Jackie Dooley and USMARC,
I read with interest the discussion of Jim Greves' question about Cotton
farmers =z Virginia =x History =y 19th century versus Cotton farmers =z
Virginia =y 19th century. (For source materials, isn't the heading
Cotton farmers =z Virginia =x History =x Sources =y 19th century
already available? [Do I have the Sources in the right place?])
The question and your reply seem to make an intuitive assumption that the
reason archival catalogers should have different rules is that it's a
different community of catalogers as well as a different world of
materials. Granting that it's a different world of materials, it seems to
me, however, that the key question is not whether it's a different
community of catalogers, but whether it's a different community of catalog
users. In other words, if the archival collection has a free-standing
catalog, it's all right to have different subject heading rules. But, to
me, if the archival cataloging is going into a college/university library
catalog, where it will mingle with cataloging for published materials,
then the distinction between Farmers =x History =x Sources =y 19th century
[used for reprints of source materials] versus Farmers =y 19th century
[used for the actual unpublished source materials themselves] is not a
good nuance. We already have LC subject headings and Medical subject
headings mingling in the same catalogs, and LC and LC children's
(annotated card) subject headings mingling in the same catalog, but surely
it isn't a good idea to take these as a precedent and proliferate the
number of subject systems in a single catalog. I should think one of the
goals of subject heading planning is to strengthen the catalog user's
confidence in the thesaurus. Mingling thesauri undermines users'
confidence in our subject schemes.
As for the constant repetitiveness of the subdivision =x History in
archival cataloging, maybe it is in the nature of an occupational hazard;
it seems an appropriate reflection of the reason the materials are
preserved.
__________________________________________________________________________
| Frank Newton |
| Librarian I |
| |
| Mail: Cumberland County Public Library & Information Center |
| Foreign Language Center |
| 300 Maiden Lane |
| Fayetteville, North Carolina 28301-5000 |
| |
| E-Mail: [log in to unmask] |
| |
| Phone: (910) 483-5022 |
| Fax: (910) 483-8644 |
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
On Wed, 19 Nov 1997, Jackie Dooley wrote:
> On Wed, 12 Nov 1997, Jim Greve wrote:
> > A question has arisen in our Description Section at The Library
> > of Virginia concerning periodic subdivisions in the 650 field.
> ...
> > Secondly, adding the subdivision "-History" implies a narrative
> > or analysis or treatment of the subject in question. Like a
> > book on cotton farming in the 19th century. The material being
> > described is orginal manuscript material from cotton
> > plantations. It's the material itself. ...
>
> Many archival catalogers have a problem with the advice given in the
> _Subject Cataloging Manual_ regarding use of both "History" and
> "History--Sources" for precisely the reasons you describe. The Manual was
> written almost entirely with published works in mind, and the nuances are
> very, very different for original source materials such as manuscripts.
>
> Lots of archival repositories omit form-based final subdivisions
> ("--Pictorial works" is another good example) from their subject headings
> across the board, because their use is both impractical and often
> inaccurate in collection-level cataloging.
>
> What's legal? Who's right? When the prevailing content standard (the
> Manual) doesn't adequately take into account the nature of the material
> you're cataloging, I think it's entirely appropriate to interpret it in a
> way that you feel is well-considered and sound. Purists will disagree.
>
> Jackie M. Dooley, Head of Special Collections and University Archives
> UCI Libraries, P.O. Box 19557, Univ. of California, Irvine, CA 92623-9557
> Internet: [log in to unmask] Phone: 714/824-4935 Fax: 714/824-2472
>
|