A Common Ground 525

A Common Ground: Communication and Alliance between Cataloguer and Curator for Improved Access to Rare and

Elaine Beckley Bradshaw and Stephen C. Wagner

Rare catalogers and special collections curators can benefit greatly from cooperating on matters concerning cataloging policy and practice. This alliance is necessary for providing full access to special collections in a rapidly changing environment. The authors examine rare book cataloging from the perspectives of cataloger and curator; discuss the areas where a cataloger–curator alliance can affect cataloging, as well as relevant factors over which the two have little control; and promote a con­ cept of customized cataloging for special collections materials.

are book catalogers and special The curator benefits from rare book collections curators can benefit cataloging by gaining better intellectual greatly from cooperating on control over the collections’ holdings, matters concerning cataloging thereby promoting more effective refer­ policy and practice. Indeed, such an alli­ ence, development, and out­ ance is necessary for providing full access reach. However, to take advantage of its to special collections materials in an en­ benefits, the curator first must know the vironment that is changing rapidly and basics of rare book cataloging, regardless perhaps insensitive to standards and prac­ of whether he or she ever catalogs a book.2 tices of special collections librarianship. This More specifically, the curator must be able article examines rare book cataloging from to read, understand, and recognize the the perspectives of both cataloger and cu­ limitations of records in the local online rator. The authors discuss the areas where catalog, OCLC and/or RLIN, and other a cataloger–curator alliance can affect ’ online catalogs accessible via the policies and decisions, as well as the fac­ Internet. The curator who understands tors over which such an alliance has little the language of cataloging can expect to control but which, nevertheless, need to have a more profitable relationship with be taken into account. Collaboration be­ not only the rare book cataloger but also tween catalogers and curators is just as the cataloging department as a whole. important as that between curators and Finally, a curator writing any grant pro­ conservators, donors, administrators, and posal whose aim is to improve intellec­ researchers.1 tual access to the collections, including the

Elaine Beckley Bradshaw is the Cataloging/Computer Services Librarian in the University of Oklahoma Law Library; e-mail: [email protected]. Stephen C. Wagner is the History of Science Bibliographer in the Department of Philosophy at the University of Oklahoma; e-mail: [email protected].

525 526 College & Research Libraries November 2000 construction of indexes and databases, Current Trends in Librarianship must demonstrate and incorporate Several recent trends in librarianship, knowledge of the fundamentals of rare general as well as specific, undermine book cataloging.3 He or she will have an both traditional cataloging practice and even greater need for knowledge of rare the needs of special collections.4 For ex­ book cataloging when supervising a cata­ ample, in-house cataloging departments loger either on staff or as part of a grant at some institutions are under attack by project. library administrators who emphasize cost cutting and believe that these depart­ In special collections, outsourcing is ments are too expensive. In all libraries, useful only for a very limited range cataloging departments are under fiscal of materials. scrutiny and present easy behind-the­ scenes targets for cutbacks. Similarly, spe­ In turn, the cataloger benefits from cial collections appear to be ancillary to knowledge of the collections’ strengths many libraries’ self-proclaimed missions and overall mission. This knowledge, in a developing information age.5 With combined with an idea of the research such emphasis on their holdings and on needs of the collections’ patrons, enables a special facility for preservation and con­ the cataloger to customize certain ele­ trolled access, special collections depart­ ments of the cataloging record to better ments seem wildly out of step in a world serve the needs of the collections and their of “libraries without walls” and the vi­ users. Moreover, the cataloger should be sion of libraries as networked informa­ aware of any backlogs or otherwise inac­ tion gateways. Thus, special collections cessible materials held by the collections, departments, which also are expensive to the nature of the backlog (e.g., its size, administer, likewise are easy targets for subject matter(s), range of dates of publi­ cutbacks. cation), and any priorities the curator has One specific trend is the outsourcing regarding cataloging. This is an example of cataloging. Although useful in circum­ where cooperation between cataloger and stances where highly specialized materi­ curator may bring about effective als require competencies outside the policy—in this case, for cataloging a back­ scope of many cataloging departments log. (e.g., formats such as sound recordings In this article, the authors elaborate on or languages such as Arabic), in other the themes of communication and alliance cases outsourcing is used merely as a in terms of goals and constraints. By goals, blanket cost-cutting measure. In extreme the authors mean informed decision mak­ cases, entire cataloging departments have ing and subsequent action where cata­ been eliminated in favor of outsourcing. loger and curator can set policy, establish In special collections, outsourcing is use­ procedures, and achieve optimal access ful only for a very limited range of mate­ to special collections materials. By con­ rials. Even drawing up the profile for straints, they mean factors, large and adequate cataloging is highly labor-inten­ small, over which curator and cataloger sive, as is reviewing cataloging records have little control. Thus, goals concern the and making any in-house enhancement ultimate aim of access and how best to of inadequate records. Moreover, for pres­ achieve it, and constraints can restrict any ervation and security reasons, most cu­ action taken by curator and cataloger and rators would never consider sending spe­ are, to a certain extent, constituted by the cial collections materials outside the li­ institutional environment in which rare brary. Finally, as discussed below, the ben­ book catalogers and special collections efits of more customized cataloging will curators toil. Both also operate within a be realized only with the close in-house broader professional culture, as discussed collaboration of cataloger with curator in the following sections. and with the materials always on hand. A Common Ground 527

A second specific trend is that of mini­ been assembled from a single, consistent mal cataloging. This may include briefer standard. cataloging records with limited descrip­ For a special collections setting, the tion, little or no subject analysis, and few situation is even worse. Not only do ret­ (if any) local notes or content notes. This rospective conversions typically work trend flies in the face of the standards of from existing, often brief, cataloging cards rare book cataloging and the mission of and not the actual item (either straight special collections as resources for re­ data input from the existing cataloging search and scholarship. For example, rare card or a match to an existing OCLC book cataloging standards demand record), but they also rarely allow for cata­ more—not less—description, including loging to current rare book standards, full transcription of almost all title page which requires much additional time, re­ information. Moreover, the customized search, and expertise. In effect, this means cataloging advocated by the authors of re-cataloging the rare books, a process this article emphasizes careful subject that runs counter to the goal of relatively analysis and appropriate, more extensive inexpensive retrospective conversion. use of notes (especially content and local Another specific outcome of evolving notes) and added entries. Furthermore, in technologies is their impact on the cre­ an era of reduced travel budgets and net- ation, distribution, preservation, and worked online library catalogs, scholars long-term access to electronic sources. are becoming more—not less—depen­ One example is the availability of elec­ dent on fuller cataloging records. tronic journals and reference works, Another general trend is the impact on which to date has had little immediate libraries of evolving technologies. Al­ impact on special collections and their though often beneficial, technological de­ holdings. However, in time, electronic velopment seems to encourage many li­ sources may well fall within the scope of brarians, especially administrators and the collections. Often very little thought educators, to overestimate its use and ef­ is given to considerations at the core of fectiveness. Specifically, many retrospec­ special collections librarianship: preser­ tive conversions of card catalogs into vation and long-term access. Will these online systems have fallen short of the sources later be accessible at all or avail­ ideal due to unrealistic estimates of the cost able in a format that ensures their long- and labor involved.6 And despite the best term accessibility? Who will own these intentions to thoroughly update all online sources and have the rights for distribu­ records to current standards, nobody has tion and redistribution over time? Who had the time and resources to do so. In fact, will have responsibility for maintaining the motivation behind retrospective the data in an accessible format? Given projects is a rapid and straightforward con­ the instability of storage media for elec­ version of the card catalog into a new, very tronic data, how will this responsibility useful format. Unfortunately, such a be met?7 If, due to technical consider­ “quick and dirty” approach only glosses ations, electronic resources are not over the complexities of transforming a “stored” physically in the collections, how catalog historically assembled using cata­ will the goal of long-term access be met? loging standards that themselves have Will a library or institution’s systems of­ evolved significantly over time. Although fice recognize, respect, fulfill, and give this mix of cataloging standards has ex­ adequate priority to such a goal? These isted within card catalogs as well, the la­ problems face libraries now without ob­ beled displays of many online systems vious resolutions, and they will have an nevertheless mask the catalog’s historical even greater impact on special collections nature. Moreover, patrons may well as­ and cataloging in the future. sume that a new online system, like most Another issue is that of making cur­ new databases they have encountered, has rent holdings more broadly available 528 College & Research Libraries November 2000 through digitization and networked ac­ However, cooperative efforts fall flat cess.8 Whether such efforts will be effec­ unless they are based on an accepted set tive for more than limited, well-defined of standards.11 Online bibliographic subsets of special collections is unclear. records would be far less accessible with­ In a library’s world of limited resources, out cataloging standards such as AACR2. any such efforts take time, staff, and With regard to rare books, the manual money away from basic library functions, Descriptive Cataloging of Rare Books (DCRB) including cataloging.9 (Ironically, catalog­ supplements AACR2 by permitting fuller ing is the traditional library function most descriptive cataloging appropriate to rare concerned with access.) Even worse, books.12 DCRB also provides an effective many repositories (such as smaller his­ tool for training the rare book cataloger. torical societies) that hold valuable, Other standards, such as the Library of unique items (especially archives and Congress Subject Headings (LCSH) and the ) do not have the resources LC name authority file, benefit the rare to shift around to large-scale digitizing book cataloger as well. efforts. Grant-funded projects, even large Technology also has brought benefits. ones, can achieve only limited goals. Even First and foremost, it provides access to if the resources were available to digitize this wealth of information on the biblio­ and index every item within a special col­ graphic utilities. Moreover, access to lection, certain physical evidence neces­ other libraries’ online catalogs via telnet, sary for scholarship (e.g., illustrations, and now the World Wide Web has been watermarks, typefaces, the book’s struc­ a benefit for cataloging and reference. ture and binding) is available only with For cataloging, these benefits include direct examination of the original item or, noting how other catalogers have if possible, at an incredible investment of emended and expanded the minimal time and money. In place of these global record available through OCLC or RLIN digitalizing efforts, the authors see tech­ in terms of enhancement of descriptive nology as complementing, not replacing, elements, use of special thesaurus terms traditional library practices and extend­ (e.g., for binding or provenance), and as­ ing the reach of special collections.10 signment of subject headings. For refer­ On a positive note, some general ence, benefits include more user-friendly trends in librarianship have advanced searching, the ability to do special the cause of rare book cataloging. As a searches (such as browse the call num­ specific example, libraries have benefited ber range of a particular, rich collection), in many ways from national cooperative enhanced subject searching, the use of efforts. The development of the interna­ fuller cataloging records to identify spe­ tional bibliographic utilities, OCLC and cific texts and their editions, and the RLIN, has contributed to both catalog­ potential to track acquisitions at other ing and reference. The ability to down­ collections to enhance one’s own collec­ load and modify bibliographic records tion development efforts. These factors has eliminated the need for each library apply especially to searching the catalog to catalog every book from scratch, in­ of large, well-known, and well-managed cluding rare books. Even though many collections in similar or related subject online records lack the full detail de­ areas. manded by an individual library’s stan­ More general benefits for both cata­ dards, online records still provide a time­ logers and curators include networking saving template for enhancement. More­ through listservs and e-mail; the avail­ over, these bibliographic utilities provide ability of resources on the Web (such as records and holdings data that support foreign-language dictionaries, catalog­ better reference and collection develop­ ing tools, and special collections project ment. All of these benefits accrue to spe­ reports); a reduced sense of isolation, cial collections. even for those working at larger research A Common Ground 529 libraries; the promotion of large- and institution or the collection) or external small-scale cooperative efforts, both for­ (e.g., national and international stan­ mal and informal; and the promotion, dards, cooperative agreements). development, and refinement of stan­ The primary institutional constraint is dards. budget. The largest budget item for most libraries is staff salary, which translates Ideals and Reality into time spent working. For a library Of course, the primary issue is the qual­ administration concerned with limiting ity of the catalog—for catalogers, curators, spending in a era of slow growth or even patrons, and others. The quality of the cutbacks, assigning staff to the highly la­ catalog can be defined in terms of: bor-intensive effort of rare book catalog­ • the quality of the individual cata­ ing, which benefits only a small portion loging records, including detail, accuracy, of the overall library’s holdings and pa­ and relevance of access points to the col­ tron use, may seem problematic. Putting lection, institution, and their patrons; this money and time into reference, auto­ • the incorporation of relevant au­ mation, and acquisitions—or even clear­ thority control; ing the omnipresent cataloging backlog— • its comprehensiveness (i.e., its re­ often seems to be a better use of limited flection of the collection’s overall hold­ resources. Even within a special collec­ ings); tion, clearing a backlog and providing at • its accessibility, especially online least minimal access to the entire holding access via the Internet; may be deemed more important than pro­ • the characteristics of the on-line viding a detailed cataloging record for system, in terms of both searching and every item sometime in the distant future. display. In other words, one ideal (access to the In addition to the benefits listed above entire collection) may be in conflict with for cataloging and reference, an outstand­ another ideal (full, detailed cataloging ing online catalog can benefit individu­ records). als and institutions outside the facility. For example, scholars regularly send e-mail The need for cooperation in rare messages to the History of Science Col­ book cataloging simply may not be lections at the University of Oklahoma recognized, however obvious it may Libraries that include downloaded cata­ seem on the face of it. loging records from its online system. If the catalog were more comprehensive On the other hand, cataloging special and more completely done to rare book collections materials simply demands cataloging standards, another scholar or more time and effort to do well than other institution’s request for information on types of cataloging. It also enhances local the collection’s holdings could be handled reference while simultaneously contrib­ more easily. Moreover, rare book dealers uting to the scholarly community, a goal could make use of a comprehensive, de­ of any research library or any institution tailed online catalog when helping the housing a major special collection. Insti­ History of Science Collections develop its tutions that are willing to accept a special rare book holdings. In a similar vein, the collection and benefit from the prestige curator would benefit immeasurably of such holdings also acquire a responsi­ from having Internet access to a complete bility that extends beyond the mere hous­ catalog when on book-buying trips to ing of materials to their preservation and Europe, thereby helping reduce the re­ access. turns of duplicate items. A second institutional constraint is However, even realized ideals are staffing. Staffing is more than a budget­ achieved within real-world constraints. ary consideration. Rare book cataloging Such constraints may be internal (i.e., the demands expertise and training beyond 530 College & Research Libraries November 2000 what is required in most cataloging de­ Customized Cataloging partments, even those that do a signifi­ Driven by the ideal of a high-quality cata­ cant amount of original cataloging. The log and the above-mentioned constraints, authors’ emphasis on cooperation be­ cataloger and curator must resolve sev­ tween catalogers and curators dictates eral matters of policy and practice in both rare book–cataloging skills from the working toward the optimal balance of cataloger and subject knowledge from the timely access and detailed records. The curator. following issues should be discussed well A third institutional constraint is ad­ before any cataloging is done: ministrative organization. When special • Will priorities be assigned to mate­ collections are part of public services and rials needing cataloging, or will books be cataloging is part of technical services (a done on a “first-in, first-out” basis? common library administrative struc­ • What is the most appropriate level ture), opportunities for collaboration are of cataloging for the collections? Do dif­ hindered. The need for cooperation in ferent parts of the collections get cata­ rare book cataloging simply may not be loged to different degrees of detail? recognized, however obvious it may seem • What cataloging standard should on the face of it. Similarly, the benefits are be used: AACR2 or DCRB? not discerned or articulated without on­ • Most important, what records will going discussion at all levels of the library. be customized for the collections, and in Nevertheless, the benefits strongly out­ what ways? weigh the costs of establishing connec­ • How can characteristics of the tions across administrative lines. online system be made to reflect fully the One alternative is to place the rare book results of optimal cataloging? cataloger within special collections. Op­ It is precisely collaboration on these portunities for collaboration are enhanced policy and practice issues that leads to because regular discussion between cata­ what the authors referred to at the begin­ loger and curator is accomplished more ning of this article as customized catalog- easily. Communication is only the first ing—that is, using a combination of sub­ step; specific policies and procedures re­ ject knowledge and cataloging acumen to main to be developed. However, en­ customize the catalog to provide an opti­ hanced communication is a necessary first mal match between the records in the stage in identifying and addressing issues catalog and the items in the collections. that lead to effective cataloging and hence The rest of this article elaborates on this to access to collections’ materials. concept. A fourth constraint is the requirement To integrate cataloging with other spe­ of libraries to meet accepted cataloging cial collections’ functions, the curator standards. The benefits of large-scale co­ needs to articulate cataloging priorities. operation and the need for standards Establishing priorities relies on his or her were discussed above. At the institu­ knowledge of the collections and their tional level, though, those benefits come use. Ultimately, the curator’s decisions at a cost—namely, the obligation to adopt depend on the following criteria: ac­ only what the standards dictate. For de­ knowledgment, subject, time period, and scriptive cataloging, such drawbacks can value. Acknowledging gifts and pur­ be minimized with DCRB and the wise chases from special funds via prompt use of notes fields. However, subject and cataloging provides proper recognition of name access may be inadequate for local welcome support of any special collec­ needs. In such cases, one either concedes tions, recognition that does not accrue to the loss or creates two records, one for items buried in a backlog. Cataloging can the national utilities and one for the lo­ encourage better utilization of the collec­ cal catalog, but only at the cost of addi­ tions by focusing on subject strengths or tional time. past, current, and anticipated use (e.g., A Common Ground 531 new faculty or visiting scholars). Priori­ Descriptive cataloging reveals a con­ ties also may be based on time period tinuum of detail from remarkably sparse (e.g., ) or value (monetary or (e.g., a minimal AACR2 record) to incred­ scholarly). There is no ready-made for­ ibly elaborate (e.g., full DCRB). The au­ mula for balancing these criteria; rather, thors propose the following recommen­ decisions must be made based on judg­ dations, subject to modification by the ment and knowledge of the collections. curator and cataloger: Deciding what to do with a substan­ 1. A minimal AACR2Rev record for all tial backlog further complicates the pro­ incoming materials: This record is recom­ cess of setting cataloging priorities. As mended above for security reasons to be mentioned above, cataloging a backlog linked with an order/gift record. pits one ideal (access to the entire collec­ 2. A full AACR2Rev record for currently tions) against another (detailed biblio­ published materials (as mentioned above) and graphic records for each item in the col­ nineteenth and twentieth machine-press book: lections). The authors believe that the In conjunction with the curator, the cata­ wisest course is to build slowly and loger may decide to include extra notes steadily a high-quality catalog rather than (such as notes on signature, advertise­ face the possibility of either cataloging ments, errata, physical details of every item twice or never cataloging ma­ multivolume sets) for books whose im­ terials to rare book standards. portance and/or structure so requires.13 Before specifying appropriate catalog­ Curator and cataloger may decide to fol­ ing standards and levels of description, low DCRB in certain cases when greater three assumptions must be mentioned. descriptive detail demands it. First, for security reasons, some type of 3. A full DCRB record for all hand-press record needs to be made for every item books and some machine-press books: DCRB as it enters the collections. For example, more fully and accurately describes the in the History of Science Collections at book, allowing a complete and unaltered the University of Oklahoma Libraries, a transcription of the title page and record­ temporary record for all incoming ma­ ing the physical structure of the book (for­ terials is created in both the card catalog mat, signatures, pagination, illustra­ and the short-title database. This pro­ tions).14 This level of detail is useful for vides two independent, complete lists of reference, security, collection develop­ the collections’ holdings. More generally, ment, cataloging, and scholarly purposes. in an age of integrated library systems, Concerning the last recommendation the authors envision simply having above, even within DCRB, there are sev­ minimal cataloging records linked to eral options for varying levels of detail.15 order records (to include both orders and For example, the title page punctuation gifts). Second, discussion should be lim­ may be retained in addition to the re­ ited to the cataloging of books and is­ quired ISBD punctuation, thereby result­ sues concerning archives and manu­ ing in “double punctuation.” The cata­ scripts should be left aside. Third, cur­ loger can convert a date appearing in ro­ rently published secondary sources man numerals on the title page to Arabic should receive adequate cataloging as numerals or transcribe the date in both they pass routinely from acquisitions roman and Arabic numerals (the latter through centralized cataloging to the within square brackets). In the physical special collections. description area, the cataloger can record The next question to deal with con­ both the specific type of illustration (e.g., cerns the amount of detail to provide in map, plan, portrait) and the technique of the process of cataloging. This in turn di­ illustration (e.g., woodcut, copper plate vides into several categories: descriptive engraving), if either is deemed significant. cataloging, subject analysis, classification, However, the greatest opportunity for authority work, and added entries. customization exists within the notes­ 532 College & Research Libraries November 2000 area. Beyond the three mandatory note the two may make similar decisions when types in DCRB (giving source of title, edi­ the historical importance of a work or its tion, or publication information taken anticipated use dictates more detailed from outside the chief source; indicating subject headings. As a corollary, curator transposition of title page elements; and and cataloger may decide to reclassify a noting errata leaves or slips), there is a work to better match the current holdings wide range of options including, but not or use of the collections. limited to, notes on title variations, au­ Concerning authority work, the cura­ thorship, and bibliographic his­ tor occasionally may identify the need to tory, publication, signatures, physical de­ revise an authority record (e.g., an undif­ scription, references to published descrip­ ferentiated personal name). Beyond this, tions, and contents. however, the curator may have a differ­ In addition to these universal notes, the ent goal in mind: to provide as much in­ cataloger and the curator also may decide formation about an author as possible, as to include a variety of local or copy-spe­ opposed to providing only enough infor­ cific notes. They may decide to use local mation to distinguish one author from notes for a variety of situations, includ­ another. To this end, the curator may want ing imperfect copies, extra illustrated or to work with the cataloger to enhance interleaved copies, binding, hand-colored authority records in the local system by illustrations, annotations, provenance, adding, for example, a complete set of and some bound-withs. Local notes may birth and death dates or a cross-reference be used to support added entries for to a different or fuller form of name. names, titles, genre/forms, physical char­ Finally, cataloger and curator will want acteristics, and provenance but are not to collaborate on additional access points. required by DCRB. For example, they may decide for works Having agreed on appropriate levels such as conference proceedings to add and standards for descriptive cataloging, names of prominent contributors who did the cataloger and the curator may even not appear in the initial cataloging record. wish to establish an item-by-item review Depending on the collections and their of cataloging records for issues that de­ use, they may add names of illustrators, pend on detailed subject knowledge: sub­ engravers, binders, printers, and publish­ ject analysis, classification, authority ers. Moreover, they may determine the work, and additional access points. In need for a uniform title to collocate books these cases, the curator’s subject knowl­ with a long history (e.g., Euclid’s edge, knowledge of the current literature Elements). Lastly, they may wish to add in the field, and knowledge of the history terms to a cataloging record that formerly of books and printing will prove valuable were included in special card files for top­ assets for comprehensive, accurate cata­ ics such as paper, type, binding, printing loging. and , and provenance.17 Concerning subject knowledge, a cu­ However, all of this work toward pro­ rator–cataloger collaboration may decide, viding a comprehensive, accurate set of for original cataloging, not to place restric­ cataloging records will be for naught if the tions on the appropriate number of sub­ local system cannot adequately display all ject headings (e.g, beyond the common the information packed into the records. practice of three to five subject headings What the patron sees in the catalog dis­ per book) as well as allow for headings play is constrained by national standards, in books of a more encyclopedic nature local system limitations, and local deci­ that may contain small, but highly impor­ sions concerning what to display and how. tant, sections on a given subject (i.e., opt­ The alliance of curator and rare book cata­ ing for many specific headings instead of loger provides essential input into the se­ one general heading). For copy catalog­ lection of an integrated library system and ing, including twentieth-century books, its adaptation for local usage. Because of A Common Ground 533 the peculiar characteristics of rare book dedicatee, printer, illustrator, forger). cataloging records, only these two indi­ Only with the prompting of cataloger and viduals will have the knowledge for, and curator will the results of customized interest in, promoting a display adequate cataloging be displayed consistently and for reference and scholarship. Due to the available for scholars.18 administrative structure of most libraries, the alliance will be able to voice these con­ Conclusion cerns in both public services and technical Open lines of communication between services meetings. cataloger and curator can make the most The concerns are really twofold: (1) the of the limited time a rare book cataloger ability to search effectively throughout all may have to work with the collection. A relevant elements of the record, and (2) cataloging strategy, worked out in ad­ the capability to have displayed all rel­ vance and drawing on the knowledge and evant information within each record. skills of both cataloger and curator, can Especially important are full title, physi­ assure that high-priority items receive the cal characteristics and other nontextual full attention of the cataloger and are elements, notes, and relator terms. For made accessible as soon as possible. title, the system itself should not arbi­ Working together and keeping in mind trarily truncate the title after a given num­ the needs and character of the collection, ber of characters. For physical and other together they can identify materials need­ nontextual characteristics, the online cata­ ing the most detailed cataloging, as well log should be able to mimic the special as items for which briefer records may be card files of old for topics such as paper, appropriate. Based on an effective col­ type, binding, printing and publishing, laboration between cataloger and curator, and provenance. For notes, systems customized cataloging can provide maxi­ should have the option of displaying and mum access to special collections materi­ searching all notes fields, including local als, to the benefit of all. notes (e.g., additional information on Customized cataloging begins with an provenance, binding, or condition). Fi­ examination of every element of a cata­ nally, for relator terms, the system should loging record in order to make it as faith­ be able to support records with such ful a representation of the work as pos­ terms, which are used to distinguish sible. Ultimately, customized cataloging name headings (e.g., to list separately an ends with the fullest use possible of the individual as author, previous owner, collections for scholarship and teaching.

Notes 1. For example, Cathy Henderson, “Curator or Conservator: Who Decides on What Treat­ ment?” in Rare Books & Manuscripts Librarianship 2 (fall 1987): 103–7 or Roberta Pilatte and Carolyn Harris, “It Takes Two to Tango: A Conservator’s View of Curator/Conservator Relations,” in Rare Books & Manuscripts Librarianship 4 (fall 1989): 103–11. 2. That such a need exists is recognized by the addition of the course “Rare Book Cataloging for Curators” in the summer 1998 offerings at Rare Book School, . 3. For example, one recent project in the History of Science Collections, University of Okla­ homa Libraries, was to catalog a large (c. 20,000-item) slide collection onto a Microsoft Access database. The original database structure, developed by historians without collaboration with librarians, would at best have been a stand-alone, in-house system. The collaboration of a rare book librarian, a cataloger, and a library systems person resulted in a revamped database whose structure would readily map into a MARC format and whose entries into data fields would use the appropriate controlled vocabularies (e.g., LCSH). The database now can be converted into a MARC database compatible with the local OPAC, a feature that eventually will make the data­ base much more accessible and more easily searched. 4. Suzy Taraba, “Administering the Cataloging of Special Collections Materials,” in Rare Books and Manuscripts Librarianship 7 (1992): 87–90. 5. For an alternate vision, see Peter S. Graham, “New Roles for Special Collections on the 534 College & Research Libraries November 2000

Network,” in College & Research Libraries 59 (Mar. 1998): 232–39. 6. Nicholson Baker, “Discards,” New Yorker, 4 Apr. 1994, 64–86. See also Henry L. Snyder, “Providing Access to Rare Book and Manuscripts Collections and Services in a Time of Change: The Electronic Revolution,” in IFLA Journal 22 (May 1996): 115–20. 7. Jeff Rothenberg, “Ensuring the Longevity of Digital Documents,” in Scientific American 272 (Jan. 1995): 42–47. 8. Examples include the Tobacco Control Archives, University of California at San Francisco (http://www.library.ucsf.edu/tobacco/); the Human Radiation Experiments site, U.S. Department of Energy (http://tis-nt.eh.doe.gov/ohre/); the Digital Scriptorium, Duke University (http:// scriptorium.lib.duke.edu/); and the Electronic Text Center, University of Virginia (http:// etext.lib.virginia.edu/). 9. Some libraries have indeed shifted most of the resources for their electronic libraries from their cataloging departments. 10. The authors currently are examining ways that digitized images can enhance work done in rare book cataloging and descriptive . A parallel project of a professor of the his­ tory of science is to scan and convert text from historical sources. 11. John B. Thomas III, “The Necessity of Standards on an Automated Environment,” in Li­ brary Trends 36 (summer 1987): 125–39. 12. Descriptive Cataloging of Rare Books, 2nd ed. (Washington, D.C.: Library of Congress, 1991). 13. It is useful for some machine-press books to include signatures, which can help identify different . For multivolume sets, notes can describe pagination of individual volumes, plates, dates of publications, and variant publishers. This is especially important for made-up sets. 14. Laura Stalker and Jackie M. Dooley, “Descriptive Cataloging and Rare Books,” in Rare Books and Manuscripts Librarianship 7 (1992): 7–23. 15. An example of this is the Core Standard for Rare Books (DCRB Core) (http://lcweb.loc.gov/ catdir/pcc/dcrbcore.html). 16. DCRB, 54–65, note 12. 17. The authors have in mind topics covered by the RBMS thesauri for binding, genre, paper, printing and publishing, provenance, and type. 18. For a fuller and more technical discussion of these points, see Henry Raine and Laura Striker, “Rare Book Records in Online Systems,” in Rare Books and Manuscripts Librarianship 11 (1996): 103–18. See also the Guide to Rare Book Records in Online Systems (http://www.lib.byu.edu/ ~catalog/people/rlm/bsc/guide.htm).