Re: Atlantic (monthly?) John Radencich 05 Apr 2007 11:18 UTC
Elmer, Well said! I haven't seen it done better in my 33 years of cataloging serials. This should be given to every budding serials cataloger as a training device. John Radencich Library-Cataloging Dept. Florida International University Miami, Florida 33199 Elmer Alvin Klebs wrote: >Lee, > >Thanks for asking an excellent question!! I figure you will likely be >deluged with responses, and so have tried to be concise, but couldn't >help lifting the hood and poking around a bit with some underlying >issues that have been on my mind of late. > >Atlantic monthly/Atlantic is one of those titles which have gone back >and forth numerous times over the decades, at least so far as the cover >presentation goes. I think the short answer is that, after a while, >folks in the cataloging world got tired of creating new records all the >time for what was essentially the same publication. > >So, with the latest (1993+) record, we came up with a solution. We >noticed that, regardless of the cover presentation, the masthead inside >the magazine continued to consistently refer to itself as "Atlantic >monthly." So we decided to base our description on the masthead >effective with that record (this is noted both in the 500 source of >title and in a 936 catalogers' note) and give "Atlantic" as a cover >variant. That way, only if/when the masthead title changes we would we >need a new record. > >We realize that this might cause confusion to those who want the main >entry to match the cover (the cover being what folks tend to pay the >most attention to). But we also don't want the confusion of having >holdings for a single title spanning over half a dozen records, and >check-in staff constantly receiving current issues on the wrong record, >which then further confuse patrons looking for specific issues. > >This highlights one of the dilemmas of serial cataloging. What do we >do when publishers do weird things that confuse the very people who are >trying to find their publications? Those of us with years of experience >can regale the captive audience with no end of tales of bizarre title >changes, cryptic variants in numbering schemes, and other baffling >oddities. There are even awards within the cataloging community for >some of these things now. > >Our job as catalogers is to do our best to put an end to confusion -- >to create structured bibliographic metadada (i.e., a catalog entry) that >succeeds in its mission. That mission: to ensure that users of the >collection (including library staff) clearly understand what the library >has in its collections, no matter which of an increasing number of >approaches the user takes to discover the answer to that question >(author, title, publisher, series, subject content, issuing body, >keyword, etc.). > >So, when a publisher located on the Atlantic coast (namely, Boston) >continues to waffle about the name of a certain Monthly they have been >issuing for over a hundred years now, we eventually get to the point >where we figure continuing to add new records on top of the half dozen >or so already there will be more confusing than nailing down a >consistent title (even if from a less prominent source) and sticking >with it as long as we are able. > >Such are the challenges of the cataloging profession. > >Elmer Klebs >Senior Serials Cataloger >Library of Congress > >[Standard Disclaimer : I represent myself, and not my institution, in >the above missive.] > > > >>>>Lee Carlton <kopycatalyst@YAHOO.COM> 04/04/07 5:26 PM >>> >>>> >>>> >This may be a very basic and stupid question to the serial catalogers, >but why is The Atlantic still cataloged as The Atlantic monthly >(*Atlantic monthly (Boston, Mass. : 1993)*)? It has caused >confusion and problems for serials students where I work. From what >little I know of AACR2 and CONSER practices with major/minor changes, >this should be a title change dating back to 2003/2004. > > Any enlightenment would be appreciated. > > > Lee > > >--------------------------------- >We won't tell. Get more on shows you hate to love >(and love to hate): Yahoo! TV's Guilty Pleasures list. > >