Libraries will again have to decide how to handle a nonfiction title that has turned out to be fiction. Misha Defonseca has admitted that her story of escaping the Nazis during World War II and living with wolves was a fabrication. Misha: A Memoire of the Holocaust Years has been translated into eighteen languages and made into a film in France. The New York Times has the story.
It is hard to believe that it has already been two years since the A Million Little Pieces controversy. At that time I argued for keeping the item in nonfiction because moving it would require us to start weighing the veracity of many other nonfiction books, some of which I named. I think I would still stick with that position. What do you think?
Showing posts with label classification. Show all posts
Showing posts with label classification. Show all posts
Saturday, March 01, 2008
Wednesday, July 11, 2007
A Day Without A Library Catalog
The woman holding the biography of Harry Houdini asked us to conjure up another book.
With the U. S. release of the fifth Harry Potter movie days away, it seems a good time to ask some questions. Do librarians practice magic? If so, can they conjure without their wands? Can they borrow wands?
My library had no access to its catalog yesterday. It was down as the Metropolitan Library System replaced some of its computer equipment. Since we disposed of the card catalog on December 30, 1999, we had no tool giving the call numbers and statuses of our books, movies, and music.
We were not totally stranded, as our materials are included in the WorldCat database, which we access through FirstSearch. I have found that our new materials do not appear for months, but most older items are included and identified by our three letter code HAO. With this in mind, we set up for the day with Firstsearch on our screen at the Reference Desk and signs on our catalog monitors promising that the reference librarians could help find books. I also printed up Dewey cheat sheets
Business at the desk was definitely up and I thought I did quite well. (Please excuse the boasting.) In a three hour period, I found seven books that WorldCat indicated we owned. The only one that I did not find is being read by a book club, so I am sure it was checked out. I took numerous reserves for items that I found at other libraries.
I was particularly proud of a few of cases.
When Worldcat showed that we owned a book about a corrupt policeman, I tried going to true crime 364.1## on the Dewey shelves, and there it was with a three digit extension. The reader was pleased.
Sandy, our head of circulation and interlibrary loan, asked me whether we would really own a book on the operations of electrical power plants. She had gotten an ILL and thought it odd that our medium small public library would have a book otherwise owned by only two universities nationwide. I recognized the author as a local resident and we did indeed have his book on the 621 shelves. She was surprised.
Our reference staff and Aaron Schmidt will be proud to know that I do know where to find the birdhouse construction books. There are two places - in the 598 and 690.89 areas.
I suspect other reference librarians in MLS libraries did just as well yesterday. Our requests were pretty common. (I'd like to hear other stories.) We all know a lot of Dewey from years of handling books and answering questions.
Today I see that the catalog is up. I would not have minded another day without it. (Wash my mouth with soap!) I enjoyed getting an increase of people at the desk, meeting a few that I had never helped before yesterday. I enjoyed seeing the books get into their hands.
There have been several stories lately about libraries using bookstore models and going without Dewey. It is not really that shocking an idea, as Dewey is somewhat 19th century in its organization, and bookstores are not totally without organization. I suspect that the bookstore model will not of itself, however, really solve any problems. I have trouble finding books in bookstores.
Books often defy classification, as their texts often combine subjects with very separate Dewey numbers. Librarians often disagree where to put them. Booksellers are not any more agreeing. Will a book on baseball cards be with the sports books or in the collectibles department? It is the same problem, no matter how you arrange books.
The key to book-finding success is knowledgeable staff and a good catalog. I once witnessed in a Books-a-Million a clerk tell a shopper that he had never heard of Dr. Seuss and, being alone at the time, he did not have time to look the author up. I hope that would never happen in a library, where we have librarians trained in magic.
With the U. S. release of the fifth Harry Potter movie days away, it seems a good time to ask some questions. Do librarians practice magic? If so, can they conjure without their wands? Can they borrow wands?
My library had no access to its catalog yesterday. It was down as the Metropolitan Library System replaced some of its computer equipment. Since we disposed of the card catalog on December 30, 1999, we had no tool giving the call numbers and statuses of our books, movies, and music.
We were not totally stranded, as our materials are included in the WorldCat database, which we access through FirstSearch. I have found that our new materials do not appear for months, but most older items are included and identified by our three letter code HAO. With this in mind, we set up for the day with Firstsearch on our screen at the Reference Desk and signs on our catalog monitors promising that the reference librarians could help find books. I also printed up Dewey cheat sheets
Business at the desk was definitely up and I thought I did quite well. (Please excuse the boasting.) In a three hour period, I found seven books that WorldCat indicated we owned. The only one that I did not find is being read by a book club, so I am sure it was checked out. I took numerous reserves for items that I found at other libraries.
I was particularly proud of a few of cases.
When Worldcat showed that we owned a book about a corrupt policeman, I tried going to true crime 364.1## on the Dewey shelves, and there it was with a three digit extension. The reader was pleased.
Sandy, our head of circulation and interlibrary loan, asked me whether we would really own a book on the operations of electrical power plants. She had gotten an ILL and thought it odd that our medium small public library would have a book otherwise owned by only two universities nationwide. I recognized the author as a local resident and we did indeed have his book on the 621 shelves. She was surprised.
Our reference staff and Aaron Schmidt will be proud to know that I do know where to find the birdhouse construction books. There are two places - in the 598 and 690.89 areas.
I suspect other reference librarians in MLS libraries did just as well yesterday. Our requests were pretty common. (I'd like to hear other stories.) We all know a lot of Dewey from years of handling books and answering questions.
Today I see that the catalog is up. I would not have minded another day without it. (Wash my mouth with soap!) I enjoyed getting an increase of people at the desk, meeting a few that I had never helped before yesterday. I enjoyed seeing the books get into their hands.
There have been several stories lately about libraries using bookstore models and going without Dewey. It is not really that shocking an idea, as Dewey is somewhat 19th century in its organization, and bookstores are not totally without organization. I suspect that the bookstore model will not of itself, however, really solve any problems. I have trouble finding books in bookstores.
Books often defy classification, as their texts often combine subjects with very separate Dewey numbers. Librarians often disagree where to put them. Booksellers are not any more agreeing. Will a book on baseball cards be with the sports books or in the collectibles department? It is the same problem, no matter how you arrange books.
The key to book-finding success is knowledgeable staff and a good catalog. I once witnessed in a Books-a-Million a clerk tell a shopper that he had never heard of Dr. Seuss and, being alone at the time, he did not have time to look the author up. I hope that would never happen in a library, where we have librarians trained in magic.
Thursday, May 17, 2007
Changing Call Numbers on Books: The Evolution from "Never" to "Right Away"
You might think that I am a dinosaur. I got into libraries just before computerized circulation systems became popular. I worked for two libraries during data entry projects for their first computers. I remember their microfilm-based checkout systems; it took these libraries six months to notice an item had not returned, develop the microfilm record of the checkout transaction, and send an overdue notice.
I am actually one of the small mammals that saw the dinosaurs die off. Opportunists, we evolved into a dominant species, computer-savvy librarians. Computers and their software led us to change more than just our library practices and procedures. They let us change our attitudes.
When I started working in libraries, few librarians would ever consider changing the call number on a book. Too much work had gone into assigning the call number and processing the item. Changing it would require not only slapping a new label on the spine, but also pulling all the catalog and shelflist cards, using buff-colored whiteout on the old numbers, lining up the cards in a typewriter to type new numbers, and refiling all the cards. The prevailing attitude was that libraries had to live with the old call numbers no matter how bad they were.
I think the seeds of change were planted by word processing software. The idea that a document could be saved and easily modified at a later date was revolutionary thinking. The real opportunity for change came when libraries closed their card catalogs.
Here is what I have seen. I will not name libraries as my intention is not to criticize. Many libraries were like them.
In my first job I worked in a city library system with numerous branch libraries. All cataloguing was done in the central library and catalog cards were filed in two buildings (the central library and the appropriate branch). Every six months branch libraries received two floppy book catalogs (produced from punch cards run through a mainframe computer). The two large paper-covered books let readers browse (if they were up to the effort) for authors or titles in libraries throughout the city. In this situation, no one would ever request a call number change. The paperwork would take months.
In my second job the situation was similar. The library served three counties, and there was a three month cataloguing/book processing backup in the best of times. No one had time to change a call number.
My third job was in a moderately small suburban library that was part of a growing consortium that was building a computerized checkout system. Call number data had not been entered into the system. The small library had its own cataloguer, who was willing to change call numbers if requested, but it was still a lot of work pulling and refiling catalog cards. We changed numbers rarely, but we did actually do it to update several call numbers that Dewey authorities had changed.
Fast forward past this increasing tedious litany to the exciting present.
The Thomas Ford Memorial Library was Library 2.0 user-friendly before the label was ever used. In the mid-1990s we began slowly changing call numbers when we found our books on topics shelved in numerous Dewey locations. Our thinking that was that our collection was too small to allow us to leave the books separated. When we had only two or three books on a subject, we needed them together. Our readers needed them together so they would find them. We did this even when it meant editing cards, refiling, and updating a computer record.
When we disposed of the card catalog, we increased our effort. We massively changed call numbers in the literature section to simplify access. Now all poetry books by an American author are at 811 with no era-related decimals added. (We took the idea from the Downers Grove Public Library.) We reorganized the books on painters, which were a mess. Claude Monet had had three call numbers. We also reworked the gardening and landscaping areas. Before this effort readers could find books on roses under four call numbers. Thomas Ford staff has been great throughout the effort. We discuss what needs to be done and then do it. Current technology makes it possible, so "Why not?" We have a developed a "right away" staff culture, which goes beyond just changing call numbers.
I said that we have seen the dinosaurs die off. I am not sure that they have all died as yet. Are you a dino or a quickly evolving mammal? How are your library's call numbers?
I am actually one of the small mammals that saw the dinosaurs die off. Opportunists, we evolved into a dominant species, computer-savvy librarians. Computers and their software led us to change more than just our library practices and procedures. They let us change our attitudes.
When I started working in libraries, few librarians would ever consider changing the call number on a book. Too much work had gone into assigning the call number and processing the item. Changing it would require not only slapping a new label on the spine, but also pulling all the catalog and shelflist cards, using buff-colored whiteout on the old numbers, lining up the cards in a typewriter to type new numbers, and refiling all the cards. The prevailing attitude was that libraries had to live with the old call numbers no matter how bad they were.
I think the seeds of change were planted by word processing software. The idea that a document could be saved and easily modified at a later date was revolutionary thinking. The real opportunity for change came when libraries closed their card catalogs.
Here is what I have seen. I will not name libraries as my intention is not to criticize. Many libraries were like them.
In my first job I worked in a city library system with numerous branch libraries. All cataloguing was done in the central library and catalog cards were filed in two buildings (the central library and the appropriate branch). Every six months branch libraries received two floppy book catalogs (produced from punch cards run through a mainframe computer). The two large paper-covered books let readers browse (if they were up to the effort) for authors or titles in libraries throughout the city. In this situation, no one would ever request a call number change. The paperwork would take months.
In my second job the situation was similar. The library served three counties, and there was a three month cataloguing/book processing backup in the best of times. No one had time to change a call number.
My third job was in a moderately small suburban library that was part of a growing consortium that was building a computerized checkout system. Call number data had not been entered into the system. The small library had its own cataloguer, who was willing to change call numbers if requested, but it was still a lot of work pulling and refiling catalog cards. We changed numbers rarely, but we did actually do it to update several call numbers that Dewey authorities had changed.
Fast forward past this increasing tedious litany to the exciting present.
The Thomas Ford Memorial Library was Library 2.0 user-friendly before the label was ever used. In the mid-1990s we began slowly changing call numbers when we found our books on topics shelved in numerous Dewey locations. Our thinking that was that our collection was too small to allow us to leave the books separated. When we had only two or three books on a subject, we needed them together. Our readers needed them together so they would find them. We did this even when it meant editing cards, refiling, and updating a computer record.
When we disposed of the card catalog, we increased our effort. We massively changed call numbers in the literature section to simplify access. Now all poetry books by an American author are at 811 with no era-related decimals added. (We took the idea from the Downers Grove Public Library.) We reorganized the books on painters, which were a mess. Claude Monet had had three call numbers. We also reworked the gardening and landscaping areas. Before this effort readers could find books on roses under four call numbers. Thomas Ford staff has been great throughout the effort. We discuss what needs to be done and then do it. Current technology makes it possible, so "Why not?" We have a developed a "right away" staff culture, which goes beyond just changing call numbers.
I said that we have seen the dinosaurs die off. I am not sure that they have all died as yet. Are you a dino or a quickly evolving mammal? How are your library's call numbers?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
