Print

Print


Many authors are inconsistent.  And of course, many surnames reflect events in the authors personal life than are none of our business and about which we have no way of knowing. In addition authors often move around, and if they move to a different country the "style" of names may be different (e.g. an author with a Hispanic "double surname" who moves to a country with a different tradition).  Once when doing a CIP (meaning there is an easy email contact for more information), I asked about why different parts of the CIP used different surnames, and the answer was that the author was getting married and hasn't yet decided whether to change her surname, keep her surname, or adopt a compound surname.  If the universe was run by catalogers, authors would be required to notify the NAF when they changed their surnames, but that is not even slightly likely to occur.:(

Aaron Kuperman, LC Law Cataloging Section.
This is not an official communication from my employer


From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Ian Fairclough
Sent: Thursday, February 02, 2017 3:55 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [PCCLIST] discontinuance of use of second part of a compound surname

PCCLIST readers,



9.2.2.7 has: If a person has changed his or her name, choose the latest name or form of name as the preferred name.



Working with a case where a person formerly used a compound surname, but about twenty years ago began to discontinue use of the second part (and completely so in the past ten or more years), would you consider the person to have changed his name?  I say yes.  But I can well understand someone who disagrees.



In the case in consideration, the NAR was upgraded to RDA in May 2016, without a change in AAP.  The agency making the change was the Library of Congress (assuming that I've correctly interpreted the history of superseded versions in Connexion).  So either the LC cataloger didn't observe the change, or didn't consider that the change called for updating the AAP, or perhaps simply didn't want to initiate the BFM of some thirty records in LC's catalog.  (OCLC WorldCat has over a hundred that would have to be changed.)



What would help in such a case is an addition to the examples.  None of them represents a situation quite like I've encountered.   The example given of Clare Boothe Luce, which comes closest, is represented by n  50048840, which doesn't show any change of heading among the superseded versions.  Furthermore, it has not yet been upgraded to RDA.



I fear that catalogers are not making updates in accordance with the instruction because of an unwillingness to "rock the boat".  Yes, updates cause work for people at other agencies, such as LC.  But if we don't collectively develop the practice of making such updates-- what will be the consequences?



Sincerely - Ian P.S. As of this writing, the case in hand (n  82212354) resides in my local save file as I eagerly await your responses!


Ian Fairclough
Cataloging and Metadata Services Librarian
George Mason University
703-993-2938
[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>