Comments on: LC Working Group – Structures and Standards, part 2 – David Bade

By: Blake

Blake — Sun, 20 May 2007 00:38:20 +0000

Blah Blah, test test, sorry, just making sure it’s not something in the post itself, but rather a word in the comments that’s causing trouble.

By: WordPress help request; commenting issues

WordPress help request; commenting issues — Sat, 19 May 2007 16:32:26 +0000

[...] This is the post which concerns me the most as it is active, and is a serious conversation that I am trying to have. The weirdest part is that I am able to comment some. I put in a couple “test” comments, which I removed. You can see that I made a couple others, although not the full one I was trying to make. [...]

By: Mark

Mark — Fri, 18 May 2007 00:58:51 +0000

Why the hell cannot I add the response I want?

There are no crazy characters and I have tried with and without the link. Multiple freaking times! I am really pretty pissed. On top of going to the bar to read and finding out the smoking ban was repealed, having my laptop (main machine) in the shop, and a million other little things, I’m about to burst a blood vessel!

By: Mark

Mark — Fri, 18 May 2007 00:56:25 +0000

Continuation of response to Tom [although not the one I am trying to make!]

I am incapable of speaking for you or your constituency. I heartily recommend that you submit written comments to the Working Group. The link is in part 1 & 6.

I share your pet peeve myself. Initially my 2nd degree was to focus on the education of catalogers but it rapidly shifted for what I consider to be good reasons.

By: Mark

Mark — Thu, 17 May 2007 12:28:39 +0000

More to come, Tom. I cannot seem to comment (as I’d like on my own blog).

By: Mark

Mark — Thu, 17 May 2007 12:26:38 +0000

Hi Tom, and thanks for the comment. I certainly cannot speak for anyone else, but I would not consider you “over your head” with all of your experience. If you are, then I have already drowned.

I, too, come across challenging materials every day–extremely challenging things. I do serials, and in my case I generally have one issue of something. While I do see some newer things, most of what I do is from the 1890s to the 1960s. I often may have a chronology or an enumeration, but rarely both, and the issue will be in the “middle” of a title’s history. How do I answer ?s of when it started, when it ended, frequency, regularity, …. And that is “simply” description; the easy part.

As for “you guys looking at bibliographic control data,” I may be a guy and I may be looking, but I am not a member of the Working Group, nor at this moment even a “professional.” [Although I am open to offers.] I am still a student, pursuing a 2nd degree in LIS, focusing on these sorts of topics and, thus, my interest.

I almost entirely agree with everything David Bade said/wrote in his paper. That I failed to make this clear is, I fear, a massive failure on my part. Perhaps, part of the explanation resides in my knowing that the 10 or so regular readers and commenters on my blog know how my questioning works. They would fully understand that my questioning–in this manner anyway–is a sign of respect.

By: Tom Kaun

Tom Kaun — Thu, 17 May 2007 05:01:43 +0000

I know I’m in over my head here as an “amateur” cataloger but with over thirty years experience in school libraries but I’ll just add my two cents worth anyway.
Every day I run across materials which challenge my cataloging skills. There is a constant struggle to get information out to users and the challenge, aside from understanding a work, is how to make that work accessible for the reader. A small (32,000 item) library is difficult enough–when one considers what cataloging for a university, OCLC or the world is like it’s no wonder David is asking why we don’t have more expert help. But we don’t and we sorta muddle along as best we can. When you guys are looking at bibliographic data control please don’t forget those of us at the bottom of the pecking order–the multi-tasking, single librarian who has to provide exactly the same service you are trying to provide on a much higher level.
BTW, my particular pet peeve when it comes to cataloging is how library schools neglect the field and denigrate it’s importance as a skill for all library practitioners, especially those who don’t have vast (or not so vast) staffs of catalogers backing them up.

By: David Bade’s paper, redux

David Bade’s paper, redux — Wed, 16 May 2007 20:45:43 +0000

[...] David Bade has responded to my critique of his paper at the LC Working Group meeting last week. [...]

By: Mark

Mark — Tue, 15 May 2007 14:00:28 +0000

Thanks for the clarification, David. I will add an addition to ensure folks understand that there is further context to help situate your remarks.

And the tea sounds lovely. Thanks for the invite.

More later; have to work.

By: David Bade

David Bade — Tue, 15 May 2007 11:29:29 +0000

Mark: Trying to reorient and reestablish librarianship on a totally different basis (communication rather than engineering), disclose and criticize the assumptions underwriting the background paper, and respond to the 5 sets of questions as I was asked to do, all in 30 minutes left little room for nuance. You can find a good deal of that nuance in my other writings. Here I only wish to respond to what caused you offence. The statement you quoted needs to be read in connection with my remarks on communication (Wittgenstein and Grice) and the separation of language and practice in libraries, this latter being an organizational matter NOT A STATEMENT ABOUT CATALOGERS! It is because administrators believe that cataloging requires no subject knowledge that catalogers are hired and expected to catalog everything whether they can do that in a manner that is useful or not. No institution would hire bibliographers or professors like they hire catalogers. Like most catalogers I do the best I can, but for me, there are times when I know that I haven’t any idea what the book is about, and I have to ask myself why am I asked to do this? Shouldn’t I leave it so that someone who does understand it can do it? Is that not the promise of shared cataloging? Yet often that is not an option.

The other side of this offence is that I am only speaking of those times when catalogers–including myself–fail, not when we succeed.

Also, my planet is 18 miles south of Urbana, so stop by for a cup of Mongolian tea some weekend.