John Buchtel & Mark Dimunation
H-10: History of the Book, 200–2000
29 July–2 August 2013
Detailed Course Evaluation
1) How useful were the pre-course readings? Did you do any additional preparations in advance of the course?
1: Good. 2: Very useful. Eisenstein is best as it was most relevant to much of the tenor of course (the role of the book in culture). 3: I read most of them. The translated French book on the history of books (name forgotten) is incredibly boring and should only be suggested as reference (although the index is not very good). 4: I would make a firm recommendation for a few things. Everything else is provided as background. While I suppose I wasn’t bothered, little from our readings was refreshed in class. 5: Useful. 6: Thyman and DeHamel very useful for nitty-gritty details. Eisenstein a little dated, but helpful. The ABC was just the classic work (which I think is freely available online as well). 7: No additional preparation. The assigned reading was plenty. The scribes and illuminations and history of printing books were very helpful. The ABC for vocabulary. Eisenstein for historical perspective. 8: Excellent. 9: Pre-course readings were very helpful and comprehensive. Only read the five books listed as “Required Reading.” 10: The readings were extremely helpful. I would recommend to a future student to do as much of the reading as possible. 11: They were useful, but a tad overwhelming. Selections would have been nice rather than whole books. 12: Very useful. I especially enjoyed the Eisenstein for its cultural contextualization of print.
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! 2–5: Yes. 6: The workbooks are helpful. The further reading provides a solid guide to look through at home. 7: Yes. There wasn’t as much material as I expected, but clearly the faculty has weeded down to only the most useful items. 8: Excellent! Will be much revisited. I am very grateful for all. 9: Very helpful. 10: Extremely useful. I will use the workbook as a reference tool in my current job. 11: Yes. I will definitely continue to use the workbook for my own studies. 12: Very. The future reading list is extraordinary, as is the list of reference sources. I appreciated the sample pages of reference sources and explanation of how to use them.
3) Have you taken one or more RBS courses before? If so, how did this course compare with your previous coursework?
1: Yes. 2: Yes. First course. 3: No. 4: N/A. 5: First course. 6: No. 7: Yes, Special Collections Librarianship, which was a wonderful but broad overview and administrative course. This was much more about books and the history of printing. 8: No. 9–10: N/A. 11: No. 12: This was my first class.
4) What aspects of the course content were of the greatest interest or relevance for your purposes?
1: Einstein, theoretical considerations, physical and mechanical processes, and questions and manners. 2: The role of the book in Western culture. Physical production and the evolution of methods of book production. 3: The sections on the physical making of books and images were very helpful. 4: I have had so little formal training in the history of the book that it was all interesting. 5: Focus on materiality. 6: Discussion of manuscripts, printing, binding, materiality. Really nothing was irrelevant. 7: Identification—bindings, materials, paper, vellum, parchment, hand press versus mechanization, decoration, and illustration. 8: Everything—the combination of history, processes, handling, and all made for an ideal combination. 9: Really enjoyed the pre-machine-made book era. 10: Linking social and historical context to cultural material objects. Also, watching the MD and JB team teaching. Laurel and Hardy have nothing on these guys. 11: All of the material presented and covered was interesting and relevant. I was particularly drawn to the materials in the Library of Congress and the c20 section. 12: I was really interested in discussion of how cultural, political and economic phenomena were reflected in the physical book and vice versa.
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. 2–3: Yes, and yes. 4: They are a great tag team. Both are engaging, knowledgeable and personable. 5: Yes. 6: Absolutely. 7: Absolutely—they were fantastic. They were very knowledgeable and very patient with our questions. 8: Yes! MD and JB are a brilliant, engaging, and entertaining combination. They synthesized an extraordinary amount of material into five rich days. 9: Great instructors. The intellectual level of the course seemed just right. 10: Yes. The instructors were informative and enthusiastic, and always open to questions.11: Yes, and yes. I feel prepared to incorporate what I learned into my own teaching and collecting efforts. 12: The level of clarity of the instructors’ explanation was astonishing. They selected primary materials carefully to illustrate each point in a way that stuck. I would have liked more nuanced and in-depth discussion, but I understand that the survey nature of the course prevents that.
6) What did you like best about the course?
1: Liveliness. 2: The opportunity to see and have explained the rare books. 3: Talked about how the book changed technology and was part of Humanism and so on. Not just a survey of books. 4: Teaching with objects. 5: Depth of knowledge and breadth of knowledge of instructors. 6: Really good all around. Field trip was fabulous. 7: The faculty incorporated active learning activities and some media along with traditional lecture. 8: MD and JB, plus the trip to the LC. 9: Seeing and working with the books themselves and the trip to the LC. 10: The amazing array of materials that we were shown, and the expert knowledge JB and MD brought to them. 11: The instructors. Both are personable and charismatic and care about what they are teaching. 12: I appreciated the instructors’ advice on what questions to ask of a book.
7) How could the course have been improved?
1: Maybe some scholarly articles in a source book. 2: It is fine as is. 4: Can’t think of anything important, although a session in the “care and feeding” of books would be good. 6: More children’s books discussed as genre. Maybe allow a little more handling or indications of when it was okay to touch materials. 7: Visit the RBS Print Shop to look at the type in casts. 8: I can’t imagine how! 9: Nothing comes to mind! 11: I can’t think of anything to improve the course. 12: I loved the moments when we were each given objects (books, illustrations, &c.) to look at closely for a longer period of time. I would add more of these and decrease the number of books shown quickly.
8) Did you learn what the course description/advertisement indicated you would learn? Additional comments optional. Y/N
1–9: Yes. 10: Yes. And more! 11–12: Yes.
9) Did you learn what you wanted in the course? Additional comments optional. Y/N
1–3: Yes. 4: Yes. 90 minutes on care of old books. 5–9: Yes. 10: Yes. It was amazing to have access to these books! 11–12: Yes.
10) How do you intend to use or apply the knowledge or skills learned in this course?
1: Related research. 2: Basis for further reading to expand on specific areas of interest. Help in refining collection. How to expand and evaluate collections. 3: It will help with my collection and working with conservators when working on their material. 4: Not sure. Much of this relates to personal interest. 5: Teaching using books, but also teaching using archival material. Scholarship. 6: Will help daily in working with classes, tours, &c. 7: Reexamining my collection. Using my collection more in instruction. Improving catalog records and description of items. 8: Teaching, writing, and general interest. 9: Hopefully I will now be able to collect with a little more knowledge of what I am doing. 10: I will certainly use the knowledge gained in this course for research and teaching. This class will involve not just my working life but my personal reading experience too. 11: I plan to add information I learned to my courses on Shakespeare, the History of the English Language, World Literature, and English Literature. 12: I now have a better idea of what questions to ask while approaching a book, which can be applied to any case of historical study I approach as I continue my studies.
11) If your course left its classroom, was the time devoted to this purpose well spent?
1: Did not make it on the trip. Please inform in advance of trips that will require a long day commitment. Just knowing it was scheduled for Wednesday the week before would have enabled me to attend. 2: Very much so. 3: Yes. The trip to the LC was amazing. 4: Yes. The trip to the LC was fantastic. 5: Yes. Well-organized and great material. 6: Yes, well organized and great material. 7: Trip to the LC was truly a once in a lifetime experience well worth the 15-hour day. 8: Yes! 9: Definitely. 10: LC! This trip was a once-in-a-lifetime experience. 11: Yes! And emphatic yes! 12: The trip to the LC was spectacular.
12) If you attended the evening events (e.g., RBS Lecture, Video Night, RBS Forum, Booksellers’ Night) were they worth attending?
1: Didn’t. 2: I didn’t attend. 4: The RBS Lecture should not have been scheduled on the same day as the field trip. We missed it. 5: Yes, primarily as a way to interact with colleagues. 7: I was not thrilled with the RBS Lecture. It could have been 15 minutes (just not enough content). He could have been on a panel. 8–9: Yes. 10: I felt the lecture I attended was not well chosen for a general audience. 11: Yes, the RBS Lecture. 12: The RBS Lecture was informative but outside of my area of interest. I loved the Video Night as the Linotype documentary helped me visualize a process discussed in the course.
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?
2: None. 4: No problems. Even as I use this pen, I am mindful to keep it far away from the collection. 5: JB and MD were careful, and instructed us well on care and handling. 7: We were given instruction and treated materials with respect. I think it was fine really. 8: Observed very good stewardship and assistance. 10: Usage guidelines were well established. I am amazed by the RBS holdings. 11: Can’t think of anything. 12: No improvements necessary. The instructors did a great job of prepping us on proper handling.
14) Did you (or your institution) get your money’s worth? Would you recommend this course to others?
1–3: Yes. 4: N/A. 5: Yes, and yes. 6: Yes. 7–8: Yes, and yes! 9: Yes, and yes. 10: Yes, definitely. 11: Yes! And emphatic yes! 12: I received a scholarship, but the travel costs were well worthwhile. I would definitely recommend it.
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.)
1: Great charisma. Variety. 2: 3: I liked that they moved the name placeholders around. It mixed us up. 4: Thanks for providing this amazing cultural and educational inter-personal resource. 5: I would recommend this course for art historians (Western art). 6: Enjoy. 7: Do the preliminary reading. Come on time and respect your professors’ time. Immerse yourself and expect to be busy day and evenings. Talk to your classmates and others at breaks. 10: I would recommend this class to others without any reservations what so ever (just as it was recommended to me several times). 11: Thank you! 12: The RBS community is warm and welcoming, and it has been wonderful to begin to be a part of it. The one thing I would say to a potential student is that this course is quite a whirlwind and very general in some places. However, it is extremely helpful to get a systematic idea of the trajectory of book history.
Aggregate Statistics
Number of respondents: 12
Leave
Institution gave me leave: 6 (50%)
I took vacation time: 1 (8%)
N/A: self-employed, retired, or had summers off: 5 (42%)
Tuition
Institution paid tuition: 5 (42%)
I paid tuition myself: 5 (42%)
N/A: self-employed, retired, or scholarship: 2 (16%)
Housing
Institution paid housing: 4 (33%)
I paid for my own housing: 6 (50%)
N/A: stayed with friends or lived at home: 2 (17%)
Travel
Institution paid travel: 3 (25%)
I paid my own travel: 7 (58%)
N/A: lived nearby: 2 (17%)
Which one category most closely defines what you do for a living, or why you are at RBS? (Please check only one category)
Archivist: 3 (25%)
Book collector: 1 (8%)
Librarian with some rare book duties: 1 (8%)
Rare book librarian: 1 (8%)
University, full or associate professor: 1 (8%)
Other professor: 2 (17%)
Work in a museum or cultural institution: 1 (8%)
PhD in optics work on imaging tools for conservation: 1 (9%)
Writer and independent researcher: 1 (9%)
How did you hear about this course?
RBS website: 3 (25%)
Work colleague: 5 (42%)
News or web article: 1 (8%)
Word of Mouth: 3 (25%)