Sue Allen

B-90: Publishers’ Bookbindings, 1830-1910


30 July - 3 Aug 2007 in Charlottesville

 

1)    How useful were the pre-course readings?

 

1: Very helpful; an enormous list, so I could not read it all. 2: I enjoyed the pre-course readings – particularly the works by Sue Allen, Douglas Ball, and Andrea Krupp. Warren Tryon’s biography of James Fields was also extremely informative and fun to read. 3: Very helpful, and also provide a place to go back to after learning a ton in the course. 4: Quite useful. 5: Very useful, and will remain valuable reference books. 6: Very useful – quite a lot of material. 7: Quite useful. 8: The readings were essential and very helpful. It would have been better if I had had the Andrea Krupp booklet, rather than photocopies. 9: Pre-course readings were quite useful. It might be useful to have a longer list that one could read selectively – since many of the materials are hard to find. 10-11: Very useful. 12: Useful for background, but the most helpful were the heavily illustrated texts.

 

2)    Were the course syllabus and other materials distributed in class appropriate and useful (or will they be so in the future, after you return home)?

 

1: Both appropriate and useful for class; will be enjoyed and used at home. 2: Yes – the time line, in particular, has become indispensable. 3: Absolutely – the one thing I’m really hoping for is SA’s book! 4: Definitely useful, especially the illustrated timeline of publisher bindings. 5: The materials will be very useful as I continue to study 19th-century bindings. 6: No syllabus, but very informative and useful handouts and bibliography. 7: Yes. 8: The timeline was very helpful. I will use it along with the very helpful American book covers pamphlet. 9-10: Yes. 11: Extremely, especially the fold-out American Book Covers 1830-1900 and the bibliography. 12: No syllabus per se, but the time line SA prepared and presented, along with the several exhibition brochures, are extremely useful.

 

3)    What aspects of the course content were of the greatest interest or relevance for your purposes? Was the intellectual level of the course appropriate?

 

1: The combination of slides and demonstrations of books worked well together. SA wove them together with highly relevant and intelligent narrative. 2: I found all aspects to be of interest, as almost every unit helped us refine our ability to date bindings. I found the unit on identifying cloth grains particularly useful, and I enjoyed our work in the McGregor room with RBS’s chronologically arranged collection of American bindings. I also was glad that we were tested at the beginning and end of the course; although I was already comfortable with many aspects covered by the course, I was able to identify my weakness and correct them. 3: The whole thing – it was even better than I had expected – time absolutely flew by and I was sad for the week to end. There were so many things that were brought up, and they all flowed into each other in a really helpful way. 4: The intellectual level was quite high, but presented by SA in a very down-to-earth and interesting manner. 5: Learning to appreciate the significance of each binding element: covers, binder’s ticket, endpapers, headbands. Learning to recognize artist designers’ and engravers’ marks. 6: Wonderful collection of RBS books available for handling and close study. Very useful and instructive to select books and record all aspects in McGregor room – great exercise and practice in correct verbal descriptions of bookbinding and design elements. Very interested to learn about artist designers. 7: Yes – so many aspects, it’s hard to say what was most interesting. 8: Learning about the different designs for each time period will be very helpful. The intellectual level was appropriate. 9: Combination of slides, real books, and lecture was ideal. The intellectual level was just the right amount of stretch. 10: The intellectual level was appropriate. The hundreds of books that we viewed over the course of the week made it possible to develop a feel for the periods, and the transitions from one period to the next. 11: All was relevant because SA knew how to make it relevant. The intellectual level was just right. 12: SA is able to give a rational explanation for the chronological development of publishers’ bookbindings without suppressing the artistic impulse of the creators. Her enthusiastic presentations and gentle humor were a great joy.

 

4)    If your course left its classroom to visit Special Collections (SC) or to make other field trips away from your classroom, was the time devoted to this purpose well spent?

 

1: Very valuable, particularly the opportunity to see the treasures in SC, and how they were originally bound. 2: Yes – SC gave us the opportunity to view some extremely rare and exciting material. 3: Yes, we got to see some really amazing books up close that we had been discussing. 4:  Yes, particularly the exercises in the McGregor room. 5: Very efficiently done. 6: Yes, but [we were] not allowed to handle books – I prefer to work with RBS books. 7: Yes, though the rules applied to RBS students in SC were surprisingly stifling (not necessarily a bad thing, though). 8: Yes, the SC trip was very helpful. 9: Much of the SC material duplicates RBS’s holdings – and we can touch RBS books. I’m not sure that the SC trip justifies a whole class period.10: Yes. The exercises in the McGregor room were useful. The visit to SC was a treat. 11: I would certainly say so! The books we saw in SC were exciting and inspiring. 12: The class exercises in McGregor were great opportunities to look, to see, to describe, to present – and to learn. The trip to SC showed us more of the lovely books we’d seen in slide or picture, but we couldn’t touch, of course, so I don’t think I learned more from them.

 

5)    What did you like best about the course?

 

1: SA! Her knowledge of the subject is vast, and she presents it in a charming, gentle, and articulate manner. The RBS collection related to our course was substantial, and made the content more relevant. My classmates were terrific; all came well prepared and added greatly to the course. 2: SA’s ability to cover in depth so many aspects of 19th-century binding history. She not only drew our attention to the material quality of books, but to the quality of their design. She explained the mechanical technologies that affected production in great detail. She also discussed the social context and history as it influenced bindings and their design. Her intelligence and passion – and particularly, her opinion and taste – serve as a model for any serious scholar. 3: SA is absolutely fabulous – her passion, humor, and intellect are really inspiring – she and Vince Golden worked together with wonderful chemistry, and looking at the books and learning about what they have to say about the time. 4: The true appreciation of the book as an object of art. 5: Listening to SA talk about the bindings of each decade, and learning how to date bindings by recognizing the characteristics of the period. 6: SA is a wonderful instructor – a living legend! Vince Golden was responsible for making the course run smoothly; he is very well organized and informed – capable of materializing the right books at the right time out of the thin air! Like magic! 7: The hands-on aspect. 8: SA. She made the course interesting and relevant. Also, seeing the actual books up close, especially special collections. 9: SA. 10: Learning the stylistic changes, the transitions – attributable to changing technology – taste and fine arts design. SA and Vince Golden were delightful. They have terrific breadth of knowledge and both are eager to share it – really nice people to know. 11: SA: her devotion to the material, my classmates, and the material itself. 12: The content of the course was beautiful, but the knowledge and the spirit of the teacher were the most important aspects. Her assistant, in the person of Vince Golden, was invaluable and entertaining.

 

6)    How could the course have been improved?

 

1: Make it a two-week course! 2: I would have liked more comparison with British bindings. Perhaps one more McGregor unit, but focused on design elements? 3: More handling of books, which is difficult when there are so many of us in a group. 4: N/A. 5: I got a little confused at first by the differences between English books of each decade and American books of the same decade – that could be clearer, perhaps. 6: Free books?! 7: Maybe having some backup slide projectors for when the bulb burns out. 8: N/A. 10: No suggestions. 11: We didn’t need two sessions in the McGregor room, I felt; one would have sufficed. 12: N/A.

 

7)    We are always concerned about the physical well-being both of the RBS 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: The materials were skillfully handled by [SA’s assistant] Vince Golden. I don’t think she could manage the course without him.  2: I think the books could use support – particularly during the endpapers unit. 180 degrees seems to be too far for some books to be opened. Otherwise, no problem: we used pencils only, kept food and drink out of the room, &c. 3: We used the baskets and resisted the tremendous urge to touch things, had no liquids or pens, so I think it’s pretty good. 4: Handling of materials was done with great care. 5: In just a few cases, I thought the open cover of a book might be supported a bit more to protect the inner hinge. 6: Was appropriate. 7: Baskets seem to work great. 8: The baskets worked well, however, it was difficult to balance baskets in SC. 9: Instruction in handling appears to be adequate. 10: No suggestions. 11: Everyone was respectful. 12: N/A.

 

8)    If you attended the Sunday and/or other evening lectures, were they worth attending?

 

1: Both the Sunday lecture by TB and the Monday night lecture [by Richard Kuhta] were first-rate. Both were worth attending. 2: Yes. I especially enjoyed RK’s lecture on Monday night. 3: Oh yes, it was a fascinating lecture about a book I knew nothing about. 4: N/A. 5: Didn’t attend. 6: The RK lecture was very good. 7: Yes, and they were extra beneficial for first-timers. 8: The Monday evening lecture was very interesting. 9: Yes! 10: No suggestions. 11: Both [lectures] were: TB is always worth listening to, and the RK talk/exhibit was fascinating. 12: Absolutely.

 

9)    Did you get your money’s worth? Any final or summary thoughts, or advice for other persons considering taking this course in a future year?

 

1: It is impossible to put a value on this course or the RBS experience. Both are priceless. I highly recommend this course to future students. 2: Yes! A fabulous course for anyone who works with American bindings. This course exposes you to a tremendous amount of material and, by the time you leave, you’ll have a new pair of eyes. Thank you, SA! This has been one of my best experiences in the classroom, anytime, anywhere. 3: Absolutely, and more than that. I’d take this course again just because the class, and SA, and Vince, and the information were so fascinating. I can’t wait to go home and start projects. 4: After taking this course and its week-long immersion in the various bindings, I will look at books in a very different way. Thank you, SA! 5: Definitely. 6: Do the reading – go to booksellers night. 7: Yes. It is such an overwhelming experience that it’s hard to issue any final or summary thoughts just yet; maybe after a few weeks! 8: Yes, I got my money’s worth. I think this course is important for anyone in the field. 9: We need to be reminded, repeatedly and forcefully, about the Paper and Type Museums, and other out-of-class opportunities. 10: Absolutely got my money’s worth. 11: Hell yeah! Best course I’ve taken here, and all my courses so far have been extraordinary. 12: Absolutely. Don’t miss the booksellers evenings – great examples from the course can be acquired. Also, if at all possible, bring an item to show at the beginning of the session, if asked. That’s a wonderful introduction to fellow classmates, as well as a possibility of a sneak preview of course topics.

 

Number of respondents: 12

 

                                                                  Percentages

Leave                        Tuition                      Housing                    Travel

Institution                 Institution                 Institution                 Institution

gave me leave            paid tuition               paid housing              paid travel

58%                             33%                             42%                             33%

I took vaca-                I paid tui-                   I paid for my              I paid my own

tion time                    tion myself                 own housing              travel

8%                               33%                             42%                             50%

N/A: self-                    N/A: Self-                   N/A: stayed                N/A: lived

employed, re-            employed,                  with friends               nearby

tired, or had              retired, or                  or lived at

summers off               scholarship                home

33%                             33%                             17%                             17%

 

There were 2 rare book librarians (17%); 2 book-collectors (17%); 1 state court judge (8%); 1 special collections librarian (8%); 1 RBS staff member (8%); 1 archivist (8%); 1 full-time student (8%); 1 conservator (8%); 1 librarian (8%); and 1 retired person (8%).