Hello all,

I am working on a panel proposal exploring the judgement calls catalogers must make that can affect access to material on or by underrepresented groups. This topic came up in a number of sessions in NYC and it generated a fair amount of interest on the brainstorming site. As catalogers we want to include as much information as possible, especially when it comes to zines, artists books, and other special collections. But how much is too much? Do we include information about a artist’s race, gender, or orientation? For all material or only when it directly impacts their artwork? Who makes that call?

 

Some potential topics based on conversations in New York:

 

• What local practices have folks developed to aid in identification of this material? Using the creator characteristic MARC field 386? Adding local subject headings?
• How do you reconcile having to apply outdated or insensitive subject headings in order to comply with cataloging standards with the sometimes personal and nuanced nature of art materials
• From a reference standpoint, what are users trying to find? What’s missing from cataloging records that would aid in discovery?
• What impact has the 2016 report from the PCC on adding gender to authority records (and the residual confusion and issues it raised) had?
  • also more generally where do you draw the line? How far is too far in tracking down and adding personal information into the new RDA authority fields, how does the process vary for living or deceased artists?

 

If you are interested in proposing a presentation or have suggestions for potential panelists I would love to hear from you!

Andrea

 

 

Andrea Puccio

Collections Management Librarian

Sterling and Francine Clark Art Institute Library

225 South Street

Williamstown, MA 01267

Tel. 413-458-0535

[log in to unmask]

http://francine.clarkart.edu/