Eric Holzenberg
H-40: The Printed Book in the West since 1800
22–26 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: Pre-course readings were extremely useful and not too onerous. 2: These largely replicated the material that we later covered in class and helped me absorb the material better, though it would have been nice to know we didn’t need to bring all of them along. No additional prep work. 3: They were a little repetitive, but the overlap was OK because each came from a different perspective. 4: Pre-course readings were extremely helpful, especially if you don’t have a lot of knowledge on the book prior to 1800. I particularly enjoyed Roto. 5: They were useful. Having seen unfamiliar terms and read about unfamiliar processes ahead, I was more prepared to understand them when we covered them in class. 6: The three readings were extremely relevant and provided nice background and context for the course. 7: The pre-course readings are a little dry but I found them useful. 8: The pre-course readings provided a great background on the subject matter. It was helpful for me to be able to read about methods and objects, then have it reviewed in class or put into greater context. 9: It was dreadfully dull; EH is much better at conveying the information. 10: The pre-course readings were well chosen and useful. I will continue to refer to them. 11: Very useful. Helped to frame class and gave understanding of background. 12: Extremely useful.
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: The workbook was very useful in class and will help a great deal when I go back over my notes once I return home (however—it should have had color images as intended). 2: Yes, and EH has been very gracious in making color PDF versions available to us. 3: The workbook was occasionally referred to in class, but most of it was presented on the in-class PowerPoint making it redundant. A more detailed workbook would be useful for future use. 4: They are good examples of illustration processes, which should help me remember them. 5: Yes. They will be especially helpful as I think about how to translate this material for my own undergraduate students. 6: The workbook was useful throughout the course and a resource I will likely use in my job. 7: Yes, and I think I’ll be referring to the workbook in the future. Illustrations are important for understanding the content of this class. 8: They’ll be useful when I return home to have a visual representation of the things we discussed. 9: Yes—very helpful. It might be helpful to put workbook page numbers on the syllabus. 10: The course workbook and other materials were appropriate and useful. 11: Yes. Will give me something to refer to in the future. 12: Yes. Examples in the workbook are more detailed and better than the ones in the advanced course reading list.
3) Have you taken one or more RBS courses before? If so, how did this course compare with your previous coursework?
1: I have taken one RBS course prior—Publishers’ Bookbindings with Sue Allen. Both courses were wonderful but I really value the way EH encouraged conversation and debate—he welcomed questions and took the time to answer them thoroughly. 2: No. 3: No. 4: EH’s class structure was a bit different from the two others RBS courses that I have taken. We did lots of pair exercises, which I thought were useful—other classes had not done these. 5: First RBS course. 6: This was my first RBS course. 7: No, first time. 9: N/A 10: I have taken four other RBS courses. This course was just as excellent as the other courses I have taken. 11: No. 12: Yes. As good and actually better than three other courses I have taken.
4) What aspects of the course content were of the greatest interest or relevance for your purposes?
1: The idea of the book as a cultural object. I feel confident that I can look at a book and understand the social and cultural implications. 2: Being able to handle actual examples—especially during comparison exercises—provided knowledge that it would have been impossible to get elsewhere. 3: I was most looking forward to the printing technologies developed during the c19, and we spent a good amount of time on this. It was very helpful for my purposes. 4: I really enjoyed learning about all of the c19-c20 printing processes and about the rise of mass market fiction. I found all of the content fascinating. The class was overall a lot of fun. 5: Most of it was quite relevant. The detailed history of technologies was more useful and relevant than the time spent looking at beautiful books in SC—though the latter is great fun. 6: A general overview of the evolution of the book over the past two centuries and discussion of bindings, paper, processes of constructing a book were most relevant. 7: Hand-on exercises were very useful and greatly enhanced my understanding of the content. 8: The discussions on bindings, decorations, paper, and their relationships to time periods is of great use, since with our cataloging we pay particularly close attention to those details. 9: I love the way that EH connects technological innovation with cultural and literary change. Plus SC! 10: I loved looking at the fine press publications. All of the course content was relevant and interesting. 11: So much it is hard to say. It is the hands-on examples that really add the relevance. 12: Examining plates and prints and books.
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. EH would clarify information if we had questions. I also appreciated the hands-on exercises that allowed us to test our knowledge, but still in a conversational manner. 2: Yes. EH was very knowledgeable and humorous, supplementing lectures with useful videos, demonstrations, and SC visits. I wouldn’t have minded a little more technical information when discussing processes. 3: Yes. 4: Yes, and yes. 5: Yes, and yes. We had a diverse group of backgrounds, and I thought the instructor accommodated that range well. 6: The course successfully imparted the information related to title of the course as well as preliminary readings. 7: Yes, the instructor was very clear and knowledgeable. Intellectual level was appropriate. 8: Yes. I felt it was a very in-depth coverage of what was promised. 9: Yes. Just right. 10: The information was presented in a very comprehendible fashion. EH was excellent at conveying information through the materials he presented and discussions. 11: Yes. Very much so. 12: Yes. EH is a great teacher. This course exceeded my expectation.
6) What did you like best about the course?
1: The instructor. 2: All the afternoon “exercises” where we looked at sample items and when we compared two items produced through different means. 3: The hands-on aspect, where we discussed a technology and then saw an example. 4: The instructor and the content. 5: The opportunity to handle relevant books and objects—especially linotype matrices, copperplates, and the like—was the best part. 6: Hands-on demonstrations of processes and texts discussed in class. 7: Hand-on exercises and trips to SC. 8: The hands-on examples. 9: Combination of instruction and handling the materials. 10: SC with the instructor! 11: Examples. Books books books. Seeing, touching, smelling all very important. 12: Using UVA collections.
7) How could the course have been improved?
1: My only suggestions for improvement is to hold it in a different room (or replace the chairs!) 2: At times, the narrative thread of the PowerPoint and workbook and the lecture didn’t seem to be moving in synchrony, though we would eventually end up at the same place. During discussions of our pair exercises, it might be helpful if each pair’s item got passed around. Our last discussion on the future of reading and books was less valuable—would have preferred a more technical or object-based discussion. 4: I don’t have any suggestions. 5: No suggestions. 6: It was a bit heavy on illustration of printed material as opposed to bindings and other aspects of the book. 9: Maybe a bit more time on identification of illustration print processes. A few more items to examine would help my information retention. 11: Nothing I can think of off-hand.
8) Did you learn what the course description/advertisement indicated you would learn? Additional comments optional. Y/N
1–12: Yes.
9) Did you learn what you wanted in the course? Additional comments optional. Y/N
1–12: Yes.
10) How do you intend to use or apply the knowledge or skills learned in this course?
1: To build and better understand my library’s book collection. 2: This will be immensely helpful in formulating new scholarly questions as well as in giving me ideas of materials for teaching survey courses. 3: I am writing my dissertation on c19 literature, so the things I have learned will be very useful in helping me frame my study and be a more well-rounded scholar. 5: I will use much of the knowledge in a new undergraduate book history course that I am developing. More broadly, the first day’s work (to 1830) is relevant to my general research interests. 6: The knowledge obtained will now be applied to my institution’s specific collection. 7: This course will help me manage large collections of c19-c20 material; how to evaluate books as objects. 8: I intend to use it to be a better cataloger. 9: In my scholarship and possible related collecting. 10: I will use the book when describing books. 11: Hopefully I will be able to share knowledge with my students as well as better take care of my collection. 12: In my own writing and academic work.
11) If your course left its classroom, was the time devoted to this purpose well spent?
1: Yes—to SC. 2: Yes—SC and “Lower Tibet” trips were invaluable. 3: Yes. 5: Yes. The books in SC are wonderful examples and it was great to get to see them, even if we couldn’t (for good reason) handle them. 6: Absolutely. Loved visits to the research room and lower Tibet. 7: Yes, trips to SC and Lower Tibet were useful. 8: Yes. The SC helped to give a visual emphasis to the topics. 9: Yes! Barbara Heritage’s session was excellent. 10: Time out of the classroom was very well spent. 11: Yes. The trips to SC were very valuable. Again: examples are most valuable asset. Make information speak. 12: Yes.
12) If you attended the evening events (e.g., RBS Lecture, Video Night, RBS Forum, Booksellers’ Night) were they worth attending?
1: Yes. 2: RBS Lecture, RBS Forum, Booksellers’ Night. Yes—the talks were particularly valuable and interesting, though it might have been nice to have speakers from different “realms” (rather than two book collectors). 3: Yes. 4: Yes. They added to the overall experience. Plus, we had mini class discussions about the lectures the following morning. 5: Lectures and Booksellers’ Night—yes. I’m less enthusiastic about the videos. 6: Only attended the RBS lecture and it was worthwhile. 7: Attended two lectures; one was great, the other so-so. 9: Yes. 10: Yes. Lectures were great. 11: Yes. It is sort of an immersion and all should be attended to get full effect. 12: Yes, absolutely.
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?
1–2: N/A 5: I thought everything was handled with great care. 6: EH was quite judicious as to what could be passed around and gave specifics on handling care. 7: None. 11: Make sure presentations are not rushed and time is given to move from one article to the next with allowing time to secure first item.
14) Did you (or your institution) get your money’s worth? Would you recommend this course to others?
1: Absolutely. 2: Yes. 3–4: Yes, and yes. 5: Yes—and more. I would certainly recommend the course. 6: Yes. I would recommend to anyone working in rare books. 7: Would definitely recommend to my colleagues. A very useful course for any subject librarian to take. 8–9: Yes. 10: Yes. Would absolutely recommend the course! 11: Yes I will definitely recommend to others. 12: Yes.
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.)
6: The days are long but well worth it. 10: If you are considering the course, take it! 11: Sit back and enjoy.
Aggregate Statistics
Number of respondents: 12
Leave
Institution gave me leave: 6 (50%)
I took vacation time: 2 (17%)
N/A: self-employed, retired, or had summers off: 4 (33%)
Tuition
Institution paid tuition: 7 (58%)
I paid tuition myself: 2 (17%)
N/A: self-employed, retired, or scholarship: 3 (25%)
Housing
Institution paid housing: 6 (50%)
I paid for my own housing: 3 (25%)
N/A: stayed with friends or lived at home: 3 (25%)
Travel
Institution paid travel: 6 (50%)
I paid my own travel: 3 (25%)
N/A: lived nearby: 3 (25%)
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: 1 (8%)
Archivist: 1 (8%)
Cataloguer: 1 (8%)
Student, Ph.D. (humanities): 2 (18%)
Librarian with no rare book duties: 1 (8%)
Librarian with some rare book duties: 2 (18%)
College, assistant professor: 1 (8%)
University, adjunct professor: 1 (8%)
Non-profit: 1 (8%)
Archivist with some rare book duties: 1 (8%)
How did you hear about this course?
RBS website: 4 (33%)
RBS printed schedule: 1 (8%)
Work colleague: 3 (25%)
Word of mouth: 1 (9%)
RBS faculty or staff recommendation: 3 (25%)