----------------------------Original message----------------------------
The art catalogers of NYC have been discussing the implementation of
form subdivision by LC. Here's a message and response that has
circulated around the catalogers. Anybody else want to jump in?

Sherman Clarke - NYU

------- Forwarded Message Follows -------
Date:          Wed, 03 Mar 1999 16:14:52 -0500
From:          "Fermon, Danny" <<a href="/scripts/wa.exe?LOGON=A3%3Dind9903%26L%3DARLIS-L%26E%3D7BIT7BIT%26P%3D149705%26B%3D--%26T%3Dtext%252FplainTEXT%252FPLAIN%3B%2520charset%3DUS-ASCII%26pending%3D" target="_parent" >[log in to unmask]</a>>
Subject:       RE: is PHOTO, ARTISTIC a form heading?
To:            "Fermon, Danny" <<a href="/scripts/wa.exe?LOGON=A3%3Dind9903%26L%3DARLIS-L%26E%3D7BIT7BIT%26P%3D149705%26B%3D--%26T%3Dtext%252FplainTEXT%252FPLAIN%3B%2520charset%3DUS-ASCII%26pending%3D" target="_parent" >[log in to unmask]</a>>,[list of names
deleted for space reasons]

Is a monograph by Ansel Adams of photographic works of Yosemite
National Park about Yosemite or Adams?  Many users believe a book of
this sort is about Adams, but that just doesn't hold up under
scrutiny; it's an artistic statement by the photographer.  A book of
poems about the natural wonders of Yosemite would never be regarded
as a book about the author (except, of course, in the broadest
poetical sense--which is useless for us catalogers). Presumably
there should be a 655 for the poetry.

So, if it's about Yosemite, the heading, Photography, Artistic, should be
coded 655.  Only if it were considered to be about Adams and his artistic
output would Photography, Artistic, be encoded 650.  But that doesn't make
sense for most of the monographs of this sort.

Danny Fermon
Assistant Librarian
Museum of Modern Art Library
<a href="/scripts/wa.exe?LOGON=A3%3Dind9903%26L%3DARLIS-L%26E%3D7BIT7BIT%26P%3D149705%26B%3D--%26T%3Dtext%252FplainTEXT%252FPLAIN%3B%2520charset%3DUS-ASCII%26pending%3D" target="_parent" >[log in to unmask]</a>
(212) 708-9434

> -----Original Message-----

> Dear CDG colleagues and artnacoisti,
>
> At the last NY CDG meeting, we discussed LC's implementation of the
> form subdivision. We have been having "how should we do it?" and
> "what's a form subdivision?" discussions here at NYU. Today, one of
> the copy catalogers came to me with this question: should I code
> "Photography, Artistic" as a 655? I'd guess that more than 90% of the
> 6XXs I've done of that heading were for examples of artistic
> photography, not ABOUT artistic photography. Yet, somehow the thought
> of blithely coding Photography, Artistic as 655 was horrifying; is it
> just the maintenance question?
>
> Maybe I'll put form headings and subdivisions on the CPDG agenda for
> Vancouver. SAC is already talking about another Form Forum for ALA
> Annual this summer in New Orleans.
>
> Sherman