Richard Noble
Advanced Descriptive Bibliography
14-18 June 2010
1. How useful were the pre-course readings? (Leave blank if you applied and were accepted late for the course, and thus did not get the list in time.)
1: Pre-course readings were wonderfully useful and not too heavy—everything I read contributed to my understanding of the materials covered in class. 2: Very useful, particularly Bowers. 3: Readings were good, though most important readings (i.e., Bowers & Gaskell) were repeated from Intro to DesBib. "Printers of the Mind" and chapter one of Tanselle's Bibliographical Analysis were very helpful orientation. 4: Extremely useful. Particularly because they are some of the fundamental texts of analytical bibliography. Although not all were discussed in class, I will surely turn back to them time and time again. 5: Essential. A thorough review of Bowers was necessary to be able to jump back in years after the intro course. Knowing my way around Gaskell is also invaluable. 6: The pre-course readings were essential. 7: Extremely useful, they formed an essential common understanding needed for class participation and discussion. 8: Essential! 9: Critical. 10: Extremely valuable—a modicum of knowledge is necessary to enter the course. Beyond intro level. 11: I thought the pre-course readings useful and some of them were referenced and expanded upon in class. Others were not and therefore may be more appropriate as exit reading. 12: The readings are vital to understanding the course content and indeed, lacking at least a passing familiarity with Bowers in particular would render this course useless.
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: Yes—I have a feeling I will be referring back to some of those materials. 2: Yes, they are. I will keep them for my future use. 3: Yes, they were helpful and will be carefully retained and studied in the future. Much material in our notebook not explicitly addressed in class. 4: Yes. I very much appreciated the hard work that clearly went into the preparation of the Advanced DesBib binder. The index to Bowers and leaf counting tool were the most heavily used. 5: Yes. I will keep the materials close to my desk indefinitely. 6: The course materials were in general useful. Although the course museum packet wasn't heavily used during class, it does contain good material for future reference. It would be very useful if there were some handouts on imposition schemes added to the course materials. 7: Yes, they make an excellent aide memoire and outline the essential issues of the course. 8: As above—essential for class. Also, will be extremely useful at home. 9: Yes. 10: More useful after I return home—I'm not sure "Course Museums" were introduced and explained at all. 11: Yes. 12: Very useful in class and I anticipate even more so when I return home and have a bit of leisure time and more energy to absorb them; the frenetic pacing of this course makes it a bit difficult to grasp the importance of the provided information during the week.
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: I really enjoyed the lecture and lab times because not only was I very interested, I also felt the benefits of learning from an instructor (and a lab instructor!) with so much knowledge and experience and so much willingness to share! 2: Homework! Some books were really difficult to deal with. But through making mistakes I learned a lot. Level was appropriate. 3: There is an interesting dual track: 1) practiced laboratory experience with rare books and description thereof and 2) situating how those tools and analysis are deployed in the field and tradition of descriptive bibliography. 4: The lab and homework sessions are the meat and potatoes of this course, and the man draw to return for part two after the intro. Eileen Smith and RN's instruction and RN's practically encyclopedic knowledge have helped me to understand better not just what to see but also what to look for in a book. Classmates' reviews of des bibs a lovely addition—the cherry on top. 5: The time spent on homework was extremely useful, but the lectures and the time with David Vander Meulen provided more valuable food for thought than I could have hoped for. 6: The session on practical and theoretical concerns was most interesting to me. The intellectual level of the course was just right. 7: The greatest relevance was in the frank discussions of how to start and complete a bibliographical project. 8: Level was definitely appropriate. Honestly, ALL of it was of "greatest" interest and relevance. 9: Analyzing the books to produce collational formulae. 10: Collational formula of greatest relevance, but I shall physical evidence better [sic], to better inform it. 11: We worked with more difficult books than in the intro class and discussed elements and strategies for creating a successful and useful bibliography. Homework and lab discussion were high-level and useful. 12: The intellectual level of the course was stellar, the content and lectures invigorating and inspiring. The hands-on opportunity for collation is invaluable of course, and the addition of Eileen Smith as lab instructor made the slightly larger class size manageable and added invaluable perspective.
4. What did you like best about the course?
1: I liked listening to everyone's presentations on published bibliographies. The lectures and labs I mentioned above, but I also enjoyed both the Monday evening lecture and the Thursday afternoon talk we had with David Vander Meulen. 2: Homework and lab. 3: The opportunity to examine more materials and describe them in the lab setting. 4: Camaraderie among instructors and students makes an exceptional environment for learning. Sharing of knowledge, experience, and questions stimulated good class discussions and a very productive lab. 5: How does one choose? Really, I ponder, but I just can't choose. 6: I enjoyed the combination of all the different activities in the course of the week: homework time, lab instruction, and the prepared remarks/discussion. 7: The discussion format with other equally amazing students. 8: Collegiality of instructors and rest of class. Mutually supportive and exploratory in investigations of books. 9: Instructor RN and opportunity to handle and analyze the books. ES as lab instructor was superb also. 10: Knowledge of the instructors and attendees. 11: In general, the class focused on the same methods of bibliography as the intro course. I would like to see more advanced methods. The best 90 minutes of the course were with David Vander Meulen on use of running titles and the Hinman collator. 12: The opportunity to work directly with RN and ES in labs on individual items was remarkable and immeasurably valuable; likewise the chance to listen to RN talk about bibliography and the work he does on a daily basis and pick his brain about our own work.
5. Did the
instructor(s) successfully help you to acquire the information and skills that the course was intended to convey?
1: Yes, I definitely think they did. 2: Yes, they helped me a
lot, answering all of my questions. 3: Yes, but in a very hands-on way,
in Socratic dialogue, as it were, with the books. Thus one gets out what
one puts in in trying to come to grips with them. 5: Yes, but I fell
that to really get where I want to be with this knowledge, I need several more
weeks of this! 6: Yes, the instructor and lab instructor did an excellent
job and their teaching styles were complementary. 7: I believe so, yes. 8: Oh my gosh, yes! 9: Yes. 10: Yes. 11: Yes. Both
RN and Eileen Smith emphasized the importance of judgment in bibliographic
description. "Intro" concentrated more on the dogmatic Bowers, and I appreciated
the more thoughtful and even-handed treatment by both instructors here. 12: Very
much so.
6. Did you learn what the course description/advertisements indicated you would learn?
1-11: Yes. 12: That and more: a course with RN is always somewhat of an adventure.
7. Did you learn what you wanted to learn in the course?
1-4: Yes. 5: And more! Particularly regarding the relevance of the work of bibliography. 6-7: Yes. 12: Again, and more—one gets what one is willing to put into a course like this, and this group and RN and ES as instructors put an extraordinary amount of time and effort into making this easily the most valuable experience of my professional career.
8. How do you intend to use or apply the knowledge or skills learned in this course?
1: I intend to try to apply them where I work in possibly describing or at least finding out more about the materials there. 2: I will use some descriptive bibliographical evidence or facts to support my argument in my Ph.D. dissertation. 3: In physical description of books for catalog records. And as the foundation for a full, intellectual bibliographical project. 4: As a private cataloger I use bibliographies. It will be useful to turn to them now with a critical eye. I hope to continue my education on a graduate level in the years to come, with the intention of pursuing bibliographical scholarship on a higher level. DesBib will be, I'm sure, a valuable tool if and when that time comes. 5: The knowledge I gained here will inform my every encounter with rare books. I feel as though I might now be looking with both eyes opened. 6: The knowledge and skills from this course will be useful in using and interpreting published bibliographical tools as well as doing bibliographical research. 7: I intend to engage in yet more research. 8: Both professionally and personally in a number of bibliographical and cataloging projects. 9: Will be of continuing use in analyzing books for purchase, and in assessing existing materials in our collection. 10: My job requires use of knowledge and skills. 11: I am doing bibliographical research and writing. This course substantially improved my ability to do both. 12: Will apply to my daily work as a rare book librarian, as well as potentially furthering work in areas of personal/academic interest.
9. How could the course have been improved? If you have a suggestion for a new course (and—equally important—a person who could teach it), please contact the RBS Program Director.
1: I know of no way the course could be improved. 2: A new course, about c20 century American magazines. I don't know who can teach this, though. This topic is getting more and more scholarly attention, it seems to me. 3: The choice of books seemed hurried. A little more deliberation would have helped. 4: The course might be improved with a museum/lab session to deal with wacky impositions. Lots of folding paper and comparing books. This is very difficult to grasp in 2D. 5: Perhaps slightly fewer books in each homework session so as to allow for more discussion about each in labs. And, if possible, a deeper discussion of the story each oddity is telling us. 6: I would have liked to have had a little more time for lab discussion. Given the newly limited library hours, perhaps a book set of five instead of six would work better, and would allow for more leisurely discussion. 7: It would be useful to have yet another week to learn. Advanced seminars in DesBib? 8: Not sure—perhaps longer—more books to collate (believe it or not)! 9: Would be difficult to improve since already much of the time is devoted to hands-on book analysis and instruction. 10: I cannot think of a thing. 11: As mentioned earlier, I would love a course in advanced bibliographical methods. 12: Perhaps more variety in the items provided for homework—some were familiar from the Intro course. Short of adding another four or five hours to the day, which could easily be filled with more and deeper exploration of descriptive bibliography, there is not much more RN could do to improve this wonderful experience.
10. 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: Yes—we had a demonstration by David Vander Meulen on his work and how to use a Hinman collator—it was a good way of getting an idea of what research of that type entails. 2: Yes, exactly. Hinman collator was really interesting. 3: Yes. Lecture by David Vander Meulen and demonstration of Hinman collator very much worth the time. 4: N/A. 5: Yes! I was so excited to be able to try the two collators in Small. What a treat! 6-8: Yes. 9: Yes—David Vander Meulen and his work with The Dunciad. 10: No—but my problem. 11: Absolutely. We used SC for a demo of the two collating machines. 12: Yes—seeing the Hinman collator "in action" so to speak, and the opportunity to hear David Vander Meulen talk about his work added immense value.
11. 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: I know I appreciated very much the opportunity of handling and examining the books used for homework in this course, and I think all of us were equally respectful of them. 2: Students in this class were all of them specialists. So no problem, they know how to. 3: RBS should investigate using book pillows (which we use at our special collections library) rather than the foam wedges, which are ungainly and can actually grip too much on the materials. 5: Perhaps a brief discussion at the beginning of the week about the importance of care. 6: The book supports on hand were sufficient. 7: No. 9: Handling of books was exemplary. 10: Book handling skills were assumed in Advanced DesBib—is that the best way to go. 12: Of course these books have been much handled and are in some cases falling to pieces, but the instructors took great care in ensuring as much as possible that items were carefully handled and in usable condition.
12. If you attended the optional evening events (e.g., RBS Lecture, Video Night, RBS Forum, Booksellers' Night) were they worth attending?
1: The lecture was really just wonderful—I thought it a most fascinating and relevant subject and David Vander Meulen an excellent speaker. Booksellers' Night was fabulous too. 2: Professor David Vander Meulen's lecture was worth it. 3: Booksellers' Night is always enjoyable. Could not attend Video Night or Forum because of homework. 4: Lecture by David Vander Meulen was wonderful. Too much homework for other events, except bookseller's night. 5: DVM's talk was excellent. And I always enjoy a visit to Franklin and Gilliam [i.e., Franklin Gilliam Rare Books−Mgt]! I was too busy with homework the other evenings. 6: Yes, for us the RBS lecture was non-optional, but it was worth attending. 7: The lecture was great. 8: Lecture was great and exactly on-point for our class. Movie night was a welcome break and refresher. 9: N/A. 10: Yes. 11: I attended the lecture, which I found worthwhile. 12: David Vander Meulen's lecture on Tuesday evening [sic] was fantastic.
13. Did you get your (or your institution's) money's worth? Any final or summary thoughts, or advice for other persons considering taking this course in a future year?
1: Yes—I feel I got a great deal of very valuable things out of this course. I would recommend anyone interested in books to take a course at RBS, but this one was something special—for those of us with an interest in bibliography, there can be very little that is more fulfilling or a greater pleasure than a course like this. 2: Yes definitely. Advice: Bowers, Bowers, Bowers! 3: My institution (bless them) pays for everything as professional development. They get their money's worth. 4: Yes! 5: Money's worth—absolutely. Final thoughts—can we do it again next week, please? Advice—immerse yourself fully in the experience—it's a wonderful opportunity. 6: Yes. 7: Yes. Do the readings and come prepared with an interesting project, digital images, facsimiles, &c. 8: More than my institution's (or my own, if I'd had to pay for it) money's worth. Simply wonderful. Advice: embrace bibliographical madness! It's much nicer on this side of the fence! 9: Yes! 10: Yes. 12: Worth every penny. Anyone who has taken Intro to DesBib and finds themselves wanting more should seriously consider taking this course. It is not a cake-walk, but it is the best intense bibliographic education.
Number of respondents: 12
PERCENTAGES
Leave
Institution gave me leave
50%
I took vacation time
25%
N/A: self-employed, retired or had the summers off
25%
Tuition
Institution paid tuition
50%
I paid tuition myself
34%
N/A: Self-employed, retired or scholarship
16%
Housing
Institution paid housing
42%
I paid for my own housing
42%
N/A: stayed with friends or lived at home
16%
Travel
Institution paid travel
42%
I paid my own travel
58%
N/A: lived nearby
0%
There were six rare book librarians (50%), one library assistant with some rare book duties (8%), two PhD students (18%), one rare book curator (8%), one MLIS student (8%), and one retiree (8%).