My understanding from Paul Frank's message is that both headings are corporate headings. Neither is for the building specifically. I doubt that it's necessary to worry about the change from Bridges Street to Drury Lane, because according to Wikipedia, that only has to do with where the entrance to the building was:
"The building faces Catherine Street (earlier named Bridges or Brydges Street) and backs onto Drury Lane. The current building is the most recent in a line of four theatres which were built at the same location ..."
The building is on the block between Catherine (or Bridges) Street and Drury Lane, bounded by Russell and Tavistock. You can find it on this map:
You have to zoom in pretty close.
UAB Lister Hill Library
From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of john g marr
Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2012 12:37 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] Drury Lane Theatre
On Wed, 19 Sep 2012, Ted P Gemberling wrote:
> It seems like this is a situation where they used to mostly call
> something Royal Theatre Drury Lane, but now they mostly call it Drury
> Lane Theatre. Is that situation handled at all by rules?
The problem is "mostly." If it's a matter of inconsistent referents on publications, then one of the names should be the heading and the other a cross-reference to it.
If it is a matter of the two names having different meanings (e.g. one is a building, one is a theatre company), or the name having formally changed at some point but publishers being inconsistent despite the change (like that would ever happen!), then there should be separate records.
To start with, how about a history note on the authority records.
According to Wikipedia:
"Theatre Royal, Bridges Street" (aka. Theatre Royal in Bridges Street, King's Playhouse, etc.) opened in 1663 and burned down in 1672;
"Theatre Royal, Drury Lane " opened in 1674 and was demolished in 1791;
"Theatre Royal, Drury Lane " opened in 1794 and burned down in 1809;
"The present Theatre Royal in Drury Lane" [aka. Theatre Royal, Drury Lane ?] opened in 1812. "Theatre Royal, Drury Lane [is] commonly known as Drury Lane" [Wikipedia], so the appellation "Drury Lane Theatre"
is probably a common informal term (can't prove it's only been used for the modern theatre).
I'd summarize all that as there having been 4 different buildings on the same spot, the 1st with the formal name "Theatre Royal, Bridges Street" and the following 3 with the same formal name ("Theatre Royal, Drury Lane") and informal name (Drury Lane [Theatre]).
John G. Marr
Univ. of New Mexico
Albuquerque, NM 87131
[log in to unmask]
[log in to unmask]
**There are only 2 kinds of thinking: "out of the box" and "outside the box."
Opinions belong exclusively to the individuals expressing them, but sharing is permitted.