John Buchtel & Mark Dimunation
81: History of the Book, 200-2000 [H-10]
25-29 July 2005
1) How useful were the pre-course readings?
2: The readings are well-selected. Even if I didn’t understand something in the readings, I would have that flash of understanding later in class. The readings match very well with course content and materials. 3: Helpful. 4: The pre-course readings were very helpful in laying the foundation for what we learned. I plan on re-reading many of them after the course. 5: Very helpful. 6: They were very important -- I would have been lost without them. 7: I found the readings extremely helpful, since I had no prior experience with the topic. I really liked Christopher de Hamel’s Scribes and Illuminators and Elizabeth Eisenstein’s The Printing Revolution in Early Modern Europe and found them very relevant for course work. 8: The readings served as a useful prep for the class. 9: Good choices -- but easier to comprehend post-class. I would have spent more time with Eisenstein and less with Warren Chappell’s A Short History of the Printed Word. 10: Very useful, quick to read, and helped to prepare me for the course. 11: Hit or miss. A History of the Printed Word was awful and confusing. 12: Very useful.
2) Were the course syllabus and other materials distributed in class useful (or will they be so in the future, after you return home)?
1: I am very anxious to follow up with most of the recommended course readings and with the copious notes taken in class. The handouts were also very helpful. 2: Absolutely. 3: Yes; however, I would revise the historical timeline. Perhaps fewer entries or instead of date and name, provide a short synopsis of the socio-cultural importance of the entry. 4: The course materials were very useful. The bibliographical handouts are a great tool, and the advanced reading list is as well. 5: Very useful during class, and I imagine they will be very good reference in the future. 6: Yes, very much so. I know I will use many of the materials in future study. 7: The timeline will come in very useful, as will the handouts from Printing and the Mind of Man. 8: The course materials will serve as ongoing reference works for my work with rare books. 9: They gave structure, so yes. 10: Yes. The three-ring binder will allow me to keep all my notes and handouts as an excellent reference source. 11: Yes. 12: Yes, excellent.
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 opportunity to handle so many documents and use them as primary examples of the study area was invaluable. (Slides simply don’t work!) The intellectual level was substantive, but not overly rigorous. 2: The whole course was very interesting, although the c19 is most relevant to me. I can see that century within a much wider context. 3: Yes, the intellectual level was appropriate. How books were constructed and the printing press were of greatest interest. The movies were very interesting. The importance of typography and how the container shapes the book! 4: Pretty much every aspect of the course was relevant; however, I especially found the demonstrations of printing useful, the examples demonstrating the physical make-up of books were very useful, and also the demonstrations of the various illustrating techniques. I found the discussion of the early printed books to be the most interesting. 5: As a student, all of the content was interesting and relevant. 6: I really liked the sections on incunabula and early printing, which I didn’t know much about before. Yes, the intellectual level was entirely appropriate. 7: I enjoyed actually looking at the materials in class and trying to identify what the book was telling about the culture. The intellectual level of the course was appropriate, since it gave a good overall view. If additional information is needed, one could always take a more specific course. 8: Incunables became the most interesting, especially with the great actual examples presented. The intellectual level was just right. 9: The physical and cultural impact of printing, and the physical construction of books. 10: The personal interaction with the techniques was of greatest interest. In a survey and introductory course such as this, the intellectual level was more than appropriate. 11: All of the visual aids (equipment, demonstrations and items) were wonderful. 12: The survey helped me integrate a lot of information that I have gathered in my studies and reading, i.e. provided a synthesis for understanding the history of the book.
4) If your course had field trips, were they effective?
1: Our visit to Special Collections [SC] were most helpful, again allowing us to see and handle (carefully, of course) relevant documents, books, &c. Of course, our trip to the Library of Congress [LC] was a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity -- what a treat! 2: These trips made the course extra special. The trip to LC I will value for the rest of my life. 4: We went to LC, and it was most definitely time well spent. We saw books which many of us may have otherwise never had the opportunity to see. 5: Yes, yes, yes! 6: Yes, it was fascinating. The field trip to LC was amazing -- the Rosenwald collection took my breath away. I can’t think of a better way to spend a day. 7: The time at LC was an experience I will always remember and treasure. The time in SC was very effective to experience the topics we learned in class. 8: Absolutely, the day-long trip to LC was a once-in-a-lifetime experience. The trips to SC were also valuable. 9: Yes, certainly the trip to LC should not be missed. 10: Yes -- well-planned, and with great music in one staff member’s car on the way up. The experience was magical. 11: The trip to LC was a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity. The trips downstairs to SC were equally enlightening. 12: Yes!!
5) What did you like best about the course?
1: MD and JB were excellent instructors, functioned well as a team, and really brought the material to life. Both are extremely knowledgeable and helpful. They were the best thing about the course. 2: This is a fine course, with great instructors and materials. It is an ideal example of team teaching. 3: The hands-on experiences. 4: A few things: The instructors were fantastic. They are extremely knowledgeable and engaging, and really put the course together well. Also, the opportunity to physically see the books, machines and processes discussed in class. 5: JB and MD are outstanding teachers. They work so well together and have a staggering amount of knowledge to share. Examples from the UVa, RBS, and LC collections really made learning about the history of the book a pleasure. 6: The instructors were fabulous. And the Rosenwald Room at LC was like my birthday and Christmas smashed together. 7: The visits to LC and SC. Also, the professors were extremely informative and had great personalities. I also liked being able to work with materials in class. 8: The visit to LC. 9: Seeing many texts that I have only read about and discussing their significance. 10: The informal yet intense approach to many varieties of technology and concepts that enabled me to determine what aspects of the history of printing appealed to me the most. And the field trip. 11: Seeing all of the books firsthand. And JB and MD were entertaining and brilliant. 12: The chance to see great examples of great books.
6) How could the course have been improved?
1: A pencil sharpener, please, would be helpful. Beyond that, I would recommend extending the course an additional day. We move through an extraordinary amount of material in a very short time. 2: Great course. I can’t imagine how to improve it. 3: The concrete use of the physical timeline. Perhaps visually display the segment of the timeline for the period you are teaching? 4: I can’t really think of a way that it could be improved. 5: I cannot think of a way. 6: I don’t have any suggestions. 7: It’s excellent the way it is now. 8: Maybe spend more time on c20 printing techniques. 9: I think Friday could be improved -- perhaps by leaving c20 for another course. 10: Longer, more time. There is so much area to cover. 11: It couldn’t.
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: All of us were mindful of the fragility -- not to mention monetary values -- of the collections, &c. I didn’t find it to be an issue. 2: Materials were handled with care and respect. We could have used access to a pencil sharpener. 3: Kleenex and wipes, if students need to wipe their hands or noses afterward because of mold allergies or dust issues. Access to pencil sharpeners! 4: I have no suggestions. 5-6: None. 7: None. I think the professors did a good job of deciding what could be touched and what was handled by them. 8: No concerns. The depth of RBS teaching materials was used to its fullest without damaging the items. 9: None. 10: The staff did an excellent job. You have so many materials! 11: None.
8) If you attended the Sunday and/or Wednesday night lectures, were they worth attending?
1: Sunday was an excellent introduction to RBS and set the tone for the week. Unfortunately, our field trip conflicted with the Wednesday evening lecture. 2: Sunday, yes. Wednesday, N/A. 3: Yes. 4: I attended the Sunday lecture, which was interesting and definitely worth attending. 5: Yes. 7: The Sunday lecture was very informative for the first-time student. I wish I had been able to go to the Wednesday night lecture. 8: The Sunday lecture proved informative, and I was glad to hear of RBS’s grant funding. 9: Missed Wednesday. Sunday’s was pleasant but not key. 10: No Wednesday lecture (field trip). TB was at his best on Sunday. 12: Yes.
9) If you attended Museum Night or Video Night, was the time profitably spent?
1: Did not attend. 2: I attended both, and both were time well spent. 3: Yes, loved the videos! 4: I attended Museum Night, which was very informative as a few machines and processes were covered that were not really covered in class (music printing, for example). 5: Yes. 7: Yes, although one or two topics were repeated in class. I liked the music engraving demo very much. 9: The videos were enjoyable, but it was a long day. 11: Museum Night was fun, except that two of the events were repeated in my class, which was unfortunate. Video Night was okay. Farewell, ETAOIN SHRDLU was the best part. 12: Yes.
10) Did you get your money’s worth? Any final thoughts?
1: I absolutely got my money’s worth! And I would recommend that all first-time RBS students take this course -- even experienced librarians and collectors. 2: I definitely got my money’s worth. I hope to convince more people from my institution to attend and to come back myself. 3: Yes. 4: I definitely got my money’s worth. The class was worth every penny, not only for the knowledge and skills that I will be taking away with me, but also because it was really fun! My main advice would be to stay on the Lawn. 5: Yes. What a wonderful experience. Students, staff and teachers make the week very enjoyable. Meeting people with similar interests from different backgrounds (students, collectors, librarians) is a rare opportunity. Stay on the Lawn, but bring a fan and coat hangers. 6: More than your money’s worth -- a great experience. Take it if you are in any way interested in books. 7: I absolutely got my money’s worth. I would recommend this class for a person interested in but unfamiliar with RBS or the topic. The two professors are wonderful, and time goes by quickly. 8: Absolutely; it was a wonderful week of good teaching, conversation and discovery. Anyone interested in a crash course of book history should consider attending. MD and JB are incredible teachers who have excellent classroom chemistry. I feel confident that either one would be willing to help me with a book question many years from now. 9: Yes. Great course. Read Eisenstein, and leave yourself enough time to enjoy it. 10: Take it. Get sleep every night. 12: Absolutely; an invaluable experience.
Number of respondents: 12
Percentages
Leave Tuition Housing Travel
Institution Institution Institution Institution
gave me leave paid tuition paid housing paid travel
33% 42% 42% 25%
I took vaca- I paid tui- I paid for my I paid my own
tion time tion myself own housing travel
0% 50% 50% 67%
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 exchange home
67% 8% 8% 8%
There were five full-time students (42%), two archivist/manuscript librarians (17%), two book collectors (17%), one general librarian with some rare book duties (8%), one teacher/professor (8%), and one antiquarian bookseller (8%).