I can see how one would arrive at that reading; I just never took it to mean that LC would never recognize an artist as a creator for children's materials. The more sensible reading, I think--perhaps a bit of a stretch given the current wording of the PS--is that IF there are illustrations in the resource BUT they aren't so predominant or integral as to regard the illustrator as a creator, THEN put the AAP for the illustrator in a 700 field with the relationship designator "illustrator." I would still rely on 19.2 for determining who is the creator in any case.
Trina Trina Pundurs Serials Cataloger Library Collection Services University of California, Berkeley tpund...@library.berkeley.edu http://www.lib.berkeley.edu/ Proudly wearing the sensible shoes since 1990 On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 5:56 AM, Don Charuk <dcha...@torontopubliclibrary.ca > wrote: > We are trying to come to grips with this issue as staff adjust to some of > the peculiarities of > RDA. I would agree that a creator of an illustrated book sans text should > be regarded as the "creator" > and given the designator "artist". Yet, if you read LC-PCC PS for rule > 18.5.1.3 it suggests that illustrators/artists of > juvenile material will be coded in the MARC 700 tag with the designator > "illustrator" This is exampled in > http://lccn.loc.gov/2012944944. This suggests LC would never regard an > illustrated children's book as being created by > an artist. I may be wrong in this interpretation and I hope I am. I > believe this relegates some artists to a "second class" status. >
