tools are definitely and abundantly provided to do this. 3: Yes, although I would like to see some expansion of dates to include material after 1501. 4-5: Yes. 6: More or less. I would say the course concentrated more on the "physical evidence" and less on the "use," that is, it did not make clear the applications that much of the detailed observations could be put to. 7: Not really. There were some aspects (eg bindings) which were barely touched on, while others occupied far more time than the description indicated. 8: Fairly well. 9: Yes. 10: Yes, more or less.

6) What did you like best about the course?

1: Being in the presence of a very articulate and productive scholar who very much enjoys his research and loves to share his ideas with others - an inspiring experience! 2: The instructor's (may I say) passion for the subject is inspiring. His objective analysis is refreshing and extremely illuminating. His knowledge of the field of bibliography is very impressive and instructive. 3: PN's expertise. 4: PN's vast and impressive knowledge of incunabula and their structures, histories, variations, &c. 5: I enjoyed looking at the early printed books in Special Collections. I also enjoyed listening to PN. He is an excellent instructor who obviously enjoys the subject and has a thorough knowledge of it. 6: I enjoyed the instructor's sense of humor and his stories of the lives of great bibliographers. I appreciated his comments which drew on the experience of handling many, many books. As I said above, I enjoyed the sessions on marks of provenance the most. 7: The instructor. Listening to PN's thoughts on various bibliographic subjects is a pleasure. 8: Intellectually stimulating. Pleasant atmosphere. 9: My interest in this course is probably different from many RBS students. I am not a bibliographer or otherwise involved in the book trade, except as a consumer. However, it was fascinating to see how someone else does something completely different with the texts of the period I study. In this sense, the course has been very stimulating and he's given me ideas for my own work. 10: The depth of knowledge of the instructor and the ability to look at books in Special Collections.

7) How could the course have been improved?

1: The workbook needs to be reorganized (it must be several years old now) to reflect the actual structure and sequence of topics of the course - and a thorough, updated bibliography to reflect the authors discussed by the instructor. 3: As I stated earlier, an expansion of the period covered would be good, but I suppose it's not practical in the given week of class. Another course added, perhaps? 4: PN lectured without notes; this at times led him either to wander off the topic, or sometimes to repeat what he had already said. Better organization of this material by using an outline or by following a syllabus would undoubtedly enhance his presentation. 5: Make it longer! 6: A reference list of incunables at UVa. A list of further reading or useful reference books. There should have been a clearer timetable and agenda for the course. I would also have liked to have the opportunity to handle some of the books myself. The material would maker more sense if organized around kinds of bibliographical questions or problems, rather than simply around kinds of evidence. 7: A printed syllabus would, perhaps, have provided more structure and insured that all topics were covered. The instructor tended to follow tangents which - though fascinating - were sometimes beyond the promised scope of the course and left less time to cover these other topics. 8: Instructor was not as disciplined as he might have been in directing appropriate amounts of time to the various subjects. He drifted and was too wordy at times, sometimes too detailed. 9: It would have been nice to have an expanded bibliography or bibliographical material. 10: More structure to daily presentations would have helped. We didn't know the topic of discussion from day to day. Furthermore, PN tended to spend a lot of time on some topics and very little on others. The format-collation interrelationship was never addressed, even though a reminder note was on the black board all week (but we spent hours on transcription).

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: This does not seem to be a problem in a small class such as this (we had 10 students), except for the case of handling the rare books in Special Collections. 2: Some smaller foam or velvet snake supports may be helpful and easier for the instructor to manipulate during lectures. 3: PN always handled the materials in Special Collections, so this was never a concern. 4: Incunabula from Special Collections were difficult to see because of the restrictions against their being handled. Perhaps a packet of color reproductions of those pages being shown could be circulated in class, à la the method in "Book Illustration to 1890." 5: No suggestions. 6: Not relevant. 7: Materials were handled only by the instructor. 9: I can't think of any. 10: Everything was handled respectfully.

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: I think TB described these activities as a kind of midway, adjacent to the real attractions, so I don't have much opinion on this, and did not have high expectations anyway. It was the course, not the side show, that matters. It's always hit or miss whether you get an exciting guest speaker, or ones who put you to sleep. 2: I think activities are very enjoyable. 3: All extra activities are well planned. 5: The Sunday tour, dinner, and videos were excellent. Bookseller Night was also enjoyable. I attended two of the lectures - they were interesting, but not on subjects I'm really interested in. The Rotunda exhibit is great! 6: I enjoyed meeting with other participants at Sunday Night Dinner, Bookseller Night, &c. Part of the value of RBS is, in fact, social. 7: The Sunday Night Dinner and the lectures and Bookseller Night all added to the overall RBS experience in a most positive way. 8: Adequate, but not outstanding. 9: Fantastic. 10: Very enjoyable.

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

1: I certainly got my money's worth - the experience of living on Jefferson's Lawn and the beautiful campus and countryside make a great setting for this educational opportunity. 2: A very good course. 3: PN is a great instructor and a fountain of knowledge. It was a pleasure to be able to take his course. 4: This course is one of the trinity of essential ones devoted to the understanding of the first printed books and their history and structure (the other two being "Introduction to Descriptive Bibliography" and "How to Research a Rare Book."). 5: I would highly recommend this course to anyone interested in c15 printing. Participants should definitely do the readings before class, and have a fairly good knowledge of Latin. Yes, I did get my money's worth. 6: Yes, I was satisfied with the course. Even with its meandering start, it still provided a great deal of useful information and the pleasure of seeing;/hearing a serious scholar and original mind discuss his own work. Very inspiring. 7: I always get my money's worth from RBS courses. They're wonderful! 8: Come prepared by pre-course reading. Yes [got my money's worth]. 9: This is a very high level, highly focused course. However, and the instructor states in the description, it does show ways of dealing with books in general. I think it would be very interesting to anyone working with texts from the c18 or earlier. I highly recommend it. 10: I was satisfied with the course, but had it been structured better, I think I would have gotten more out of it. As it is, I'll always wonder about the format-collation interrelationship.

Number of respondents: 10

There were two antiquarian booksellers (20%), two archivist/manuscript librarians (20%), two rare book librarians (20%), two teacher/professors (20%), one general librarian with some rare book duties (10%), and one retiree (10%).