Nicholas Pickwoad

No. 43: European Bookbinding, 1500-1800

2-6 August 1999

1) How useful were the pre-course readings?

1: Very useful. 2: I did not do enough of the readings beforehand, but was somewhat put off by the first assigned book - Douglas Cockerell. Fortunately, the course itself did not take that direction. 3: Moderately useful. For people with an academic (as opposed to conservation) background, these technical readings were very hard to understand. Perhaps a "read this first" note might have helped. 5: Extremely useful - I look forward to looking at them again. 6: Very useful.7: Good introductory information, but not totally necessary if one is familiar with bookbinding. 8: The pre-course readings were very useful and the readings I did not have time to read, I hope to read over the next month. 9: Very. 10-11: Very useful.

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: Workbook was, and will continue to be, very useful. No syllabus, per se, was issued, which I believe would aid us in thinking more and preparing for the next day's class. 2: Could use more graphic description of individual categories in some sort of tabular arrangement by binding type, chronological period, country, &c., &c., to refer to when such characteristics come up - until they are solidly absorbed. 3: Yes. 4: Highly appropriate and useful. 5: Extremely useful and appropriate. 6: Useful. 7: Yes, and I hope they will continue to be relevant. It would be really nice (and probably too much work to expect from the instructor) to have a chart that listed the dates and geographical areas of key features so one could focus on the slides instead of madly trying to write down "French c16." 8: Yes, especially the bound notes by the instructor. It contains many useful drawings. 9: Yes, tremendously. 10: Course packet was very useful. Illustrations of binding information were invaluable to understanding particularities of the structures presented. 11: Yes. 12: Absolutely.

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

1: Absolutely, and difficult to achieve, considering the diversity of professions in the class (eg librarians, conservators, booksellers). 2: Yes. 3: Cannot speak for the conservators, but as an academic rare book librarian, I found that NP assumed too much. More about this in no.7, below. 4: Highly so. 5-7: Yes. 8: Yes. The content was appropriate, but there was too much content and too little time to cover everything well. The entire course moved at lightning speed. 9-12: Yes.

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

1: Yes; a pleasure and a rare treat to hear NP describe the wide variety of bindings. 2: Very much so. 3: Yes. 4: Yes, I would like to see more time in Special Collections, given the content of this course. Better examples are there than in BAP. USE UVa SPECIAL COLLECTIONS MORE!! 5-6: Yes. 7: Yes, very. 8-9: Yes. 10: Our visit to Special Collections was an important part of the course. 11: Yes. 12: Absolutely, though too short to see everything.

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: Yes. 2: Don't know. 3: Yes, mostly. 4-12: Yes.

6) What did you like best about the course?

1: NP, a wonderful teacher who clearly likes to impart his vast knowledge; excellent images. 2: The breadth of the instructor's organized examples. Probably no one else could have presented such a comprehensive survey. 3: 1) The expansive knowledge of the instructor. 2) The very clear slides, with which he should describe binding structures. 3) The great number of examples. 4) NP's articulation and humor. 4: Instructor's insight and ability to synthesize craft/structure and history. It seems a fairly unique fusion. Instructor's noble attempt to always do more, add more, say more; rather than attempting to do less. 5: The instructor was superb - extremely serious about the topic, but creative in his presentation, even poetic, and often humorous. One of the best instructors I've had. 6: NP's experience. Wonderful course! Thank you. 7: The complete depth and breadth of knowledge of the instructor and the clarity of his presentation of vast amounts of material. 8: The quality and number of slides were great. 9: Very well organized. Excellent visuals and descriptions. Very thorough, yet still very coherent. The whole thing was tremendous. 10: Our instructor was incredibly knowledgeable about the content of the course and his presentation of the material was clear and well organized. 12: The instructor's wealth of knowledge and experience.

7) How could the course have been improved?

1: I would have appreciated being able to have more contact with the BAP materials - being conservators and rare book librarians, I feel we would not have put too much stress on the materials. 2: See no.8, below. 3: 1) Class schedule, distributed first thing. The course was tightly organized, but having a written framework would have been helpful. 2) NP's pedagogical techniques. Although I did the readings, I needed a verbal, in person description of various procedures and methods of the binding processes. If he had taken pains to properly introduce each structure, define terms, to compare/contrast with other methods, a reduced number of slides to accommodate that, we all would have gotten more out of the course. 3) More opportunity to ask questions. 4) Being able to handle the BAP exemplars. The Lenin's Tomb style of show-and-tell of real books wasn't all that helpful. 4: Use Special Collections more. Integrate slides and real books even better, if possible. 5: It would help to be able to get a better look at some of the books shown in class. 6: By handling the books and better light in the classroom. 7: Only by including charts mentioned in no.2, above. 8: Maybe the course needs to be broken down into two courses, or a follow-up course given. 11: Have the instructor's notes and slides duplicated for distribution. There is so much useful and valuable information that one cannot possibly record by hand. 12: It would have been great to have been able to handle some of the rare books, ie have a touch of the covering material, leather, vellum.

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: See no.7, above. 2: Not being able to handle any of the books was overly restrictive - with proper advance preparation, surely some of the materials could have been handled. Handling would help us appreciate many of the individual bindings' characteristics. 4: I think it is important to handle materials. Other professionals, the students in this course, are perfectly able to handle materials wearing white gloves, as we handle prints in a museum. Not in every case, of course, but when really feasible. 5: Could books be placed in cradles so that we could take more time to look at them, but not subject them to too much abuse? 7: It's hard not to be able to handle the examples - but I'd say you've already restricted use enough with only the instructor allowed to hold them. 8: None.12: Some of the books could be left in some show cases, to allow a longer visual inspection of them.

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: Sunday Night Dinner was good. Videos were not (though the Lindesfarne Gospels was good). Evening lectures were mixed. 2: Well organized. 3: Very much enjoyed the coffee breaks and receptions, but for the former, would have liked decaf brewed coffee and fruit. John Bidwell's lecture was very interesting; E. Speed Hill's lecture would have been more interesting if he'd had a snappier delivery. 4: Some lectures were a bit esoteric, even for this field. 5: I found TB's talk the most informative and entertaining this week, and I enjoy very much attending talks in the Rotunda Dome Room. The printing demonstration was also quite enjoyable. Could there be more studio-type demonstrations for general attendance (eg various illustration techniques)? Could RBS coordinate an evening tour of Monticello? I think the director there would consider such a suggestion - something to do with Jefferson's library? 7: Bookseller Night and the one evening lecture I attended were pleasant. 10: I very much enjoyed the evening lectures and Bookseller Night. 11: Sunday Night Dinner was a good beginning to meet with other attendees. 12: I was very satisfied with the organization of our free time.

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

1: Wonderful course; worth it in every way! 2: Best introduction to bookbinding history we could possibly get, but be prepared for an enormous amount of detailed material and perhaps be advised to set up a notebook by date, country, &c., to record and classify the different examples presented. 3: Money's worth, yes. Non-binders should try to sit with a binder to have the basics described and illustrated. 4: This course was for me stunning, over-stimulating, brilliant. 5: Absolutely got my money's worth. I am very glad I had some instruction in basic bookbinding techniques (making books) before I took the course - I would have been a little lost without that. 7: Drink plenty of caffeine (to keep you up to speed - you'll have no problem staying awake). Yes, the course totally fulfilled my expectations. 8: I do feel that the course was well worth the expenditure and, based on my experience in NP's class, I am hoping to take other RBS courses. 9: Highly recommended. Yes [got my money's worth]. 10: This course was fantastic; I definitely got my money's worth. 12: [Got my money's worth] and more!

Number of respondents: 12

There were five conservator/binder/preservation librarians (42%), four rare book librarians (33%), two antiquarian booksellers (17%), and one teacher/professor (8%).