Tom Congalton, Johan Kugelberg & Katherine Reagan
C-30: Developing Collections: Donors, Libraries, and Booksellers
8–12 July 2013
Detailed Course Evaluation
1) How useful were the pre-course readings? Did you do any additional preparations in advance of the course?
1–2: N/A. 3: No pre-course readings. As a student outside of the trade, I did some introductory readings about rare book collecting and selling. 4: There were no pre-course readings. 5–6: N/A. 7: N/A on readings. I did spend time thinking about goals for the class and my own current collection policy and landscape. 8: N/A. 9: This was a new course, so there were no readings to do. 10: No pre-course readings. 11: No assigned pre-course readings. 12: N/A. 13: No readings this year. 14: N/A—no pre-course readings.
2) Were the course workbook and other materials distributed in class appropriate and useful (or will they be so in the future, after you return home)?
1: Yes, appropriate and will be consulted upon my return. 2: I will certainly retain them, but I wish they were more in-depth and less overview. 3: Yes. 4: Yes, the handouts were all appropriate and useful. 5: Yes. 6: Yes. Materials were and will be very helpful as resources. 7: Yes. 8: The materials distributed are particularly useful, and I intend to place them in my active reference collection. 9: Yes, yes, yes, yes, yes. 10: Very valuable handouts. 11: The distributed materials were one of the best parts of the course. I plan to put them to good use. 12: The materials provided were generous and of utmost use: sample catalogues, resource guides, &c. Thanks to all the instructors for their high quality preparations; I will use them for years to come. 13: A workbook would have been good. The historical reproduction perspective handout was fabulous. 14: The materials handed out will be MOST useful! Thanks for “Beyond Carter,” as well as “Modern Home and Office Printing Processes” especially. All of the materials distributed will be helpful.
3) Have you taken one or more RBS courses before? If so, how did this course compare with your previous coursework?
1: Yes. I like three instructors. The class was almost like a daily panel discussion. A fine way to learn about a wide subject range. 2–3: N/A. 4: This was my first RBS course. 5: About the same. 6: N/A. 7: No—first course. 8: I have taken four courses previously, one with two of the instructors in this class—my expectations were not disappointed. 9: N/A. 10: Yes—this course was looser, partly because it’s the first time, and partly due to the nature of the course. 11: This is my first RBS course. 12: This is my second course and my favorite by far, mainly because we were able to have frank discussions about typically hushed sides of the rare book world (i.e., the business side) and handled so many non-traditional materials. 13: N/A. 14: Yes. This course was extraordinarily dynamic—the conversations were particularly rich, as were the hands-on exercises with materials. A dynamite course!
4) What aspects of the course content were of the greatest interest or relevance for your purposes?
1: Actual activities that allowed us to mimic real life. No substitute! 2: JK’s contributions on zines and other counterculture publications, TC’s “real life” experience buying and selling archives. 3: This course is multi-perspectival and gave me the opportunity to hear things that are really going on in the trade right now. Eye-opening. 4: The discussions about non-book archival materials and ephemera. 5: I acquired a greater understanding of the importance of non-traditional materials. 6: Donors. How dealers/collectors assemble and package collections. And how the process from collecting/purchasing/donating takes place. 7: The framing of how and why to think about non-book items and to pursue emerging markets was very interesting and relevant. In addition, I really appreciated KR’s discussion of donor logistics. 8: The interchange between the disciplines of both the instructors and other students gave me a window into worlds I was most curious about. 9: Identifying easily faked print matter; getting up to speed with what institutions are collecting and why. Making connections with peers. 10: Learning more about the nuts and bolts of the book trade, talking to librarians, and understanding the changing nature of collecting. 11: The opportunity to hear collection development and the antique book market discussed by a group of experienced practitioners and librarians. 12: I enjoyed learning about fostering relations with donors, pricing materials, and the case study activity we did Thursday afternoon. The fact that each case varied extensively gave me a lot of perspective. 13: Hearing the in-depth commentary of KR and TC—the head of internal special collections at a major university, and a very successful seller. Excellent pairing. 14: I learned tons about acquiring non-traditional materials—especially working with living creators to build them. The conversations about determining the “uniqueness” of artifacts were helpful, as were the lectures on different media.
5) Did the instructor(s) successfully help you to acquire the information, knowledge, and skills that the course was intended to convey? Was the intellectual level of the course appropriate?
1: Yes. Absolutely. The class was comprised of roughly 50/50 librarians and booksellers. I understand the collegial relationship these groups can and should have. 2: They gave me the tools and direction to move beyond the 101-course level. 3: Yes. Even as a student who is not so familiar with the trade I could understand and learn a great deal from the course. 4: Yes. It was obvious that all three of the faculty members gave a great deal of thought to the information they wanted to convey to the class. 5: Yes. 6: Yes, and yes. 7: Yes to both. 8: Yes, and most definitely yes. 9: Yes. Intellectual level was generally quite high. 10: Yes. 11: This course was absolutely stuffed-to-bursting with useful information and suggestions for further skills development. 12: Absolutely. JK, KR, and TC are able to work on both micro and macro levels to explain material in abstract and concrete ways. They thought about not only the philosophy of collecting but also the nitty-gritty logistics. 13: Yes. 14: Yes—the course met and exceeded my expectations. The intellectual level was spot on.
6) What did you like best about the course?
1: Interactive group projects. 2: The bookseller roundtable, JK’s zine presentations, the “quick fire” evaluations. 3: Not book knowledge, but things that are more tangible and up-to-date. 4: Handling the very wide variety of materials brought to the course as examples. 6: Handling the wide array of materials and the class discussions. I also enjoyed learning about the terms/jargon used “in the trade.” 7: The case studies and hands-on experiences. 8: Being introduced to new methods of collecting, discovering, acquiring materials for my areas of interest. 9: JK’s rap artist stories; TC’s analysis of dealer practices; KR’s explanation as to how Cornell was able to acquire the Hip Hop Collection. 10: I liked the variety of viewpoints (curator/dealer, collector/dealer) of the faculty and class—the ability to have candid discussions, and to see some very cool things. Also, bookseller guest round-table was excellent. 11: The instructors! Engaging, honest, experienced, well-prepared, and approachable. The benefits of team-teaching really shone through. 12: The exchange between three instructors who each have such unique perspectives, which both overlap and occasionally clash (but always in wonderful, respectful ways). Getting to see things that aren’t normally looked at by RBS folk. 13: The in-depth knowledge and expertise of the instructors. 14: The course’s instructors were each experts in their fields, which showed; their sound judgment and advice were enriched by informed, constructive debate of the highest order. The materials we handled were incredible.
7) How could the course have been improved?
1: N/A. 2: Far too much time was dedicated to the research projects; a few aspects, like Nicole Bouché’s visit, had little or no value for a collector and/or bookseller. 3: Can provide some preliminary readings next time the course is offered. 4: The course had a very post-1960 focus. That’s fine, but I would have liked there to have been a little more discussion about older archives and ephemera. 5: More practical advice and less discussion of the histories of particular materials (creators, genres, &c.). 6: I would have liked to hear more about collecting/donations/donors when the institution obtaining materials has a very small or no budget at all. 7: I would balance the information and perspectives of donor, dealer, and library in each section. It was a little heavy on the bookseller perspective at times. 8: While any course can be improved, this course is a stunner. 9: Do it in New York? 10: I’d like even more lectures and discussions—we spent a lot of class time on our research projects, and while they were interesting and worthwhile, I’d rather talk more in general. 12: It’s pretty darn hard to say. Perhaps a more concrete section devoted to donor relations. We would also try having presentations right away Friday morning to leave the afternoon for conclusions. 13: The projects need more structured presentation. The students overwhelmingly spoke to the instructors, which is quite tedious for over six hours. Suggest more training and development showmanship. Put project presenters in the front of the room, instructors in the back and they will be presenting to the full class. Up the standards also. Presenters should be including handouts, overheads, or something besides just talking. 14: My only advice would be to feature a couple more prominent examples of collections with books in them—the “assemblage” point KR made regarding the TV tie-in books was excellent—I simply wanted a few more examples like it for balance.
8) Did you learn what the course description/advertisement indicated you would learn? Additional comments optional. Y/N
1: Yes. 2: Yes and no. I have mixed feelings. Some of the information gleaned is invaluable, but there should have been more. Not enough in-depth study/discussion. 3–7: Yes. 8: Yes. I learned much more than anticipated. 9–10: Yes. 11: Yes. 12: A resounding yes, and then some. 13: Yes. Would like more on guidelines to building a collection. Perhaps a bit more structure around that. 14: Yes.
9) Did you learn what you wanted in the course? Additional comments optional. Y/N
1: Yes. 2: Yes and no. I have mixed feelings. Some of the information gleaned is invaluable, but there should have been more. Not enough in-depth study/discussion. 3: Yes. Even more than I expected. 4–8: Yes. 9: Yes. It would have been nice to learn more about tricks/traps bad dealers use. 10–3: Yes. 14: Yes—and more!
10) How do you intend to use or apply the knowledge or skills learned in this course?
1: Convey to my supervisors the need to develop working relationships with a variety of vendors. Recommend we fine-tune our collection development process. 2: I just opened a Tumblr account. It will certainly affect how I decide what to purchase and my interactions with librarians henceforth. 3: I can see how my major thesis is getting longer and longer. 4: The course was pretty much a confirmation of the direction my bookselling business was heading; that is, shifting to providing more ephemeral materials for sale as opposed to traditional books. 5: I intend to intensify my institution’s collecting of non-traditional materials and think harder about how to market what we already have. 6: The bulk of information pertains to my job and what I hope to accomplish. 7: To start building new collections to persuade my institution to support this effort intellectually and financially, and to tweak my collections policy to account for the opportunities I now see. I also will use the course information to work more confidently with donors and dealers. 8: I feel as though my brain is on fire with new approaches to my areas of collection, and I can’t wait to get started. 9: I can explain much more successfully what the market for unique material is doing and why. 10: Multiple discussions about collecting area trends, and how to interact with librarians and dealers, and new scouting possibilities were all helpful. 11: In the short-term I plan on highlighting my experience in my job application materials. 12: This class is excellent for someone who is new to the field and looking to gain insight into how different careers in the book world intersect and communicate with one another. It made me realize I absolutely want to work in the trade and that even as an amateur, I can collect things of great cultural significance. 13: Took in so much new information; I will need to process it all over the coming weeks to answer that question. 14: I will never look at non-traditional materials the same way again. I will build a collection for my institution, if possible, and, as an academic, I will pursue partnerships with living artists down the road. There are many opportunities out there for collaboration—this course was most inspiring in that respect.
11) If your course left its classroom, was the time devoted to this purpose well spent?
1–9: N/A. 10: No field trips. 12: We did not, but when we brought others in, it was great. Nicole Bouché, Lorne Bair, and Brian Cassidy were great speakers. 13–14: N/A.
12) If you attended the evening events (e.g., BS Lecture, Video Night, RBS Forum, Booksellers’ Night) were they worth attending?
1: Video Night was fun. More lecture after sitting all day was not so enticing. 2: RBS lecture: yes. Video Night: no. Dreadfully dull. RBS forum: yes. Booksellers’ Night: yes. 3–4: N/A. 6: Yes, I attended the Stetz lecture and found it interesting. 8: Yes, generally. 9: Yes, the lecture and forum were excellent. 10: Yes, as always. 12: I am sad to say I did not attend many, though I know from experience how great of a job RBS does. 13: N/A. 14: Yes, they were compelling. I think Lisa Gitelman’s talk might have benefited from a stronger understanding of printing history and technology.
13) 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: Permit liquid refreshments at all times materials are not in proximity. Conditions are dry in both dorm room and class. 2: I was satisfied with how materials were handled. 4: None. 6: N/A. The instructors brought their own materials. 7: N/A. 8: None. 9: Ask the group before each session if they’ve washed hands, perhaps. 10: No complaints, all materials were properly handled. 12: We didn’t handle RBS collections, but we did use many things owned by TC, JK, and KR, and they made us feel comfortable handling them. 13: None—excellently handled. As a non-professional (collector), I appreciated the guidance on how to handle. 14: Fine!
14) Did you (or your institution) get your money’s worth? Would you recommend this course to others?
1: Yes, and yes. 2: The instructors shared their thoughts about how this course might come together were it held in New York—that sounds FANTASTIC! Recommending the course to others: for librarians, yes; for booksellers, no. 3: Yes. DEFINITELY. 4: Yes, I’d recommend the course to others. 6: Yes, and yes. 7: Yes. 8: I did, as always. I would certainly recommend this course. 9: I think so; we’ll see. I’ll happily recommend it to anyone interested in trends in collecting or dealing in rare and unique material. 10: Yes! 11: Absolutely. I have already recommended the course to a couple of fellow grad students. 12: Yes! 13: Yes—the most fun I have had in years. I find most professional programs and adult educational programs are disappointing. This one exceeded my expectations! 14: Yes! This course is packed with content that has transformed my understanding of the field. THANK YOU, TC, JK, AND KR!
15) Any final or summary thoughts, or advice for other persons considering taking this course in a future year? (If you have further praise/concerns, please speak with Amanda Nelsen or Michael Suarez.)
2: Interact with your fellow students; they have unique experiences and insights that make RBS a worthwhile and potentially rewarding experience. 3: Every librarian and bookseller is also part of the course: the more you talk, the more experience/problems you share with others, the more you would benefit from the course. 4: N/A. 7: It would be interesting to hear the viewpoint of a donor and/or collection creator. I think it also would be interesting to hear a more detailed breakdown of the path and timeline of bringing in a donated collection. 8: Do it! 10: Highest level, as always. 12: Thanks for an amazing experience. I’m lucky to have experienced it and want to share it with all my friends. 14: Take it! It’s a gem.
Aggregate Statistics
Number of respondents: 14
Leave
Institution gave me leave: 9 (64%)
N/A: self-employed, retired, or had summers off: 5 (36%)
Tuition
Institution paid tuition: 6 (43%)
I paid tuition myself: 5 (36%)
N/A: self-employed, retired, or scholarship: 3 (21%)
Housing
Institution paid housing: 6 (43%)
I paid for my own housing: 5 (36%)
N/A: stayed with friends or lived at home: 3 (21%)
Travel
Institution paid travel: 5 (36%)
I paid my own travel: 6 (43%)
N/A: lived nearby: 3 (21%)
Which one category most closely defines what you do for a living, or why you are at RBS? (Please check only one category)
Antiquarian bookseller: 4 (29%)
Book collector: 1 (7%)
Student B.A.: 1 (7%)
Student M.L.I.S.: 1 (7%)
Librarian with some rare book duties: 1 (7%)
Rare book librarian: 3 (21%)
Work in a museum or cultural institution: 1 (7%)
Curator and Administrator: 1 (7%)
University Archivist with Special Collections responsibilities: 1 (8%)
How did you hear about this course?
RBS website: 8 (57%)
RBS printed schedule: 1 (7%)
Advertisement: 1 (7%)
News or web article: 1 (7%)
Word of mouth: 2 (14%)
RBS faculty or staff recommendation: 1 (8%)