----------------------------Original message----------------------------
To: ARLIS/NA
From: Daniel Starr, Chair, Cataloging Advisory Committee
Earlier this year the Library of Congress proposed several major revisions
in cataloging practice for works in the field of art. These proposals are
part of their continuing effort to simplify cataloging and are part of the
ongoing changes associated with the recommendations of the Airlie House
conference on subject subdivisions. A draft of these proposals was reviewed
and endorsed by CAC earlier this year. It is now time for CAC to make a
formal response to the final proposals. These proposals will have a
far-reaching affect on art subject headings with major implications for both
the assigning of headings and for access to materials. I urge all ARLIS/NA
members to read LC's proposals. The are available at
http://lcweb.loc.gov/catdir/cpso/artrev.html; I would also urge you to
revisit policy H1250 in the Subject Cataloging Manual since these changes
must be viewed in the context of the remaining rules for assigning subject
headings for art. Our proposed response follows on behalf of ARLIS/NA.
Please send any comments to the list.
Change in assignment of headings for time period
We support this change, but would like to clarify two points.
1. The syndetic structure that leads from headings with chronological
subdivisions to narrower terms as is currently done would still be
maintained. References of the type Drawing-20th century see also the
narrower term Drawing, Cubist would still be created.
2. The proposed list of free-floating subdivisions that would be
developed (see section 3 of the next proposal below) would be applicable to
the other headings called for in H1250, sec. 1. For example, headings such
as Sculpture, Baroque-Italy-18th century or Painting, Baroque-17th century
would be appropriate because the Baroque style covers more than one century.
Change in formulation of headings with chronological subdivisions
1. We support this proposal, but with strong reservations. These
reservations would be relieved by a more extensive list of free-floating
chronological subdivisions when used in headings expressing national, ethnic
or religious background. We suggest that the list of free-floating
chronological subdivisions proposed in section 3 below be expanded to
include individual centuries before the 16th century. -500-1500 is too broad
a subdivision to express Medieval and will require editorial creation of
many headings with specific century subdivisions such as Painting,
German-13th century. Furthermore, there is still strong support in the art
community for the argument that art historians treat the terms Ancient and
Medieval as stylistic terms as well as chronological terms. We suggest that
these two terms continue to be divided geographically.
2. We support this proposal.
3. We support this proposal, with the modification suggested in section
1 above, namely that more individual centuries be added to the list of
free-floating chronological subdivisions. We suggest that individual
centuries from the 10th century to the 15th century be added to the list.
4. We support this proposal.
Suggestion for further action
If these proposals for far-reaching changes in art cataloging practice are
adopted, we suggest that the Library of Congress organize a workshop to
discuss implementing these changes. Such a workshop should address how
these changes will affect other policies, especially the syndetic structure
of art subject authority records and those for assigning other art headings.
__________________________________________________________________
Mail submissions to [log in to unmask]
Administrative matters (file requests, subscription requests, etc)
to [log in to unmask]
ARLIS-L Archives and subscription maintenance:
http://lsv.uky.edu/archives/arlis-l.html
Questions may be addressed to list owner at: [log in to unmask]
