I think this does show how problematic the idea of “Work” is in some ways. If something is someone’s work, they really determine what its content is. If they decide to add a lot to it or change it in some way,
how can we say it’s not the same work? As I said, if it has the same title, there should be some presumption that it’s the same work.
Actually, as I said, I’m not even sure it makes sense to say it’s a different Expression. I think it’s probably just a new Manifestation. Gilman was still alive and writing, so she added to this aggregate Work.
Now, I suppose it’s possible we might someday run into a case where an author was intentionally trying to do something absurd and put the same title on something that was 100% different. Then of course it would be a different work.
Just some thoughts.
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?
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
240 10 In this our world and other poems. $f 1893
240 10 In this our world and other poems. $f 1895
University of Washington Libraries
From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging <[log in to unmask]> on behalf of Jessica Janecki <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2017 9:06:20 AM
To: [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.