Print

Print


Since I seemed to be badmouthing Expression, I thought I should show I can see some value in it. For example, there’s a work by Johan Huizinga called, in the original Dutch, Herfsttij der Middeleeuwen. It was translated into English in 1924 as The waning of the Middle Ages, and then retranslated in 1996 as The autumn of the Middle Ages. I remember a Renaissance history professor saying the second translation was more accurate. Though they are currently both see references on the same Expression record, I can see how there could be value in creating separate Expression records for them.

In line with that, notice there is a Hippocrates. ǂt Works. ǂl Latin. ǂf 1665 and one dated 1685. It’s possible those could also be different translations of varying quality. But if Hippocrates was publishing collections of his works during his lifetime, I doubt it would make sense to say they were different Expressions because they had different numbers of works. I think just different Manifestations.

Ted Gemberling

From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Gemberling, Ted P
Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2017 4:36 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] manifestations with same title proper and author but different content

Personally, I think that if an author has given two manifestations the same title, you can only say they are different works with a lot of justification. I think the title needs to be the central criterion. If we start saying that two different manifestations are different works because of change in content, it seems the decision on that could become quite arbitrary and puzzling to patrons.

My biggest focus tends to be subject cataloging, and there’s a good argument you could make that subjects are purely an “attribute,” if that’s the right word, of the Manifestation, since subjects vary from Manifestation to Manifestation. You could argue the only things that belong on the Work record are the author and uniform title. We know there should be some continuity of subject matter between different Manifestations of the same work, but there may be no way to show the continuity with subject headings as we normally use them.

I think it’s possible we could create Work records with the primary subjects, and some sort of link showing there are additional subjects on Manifestation records.

I think Expression is a somewhat artificial entity that may not be useful if used too much.

Just my two cents.

Ted Gemberling

From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Yang Wang
Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2017 1:32 PM
To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] manifestations with same title proper and author but different content

In the case of In this our world and other poems (1895), considering that the number of poems has grown from 74 to 124, one might well argue that it has become a new work. The additions and presumably the new arrangement made by the author could represent something conceptually new and different, as individual poems now would interact with one another in a new way and resonate differently. Even a change of position of one poem could sometimes tip the scales, so to speak, not unlike “I placed a jar in Tennessee ...” (Anecdote of the jar by Wallace Stevens).

Based on the above reasoning, one might find the second set of AAPs suggested by Adam equally valid and attractive.

240 10 Poems. $k Selections (In this our world and other poems : 1893)
240 10 Poems. Sk Selections (In this our world and other poems : 1895)

Just a thought.

Yang


From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Jessica Janecki
Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2017 1:41 PM
To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] manifestations with same title proper and author but different content

I don’t know that the difference between “In this our world: poems” and “In this our world and other poems” means much in terms of authorial intent. Going through digitized versions, there were at least 3 different expansions of content and the manifestation titles are all minor variations. For example, the third expansion (1898) is entitled “In this our world: poems and sonnets” and has 149 poems.

Despite the differences in content, there does seem to be the idea of “sameness” where things with the tile “In this our world” contain a core of poems that are the same. In that light, I find the different expressions of the same work idea very attractive.

Jessica

From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Stephen Hearn
Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2017 1:03 PM
To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] manifestations with same title proper and author but different content

Walt Whitman's "Leaves of grass," which grew from 12 poems to over 400, is an even more dramatic example of how flexibly a work can be defined. Looking at a couple of the editions of this collection in HathiTrust, it seems clear that "In this our world" is a collection title, not the title of an individual poem. The puzzle becomes, does "In this our world" name a particular collection of poems, or does it name an expanding project on the part of Gilman like "Leaves of grass"? Note also that in OCLC, the only title for 1893 editions is "In this our world: poems" That being the case, we could argue that "In this our world and other poems" is actually a preferred title for a different work and not simply an expression of "In this our world," though it contains "In this our world."

Stephen

On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 11:56 AM, Adam L. Schiff <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:

or another alternative for different work access points would simply be:


240 10 Poems. $k Selections (1893)

240 10 Poems. Sk Selections (1895)

Adam Schiff

________________________________
From: Adam L. Schiff
Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2017 9:55:32 AM

To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: manifestations with same title proper and author but different content


I think you just have to make a judgment as to whether the content has changed significantly enough to have created a new work rather than a different expression.  I don't know of any guidance other than personal judgment.



If you decide the compilations are different works then you wouldn't use $f in front of the date:
240 10 Poems. $k Selections (In this our world and other poems : 1893)

240 10 Poems. Sk Selections (In this our world and other poems : 1895)

or

240 10 In this our world and other poems (1893)

240 10 In this our world and other poems (1895)

Adam Schiff

________________________________
From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> on behalf of Jessica Janecki <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2017 9:48:20 AM
To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: manifestations with same title proper and author but different content

Is your opinion based on the manifestation titles being the same? If they had different manifestation titles would you lean toward them being different aggregate works? I recently had a similar situation where the manifestation titles were the same but the content was completely different (completely different compilations of short stories by the same author).

Is there any guidance on when the content differs enough to become a new aggregate work?

Jessica

From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>] On Behalf Of Adam L. Schiff
Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2017 12:34 PM
To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] manifestations with same title proper and author but different content


I would add $f 1893 to the first collection and $f 1895 to the second.  They seem like different expressions of the same compilation.  You would have a few options:



240 10 Poems. $k Selections (In this our world and other poems). $f 1893



240 10 Poems. Sk Selections (In this our world and other poems). $f 1895



or



240 10 In this our world and other poems. $f 1893


240 10 In this our world and other poems. $f 1895



Adam Schiff

University of Washington Libraries

________________________________
From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> on behalf of Jessica Janecki <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2017 9:06:20 AM
To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
Subject: manifestations with same title proper and author but different content

I have a collection of Charlotte Perkins Gilman’s poems, entitled “In this our world and other poems”. It was published in 1895.  However, it turns out that a compilation also entitled “In this our world and other poems” was published in 1893 but which contains over 50 fewer poems than the 1895 compilation. Although there is substantial overlap in the contents, to my mind 50 poems is a significant difference (the 1895 volume is 64 pages longer than the 1893 volume) and they are two different aggregate works. No editor is given for either volume and they are by the same publisher, which enhances the appearance of similarity.

I only have the 1895 volume, but even if I had the 1893 volume as well, I am not sure what is the best way to prevent confusion about the differences between the two volumes when I create a work record. There are 124 poems in the 1895 volume so I can’t make 500’s for all of them. Is there a note field I should be using (“Do not confuse with…”)?

This is the second time this has come up at my library this week, so if anyone has any advice, it would be much appreciated.

Thanks,
Jessica




--
Stephen Hearn, Metadata Strategist
Data Management & Access, University Libraries
University of Minnesota
170A Wilson Library (office)
160 Wilson Library (mail)
309 19th Avenue South
Minneapolis, MN 55455
Ph: 612-625-2328
Fx: 612-625-3428
ORCID:  0000-0002-3590-1242