Print

Print


First, I'm assuming that the exhibit catalog and the body of photographs
are being regarded as separate works. Otherwise Berengo-Gardin would be the
main entry and  "Photographs. Selections" would be a 240.

That being the case, I'm not sure that Berengo-Gardin has a "photographer"
relationship to the exhibit catalog per se. He took the photographs in the
exhibit, but presumably not photographs of the exhibit or of contributors
to the text which might appear in the catalog.  If reproductions of his
photos are a component of the catalog, then the analytic work 700 can
represent that; and eventually, his relationship as photographer to the
body of photographs could be expressed in a separate description of the
work named by "Berengo-Gardin, ... Photographs. Selections."

On the other hand, if the exhibit catalog is regarded as an expression of
which the primary content is the photographs, one could argue that
Berengo-Gardin should be the main entry. In that case, through the magic of
MARC, which sees the 100 field as both a relationship statement and a
component of the authorized access point for the work, the $e could be
included with the 100 but omitted in the authorized access point derived
from the 100/240 combination.

To me, the need to repeat a name in access points arises when the roles
differ. If Berengo-Gardin contributed an introduction to the exhibit
catalog, then one would need a separate 700 where he could be identified as
"writer of introduction" per RDA Appendix I.3.1 in addition to the 700 12
Berengo-Gardin, ... Photographs. Selections.

I noted that LC has revised its bib record to drop the $e from the 700.

Stephen



On Thu, Nov 7, 2013 at 9:23 AM, Wilson, Pete <[log in to unmask]>wrote:

>  Yes, 18.5 speaks of the “resource,” not the “work,” so a relationship
> designator applied on the basis of that rule in a name access point shows
> the relationship of the name to the resource, not the work embodied in it
> (or the work that is one of several embodied in the resource).  It seems to
> me a stretch to include a relationship designator in a name-title AAP for a
> work in order to show the name’s relationship to the work.
>
>
>
> Stephen, how do you feel about John Wright’s suggestion to make two
> different access points, one for the work (without $e) and one for the
> contributor to the resource (with $e)?
>
>
>
> *From:* Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:
> [log in to unmask]] *On Behalf Of *Stephen Hearn
> *Sent:* Thursday, November 07, 2013 9:08 AM
>
> *To:* [log in to unmask]
> *Subject:* Re: [PCCLIST] 700 name/title work entries that include
> relationship designators
>
>
>
> RDA 6.2.2.10.2 gives us leeway to select "an appropriate specific
> collective title." If the assembled Berengo-Gardin works are all
> photographs, then using "$t Photographs. $k Selections" seems specific and
> appropriate.
>
>
>
> I could see including the $e in a relationship statement to express the
> relationship between Berengo-Gardin and the work per RDA 18.5; but that's
> different. The name that appears in the authorized access point is just
> that--part of the work's access point, and not generally the preferred
> place to express the relationship.
>
>
>
> Though there appear to be exceptions. The MARC21 Authority Format includes
> "$e defendant" in the name/title access point for a court case as an
> example of using $e (cf. Names and Terms--General Information/X00, $e).
>
>
>
> Stephen
>
>
>
> On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 5:37 PM, Wilson, Pete <[log in to unmask]>
> wrote:
>
> Honestly I don’t know—I am still a little boggled by the new
> “works/selections” approach to art.  I gather you are agreeing that the
> relationship designators should not be included in the work authorized
> access point, though?
>
>
>
> Pete Wilson
>
> Vanderbilt University
>
>
>
> *From:* Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:
> [log in to unmask]] *On Behalf Of *Stephen Hearn
> *Sent:* Wednesday, November 06, 2013 5:33 PM
> *To:* [log in to unmask]
> *Subject:* Re: [PCCLIST] 700 name/title work entries that include
> relationship designators
>
>
>
> Is "700:12: Berengo-Gardin, Gianni. $t Photographs. $k Selections." an
> option?
>
>
>
> Stephen
>
>
>
> On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 5:07 PM, John Wright <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> Yes, it seems that an error was made and this would best be presented as
> two separate 700 fields as follows:
>
>
>
> 700:1 : Berengo-Gardin, Gianni, $e photographer.
>
>
>
> 700:12: Berengo-Gardin, Gianni. $t Works. $k Selections.
>
>
>
> *From:* Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:
> [log in to unmask]] *On Behalf Of *Wilson, Pete
> *Sent:* Wednesday, November 06, 2013 3:29 PM
> *To:* [log in to unmask]
> *Subject:* 700 name/title work entries that include relationship
> designators
>
>
>
> I’m curious about what seems a strange combination of name-title work AAP
> and relationship designators.
>
>
>
> This is from LC’s record 2013-361481:
>
>
>
> 700:12: Berengo-Gardin, Gianni, $e photographer. $t Works. $k Selections.
>
>
>
> Is the use of the relationship designator appropriate here?  It looks
> funny to me.
>
>
>
> Philosophically it seems that we are using this field awkwardly for two
> purposes.  The relationship designator expresses the relationship of
> Berengo-Gardin to the manifestation.  The field as a whole, minus the
> relationship designator, records a work contained in the manifestation.
>
>
>
> Would it be better to use two separate fields?  Or is the relationship
> designator simply unnecessary?
>
>
>
> In this case, by the way, the book is entered under title.  It is an
> exhibition catalog.  The only other 7xx field is for the “editor of
> compilation.”
>
>
>
> Would love to hear what you think.  Thanks!
>
>
>
> Pete Wilson
>
> Vanderbilt University
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Stephen Hearn, Metadata Strategist
>
> Technical Services, University Libraries
>
> University of Minnesota
>
> 160 Wilson Library
>
> 309 19th Avenue South
>
> Minneapolis, MN 55455
>
> Ph: 612-625-2328
>
> Fx: 612-625-3428
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Stephen Hearn, Metadata Strategist
>
> Technical Services, University Libraries
>
> University of Minnesota
>
> 160 Wilson Library
>
> 309 19th Avenue South
>
> Minneapolis, MN 55455
>
> Ph: 612-625-2328
>
> Fx: 612-625-3428
>



-- 
Stephen Hearn, Metadata Strategist
Technical Services, University Libraries
University of Minnesota
160 Wilson Library
309 19th Avenue South
Minneapolis, MN 55455
Ph: 612-625-2328
Fx: 612-625-3428