Cataloging Fiction by Sergio Ragno Rebecca Slinger Beth Theobald Jason Vey Jasmine Woodson K.Currier, J.Oh, R.Riter, LIS 2005
Dec 18, 2014
Cataloging Fiction
bySergio Ragno
Rebecca SlingerBeth Theobald
Jason VeyJasmine Woodson
K.Currier, J.Oh, R.Riter, LIS 2005
Effective Cataloging• Effectively cataloging
fiction still a challenge.
• Thousands of genres and sub-genres exist.
• New varieties invented daily.
• If a customer wants a book about a vampire heroine, where do you point them?
• Just some of the possibilities:– Supernatural romance– Urban fantasy– Supernatural thriller– Plain horror– Fantasy
“Which Section?”
Genres• Fiction identifiers less
concrete than non-fiction.
• Catalogers forced to rely on subjective metadata
• What about genre crossing works?
{Classification
Today}• Catalogers seek out
aspects of fiction deemed worth indexing.
• General classification systems focus on concrete facts.
• Some schemes expanded to include classes of subject matter.
horror
action
romance
• Literary type, publication date and region remain useful bases for classification for academia.
however…
• Pleasure readers don’t know where to find a book if the book isn’t classified by its content.
The Problem
Finding a Solution
• Many scholars have devised ways to classify fiction with the reader in mind.
• But there is no easy solution to perfectly organize fiction.
Note: This is a real bookshop. For more info: http://www.mcsweeneys.net/links/events/chriscobb.html
An Attempt at Progress• In the early 1980s
Annelise Pejtersen and Jutta Austin developed the AMP Classification System.
• It took into account the subjectivity of fiction.
• The AMP system is better for indexing not shelving.
Pejtersen’s Categories• These categories are
divided into connotative and denotative characteristics.
• Connotative: Subject, frame and author’s intent
• Denotative: physical characteristics
A Different Two Categories• Rebecca Green’s
method classified by subject and attribute (i.e. author’s intended audience).
• The attribute is supposed to reflect the user’s needs and ideas —too subjective.
Teens! Kids!
They Don’t FitWhy don’t these system work?
because:
•Information systems built on existing standards (MARC formats).
•Forces fiction to fit standards developed for non-fiction.
•Value is personal and badly fits the traditional values of indexing and classifying.
The Nature of Terminology
• Value judgments must be made when choosing the right terms.
• The author’s intentions and attitudes must be divined and reflected in the vocabulary.
Baby Steps
• Michael Burgess developed an evaluative code.
• Today people would question the cataloger’s judgments.
• The system is too basic.
How Dewey Worksfor example:
• The 808 class is devoted to literary genres (poetry, drama, satire, etc.)
• Sub-class 809 for history and criticism of literature.
• Further sub-classes for national literatures.
Dewey Is Useful for Academia
• Within each sub-class are more genre and sub-classes.
• Useful for study but don’t deal with the content in fiction.
Searching Beyond
• The Online Computer Library Center (OCLC)’s Fiction Finder.
• Allows users to retrieve content information.
• Searches beyond formal characteristics.
{Continued Challenges}• The challenge of helping
readers find books easily has always existed.
• It’s been a topic in library literature since at least 1933, when Frank Haigh’s fiction classification scheme was proposed and tested.
• So where do we go from here?
“False Ceiling” by Richard Wentworth
Can Shelves Ever Be More Than 2D?
• Indexing systems in the future?
• Can point users to a location on the shelf.
• Shelving classifications are two-dimensional and limited.
The Future
There is a long way to go before (if ever) we establish an effective classification method.
the end