"As told to" is a common formulation on books from prominent people. The person the story was told to is kind of like a ghostwriter, except their identity is not hidden. I would definitely consider them a creator, but it's hard to tell from the title page how extensive their role was. This is an example of the kind of minutiae we get into when we try to assign relationship designators to everything. Is it worth it?
------------------------------------------ John Hostage Authorities and Database Integrity Librarian // Harvard Library--Information and Technical Services // Langdell Hall 194 // Cambridge, MA 02138 host...@law.harvard.edu +(1)(617) 495-3974 (voice) +(1)(617) 496-4409 (fax) > -----Original Message----- > From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access > [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Heidrun > Wiesenmüller > Sent: Thursday, May 02, 2013 15:34 > To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA > Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Relator term for "as told to" > > I haven't seen the book, so I'm not certain about the exact nature of Libby > Kopolen's contribution. Does she act like some sort of interviewer, asking > questions? Then I would agree that she should be seen as another author. > > But if she's really only the person the story is told to, then I find it hard > to > think of her as a creator. Wouldn't it rather be something from RDA 19.3 > (other person, family or corporate body associated with a work)? In > Appendix I.2.2. there is a relationship designator for "addressee". Perhaps > that would come at least close. > > I noticed that there is an example of "as told to" in 19.2.1.3 ("Aaron, r.f." > / by > Henry Aaron as told to Furman Bisher), where both persons are seen as > creators, but I assume that Furman Bisher did somewhat more than just > listening (probably he was the one to put Aaron's autobiography into an > actual text). RDA should definitely give more information here; as it stands > the example is difficult to interpret. > > Heidrun >
