Re: [RDA-L] Fictitious characters as authors

[Alison Hitchens]

Hi all

We had an internal library discussion on this just as the questions started to 
come in on the list! The LC PCC statement at 9.0 is:

Fictitious Entities and Real Non-Human Entities
LC practice/PCC practice: Apply this chapter to fictitious entities and real 
non-human entities following the guidelines below:

No LCSH Authority Record Exists
Create a name authority record for the entity following RDA instructions and 
NACO guidelines, whether needed as a creator, contributor, etc., under RDA, or 
needed only for subject access. Do not create a subject proposal for LCSH.

LCSH Authority Record Exists
If needed as a creator, contributor, etc., under RDA, create a new name 
authority record and notify the Policy & Standards Division (pol...@loc.gov) to 
cancel the existing subject authority record.
Optionally, a new name authority record may be created for such an entity if 
needed only for subject access. If a name authority record is created, notify 
the Policy & Standards Division (pol...@loc.gov) to cancel the existing subject 
authority record.

Future activity: A project to transition all fictitious and real non-human 
entities from LCSH will be conducted as resources are available.

At 9.19.1.1 on constructing the authorized access point:
"Make the additions specified at 9.19.1.2 even if they are not needed to 
distinguish access points representing different persons with the same name."

And fictitious character is included in 9.19.1.2 with the example "Holmes, 
Sherlock (Fictitious character)"

So,  I'm not sure why it is being applied depending on whether or not there is 
a conflict. I can't see a policy statement at 9.19.1.1 or 9.19.1.2 
contradicting the RDA instruction but perhaps I'm just missing it.

Alison

Alison Hitchens
Cataloguing & Metadata Librarian
University of Waterloo Library
ahitc...@uwaterloo.ca
519-888-4567 x35980

-Original Message-
From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access 
[mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of FOGLER, PATRICIA A GS-11 
USAF AETC AUL/LTSC
Sent: Tuesday, October 08, 2013 3:13 PM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: [RDA-L] Fictitious characters as authors

Michael Bernhard said:
>> It seems to me, too, that the heading for Holmes should be Holmes, Sherlock 
>> |c (Fictitious character).

I would like this clarified.  In the same load I had a number of name 
authorities & the 2 that were presented as sometime authors of books no longer 
had any qualifier.

Is this a mistake or are we to interpret the fact that RDA does not require the 
qualifier to mean that it will be removed when a character is intended to stand 
as an author/creator?

As an example, one was the new name authority record for 
600 10|a Fletcher, JessicaThis record also lacked the entire |c (Fictitious 
character) subfield that existed on the cancelled subject record.
All of the reissued Wiggin name authorities had the qualifier.  Some just 
didn't have the delimiter.
Trying to make some sense out of this.

//SIGNED//
Patricia Fogler
Chief, Cataloging Section  (AUL/LTSC)
Muir S. Fairchild Research Information Center 
DSN 493-2135   Comm (334) 953-2135  

[RDA-L] Fictitious characters as authors

[FOGLER, PATRICIA A GS-11 USAF AETC AUL/LTSC]

Michael Bernhard said:
>> It seems to me, too, that the heading for Holmes should be Holmes, Sherlock 
>> |c (Fictitious character).

I would like this clarified.  In the same load I had a number of name 
authorities & the 2 that were presented as sometime authors of books no longer 
had any qualifier.

Is this a mistake or are we to interpret the fact that RDA does not require the 
qualifier to mean that it will be removed when a character is intended to stand 
as an author/creator?

As an example, one was the new name authority record for 
600 10|a Fletcher, JessicaThis record also lacked the entire |c (Fictitious 
character) subfield that existed on the cancelled subject record.
All of the reissued Wiggin name authorities had the qualifier.  Some just 
didn't have the delimiter.
Trying to make some sense out of this.

//SIGNED//
Patricia Fogler
Chief, Cataloging Section  (AUL/LTSC)
Muir S. Fairchild Research Information Center 
DSN 493-2135   Comm (334) 953-2135  

Re: [RDA-L] Fictitious characters as authors

[Robert Maxwell]

Kevin, this is a matter for your good judgment, which you should trust. We do, 
in fact, give precedence to title pages, so you have good reason for looking to 
the presentation there in order to identify the creator of the work. Once 
you’ve made that judgment, the next question is whether you want to include 
added access points for the others. In RDA the principal creator is 
core/required; other creators/contirubors are optional. You should think about 
whether it would be helpful to your catalog users to include them. In this case 
in my opinion it would be.

By the way, regarding “Should the AAP now be under Granger rather than Rowling 
…”, the question isn’t about authorized access point but rather about who is 
the principal creator of the work. Granger, Dumbledore and Rowling all have 
authorized access points; however it is the cataloger’s judgment which is the 
principal creator of the work (and therefore which authorized access point is 
recorded in 100 in a bibliographic record).

Bob

Robert L. Maxwell
Ancient Languages and Special Collections Cataloger
6728 Harold B. Lee Library
Brigham Young University
Provo, UT 84602
(801)422-5568

"We should set an example for all the world, rather than confine ourselves to 
the course which has been heretofore pursued"--Eliza R. Snow, 1842.

From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access 
[mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of rball...@frontier.com
Sent: Monday, October 07, 2013 9:16 AM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Fictitious characters as authors

In my original post, I was actually referring to using Granger as the auth. 
access point (100 field), with Dumbledore and Rowling as secondary access 
points (700 fields). Rowling wrote the book, but the fictitious characters from 
Rowling's "Harry Potter" books are given title page credit as 
creators/contributors. RDA shows examples of fictitious character's names being 
used as access points, so my question is who should be used for the main 
creator here?

Thanks.

Kevin Roe
Fort Wayne Community Schools
Fort Wayne IN



From: "Moore, Richard" mailto:richard.mo...@bl.uk>>
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA<mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA>
Sent: Monday, October 7, 2013 2:45 AM
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Fictitious characters as authors

Kevin

App. E would suggest “Beedle|c(Bard) (Fictitious Character)”, as we don’t 
currently have colons available, in RDA syntax, to separate qualifiers in 
access points for personal names.

Regards
Richard
_
Richard Moore
Authority Control Team Manager
The British Library

Tel.: +44 (0)1937 546806
E-mail: richard.mo...@bl.uk<mailto:richard.mo...@bl.uk>


From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access 
[mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA]<mailto:[mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA]>
 On Behalf Of Adger Williams
Sent: 04 October 2013 17:54
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA<mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA>
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Fictitious characters as authors

Or perhaps, Beedle|c(Bard: Fictitious Character)?

On Fri, Oct 4, 2013 at 12:33 PM, 
rball...@frontier.com<mailto:rball...@frontier.com> 
mailto:rball...@frontier.com>> wrote:
I know that RDA now allows fictitious characters to serve as authorized access 
points. The book "The tales of Beedle the Bard" was originally entered under 
the author J.K. Rowling. The cover shows Rowling's name alone. The title page, 
however, reads: "The tales of Beedle the Bard / translated from the ancient 
runes by Hermoine Granger ; commentary by Albus Dumbledore ; introduction, 
notes and illustrations by J.K. Rowling." Should the AAP now be under Granger 
rather than Rowling, with additional access points for Dumbledore and Rowling?

Thanks in advance.

Kevin Roe
Supervisor, Media Processing
Fort Wayne Community Schools
1511 Catalpa St.
Fort Wayne IN 46802




--
Adger Williams
Colgate University Library
315-228-7310
awilli...@colgate.edu<mailto:awilli...@colgate.edu>
**
Experience the British Library online at www.bl.uk<http://www.bl.uk/>

The British Library’s latest Annual Report and Accounts : 
www.bl.uk/aboutus/annrep/index.html<http://www.bl.uk/aboutus/annrep/index.html>

Help the British Library conserve the world's knowledge. Adopt a Book. 
www.bl.uk/adoptabook<http://www.bl.uk/adoptabook>

The Library's St Pancras site is WiFi - enabled

*

The information contained in this e-mail is confidential and may be legally 
privileged. It is intended for the addressee(s) only. If you are not the 
intended recipient, please delete this e-mail and notify the 
postmas...@bl.uk<mailto:postmas...@bl.uk> : The cont

Re: [RDA-L] Fictitious characters as authors

[rball...@frontier.com]

In my original post, I was actually referring to using Granger as the auth. 
access point (100 field), with Dumbledore and Rowling as secondary access 
points (700 fields). Rowling wrote the book, but the fictitious characters from 
Rowling's "Harry Potter" books are given title page credit as 
creators/contributors. RDA shows examples of fictitious character's names being 
used as access points, so my question is who should be used for the main 
creator here?

Thanks.

Kevin Roe
Fort Wayne Community Schools
Fort Wayne IN





 From: "Moore, Richard" 
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA 
Sent: Monday, October 7, 2013 2:45 AM
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Fictitious characters as authors
 


Kevin
 
App. E would suggest “Beedle|c(Bard) (Fictitious Character)”, as we don’t 
currently have colons available, in RDA syntax, to separate qualifiers in 
access points for personal names.
 
Regards
Richard
_
Richard Moore 
Authority Control Team Manager 
The British Library
  
Tel.: +44 (0)1937 546806   
E-mail: richard.mo...@bl.uk 
 
 
From:Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access 
[mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Adger Williams
Sent: 04 October 2013 17:54
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Fictitious characters as authors
 
Or perhaps, Beedle|c(Bard: Fictitious Character)?
 
On Fri, Oct 4, 2013 at 12:33 PM, rball...@frontier.com  
wrote:
I know that RDA now allows fictitious characters to serve as authorized access 
points. The book "The tales of Beedle the Bard" was originally entered under 
the author J.K. Rowling. The cover shows Rowling's name alone. The title page, 
however, reads: "The tales of Beedle the Bard / translated from the ancient 
runes by Hermoine Granger ; commentary by Albus Dumbledore ; introduction, 
notes and illustrations by J.K. Rowling." Should the AAP now be under Granger 
rather than Rowling, with additional access points for Dumbledore and Rowling?

Thanks in advance.

Kevin Roe
Supervisor, Media Processing
Fort Wayne Community Schools
1511 Catalpa St.
Fort Wayne IN 46802
 



-- 
Adger Williams
Colgate University Library
315-228-7310
awilli...@colgate.edu 
**
Experience the British Library online at www.bl.uk
 
The British Library’s latest Annual Report and Accounts : 
www.bl.uk/aboutus/annrep/index.html
 
Help the British Library conserve the world's knowledge. Adopt a Book. 
www.bl.uk/adoptabook
 
The Library's St Pancras site is WiFi - enabled
 
*
 
The information contained in this e-mail is confidential and may be legally 
privileged. It is intended for the addressee(s) only. If you are not the 
intended recipient, please delete this e-mail and notify the postmas...@bl.uk: 
The contents of this e-mail must not be disclosed or copied without the 
sender's consent. 
 
The statements and opinions expressed in this message are those of the author 
and do not necessarily reflect those of the British Library. The British 
Library does not take any responsibility for the views of the author. 
 
* 
 Think before you print

Re: [RDA-L] Fictitious characters as authors

[Moore, Richard]

Kevin

 

App. E would suggest “Beedle|c(Bard) (Fictitious Character)”, as we don’t 
currently have colons available, in RDA syntax, to separate qualifiers in 
access points for personal names.

 

Regards

Richard

_

Richard Moore 

Authority Control Team Manager 

The British Library

  

Tel.: +44 (0)1937 546806   

E-mail: richard.mo...@bl.uk 

 

 

From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access 
[mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Adger Williams
Sent: 04 October 2013 17:54
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Fictitious characters as authors

 

Or perhaps, Beedle|c(Bard: Fictitious Character)?

 

On Fri, Oct 4, 2013 at 12:33 PM, rball...@frontier.com  
wrote:

I know that RDA now allows fictitious characters to serve as authorized access 
points. The book "The tales of Beedle the Bard" was originally entered under 
the author J.K. Rowling. The cover shows Rowling's name alone. The title page, 
however, reads: "The tales of Beedle the Bard / translated from the ancient 
runes by Hermoine Granger ; commentary by Albus Dumbledore ; introduction, 
notes and illustrations by J.K. Rowling." Should the AAP now be under Granger 
rather than Rowling, with additional access points for Dumbledore and Rowling?

Thanks in advance.

Kevin Roe
Supervisor, Media Processing
Fort Wayne Community Schools
1511 Catalpa St.
Fort Wayne IN 46802

 




-- 
Adger Williams
Colgate University Library
315-228-7310
awilli...@colgate.edu 


**
Experience the British Library online at http://www.bl.uk/
 
The British Library’s latest Annual Report and Accounts : 
http://www.bl.uk/aboutus/annrep/index.html
 
Help the British Library conserve the world's knowledge. Adopt a Book. 
http://www.bl.uk/adoptabook
 
The Library's St Pancras site is WiFi - enabled
 
*
 
The information contained in this e-mail is confidential and may be legally 
privileged. It is intended for the addressee(s) only. If you are not the 
intended recipient, please delete this e-mail and notify the 
mailto:postmas...@bl.uk : The contents of this e-mail must not be disclosed or 
copied without the sender's consent.
 
The statements and opinions expressed in this message are those of the author 
and do not necessarily reflect those of the British Library. The British 
Library does not take any responsibility for the views of the author.
 
*
 Think before you print

Re: [RDA-L] Fictitious characters as authors

[Adam Schiff]

A translator is not a creator, so they would never be used in the authorized 
access point for the work, unless in addition to translating they adapted the 
work so much that it it becomes a new work (“translated and RETOLD by Hermione 
Granger”).  Granger would get a 700 added entry.  You can take statements of 
responsibility from anywhere in a book, so it doesn’t matter that Rowling’s 
name isn’t on the title page.  She is asserted as the creator it seems, and so 
she is in the AAP.

Adam Schiff
University of Washington Libraries

From: rball...@frontier.com 
Sent: Friday, October 04, 2013 9:33 AM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA 
Subject: [RDA-L] Fictitious characters as authors

I know that RDA now allows fictitious characters to serve as authorized access 
points. The book "The tales of Beedle the Bard" was originally entered under 
the author J.K. Rowling. The cover shows Rowling's name alone. The title page, 
however, reads: "The tales of Beedle the Bard / translated from the ancient 
runes by Hermoine Granger ; commentary by Albus Dumbledore ; introduction, 
notes and illustrations by J.K. Rowling." Should the AAP now be under Granger 
rather than Rowling, with additional access points for Dumbledore and Rowling?

Thanks in advance.

Kevin Roe
Supervisor, Media Processing
Fort Wayne Community Schools
1511 Catalpa St.
Fort Wayne IN 46802 

Re: [RDA-L] Fictitious characters as authors

[Adger Williams]

Or perhaps, Beedle|c(Bard: Fictitious Character)?


On Fri, Oct 4, 2013 at 12:33 PM, rball...@frontier.com <
rball...@frontier.com> wrote:

> I know that RDA now allows fictitious characters to serve as authorized
> access points. The book "The tales of Beedle the Bard" was originally
> entered under the author J.K. Rowling. The cover shows Rowling's name
> alone. The title page, however, reads: "The tales of Beedle the Bard /
> translated from the ancient runes by Hermoine Granger ; commentary by Albus
> Dumbledore ; introduction, notes and illustrations by J.K. Rowling." Should
> the AAP now be under Granger rather than Rowling, with additional access
> points for Dumbledore and Rowling?
>
> Thanks in advance.
>
> Kevin Roe
> Supervisor, Media Processing
> Fort Wayne Community Schools
> 1511 Catalpa St.
> Fort Wayne IN 46802
>
>


-- 
Adger Williams
Colgate University Library
315-228-7310
awilli...@colgate.edu

[RDA-L] Fictitious characters as authors

[rball...@frontier.com]

I know that RDA now allows fictitious characters to serve as authorized access 
points. The book "The tales of Beedle the Bard" was originally entered under 
the author J.K. Rowling. The cover shows Rowling's name alone. The title page, 
however, reads: "The tales of Beedle the Bard / translated from the ancient 
runes by Hermoine Granger ; commentary by Albus Dumbledore ; introduction, 
notes and illustrations by J.K. Rowling." Should the AAP now be under Granger 
rather than Rowling, with additional access points for Dumbledore and Rowling?

Thanks in advance.

Kevin Roe
Supervisor, Media Processing
Fort Wayne Community Schools
1511 Catalpa St.
Fort Wayne IN 46802

Re: "Author, author!" Re: [RDA-L] Fictitious characters as authors

[Carlos Lopez]

Hi folks


Why not 'actor'? (as in; someone who has performed an action). It's not
restricted to persons (a corporate body can be an 'actor') and is more
informative than 'name'.  I'd prefer something like 'entity', the
FRBR/RDA use of the word 'entity' might cause confusion.


c.


___


Carlos Lopez
Assistant Cataloguer
Joint Theological Library
Ormond College
Parkville, Vic. 3052
Ph:   +61 3 93476360
Fax: +61 3 93491857
www.jtl.vic.edu.au




Adam Schiff wrote:

How about:

Someone Who Did Something
  or
Person Who Did Something

of course that would eliminate non-human living entities.  So, in order
not to be anthropomorphic, how about:

Being That Did Something



^^
Adam L. Schiff
Principal Cataloger
University of Washington Libraries
Box 352900
Seattle, WA 98195-2900
(206) 543-8409
(206) 685-8782 fax
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://faculty.washington.edu/~aschiff
~~

On Thu, 23 Mar 2006, Jay Smith wrote:


Along those lines, and perhaps conforming to B. Eversberg's notion of
"involver", perhaps a slightly less loaded term (but admittedly not
entirely neutral!) would be: perpetrator.  Abbreviated in relator codes
to: perp.

Jay Towne Smith
Senior Cataloger
San Francisco Public Library

[EMAIL PROTECTED]

-Original Message-
From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of A. Ralph Papakhian
Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 9:22 AM
To: RDA-L@INFOSERV.NLC-BNC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] "Author, author!" Re: [RDA-L] Fictitious characters
as authors

hi,
is mac suggesting "criminal defendants" as the single term?
now that's radical!
--r

A. Ralph Papakhian, Indiana University Music Library Bloomington, IN
47405 812/855-2970 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
co-owner: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

On Thu, 23 Mar 2006 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

Don't forget criminal defendants as 100's.  We really haven't improved



on an ISBD unlabled display in my opinion.

J. McRee (Mac) Elrod, Special Libraries Cataloguing











--
Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 268.2.2/280 - Release Date: 13/03/2006

Re: "Author, author!" Re: [RDA-L] Fictitious characters as authors

[Mark Ehlert]

Hal Cain <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>To refer to MARC21 for a moment (and revert to oldfashioned
>nomenclature), I would be reasonably happy to move into a mode where
>name headings (including work headings) were *always* categorized with
>the appropriate code in $4


And J. McRee Elrod <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> responded:
>But in a printed book catalogue, or an OPAC display, in which the 1st
>100 or 700 appears, and all titles associated with that entry follow,
>the relationship of the person to the first title might not apply to
>his/her relationship to the other titles.


Indeed, if you are referring to a list, not a single record.  But such
lists may be filtered as part of the search process: for example,
performing a generic search on Joe Blow as an "author" ("responsible
party," "contributor," what have you) brings up the motley collection to
which you refer above.  However, limiting the search to Joe Blow as
conductor before clicking the "Search" button (or perhaps after the first
broad search) brings up a compilation of works in which he plays that role
alone.  Does any OPAC do this sort of thing based on relator codes in the
100/700 $e or $4?


And to bring this topic back around to the purpose for this mailing list,
presumably RDA will continue AACR2's rule 21.0D, whether still as an
"optional addition" or--to play up FRBR a bit more and tie works by
individual "authors" together more firmly via relator codes--a
"we'd-prefer-if-you-used-it-but-still-not-yet-mandatory addition".



--
Mark K. Ehlert   University of Minnesota Libraries
Library Assistant 2  160 Wilson Library
Technical Services   309 19th Ave. S.
Phone: 612-625-0156  Minneapolis, MN 55455

Re: "Author, author!" Re: [RDA-L] Fictitious characters as authors

[Hal Cain]

Kelly Ann Green offered:
>> We could follow the practice of lawyers and use "entity" >


Diane I. Hillmann wrote:

Gosh, I think lawyers use lots more terms than that.  In my experience,
it's the computer scientists who use "entity."



And the followers of FRBR -- I suppose there's some overlap between
those groups!


Is there something wrong with "contributor?"



To be serious (even though it's Friday here, and it's been a heavy week
for me) we're trying to name a category.  All the descriptive terms
(author, contributor, compiler, editor, performer, composer, artist,
creator) come with fairly specific connotations; if not to us who are
involved in the cataloguing arts, to the users who will try to make use
of what we give them as, hopefully, useful information, without
misleading them.


To refer to MARC21 for a moment (and revert to oldfashioned
nomenclature), I would be reasonably happy to move into a mode where
name headings (including work headings) were *always* categorized with
the appropriate code in $4, and getting our system vendors to derive the
caption (in a labelled display) from those codes.


"Entity" is, in a sense, a non-term; it simply means "something that can
be defined and occupies a space in a particular frame of reference."
The frame of reference of the information specialist is not exactly the
same as that of the user of the catalogue.


Now, we still need a term to denote "persons and formal groups of
persons" with some kind of responsibility for the document in hand,
and/or its content, particularly when not treated as subject.


A shared vocabulary does wonders for discussion, clarification, and
formulation of a code.


Hal Cain
Joint Theological Library
Parkville, Victoria, Australia
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: "Author, author!" Re: [RDA-L] Fictitious characters as authors

[A. Ralph Papakhian]

"entry"
?


A. Ralph Papakhian, Indiana University Music Library
Bloomington, IN 47405 812/855-2970 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
co-owner: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: "Author, author!" Re: [RDA-L] Fictitious characters as authors

[J. McRee Elrod]

Hal Cain <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


>To refer to MARC21 for a moment (and revert to oldfashioned
>nomenclature), I would be reasonably happy to move into a mode where
>name headings (including work headings) were *always* categorized with
>the appropriate code in $4


But in a printed book catalogue, or an OPAC display, in which the 1st
100 or 700 appears, and all titles associated with that entry follow,
the relationship of the person to the first title might not apply to
his/her relationship to the other titles.


Back to ISBD!



   __   __   J. McRee (Mac) Elrod ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
  {__  |   / Special Libraries Cataloguing   HTTP://www.slc.bc.ca/
  ___} |__ \__

Re: "Author, author!" Re: [RDA-L] Fictitious characters as authors

[Diane I. Hillmann]

Gosh, I think lawyers use lots more terms than that.  In my
experience, it's the computer scientists who use "entity."


Is there something wrong with "contributor?"


Diane


We could follow the practice of lawyers and use "entity" 



Kelly Ann Green
KMS Content Analyst
Virginia Retirement System

[EMAIL PROTECTED]



--
*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*
Diane I. Hillmann
Research Librarian
Cornell University Library
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Voice: (607) 387-9207
*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*

Re: "Author, author!" Re: [RDA-L] Fictitious characters as authors

[Kelly A Green]

We could follow the practice of lawyers and use "entity"
 


Kelly Ann Green 
KMS Content Analyst 
Virginia Retirement System


[EMAIL PROTECTED]


-Original Message-
From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access 
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Cheryl Boettcher Tarsala
Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 1:39 PM
To: RDA-L@INFOSERV.NLC-BNC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] "Author, author!" Re: [RDA-L] Fictitious characters as 
authors



Why not "personality"? Surely Geronimo Stilton and Koko the Gorilla and Racter 
are recognizable to us as such.  Persoenlichkeit  ... Works in German, too!






In despair, before now, trying to find a single term for our opac that would 
cover any of the below PLUS speakers, performers, composers, artists, 
engravers, while having to deal with a character limit for the opac label, I 
have thought of resorting to "Person". But I didn't.


Cheers


Paul Davey
Cataloguing Services Manager
Collection Management
Wellcome Library
215 Euston Road
London NW1 2BE
(+44) 020-7611-8493
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
The Wellcome Trust is a registered charity, no.210183.
Its sole Trustee is the Wellcome Trust Limited, a company
registered in England, no. 2711000, whose registered office is 215 Euston Road, 
London NW1 2BE.




>> It would be nice if RDA could find a better word than 'author' to
>> encompass actors, entertainers, musicians, sculptors, composers,
>> photographers, painters, etc., but perhaps there is no such word.


>The imprecise term "creator" is used in some contexts.  But I find it
>hard to extend it to editors, compilers, translators -- all of whom may
>be genuinely involved in creation of intellectual/artistic content, of
>course -- let alone "relationship" types such as festschrift honoree.




--
Cheryl Boettcher Tarsala, Ph.D.



"I teach cataloging."

Re: "Author, author!" Re: [RDA-L] Fictitious characters as authors

[Bodling, Kurt]

"Perpetrator" works with "Family" in some contexts, too.


Kurt A. T. Bodling
Digital Resources Cataloger
State Library of Pennsylvania
333 Market St.
Harrisburg, PA 17126-1745
http://www.statelibrary.state.pa.us/
"The State Library of Pennsylvania ... Serving and Preserving a Written 
Cultural Heritage ... For, By, and About Pennsylvania"



> -Original Message-
> From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description
> and Access
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Ben Haines
> Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 1:15 PM
> To: RDA-L@INFOSERV.NLC-BNC.CA
> Subject: Re: [RDA-L] "Author, author!" Re: [RDA-L] Fictitious
> characters
> as authors
>
>
> I like it.  It seems like these days we find more and more corporate
> perpetrators, too.  Will RDA address this issue, perhaps loosening the
> restrictions of 21.1B2? (Or is this a particularly American
> phenomenon?)
>
> -Ben (tongue firmly in cheek) Haines
>  Dominican University GSLIS
>
> On 3/23/06, Jay Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Along those lines, and perhaps conforming to B. Eversberg's
> notion of
> > "involver", perhaps a slightly less loaded term (but admittedly not
> > entirely neutral!) would be: perpetrator.  Abbreviated in
> relator codes
> > to: perp.
> >
> > Jay Towne Smith
> > Senior Cataloger
> > San Francisco Public Library
> >
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Resource Description and Access / Resource
> Description and Access
> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of A. Ralph Papakhian
> > Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 9:22 AM
> > To: RDA-L@INFOSERV.NLC-BNC.CA
> > Subject: Re: [RDA-L] "Author, author!" Re: [RDA-L]
> Fictitious characters
> > as authors
> >
> > hi,
> > is mac suggesting "criminal defendants" as the single term?
> > now that's radical!
> > --r
> >
> > A. Ralph Papakhian, Indiana University Music Library Bloomington, IN
> > 47405 812/855-2970 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > co-owner: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > On Thu, 23 Mar 2006 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > > Don't forget criminal defendants as 100's.  We really
> haven't improved
> >
> > > on an ISBD unlabled display in my opinion.
> > >
> > > J. McRee (Mac) Elrod, Special Libraries Cataloguing
> > >
> >
>

Re: "Author, author!" Re: [RDA-L] Fictitious characters as authors

[Kevin M. Randall]

At 03:38 AM 3/23/2006, Davey ,Mr Paul wrote:

In despair, before now, trying to find a single term for our opac that
would cover any of the below PLUS speakers, performers, composers,
artists, engravers, while having to deal with a character limit for the
opac label, I have thought of resorting to "Person". But I didn't.



Would "Name" cover it?  I know it's pretty generic and blah, but it seems
to be the most inclusive term I can think of in the English language.


Kevin M. Randall
Head of Serials Cataloging
Northwestern University Library
1970 Campus Drive
Evanston, IL  60208-2300
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
phone: (847) 491-2939
fax:   (847) 491-4345

Re: "Author, author!" Re: [RDA-L] Fictitious characters as authors

[A. Ralph Papakhian]

hi,
is mac suggesting "criminal defendants" as the single term?
now that's radical!
--r


A. Ralph Papakhian, Indiana University Music Library
Bloomington, IN 47405 812/855-2970 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
co-owner: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


On Thu, 23 Mar 2006 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

Don't forget criminal defendants as 100's.  We really haven't improved
on an ISBD unlabled display in my opinion.

J. McRee (Mac) Elrod, Special Libraries Cataloguing

Re: "Author, author!" Re: [RDA-L] Fictitious characters as authors

[Ben Haines]

I like it.  It seems like these days we find more and more corporate
perpetrators, too.  Will RDA address this issue, perhaps loosening the
restrictions of 21.1B2? (Or is this a particularly American
phenomenon?)


-Ben (tongue firmly in cheek) Haines
 Dominican University GSLIS


On 3/23/06, Jay Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Along those lines, and perhaps conforming to B. Eversberg's notion of
> "involver", perhaps a slightly less loaded term (but admittedly not
> entirely neutral!) would be: perpetrator.  Abbreviated in relator codes
> to: perp.
>
> Jay Towne Smith
> Senior Cataloger
> San Francisco Public Library
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of A. Ralph Papakhian
> Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 9:22 AM
> To: RDA-L@INFOSERV.NLC-BNC.CA
> Subject: Re: [RDA-L] "Author, author!" Re: [RDA-L] Fictitious characters
> as authors
>
> hi,
> is mac suggesting "criminal defendants" as the single term?
> now that's radical!
> --r
>
> A. Ralph Papakhian, Indiana University Music Library Bloomington, IN
> 47405 812/855-2970 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> co-owner: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> On Thu, 23 Mar 2006 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > Don't forget criminal defendants as 100's.  We really haven't improved
>
> > on an ISBD unlabled display in my opinion.
> >
> > J. McRee (Mac) Elrod, Special Libraries Cataloguing
> >
>

Re: "Author, author!" Re: [RDA-L] Fictitious characters as authors

[Adam Schiff]

But some people don't have any personality!  


^^
Adam L. Schiff
Principal Cataloger
University of Washington Libraries
Box 352900
Seattle, WA 98195-2900
(206) 543-8409
(206) 685-8782 fax
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://faculty.washington.edu/~aschiff
~~


On Thu, 23 Mar 2006, Cheryl Boettcher Tarsala wrote:



Why not "personality"? Surely Geronimo Stilton and Koko the Gorilla
and Racter are recognizable to us as such.  Persoenlichkeit  ...
Works in German, too! 






In despair, before now, trying to find a single term for our opac
that would cover any of the below PLUS speakers, performers,
composers, artists, engravers, while having to deal with a character
limit for the opac label, I have thought of resorting to "Person".
But I didn't.

Cheers

Paul Davey
Cataloguing Services Manager
Collection Management
Wellcome Library
215 Euston Road
London NW1 2BE
(+44) 020-7611-8493
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
The Wellcome Trust is a registered charity, no.210183.
Its sole Trustee is the Wellcome Trust Limited, a company
registered in England, no. 2711000, whose registered office is 215
Euston Road, London NW1 2BE.




 It would be nice if RDA could find a better word than 'author' to
 encompass actors, entertainers, musicians, sculptors, composers,
 photographers, painters, etc., but perhaps there is no such word.



The imprecise term "creator" is used in some contexts.  But I find it
hard to extend it to editors, compilers, translators -- all of whom may
be genuinely involved in creation of intellectual/artistic content, of
course -- let alone "relationship" types such as festschrift honoree.



--
Cheryl Boettcher Tarsala, Ph.D.

"I teach cataloging."

Re: "Author, author!" Re: [RDA-L] Fictitious characters as authors

[Adam Schiff]

How about:


Someone Who Did Something
  or
Person Who Did Something


of course that would eliminate non-human living entities.  So, in order
not to be anthropomorphic, how about:


Being That Did Something





^^
Adam L. Schiff
Principal Cataloger
University of Washington Libraries
Box 352900
Seattle, WA 98195-2900
(206) 543-8409
(206) 685-8782 fax
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://faculty.washington.edu/~aschiff
~~


On Thu, 23 Mar 2006, Jay Smith wrote:



Along those lines, and perhaps conforming to B. Eversberg's notion of
"involver", perhaps a slightly less loaded term (but admittedly not
entirely neutral!) would be: perpetrator.  Abbreviated in relator codes
to: perp.

Jay Towne Smith
Senior Cataloger
San Francisco Public Library

[EMAIL PROTECTED]

-Original Message-
From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of A. Ralph Papakhian
Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 9:22 AM
To: RDA-L@INFOSERV.NLC-BNC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] "Author, author!" Re: [RDA-L] Fictitious characters
as authors

hi,
is mac suggesting "criminal defendants" as the single term?
now that's radical!
--r

A. Ralph Papakhian, Indiana University Music Library Bloomington, IN
47405 812/855-2970 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
co-owner: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

On Thu, 23 Mar 2006 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

Don't forget criminal defendants as 100's.  We really haven't improved



on an ISBD unlabled display in my opinion.

J. McRee (Mac) Elrod, Special Libraries Cataloguing

"Author, author!" Re: [RDA-L] Fictitious characters as authors

[Hal Cain]

Martha Yee wrote:



It would be nice if RDA could find a better word than 'author' to
encompass actors, entertainers, musicians, sculptors, composers,
photographers, painters, etc., but perhaps there is no such word.



The imprecise term "creator" is used in some contexts.  But I find it
hard to extend it to editors, compilers, translators -- all of whom may
be genuinely involved in creation of intellectual/artistic content, of
course -- let alone "relationship" types such as festschrift honoree.


I wish we could find some acceptable collective term for the FRBR Group
Two entities Person, Corporate Body, and (to be added, as adumbrated in
the FRAR draft and elsewhere) Family.  I've used "agent" on occasion,
meaning an entity that "does something" to create a work or expression
or to prepare/issue a manifestation or to modify an item; but in a
broader context (such as intellectual rights, interaction with which is
supposed to be facilitated by RDA) that too could be misleading.


What a tangled web we weave, when we practice to deceive (or at least
fictionalize)!  I agree with Hal Cain that Part II is going to be
interesting...



I suspect we'll have a great deal to discuss!


I'm not altogether sure that the urge to abandon technical vocabulary of
cataloguing, built up over more than a century, is altogether a good
thing.  Other disciplines maintain their technical vocabulary, and (if
they're smart) take care to show that it has technical meaning.  To my
mind, fuzzy use of vocabulary leads to fuzzy thinking.


Hal Cain
Joint Theological Library
Parkville, Victoria, Australia
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: "Author, author!" Re: [RDA-L] Fictitious characters as authors

[Bernhard Eversberg]

Hal Cain wrote:


I wish we could find some acceptable collective term for the FRBR Group
Two entities Person, Corporate Body, and (to be added, as adumbrated in
the FRAR draft and elsewhere) Family.  I've used "agent" on occasion,
meaning an entity that "does something" to create a work or expression
or to prepare/issue a manifestation or to modify an item; but in a
broader context (such as intellectual rights, interaction with which is
supposed to be facilitated by RDA) that too could be misleading.


In German, we have a useful noun "Beteiligte" for all who are involved
in something. English vocabulary has a blank spot here.
We say "beteiligte Person" and "beteiligte Körperschaft" for persons and
bodies involved in a publication.
Just create "involver" or, briefer yet, "invol" to mean anybody having
anything to do with the coming about of a "resource", and be done with
it. (After all, you have the "in-laws" which we would be hard-pressed to
find a German counterpart for...)


Hey, had the old bard known this, he might've writ,


  Show me the resource that is never shaken,
  nor bends with the involver to involve,
  that alters not come alteration
  but counters the resolvers with resolve.


... or something like that.



B. Eversberg

Re: "Author, author!" Re: [RDA-L] Fictitious characters as authors

[Cheryl Boettcher Tarsala]

[I'm resending this with more adequate contact/affiliation
information in my signature--sorry for the duplication.]


Why not "personality"? Surely Geronimo Stilton and Koko the Gorilla
and Racter are recognizable to us as such.  Persoenlichkeit  ...
Works in German, too! 







In despair, before now, trying to find a single term for our opac
that would cover any of the below PLUS speakers, performers,
composers, artists, engravers, while having to deal with a character
limit for the opac label, I have thought of resorting to "Person".
But I didn't.

Cheers

Paul Davey
Cataloguing Services Manager
Collection Management
Wellcome Library
215 Euston Road
London NW1 2BE
(+44) 020-7611-8493
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
The Wellcome Trust is a registered charity, no.210183.
Its sole Trustee is the Wellcome Trust Limited, a company
registered in England, no. 2711000, whose registered office is 215
Euston Road, London NW1 2BE.




 It would be nice if RDA could find a better word than 'author' to
 encompass actors, entertainers, musicians, sculptors, composers,
 photographers, painters, etc., but perhaps there is no such word.



The imprecise term "creator" is used in some contexts.  But I find it
hard to extend it to editors, compilers, translators -- all of whom may
be genuinely involved in creation of intellectual/artistic content, of
course -- let alone "relationship" types such as festschrift honoree.




--
Cheryl Boettcher Tarsala
Adjunct Assistant Professor
LEEP Program, Graduate School of Library and Information Science
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign


[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]


The views expressed here are my own and not those of UIUC or GSLIS.

Re: "Author, author!" Re: [RDA-L] Fictitious characters as authors

[Cheryl Boettcher Tarsala]

Why not "personality"? Surely Geronimo Stilton and Koko the Gorilla
and Racter are recognizable to us as such.  Persoenlichkeit  ...
Works in German, too! 







In despair, before now, trying to find a single term for our opac
that would cover any of the below PLUS speakers, performers,
composers, artists, engravers, while having to deal with a character
limit for the opac label, I have thought of resorting to "Person".
But I didn't.

Cheers

Paul Davey
Cataloguing Services Manager
Collection Management
Wellcome Library
215 Euston Road
London NW1 2BE
(+44) 020-7611-8493
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
The Wellcome Trust is a registered charity, no.210183.
Its sole Trustee is the Wellcome Trust Limited, a company
registered in England, no. 2711000, whose registered office is 215
Euston Road, London NW1 2BE.




 It would be nice if RDA could find a better word than 'author' to
 encompass actors, entertainers, musicians, sculptors, composers,
 photographers, painters, etc., but perhaps there is no such word.



The imprecise term "creator" is used in some contexts.  But I find it
hard to extend it to editors, compilers, translators -- all of whom may
be genuinely involved in creation of intellectual/artistic content, of
course -- let alone "relationship" types such as festschrift honoree.




--
Cheryl Boettcher Tarsala, Ph.D.


"I teach cataloging."

"Author, author!" Re: [RDA-L] Fictitious characters as authors

[Davey ,Mr Paul]

In despair, before now, trying to find a single term for our opac that would 
cover any of the below PLUS speakers, performers, composers, artists, 
engravers, while having to deal with a character limit for the opac label, I 
have thought of resorting to "Person". But I didn't.


Cheers


Paul Davey
Cataloguing Services Manager
Collection Management
Wellcome Library
215 Euston Road
London NW1 2BE
(+44) 020-7611-8493
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
The Wellcome Trust is a registered charity, no.210183.
Its sole Trustee is the Wellcome Trust Limited, a company
registered in England, no. 2711000, whose registered office is 215 Euston Road, 
London NW1 2BE.




>> It would be nice if RDA could find a better word than 'author' to
>> encompass actors, entertainers, musicians, sculptors, composers,
>> photographers, painters, etc., but perhaps there is no such word.


>The imprecise term "creator" is used in some contexts.  But I find it
>hard to extend it to editors, compilers, translators -- all of whom may
>be genuinely involved in creation of intellectual/artistic content, of
>course -- let alone "relationship" types such as festschrift honoree.

Re: "Author, author!" Re: [RDA-L] Fictitious characters as authors

[Jay Smith]

Along those lines, and perhaps conforming to B. Eversberg's notion of
"involver", perhaps a slightly less loaded term (but admittedly not
entirely neutral!) would be: perpetrator.  Abbreviated in relator codes
to: perp.


Jay Towne Smith
Senior Cataloger
San Francisco Public Library


[EMAIL PROTECTED]


-Original Message-
From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of A. Ralph Papakhian
Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 9:22 AM
To: RDA-L@INFOSERV.NLC-BNC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] "Author, author!" Re: [RDA-L] Fictitious characters
as authors


hi,
is mac suggesting "criminal defendants" as the single term?
now that's radical!
--r


A. Ralph Papakhian, Indiana University Music Library Bloomington, IN
47405 812/855-2970 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
co-owner: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


On Thu, 23 Mar 2006 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Don't forget criminal defendants as 100's.  We really haven't improved


> on an ISBD unlabled display in my opinion.
>
> J. McRee (Mac) Elrod, Special Libraries Cataloguing
>

Re: "Author, author!" Re: [RDA-L] Fictitious characters as authors

[jelrod]

> In despair, before now, trying to find a single term for our opac that would 
> cover any of the below PLUS speakers, performers, composers, artists, 
> engravers, while having to deal with a character limit for the opac label, I 
> have thought of resorting to "Person". But I didn't.


Don't forget criminal defendants as 100's.  We really haven't improved on an 
ISBD unlabled display in my opinion.


J. McRee (Mac) Elrod, Special Libraries Cataloguing

Fictitious characters as authors

[Martha Yee]

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.


Just to add to the collection of past practice in this regard:


Eddie Anderson (n78080690) has a see reference from Rochester, the character
he played on The Jack Benny program, because he became so identified with
the character that sometimes he appears as Rochester in the credits of films
and programs.


Moran and Mack (n87896301) was a vaudeville performing group; Moran (George)
was played at various times by George Searchy, Bert Swor and John Swor.  So
far, the LC/NACO authority file has an authority record for Moran, George,
1881-1949 (n87911968) which has a see reference from Searchy, but not from
either Swor brother.


It would be nice if RDA could find a better word than 'author' to encompass
actors, entertainers, musicians, sculptors, composers, photographers,
painters, etc., but perhaps there is no such word.


What a tangled web we weave, when we practice to deceive (or at least
fictionalize)!  I agree with Hal Cain that Part II is going to be
interesting...


Martha
%%
Martha M. Yee
Cataloging Supervisor
UCLA Film and Television Archive
1015 N. Cahuenga Blvd.
Los Angeles, CA  90038-2616
323-462-4921 x27
323-469-9055 (fax)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Email at work)
%%



"Whatever the costs of our libraries, the price is cheap compared to that of
an ignorant nation"--Walter Cronkite.

Re: Fictitious characters as authors

[Allyson Carlyle]

Two thoughts - first, as far as I know, we have little evidence (in the
research sense) about how people will search for non-persons (be they
fictional characters, animals, or whatever) as authors.  It seems to me
that since that is the case, and since there are so few of these
instances in general, that we could be generous and award both name
access points and subject access points whenever this comes up.   Even
when the attribution is done in fun (The True Story of the Three Little
Pigs, by A. Wolf, for instance), how are we hurt by providing access to
our users who would not be familiar with the cultural contexts that make
such attributions jokes?


Second, Lubetzky comes to mind in this discussion, as he so often does,
and his paper "Is This Rule Necessary?"  Do we need separate rules for
every sort of non-person author?  Can't we create more principled rules?



I can see that we might need separate rules for non-persons who are
represented as existing/previously existing persons (e.g., spirit
communications - this rule could also do with some scrutiny of the "is
this rule necessary" sort)  and those non-persons who are not
represented as existing/previously existing persons.  At least, we will
probably need separate rules regarding form of name.  But, we could go
on and on using our favorite examples (mine is Racter, the computer
program which is attributed as writing "The Policeman's Beard is Half
Constructed"), each a little bit different, by an entity that is not a
non-person.


So, how about a few nice principle-based rules regarding non-persons of
any sort, so that when the next one (that we cannot yet imagine)
arrives, a rule will already be there to handle it?


PS, because I can't help it - What makes the Racter case so very sad, it
seems to me, is the decision to make Racter a title access point instead
of a name access point.  It took me a while to figure out that a title
access point was assigned because Racter is a computer program, and
computer programs are works, so they are named by a work citation, in
this case, a title, therefore assign a title added entry I simply
cannot imagine a user looking for this item - and other items by the
same author - using a title search.






-Original Message-
From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Adam Schiff
Sent: Friday, March 10, 2006 10:22 AM
To: RDA-L@INFOSERV.NLC-BNC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Fictitious characters as authors


Another issue that perhaps needs addressing is animals as authors, which
also currently do not get name headings and cannot be given entries.  We
are all familiar with the books by Millie the dog and Socks (Sox?) the
cat, but commercials, fictional films and television programs, and
documentaries have starred or featured named animals, and one can find
artwork created by specific named animals, etc.  Movie credits usually
name important animal performers.  Don't users expect to find these
entities in catalogs under name/author searches rather than as subject
headings?


Adam


^^
Adam L. Schiff
Principal Cataloger
University of Washington Libraries
Box 352900
Seattle, WA 98195-2900
(206) 543-8409
(206) 685-8782 fax
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://faculty.washington.edu/~aschiff
~~


On Fri, 10 Mar 2006, J. McRee Elrod wrote:


> AACR2 makes a distinction between pseudonyms (which may as literary
> identities be used as prime entry AACR2 22.B2), and fictitious
> characters which may not be so used.  It seems to me that if one does
> not know the name of the human author, the name of the fictitious
> character is as much a pseudonym as any other, and is needed to bring
> together the works of a single bibliographic identity, whether that
> identity is presented as a mouse or not.
>
> I hope those drafting the next portion of RDA will take this into
> consideration.
>
> Joel Hahn has given his permission to forward the following to the
> list, which I think makes an important distinction:
>
> The Archy & Mehitabel books are clearly labeled as "by Don Marquis."
> There is no question as to who the real-world author is, as it's
> clearly stated on the item itself.  Therefore, the main entry is under


> Marquis.
>
> In AACR2, there is an example of an autobiography of Alice Toklas,
> Gertrude Stein's secretary, which is known to have been *actually*
> written by Gertrude Stein about herself.  Therefore, the main entry is


> under Stein.
>
> In AACR2, there is an example of a book "written" by Winnie-the-Pooh,
> which is known to have *actually* been written by A.A. Milne, and is
> not a case of Milne intending to create a pseudonym with a separate
> bibliographic identity. Therefore, the main entry is under Mil

Re: Fictitious characters as authors

[Hal Cain]

On Sat, March 11, 2006 3:46 am, J. McRee Elrod wrote:
> AACR2 makes a distinction between pseudonyms (which may as literary
> identities be used as prime entry AACR2 22.B2), and fictitious
> characters which may not be so used.  It seems to me that if one does
> not know the name of the human author, the name of the fictitious
> character is as much a pseudonym as any other, and is needed to bring
> together the works of a single bibliographic identity, whether that
> identity is presented as a mouse or not.


I see entry under the entity *represented* as the author a simple
application of the principles of representation and of common usage.


Now that we've digested the notion (added to AACR2 a while ago) of entry
under pseudonym (bibliographic identity), what's the difference with any
other name represented as responsible for a work and for the document it's
presented in?


A lot of the theoretical discussion on this topic that I've read has been
just making a simple concept complex.  The resources and their content are
complex enough: let's cut down on complexities generated by rules!


Part II is going to be interesting!


Hal Cain
Joint Theological Library
Parkville, Victoria, Australia
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Fictitious characters as authors

[Ian Fairclough]

Dear RDA-list readers,


Previous discussion has taken place on OCLC-Cat.  For the benefit of anyone
interested, I'm reposting my e-mails to that list, from the archives
http://listserv.oclc.org/archives/oclc-cat.html.  (If other contributors to
the discussion want to bring their writings to your attention, they can do
so without my intervention!)


- Ian


Ian Fairclough
Marion (Ohio) Public Library
tel. 740-387-0994 x233
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Thu, 15 Sep 2005 12:54:34 -0400


Jane Myers writes "But why should they [i.e. the people out working with the
public] have to keep track of which authors are fictitious and which are
not?" This is reminiscent of the ancient criterion "capable of authorship"
for determining entry status. Regardless of whether or nay mice are capable
of authorship, surely a fictitious mouse is not.


But what is being suggested here? Main entry under fictitious character? Or
a reference, tagged 400 as a personal name, in an authority record? The fact
that the fictitious character is a mouse is a distraction from the essence
of the question. Most fictitious characters are subjects and understood to
be such. They are accessed via a subject search. Here, the fictitious
character is presumably being searched as an author, so the search fails.
Must it fail?


What if Sherlock Holmes were to have someone "ghost write" his
"autobiography"? Perhaps it's been done - or if not Holmes, a
pseudo-autobiography of some other worthy though fictitious person (anyone
who knows an example, please post to the list).

Fri, 16 Sep 2005 10:45:00 -0400


Responding to the person who said: "Geronimo Stilton is not just a
fictitious character; it is also a pseudonym." I disagree. In my humble
opinion, people who think a person can be fictitious as well as pseudonymous
are confused.


As lawyers would say, "Produce the body." The existence of a body, dead or
alive, is the test to determine whether a person is real or fictitious. A
pseudonym does not represent a fictitious character, but a real one, having
a body. A fictitious person has no body -- and the resemblance of any real
person, living or deceased, is entirely coincidental.


Perhaps, rather than focusing on access, we should consider the educational
role of our profession with respect to fictitious persons (or mice). If
someone, be it a circulation clerk or a customer, does not know who Geronimo
Stilton "is", librarians (broadly speaking) should educate that person. If
someone searches for the "author" Geronimo Stilton and doesn't find any
books written by said mouse, that person receives an educational benefit.
Geronimo Stilton didn't author any books. The fact that an author search for
Geronimo Stilton fails is in itself educational. That's a good thing. An
author search should retrieve works written by those capable of authorship,
not by those who aren't. Show me a mouse that has authored a book, and I'll
write you an authority record for it. (Don't worry, I don't contribute to
NACO.)


Perhaps there really was an actual mouse with that name, presumably by now
dead (in which case, should one add dates of birth and death to the heading
for a dead mouse? Just kidding, folks!).
__
Fri, 16 Sep 2005 14:03:21 -0400


In a private communication a correspondent has noted that a name can be a
pseudonym as well as in use for a fictitious person (or mouse). A human
whose "real" name is unknown but who has adopted the pseudonym "Geronimo
Stilton" has, if I understand correctly, used the same name for the
character of the fictitious mouse. This person has also authored a cookbook.



This being the case, the heading "Stilton, Geronimo", as established in n
2005053414, is a valid name heading. It's unfortunate that the record, which
Kenichi Tsuda has kindly posted for use to review, has no mention of either
the pseudonymous status nor the relationship to the fictitious mouse.


A separate heading is appropriate as a subject heading. And such a heading
is to be found!


sh2005002661 HEADING: Stilton, Geronimo (Fictitious character) 000 00686cz
2200229n 450 001 6521379 005 20050518235852.0 008 050422 | anannbabn |a ana
035 __ |a (DLC)6521379 035 __ |a (DLC)sh2005002661 035 __ |a (DLC)329130 906
__ |t 0520 |u te04 |v 0 010 __ |a sh2005002661 040 __ |a DLC |b eng |c DLC
150 __ |a Stilton, Geronimo (Fictitious character) 450 __ |a Geronimo
Stilton (Fictitious character) 670 __ |a Work cat.: The curse of the cheese
pyramid, 2004. 670 __ |a Paws off, cheddarface!, 2004. 670 __ |a A fabumouse
vacation for Geronimo, c2004. 952 __ |a 0 bib. record(s) to be changed 952
__ |a SCM H 1610 953 __ |a ym09


I sincerely hope that these authority records have NOT been deleted. Though
modification, by addition of notes clarifying the relationship, if not of
cross-references, would help stave off some of the confusion.


I stand by what I previously wrote about a name being a pseudonym if a
(human) body is represent

Re: Fictitious characters as authors

[Bob Hall]

Good afternoon all,


Thank you for your email.  We have been discussing this issue at our
ALA/PLA Cataloging Needs of Public Libraries discussion group since the
topic first appeared on the OCLC cataloging list several months ago.  We
also found out that OLAC had presented this very issue a few years ago (
http://ublib.buffalo.edu/libraries/units/cts/olac/newsletters/sept04.html#capc
), but I believe they are not going to pursue it.  I am the PLA Liaison to
CC:DA and I am definitely going to bring this up just as soon as RDA pt. 2
is available for comment.  Please, also, feel free to comment on this list
when pt. 2 does become available.


[And now, for a not-too shameless plug]: any of you public library
catalogers who are going to Annual in New Orleans and want to be involved
in the Cataloging Needs of Public Library discussion group, please attend.
 We usually meet on Sun. morning, and Mon. afternoon, and welcome discussion!


Enjoy the weekend.


Robert.


--
Robert C.W. Hall, Jr.
Technical Services Associate Librarian
Concord Free Public Library, Concord, MA  01742
978-318-3342 -- FAX: 978-318-3344 -- http://www.concordnet.org/library/
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--



-Original Message-
From: "J. McRee Elrod" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: RDA-L@INFOSERV.NLC-BNC.CA
Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2006 08:46:41 -0800
Subject: [RDA-L] Fictitious characters as authors


> AACR2 makes a distinction between pseudonyms (which may as literary
> identities be used as prime entry AACR2 22.B2), and fictitious
> characters which may not be so used.  It seems to me that if one does
> not know the name of the human author, the name of the fictitious
> character is as much a pseudonym as any other, and is needed to bring
> together the works of a single bibliographic identity, whether that
> identity is presented as a mouse or not.
>
> I hope those drafting the next portion of RDA will take this into
> consideration.
>
> Joel Hahn has given his permission to forward the following to the
> list, which I think makes an important distinction:
>
> The Archy & Mehitabel books are clearly labeled as "by Don Marquis."
> There is no question as to who the real-world author is, as it's
> clearly stated on the item itself.  Therefore, the main entry is under
> Marquis.
>
> In AACR2, there is an example of an autobiography of Alice Toklas,
> Gertrude Stein's secretary, which is known to have been *actually*
> written
> by Gertrude Stein about herself.  Therefore, the main entry is under
> Stein.
>
> In AACR2, there is an example of a book "written" by Winnie-the-Pooh,
> which is known to have *actually* been written by A.A. Milne, and is
> not a
> case of Milne intending to create a pseudonym with a separate
> bibliographic identity. Therefore, the main entry is under Milne.
>
> The Geronimo Stilton books (of which I have one in front of me, as it
> just arrived today), say "Text by Geronimo Stilton, Original title:
> {original title in Italian}, Cover by Giuseppe Ferrario, Illustrations
> by Larry Keys, Ratterto Rattonchi, and Chiara Sacchi," etc.  The
> copyright statement is "Copyright (C) 2005 by Edizioni Piemme S.p.A.,
> Via del Carmine 5, 15033 Casale Monferrato (AL), Italia; English
> translation (C) 2005 by Edizioni Piemme S.p.A."  The books are all told
> from the first person point of view.
>
> Unlike the case of Archy & Mehibatel, where the real author is stated
> on the work itself, or the Winnie-the-Pooh case, where the true author
> is well known, the publisher itself has intentionally obfuscated the
> name(s) of the real author(s); they label Geronimo Stilton as the
> author. Since this obviously cannot be ... , and there is no known
> author that can be used instead, the rules call for main entry under
> title, which is why LC has cataloged them that way.  (If Archy &
> Mehibatel was instead labeled by the publisher as "by Archy, a
> cockroach", and no one knew or could readily determine that it was
> really by Don Marquis, then it would be the same situation as Geronimo
> Stilton.)
>
> However, because that treatment prevents collocation on the shelf of a
> popular fiction series, and prevents catalog access by one of the more
> "obvious" access points from the point of view of the target audience
> of this particular series, and thus may significantly inhibit public
> service, that is not considered a desirable situation by many
> libraries, even if it does strictly follow the rules.  Because the
> rules also allow for pseudonyms such as Mark Twain, or the recently
> discussed Jean Plaidy) to be used as main entries, even if the
> author's real name is known (again, in order to enable useful customer
> service), if the pseudonym constit

Re: Fictitious characters as authors

[Adam Schiff]

Another issue that perhaps needs addressing is animals as authors, which
also currently do not get name headings and cannot be given entries.  We
are all familiar with the books by Millie the dog and Socks (Sox?) the
cat, but commercials, fictional films and television programs, and
documentaries have starred or featured named animals, and one can find
artwork created by specific named animals, etc.  Movie credits usually
name important animal performers.  Don't users expect to find these
entities in catalogs under name/author searches rather than as subject
headings?


Adam


^^
Adam L. Schiff
Principal Cataloger
University of Washington Libraries
Box 352900
Seattle, WA 98195-2900
(206) 543-8409
(206) 685-8782 fax
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://faculty.washington.edu/~aschiff
~~


On Fri, 10 Mar 2006, J. McRee Elrod wrote:



AACR2 makes a distinction between pseudonyms (which may as literary
identities be used as prime entry AACR2 22.B2), and fictitious
characters which may not be so used.  It seems to me that if one does
not know the name of the human author, the name of the fictitious
character is as much a pseudonym as any other, and is needed to bring
together the works of a single bibliographic identity, whether that
identity is presented as a mouse or not.

I hope those drafting the next portion of RDA will take this into
consideration.

Joel Hahn has given his permission to forward the following to the
list, which I think makes an important distinction:

The Archy & Mehitabel books are clearly labeled as "by Don Marquis."
There is no question as to who the real-world author is, as it's
clearly stated on the item itself.  Therefore, the main entry is under
Marquis.

In AACR2, there is an example of an autobiography of Alice Toklas,
Gertrude Stein's secretary, which is known to have been *actually* written
by Gertrude Stein about herself.  Therefore, the main entry is under
Stein.

In AACR2, there is an example of a book "written" by Winnie-the-Pooh,
which is known to have *actually* been written by A.A. Milne, and is not a
case of Milne intending to create a pseudonym with a separate
bibliographic identity. Therefore, the main entry is under Milne.

The Geronimo Stilton books (of which I have one in front of me, as it
just arrived today), say "Text by Geronimo Stilton, Original title:
{original title in Italian}, Cover by Giuseppe Ferrario, Illustrations
by Larry Keys, Ratterto Rattonchi, and Chiara Sacchi," etc.  The
copyright statement is "Copyright (C) 2005 by Edizioni Piemme S.p.A.,
Via del Carmine 5, 15033 Casale Monferrato (AL), Italia; English
translation (C) 2005 by Edizioni Piemme S.p.A."  The books are all told
from the first person point of view.

Unlike the case of Archy & Mehibatel, where the real author is stated
on the work itself, or the Winnie-the-Pooh case, where the true author
is well known, the publisher itself has intentionally obfuscated the
name(s) of the real author(s); they label Geronimo Stilton as the
author. Since this obviously cannot be ... , and there is no known
author that can be used instead, the rules call for main entry under
title, which is why LC has cataloged them that way.  (If Archy &
Mehibatel was instead labeled by the publisher as "by Archy, a
cockroach", and no one knew or could readily determine that it was
really by Don Marquis, then it would be the same situation as Geronimo
Stilton.)

However, because that treatment prevents collocation on the shelf of a
popular fiction series, and prevents catalog access by one of the more
"obvious" access points from the point of view of the target audience
of this particular series, and thus may significantly inhibit public
service, that is not considered a desirable situation by many
libraries, even if it does strictly follow the rules.  Because the
rules also allow for pseudonyms such as Mark Twain, or the recently
discussed Jean Plaidy) to be used as main entries, even if the
author's real name is known (again, in order to enable useful customer
service), if the pseudonym constitutes a "separate bibliographic
identity" from the author's own, there is some precedent for using
names of people who do not and have never existed, it is perhaps not
all that much of a stretch to treat Stilton as a shared pseudonym of
the publisher's otherwise anonymous stable of writers, much like
Franklin W. Dixon or Carolyn Keene are, with the exception that the
shared pseudonym "happens" to have the same name as the main character
of the stories.  We have not done that here, but I can understand why
that solution would be attractive.

(One might also make a case in favor of main entry under "Edizioni Piemme
S.p.A.," but since this does not fall into any of the categories that
allow for corporate main entry, that would require it's own local
exception to the rules, and if you're going to make an exception anyway,
creating the main entry under "Geronimo Stilton" wil

Fictitious characters as authors

[J. McRee Elrod]

AACR2 makes a distinction between pseudonyms (which may as literary
identities be used as prime entry AACR2 22.B2), and fictitious
characters which may not be so used.  It seems to me that if one does
not know the name of the human author, the name of the fictitious
character is as much a pseudonym as any other, and is needed to bring
together the works of a single bibliographic identity, whether that
identity is presented as a mouse or not.


I hope those drafting the next portion of RDA will take this into
consideration.


Joel Hahn has given his permission to forward the following to the
list, which I think makes an important distinction:


The Archy & Mehitabel books are clearly labeled as "by Don Marquis."
There is no question as to who the real-world author is, as it's
clearly stated on the item itself.  Therefore, the main entry is under
Marquis.


In AACR2, there is an example of an autobiography of Alice Toklas,
Gertrude Stein's secretary, which is known to have been *actually* written
by Gertrude Stein about herself.  Therefore, the main entry is under
Stein.


In AACR2, there is an example of a book "written" by Winnie-the-Pooh,
which is known to have *actually* been written by A.A. Milne, and is not a
case of Milne intending to create a pseudonym with a separate
bibliographic identity. Therefore, the main entry is under Milne.


The Geronimo Stilton books (of which I have one in front of me, as it
just arrived today), say "Text by Geronimo Stilton, Original title:
{original title in Italian}, Cover by Giuseppe Ferrario, Illustrations
by Larry Keys, Ratterto Rattonchi, and Chiara Sacchi," etc.  The
copyright statement is "Copyright (C) 2005 by Edizioni Piemme S.p.A.,
Via del Carmine 5, 15033 Casale Monferrato (AL), Italia; English
translation (C) 2005 by Edizioni Piemme S.p.A."  The books are all told
from the first person point of view.


Unlike the case of Archy & Mehibatel, where the real author is stated
on the work itself, or the Winnie-the-Pooh case, where the true author
is well known, the publisher itself has intentionally obfuscated the
name(s) of the real author(s); they label Geronimo Stilton as the
author. Since this obviously cannot be ... , and there is no known
author that can be used instead, the rules call for main entry under
title, which is why LC has cataloged them that way.  (If Archy &
Mehibatel was instead labeled by the publisher as "by Archy, a
cockroach", and no one knew or could readily determine that it was
really by Don Marquis, then it would be the same situation as Geronimo
Stilton.)


However, because that treatment prevents collocation on the shelf of a
popular fiction series, and prevents catalog access by one of the more
"obvious" access points from the point of view of the target audience
of this particular series, and thus may significantly inhibit public
service, that is not considered a desirable situation by many
libraries, even if it does strictly follow the rules.  Because the
rules also allow for pseudonyms such as Mark Twain, or the recently
discussed Jean Plaidy) to be used as main entries, even if the
author's real name is known (again, in order to enable useful customer
service), if the pseudonym constitutes a "separate bibliographic
identity" from the author's own, there is some precedent for using
names of people who do not and have never existed, it is perhaps not
all that much of a stretch to treat Stilton as a shared pseudonym of
the publisher's otherwise anonymous stable of writers, much like
Franklin W. Dixon or Carolyn Keene are, with the exception that the
shared pseudonym "happens" to have the same name as the main character
of the stories.  We have not done that here, but I can understand why
that solution would be attractive.


(One might also make a case in favor of main entry under "Edizioni Piemme
S.p.A.," but since this does not fall into any of the categories that
allow for corporate main entry, that would require it's own local
exception to the rules, and if you're going to make an exception anyway,
creating the main entry under "Geronimo Stilton" will make MUCH more sense
to the general public--and yes, WITHOUT causing almost all of them to
become frozen in place with confusion due to undergoing a major literary
crisis over the metatextual ramifications of fictional characters writing
their own stories in a manner similar to the way M.C. Escher's hands are
seen drawing themselves--than creating a main entry under the publisher
would.)


Joel Hahn
Lead Cataloger
Niles Public Library District
Niles, Ill.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]