Pete,
The book I cataloged last week is entitled: TJAD selected works. TJAD is the acronym for Tongji Architectural Design (Group) CO., LTD. The resource contains both the concept sketches and the final display of
the company’s works in the las 20 years or so. So I created a name/title access point for the aggregate (TJAd (Firm). Works. Selections (Images Publishing Group): LCCN no2018129749), but I faced the problem of creating a name/title for a single work in the
compilation as “the predominant or the first work” as PCC recommends (BSR Profile).
RDA defines architect as creative agent (RDA I.2.1):
An
agent responsible for creating an architectural design, including a pictorial representation intended to show how a building, etc., will look when completed.
And it defines work (RDA 23.1.2) as:
A distinct intellectual or artistic creation, that is, the intellectual or artistic content.
The term
work can refer to an individual
work, an aggregate
work, or a component of a work.
So I find it necessary to ask the question about giving a name/title AAP for an named individual work (architectural plan/concept) to meet the PCC’s recommendation.
I understand that there’s a difference between a completed building and its original architectural design by the architect, similar to a screenplay for a motion picture—the writer of the screenplay is the creator
of a new work in and of itself, is s/he not? These are different work entities and they should be treated as such.
In PUL’s own catalog, the bib is complete. But it has not been uploaded to OCLC for distribution. Therefore collective wisdom is much appreciated.
Best regards,
Yang
From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
On Behalf Of Wilson, Pete
Sent: Monday, October 01, 2018 1:04 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] Name/titles for an archtect
Yang, is what you have to catalog actually a collection of plans?
If it is instead a catalog featuring information about and pictures of buildings, I don’t think you really need any name-title entries. I don’t think such a book contains reproductions of any works that should
be entered under the architect’s name. As the son of a consulting engineer, I am well indoctrinated that the architect is in no wise solely responsible for the creation of a building. We might see this as analogous to not entering movies under the screenwriter
or director’s name.
Pete Wilson
Vanderbilt University
From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
On Behalf Of Yang Wang
Sent: Monday, October 1, 2018 10:55 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] Name/titles for an archtect
Yes, that was also my concern.
In a linked data environment such as FAST, however, would the following two entries would cause some degree of confusion?
John F. Kennedy Library (http://id.worldcat.org/fast/522240)
John F. Kennedy Library (Pei, I. M.) (once the name/title access point is in NAF, it would be flipped by FAST Project).
But if we were to add a qualifier, the concept would be clearer, perhaps?
John F. Kennedy Library (Architectural plan : Pei, I. M.)
Yang
From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
On Behalf Of Wilson, Pete
Sent: Monday, October 01, 2018 11:45 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] Name/titles for an archtect
How should the title be chosen for the plan-work? It would seem helpful to use the same name as is used for the building itself, but if the building is not the work, then is the building name necessarily the
work title?
Pete Wilson
Vanderbilt University
From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
On Behalf Of McDonald, Stephen
Sent: Monday, October 1, 2018 10:30 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] Name/titles for an archtect
My reaction matches Robert’s. What you are trying to describe is an architectural drawing, whose title happens to match the name of the building that the drawing is associated with.
Steve McDonald
From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging <[log in to unmask]>
On Behalf Of Robert Maxwell
Sent: Monday, October 1, 2018 10:58 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] Name/titles for an archtect
My opinion: the architect is the creator of the plan, not the building itself. So if you have I.M. Pei's architectural drawings for the Louvre pyramid, the AAP you give below could be correct (depending on what the preferred title turns out to be). The plans/designs
are not the same work as the building itself, so it would be appropriate to have two different AAPs for those two different entities.
Bob
Robert L. Maxwell
Ancient Languages and Special Collections Cataloger
6728 Harold B. Lee Library
Brigham Young University
Provo, UT 84602
(801)422-5568
"We should set an example for all the world, rather than confine ourselves to the course which has been heretofore pursued"--Eliza R. Snow, 1842.
From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging <[log in to unmask]> on behalf of Yang Wang <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Monday, October 1, 2018 8:51:38 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Name/titles for an archtect
Could someone explain to me how to establish name/title authorized access points for an architect?
An AAP for an aggregate, such as an architect’s catalog, is fairly easy to establish (Works. Selections, etc.), but individual works contained in such a compilation seem to fall into a different category of entities,
because names of buildings (structures, etc.) are independent NACO or SACO entities. For example, among I.M. Pei’s works,
John F. Kennedy Library (NACO, LCCN n 50082519)
Louvre Pyramid (SACO, not established yet)
For a compilation of selected works by I.M. Pei, we could assign a conventional title as follows:
100 1 Pei, I. M., $d 1917-
240 1 0 Works. $ Selections (qualifier)
But what about “giv[ing] an analytical authorized access point for the predominant or first work in the compilation?” How are we supposed to construct name/titles
for his individual works? Would the following AAPs be valid?
700 12 Pei, I. M., $d 1917- $t John F. Kennedy Library
700 12 Pei, I. M., $d 1917- $t Louvre Pyramid
If artistic or creative conceptions are considered “works,” then “J.F.K Library” or “Louvre Pyramid” as named entities of Pei’s works would stand as such. Or, in order to make them distinct from the “completed”
buildings, should we give them each a qualifier? If so, what would be a good qualifier to use?
Best regards,
Yang
P.S. “PCC
recommends providing a contents note (no limit on number of works in the contents note unless burdensome). Give an analytical authorized access point for the predominant or first work in the compilation. Additional access points for other related works
may also be included at the discretion of the cataloger. See section above for elements used to identify works and expressions.” (page 18,
BIBCO
Standard Record (BSR) RDA Metadata Application Profile).