is for definite information for immediate use; the library patron
wishes, not training in acquiring information by and for himself, but
the information itself; no substitution of deferred dividends will
satisfy his insistent demand for immediate cash payment; he cares not
at all for method but he cares very particularly for instant results.
Moreover, no one intervenes between the reference librarian and the
library patron,--he alone is responsible for giving the information
desired. And again, the reference librarian has to deal with an
irregular, constantly fluctuating clientele. The man who wants to know
who first thought the world was round and whether he was a vegetarian
or perchance a cannibal may never visit the library again, but the
effort must be made to satisfy his curiosity. The reference librarian
of the public library must always be more or less of a purveyor of
miscellaneous information to an irregular fluctuating public.
But the functions of the college reference librarian are altogether
different. It is often his duty not to give, but temporarily to
withhold information; not to answer but to ask questions; to answer
one question by asking another; to help a student answer his own
question for himself, work out his own problems, and find a way out
of his difficulties; to show him how to find for himself the material
desired; to give training rather than specific information; to be
himself a teacher and to co-operate with other instructors in training
the students who seek his help. All this is possible for him for he
deals with a regular constituency and he can build up each year on
the foundations of the previous year. But while progression comes
for the students, there is always the solid permanency of subject
with which the reference librarian deals. With the regularity of
the passing calendar there come the questions of the feudal system
and of the frontier, of the renaissance and of how to follow a bill
through congress. The personnel of the student body changes, but there
is always an unchanging residuum of subject matter. On the side of
the regular college work there is therefore practically no demand
whatever made on the college reference librarian for the miscellaneous
information demanded of the public reference librarian,--he is not the
one who writes for the daily papers the description in verse of the
daily life of the reference librarian.[9] Just what his work is in the
college, from the students' point of view is indicated by a recent
experience.
[9] =Library Journal=, Oct., 1912. =Public Libraries=, June, 1913.
A class of seventy in American history was recently asked to what
extent the members of it had availed themselves of the services of the
reference librarian in that particular course and the replies seem to
show that their inquiries had chiefly related to the use of government
publications, early periodical literature, material not suggested
by the titles of books, out-of-the-way material, source material,
and current newspaper material not available through indexes. The
many tributes to the help received from the Vassar College reference
librarian are perhaps best summed up, so it seems to the teacher, in
the statement of one student "she shows you how to go about finding a
book better the next time."
If then it must be evident that the work of the college reference
librarian differs widely from that of the public reference librarian,
it remains to consider specifically what division of the field should
be made between the college reference librarian and the college
instructor. Here a clear line of demarcation seems evident. The college
instructor must know the student personally and intellectually, as he
must know the conditions from which he has come and the conditions
to which he presumably is to go. He must help the student relate all
the various parts of his college work and help him relate his college
work to the general conditions in which he is placed. Hence he cannot
separate for the student the bibliography of a subject from the subject
itself. Nor can he turn over to the librarian the instruction in
bibliographical work. The reference librarian is the only member of
the library staff who in the capacity of a teacher comes into direct
personal relationship with the student, but his work, as has been seen,
is entirely different.
In this division of the field that leaves to the college instructor the
actual instruction of students in the use of books, a large unoccupied
territory is claimed by the reference librarian as peculiarly his
own. This concerns the "extra-collegiate activities" and includes
help on material needed in inter-class debates, dramatics, pageants,
college publications, Bible classes, mission classes, commencement
essays, and all the miscellaneous activities in which the student, not
the instructor, takes the initiative. This work corresponds somewhat
closely to that of the general reference librarian in a public library
and it demands about one-half of the time of the librarian.
Instruction in the use of the library is facilitated by unrestricted
access to the shelves and here the students are able to put their
knowledge to the test and to work out their own independent methods.
What are the advantages and the disadvantages of unrestricted access to
the library shelves? The question was recently asked a class of seventy
students and their replies show an almost unanimous opinion that the
advantages are overwhelmingly in favor of the open shelves.
Among the educational advantages enumerated are that this fosters
independence and self-reliance, through encouraging personal
investigation; that it enables students to see books in relation to
other books, to make comparisons, and therefore to select those that
are the best to use; that it shows the library resources and, to a
certain extent, the breadth of the investigation that has been done in
specific lines. "The open shelf is an instructor, a great indispensable
helper, an education in itself," writes one student, while another
states, "It gives an opportunity to form a closer acquaintance with
books already known by name, and for casual acquaintance with books one
has not time to draw out and read at length."
On the more personal side the students have found the advantages to
be the pleasure found in handling books; the appeal made by titles
and bindings; the inspiration that comes from the feeling of kinship
with books; the opportunity given for wide acquaintance with books and
authors; more extensive reading; the saving of time; the satisfaction
of being able to find what is wanted, freedom from the limitations of
specific references. "We become interested in subjects and in books
we should not otherwise have known at all," writes one, while another
asked a friend who replied, "Well, I don't know exactly what it means,
but I guess it means that I for one use books I never otherwise would
have used."
On the side of the library as a whole, many have found advantages in
the opportunity it gives of doing general and special bibliographical
work and in the knowledge afforded of the general plan of arrangement,
classification, and cataloging. "If we had to stay in a reading room,
how much idea of library organization should we have?" is the clinching
question of one enthusiastic student.
The moral advantages are found to be the feeling of responsibility
towards books and the training given in not abusing the privilege.
But it is in the failure of some persons to avail themselves of these
opportunities for moral training that students find the disadvantages
of the open shelf. There are the periodic complaints that books are
lost, misplaced, hidden, and monopolized; that the privilege is abused;
and that the social conscience is lacking. "The open shelf is the ideal
system but it is designed for an ideal society," feelingly writes one,
while another, more philosophical, finds that the open shelf has its
annoyances, but no disadvantages, and that these are probably to be
charged up to human nature, not to the system.
Only an occasional one sees any other disadvantages. One student finds
herself bewildered and lost in irrelevant material, while another
brought up in the atmosphere of Harvard, thinks that the closed stack
encourages greater precision and carefulness, "for if you have to put
in a slip and wait for a book you are more careful about your choice
than you are when you can easily drop one found to be unsatisfactory
and lay your hands immediately upon another one." "It may be," adds a
third, "that we do not get all we might from a book when it is so easy
to get others. I find myself often putting aside a book when I do not
immediately find what I want."
With an occasional plaint about the increased noise and that the open
shelf really takes more time since it is easier to ask for an authority
on a specified subject than it is to look it up for one's self, the
case for and against the open shelf, from the side of the student,
seems closed, with the verdict overwhelmingly in favor of unrestricted
access to the library shelves.
I cannot forbear suggesting two directions in which it seems to me the
library work could be extended to the advantage of both library and
academic force.
The first is the desirability of having connected with every college
library an instructor in the department of history who gives
instruction in one or more courses in history and who is at the same
time definitely responsible for the development of the bibliographical
side of the history work.
The work of the history librarian on the library side would be to serve
as a consulting expert on all questions that arise in cataloging books
that are on the border lines between history and other subjects. Such
perplexing questions are constantly arising and valuable aid might be
given in such cases by an expert in history.
Another part of the work of the history librarian from the side of
the library would be to keep the librarian and the history department
constantly informed of opportunities to purchase at advantage works on
history that are available only through the second-hand dealers. It
now usually devolves on some member of the library staff to study the
catalogs of second-hand books and report "finds" to some officer of the
history department. Could facilities be provided for making it possible
to have the initiative come from the history side it would seem a
distinct gain.
The work of the history librarian would also include the responsibility
for the classification, arrangement and care of the mass of apparently
miscellaneous material that accumulates in every library but does not
slip naturally into a predestined place. All is grist that comes to the
history mill, yet it is difficult to know how it can best be cared for.
Miss Hasse in her well-remembered article =On the Classification of
Numismatics=[10] has shown that the utmost diversity has prevailed in
regard to the classification of coins and the literary material dealing
with them. This is but one illustration of the uncertainty, confusion,
and diversity that prevails in classifying much of the material that
seems miscellaneous in character, and that yet should be classified as
historical material.
[10] =Library Journal=, September, 1904.
The work of the history librarian on the side of the students would be
concerned during the first semester particularly with the freshmen and
the sophomores. The bibliographical and reference work now done could
be greatly enlarged and extended. It would be possible to explain still
more fully the possibilities of assistance from the card catalog; to
help students locate the more special histories that might seem to
be luxuries rather than the necessities of their work; to make them
acquainted with histories as histories, rather than with histories as
furnishing specific material; to develop their critical appreciation
of books and their judgment in regard to the varying degrees of
authoritativeness of well known old and recent histories. Encouragement
would be given the students to begin historical libraries for
themselves, advice could be given in making reasonable selections of
books, and help in starting a catalog. Interest in suitable book-plates
for historical collections might be roused as well as interest in
suitable bindings, and thus through these luxurious accessories the
student be led on to friendship with the books themselves and with
their author.
During the second semester the work of the history librarian would
be largely with the seniors and would be more constructive in its
nature. The seniors are looking forward to taking an active part in
the life of their home communities and they will be interested in
the public schools, in the public library, in social work, in church
work, in history and literary clubs, in historical pageants, fêtes
and excursions, in historical museums, in the celebration of historic
days, and in innumerable other civic activities, many of which are
intimately connected with the subject of history. The history librarian
would be able to give invaluable aid to the seniors in preparing
lists of histories suitable for public libraries in communities where
suggestions may prove welcome; in suggesting histories adapted to all
these demands made by personal, co-operative, and civic activities.
This constructive work of the history librarian would be capable
of infinite extension and variation and its good results would be
far-reaching and of growing momentum.
May I suggest one further possible direction in which the activities
of the library staff would lend interest to the general work of the
college. Every institution needs luxuries and the members of the
library staff have it in their power to offer courses of lectures open
to all members of the college and also to citizens of the community
who are interested in educational questions. Such courses would
include lectures on the history of libraries; on the great libraries
of Europe and America; on the great libraries of the world; on great
editors like Benjamin F. Stevens; on rare books; on books famous for
the number of copies sold, of editions, of translations, of migrations
through auction rooms; on the famous manuscripts of the world. The
possibilities of such courses are limitless.
There are also the courses of lectures that we are all eager to hear
on the plain necessities that are of even greater interest than are
those that deal with the luxuries. The college wants to hear about the
administration of a library and its general problems; about the special
questions of cataloging, interlibrary loans, the special collections
of the library as well as its general resources. From the standpoint
of special departments, lectures might be given by representatives of
these departments on the treasures of the library as they concern their
special fields.
Joint department meetings of the members of the library staff and
the officers of the departments of English and of history for the
discussion of questions of mutual interest have at Vassar College
proved stimulating and contributed much to a mutual understanding
of each other's ideals and to a sympathetic appreciation of the
difficulties attending their realization.
"Why cannot all this work with and about books be explained by the
librarians,--" college authorities sometimes ask. "That is their
business; it is the business of the teacher to teach."
The answer is simple. The good teacher must individualize the student,
the good librarian must individualize the book; and both teacher and
librarian must co-operate in helping the college student get the utmost
possible from his college course in order that in his turn he may help
the community in which he lives in its efforts to realize its ideals.
The endless chain extends to the farthermost confines of heaven!
Discussion of the paper was led by Mr. J. T. Gerould, librarian of the
University of Minnesota. He believed that most college teachers had
neither the knowledge nor the enthusiasm necessary to give systematic
bibliographic instruction. Training in the use of the library should,
he thought be given by a member of the library staff, from a general
point of view, introducing the student to reference books not simply in
one field, but in all. The time had come for the university libraries
to define their position as a distinct educational integer, not a
mere adjunct to the academic departments. Of course, to take such a
position, the library staff must be thoroughly equipped, and must
include trained bibliographers in adequate number.
Dr. E. C. Richardson, librarian of Princeton University, called
attention to the fact that the principle of unrestricted access to the
shelves required hearty co-operation between the college public and
the library staff. It should be recognized that the librarian is not
responsible for the correct placing of every book on an "open shelf."
Mr. John D. Wolcott, librarian of the Bureau of Education, Washington,
D. C., spoke of the questionnaire on the subject under discussion sent
out in October, 1912, by the A. L. A. to two hundred colleges and
universities. A summary of the results were included in the chapter
entitled "Recent aspects of library development" by John D. Wolcott,
which forms a part of the Report of the U. S. Commissioner of Education
for the year ended June 30, 1912. Reprints may be obtained from the
Commissioner.
Mr. H. C. Prince, librarian of the Maine state library, called
attention to the courses in legal bibliography which were being given
at various law schools. Those at the University of Chicago, though
without credit, were eagerly attended by law students.
Mr. Goodrich reiterated his belief that the libraries should take a
definite stand in insisting that college students must be taught how
to use library resources to the full. They must learn the many "tricks
of the trade," which in his opinion, were better known at present
to the librarian than to the teacher. Miss Salmon replied that she
thought it less a question of learning the "tricks of the trade" than
of adapting the desired knowledge to the individual need and capacity
of the student; hence her belief in the teacher as the proper medium of
instruction. The discussion could not be pursued for lack of time.
Mr. H. E. BLISS, librarian of the College of the City of New York, read
a paper on
SOME PRACTICAL CONSIDERATIONS REGARDING CLASSIFICATION FOR LIBRARIES
I
The letter inviting me to take part in this conference echoes to me
now across the busy field of the past month with notes something like
this: "Come, if you will, and talk to us and with us, but =please= be
=practical=." Perhaps I have elsewhere in-adroitly given the impression
that I believe classification for libraries should be a matter of
science or of philosophy. I did indeed say in print, some months ago,
that "To be practical today and tomorrow, man must be scientific."
Upon science, that is verified and organized knowledge, practical
common sense is becoming more and more dependent. To be practical
without knowledge is in most matters to be ineffectively practical. How
practical should we be in classification for libraries, and how should
we be practical effectually?
Those who have had to do with classification only in small collections
of books for popular use may regard it as a comparatively simple
and unimportant thing. They do not see why there should be so much
trouble and fuss about it. This we may term the naïve view, to borrow
a phrase from recent philosophical literature. But some of those who
have undertaken to maintain a classification for a large university
or reference library know that it is one of the most difficult and
complicated of our problems. They apprehend furthermore that it has not
yet been solved satisfactorily. This may be termed the =critical= view.
It may vary from moderation to extremes optimistic or pessimistic.
Not a toy librarians want but a =tool=, as we say. The mechanism
of a library, however, is not operated by merely mechanical hands.
There should be somewhat in library service beyond mere statistical
and technical economies. Our arrangement of books should not be
inconsistent with the organization of knowledge, lest we fail in an
=inestimable= service to the seekers and disseminators of knowledge.
II
Is it feasible economically to adapt this instrument, classification,
to that higher service? There are three answers to this question. There
is the pessimistic negative. Books are wanted in all possible and
impossible arrangements. You cannot make a classification that, even
with the customary transfers of charging-systems, will serve all these
ever-varying needs. This argument leads to the virtual negation of the
very =principle= of classification. If this were wholly true, it were
futile to provide a place for bacteriology, for the books would be
wanted now under botany, now under pathology, or sanitation, and again
perhaps under agricultural science.
Shall we separate such branches or not? The pessimist says:
"Whichever you do, classification fails." The optimist answers: "Good
classification serves the average or prevailing demand." To more
special subjects the pessimist then turns, such as crystallography,
eugenics, child-psychology. These he says are claimed in their
entirety by two or three different sciences. These arguments, launched
against so-called "scientific classifications," are no less hostile
to the worthy undertaking of a practical system in such conformity to
the consensus of modern science as the conditions permit. But most
librarians have not accepted this pessimistic negative. They continue
to classify books for average demands, and the interest in the problem
increases.
Contrasted is the more prevalent optimistic view. We have good
classification. The Decimal Classification is an admirable, successful,
at least serviceable system; it is the established, the familiar, the
most practical. With all its faults, we love it still. Is not that
=naïve=? Then, a consistent, scientific system is an impossibility. The
relations and interests in science are ever changing, always complex.
The thing would not continue for a decade to be satisfactory.
Another outcome of the naïve optimistic view, as realizing the
complexity of scientific specialization, is the doctrine that a simple,
practical system may be kept abreast of scientific progress by the
addition of new details. This elaboration of schedules is compatible
with what we term "expansion." Expansibility is essential to the
very life of a notation, but it may be overworked. Certain systems
have, I fear, expanded beyond the capacity of their safety valves to
save them from explosion. Thousands of the details of those inflated
schedules are practically useless even in the largest library. Such
abnormal distension of the bibliographical body, or hypertrophy of
its special parts, is not now for the first time called a disease of
the bibliothecal system. That the subjects and topics are innumerable
and of intricate complexity has led to the misconception that a
classification for libraries should embody an infinity of captions in
infinite complication. An alphabetical subject-index is believed to be
all that is requisite to operate this maze of entangled details. This
view may be termed the =subject-index illusion=.
Classification for libraries is to be distinguished on the one
hand from notation and on the other hand from an arrangement of
bibliographical subjects indexed. Notation and index are but
correlative to classification, and, however requisite to a practical
system, are in truth of minor importance. They are the fingers and the
feet of the body and brain that organize the materials of knowledge.
Yet it is these fingers and feet that have chiefly occupied the
attention of most classifiers.
In the theory of classification subjects are to be distinguished from
classes as contents from containers. The subject is that which is
denoted by its definition; the class is the aggregate of particular
things--books, or other things--that are comprised by the definition.
A class may be comprehensive of many subjects or aspects of subjects.
Such need not appear in the schedules of the classification, but they
should be in its subject-index. Thus, Botany is a subject, to which
Botanical Books is the corresponding class; Plant Physiology, a less
general subject, has a less comprehensive class of books. Geotropism
is a specific subject in the physiology of plants. The question
arises, is there a class of books and pamphlets treating especially
of this subject, the tendency of plants to respond to gravitation, as
a stimulus? "Have you in your library," I might ask individually of
the majority, "have you an aggregation of books on this subject?" The
A. L. A. List comes nearest in the sub-headings under Plants, where
with Movements appears Heliotropism, a kindred subject. This caption
Movements is for a veritable class of subjects, and it might indeed
comprise Geotropism. That is just what the Library of Congress schedule
does, subordinating under QK 771 "Movements, Irritability in plants,
(general)", the caption of 776, "Miscellaneous induced movements:
Geotropism, Heliotropism, etc." In my own classification, the mark GCM
goes with the caption, "Movements, Heliotropism, Geotropism, etc."
It seems well thus to provide for a future group of monographs. If I
criticise the Library of Congress classification today, or elsewhere,
be it remembered that I recognize its correct treatment of this and
thousands of other subjects. But is the E. C. justified in reaching
into the dim future for subdivisions of specialization such as its
NESGD, Diatropism, and NESGL, "Lateral Geotropism?" That is where we
must open the safety valve or burst.
The body of the D. C. is congested with thousands of names of persons,
places, and events which may be subjects, but hardly for classes of
books. Systematic schedules might provide for most of these, reduce the
bulk of the system, and make for economy and convenience. The L. C.
schedules suffer from similar but more astounding expansion. Class H,
Sociology and Economics, is needlessly immense, having 551 p., of which
but 51 are index. According to the principle laid down a moment ago,
the number of subjects in the index should by much =exceed= those in
the schedules.
The "Expansive" Seventh expansion expanded so much with its own
specialistic tissue that it could afford to omit such bulk of proper
and place names. For instance Aves (Birds), covers 8 pages of fine
print; there are all the taxonomic terms, for example, PGSLPI is for
Phalacrocoracidæ, some family related to the pelicans; but there
appears besides only the single subject Oology (eggs), at the end
as PGZ. No place under Birds for their structure, their habits,
for the popular bird-books, and for such interesting subjects as
their migration, flight, etc., about which there =are= books!
However much there is to interest, to commend, and to admire in this
great undertaking, it must be admitted that this is not practical
classification for libraries. It is the province of the subject-catalog
to bring together topics and titles which are too special for
classification to bring into collocation.
But let us return to the main question of the feasibility of =better=
classification. There are three answers, I said. Two we have
considered, the naïve, and the pessimistic, also their offspring, the
subject-index illusion, but we have not yet completely answered the
pessimistic. This we may now proceed to do in connection with the third
answer, which is optimistic and constructive, while at the same time
critical. This affirms that better classification is feasible, that it
may be sufficiently flexible and durable, that changes and adjustments
may be provided for in alternative and reserved locations, that the
notation may be quite simple, and that the index may be as full and
specific as comports with convenience.
The purpose of library classification is to group books and to
=collocate groups= for the convenience of readers and students in
their =average wants=. It is not so much for those who want a book,
whose author and subject are known, or any good book on a particular
subject; for such, the author and subject-catalogs may suffice. But
classification is for those who want books, in the plural, directly,
without preliminary handling of cards. Three types of such wants are to
be distinguished.
(1) To all libraries come (the prevalent type) those who wish a
few good books on the subject, or a few facts to be found in the
standard books. They do not care to fuss over the card-catalog.
The reference librarian, the selective lists, may serve such
wants, but close classification usually does so most economically
and most satisfactorily. For very specific subjects, however, the
subject-catalog in the large library may often best serve this type and
may make it less dependent upon free access and close classification.
(2) The second type wants all the good books treating of the subject
especially. From these the user himself is to make selection according
to his purpose or point of view. Free access and classification are
here requisite. A bibliography, if there be one, would be most likely
an _embarras de richesse_.
(3) The third type is that of exhaustive research: all the available
literature is wanted, not only the books and pamphlets treating
especially of the subject, but also those on related subjects and
those of broader scope. Subject-catalogs and bibliographies are
needed preliminaries, but access, continued access to the books, is
the desideratum. It is for this type that the most carefully guarded
libraries give access to their precious collections. Classification,
not merely any old kind of subject, or close classification, but good,
scientific, close classification, based upon good, consistent, broad
classification, is here of paramount importance. The test comes when
the student turns from the special to the more general and the related
subjects, which are mostly in related branches of science. The tendency
to organization in science is rapidly and surely growing. The more
consistent with the consensus, to which studies on the average are
adapted, however original and divergent their aim, the more convenient
will be the classification. It is in subordination of the specific to
the broader subject or class and in collocation of related subjects
and subdivisions of classes that most systems fail; and here that most
classifiers fail to understand either the fault or the remedy.
The difficulties emphasized by the pessimist, the overlapping
of studies and the rival claims, arise chiefly from improper
subordination. The material is common to the several sciences because
these are portions differentiated from larger fields. Child-psychology
is part of Psychology. The science and art of education are mainly
concerned with the mental. They are related to Physiology and to
Sociology as Psychology is related. But to place Education under
Sociology, as is done by the D. C. and the E. C. is to answer the
relation of second, not of first dependence, and is as false as it
were to put psychology under sociology, to put the cart before the
horse. Education and Psychology are working together, and their books
should be contiguous. How shall we arrange these practically? Well,
scientifically, in the order of generality, thus:
I Anthropology.
ID to IG Human physiology.
J Psychology.
JN Social psychology.
JO Child-psychology.
JP Education.
JQ Educational psychology.
K Sociology and Ethnology.
KA Sociology.
KE Ethnology.
L History.
The principles of consistent subordination and practical collocation
should guide the maker of a system, and his notes should guide the
classifier of books. Here indeed should be a "code for classifiers"
more intimately articulated than in a separate book. But herein lies
the practical art of classification, so to dispose classes, divisions,
and subdivisions, that they shall produce a relative minimum of
inconvenience under the average conditions of demand and a relative
maximum of collocation not only of special classes but of general, as
well as a degree of consistency as high as practical conditions permit,
and ultimately, as an ideal, a consistency not only with the pedagogic
but with the philosophic organization of knowledge. This ideal, I
believe, is not beyond approximate realization.
This critical but optimistic view ascribes the failure of library
classifications to the dispersion of related material under subject,
or close classification, without proper subordination and collocation.
The subject-index, however useful to classifiers, is of little value
to students. I approve close classification, but find it the more
unsatisfactory and baffling as it is the less consistently adapted to
good broad classification, with good articulation of related subjects
according to predominating interests, and with alternative locations
for flexibility to changes and for durability in the progress of
science.
III
Having answered the main question of feasibility, we may now take up
some minor practical questions, first Notation. It is not likely that
reason shall soon remove all traces of prejudice and controversy in
this matter. A few propositions, however, are so reasonable that I
think they will be accepted. Notation should be brief and simple. Its
simplicity depends upon its brevity, though also upon the familiarity
and homogeneity of its elements. Letters give brevity. The capacity
of three-letter notation, allowing for omission of all objectionable
combinations, is about 15,000. Using letters and figures together
increases this capacity to about 25,000, omitting confusing mixtures
such as K7G and 8B4. Since somewhat more than 10,000 subdivisions
seem requisite, the question reduces to this form: "Which is simpler,
notation of three letters, or of five figures?" But figures, it is
argued, are more familiar. They may be so to bookkeepers, but to the
keepers of books! Familiar here means familiar with the numbers of
the D. C. Then, are unmeaning combinations like DAL or GWK really
more meaningless than numbers like 13859? On the other hand, isn't
RAG easier to see and to remember? But the argument, so far as it
is not merely prejudiced, is childish. Such combinations as A1, 3B,
C42, and CF6, are hardly objectionable, and may prove convenient and
economical in class-notation as they do in the author numbers, with
which librarians are so friendly. Since they are come to stay, what is
the use of arguing for homogeneous notation?
Notation is the more systematic and economical where it reduces in
part to schedules applicable to the subdivision of many classes or
divisions. This feature appeared to a minor extent in the "form signs"
of the D. C., but was carried out extensively and complexly in the E.
C. It is apparent also in the L. C., but there is more conspicuous
by its absence through hundreds of pages of names of countries,
places, and persons. Time does not permit me to describe here the six
schedules that economize the system I have worked out: Schedule 1,
Mnemonic numerals, constant throughout; Schedule 2, for subdivision
by countries, applicable under subjects, where-ever desired; Schedule
3, for subdivisions under countries and localities; Schedule 4, for
subjects under any language, except the chief literary languages;
Schedule 5, for the chief literary languages; and Schedule 6, for
arranging the material under any prominent author.
Some who admit the feasibility of better classification object that
a classification modern for the present will be out of date in a
generation. This in new guise is the familiar argument that it is
useless to clean the house today, for it will need again to be cleaned
next week--which all good housewives say is an unreasonable argument.
It would be a pity to have fair librarianship called a slouch.
Is it conceivable that your books shall remain forever classified as
they are at present? Are there to be no changes, merely additions of
new captions? Conservatism is not strange, considering the cost of
changing notation; but that cost is small compared with the cost of
new building or new collections, and is justified by the service to
be rendered. The longer postponed, the larger the cost, the larger
the burden. Some libraries are changing now--to what? That change may
indeed have to be changed again in a decade or two. But how long,
then, should a classification endure--or rather, be endurable? One
who would not prophesy may nevertheless give an opinion. I believe
that a good classification should last a century--with some minor
alterations. I believe that a good library should be willing to
reclassify, if necessary, at least some of its collections two or
three times in a century. I think that library economy should have
been developed with better regard to this problem. It is not practical
to arrange books inconsistently with the scientific and pedagogic
organization of knowledge. Organization based on consensus is one
of the marked tendencies of modern thought and purpose, and is not
likely to be overcome by dissenting or disintegrating philosophical
counter-tendencies. This organization is more stable than the theories
on which it rests, and these are more stable than the popular press
would lead us to suppose. New theories, new statements, are assimilated
to the established body of knowledge without much dislocation of
members. Durability in a system would depend not only upon present
consistency with the organization of knowledge, but upon flexibility
through reserved and alternative locations, judiciously chosen with
regard to tendencies in science. There might be flaws and errors, but
all practice, in whatever profession is thus imperfect and tentative.
That the D. C. is antiquated is not because of any change in science,
but because it did not conform to the science of its generation. The
welcome accorded to it in the pioneer days was in keeping with the
earlier view that classification is a simple thing, as it indeed was
for the small popular libraries. That acceptance has mellowed now
into an affectionate companionship with a familiar and comfortable
conveyance that has proved serviceable so far. Now the thing is said to
need repair. But that it cannot economically be reconstructed has been
recently demonstrated. It evidently must go on till its thousand pieces
fall in a heap together, like the "wonderful one-hoss shay." Loading
it with more and more scientific luggage may for a time increase its
service, but the rattling of its parts grows all the more distressing
to those who ride.
I reserve my opinion of the Expansive Classification and of that of the
Library of Congress. It is to the point to say, however, that they are
as unsatisfactory in the major principles of practical and scientific
classification for libraries as they are valuable and admirable in
the details which they have elaborated. They should help to solve the
ultimate problem; but, if consistency with science and economy with
convenience are feasible and requisite, neither of these systems is
fit, nor is either, I think, likely to endure in general use in the
future.
The simpler, the more systematic, and the more consistent with the
organization of knowledge a classification and notation is, the more
economical and the less vexatious will be the operation of classifying
books. The subject, scope, treatment, purpose of the book--if that
could be stated beforehand--and why not?--by author and publisher,
and confirmed by the copyright office or the national library, then
the class-notation could in most cases be quickly found through
subject-index. That information might be printed in the book and more
readily found there than through centralized cataloging and service of
cards. Centralized or co-operative classifying however, or assigning
of subjects and of the class-marks of an elaborately classified
central or national library, would be a service of high value and
of very considerable economy. =But= it should be distinguished from
standardized classification. As libraries differ and differentiate, so
should their classifications. At best a system may serve for libraries
of a type, but not for all types. A university need not adopt an unfit
classification as more than one has done of recent years. It may
translate the centrally assigned subjects and class-marks into its own
system, through its own index. Some general conformity, or conformity
in special parts, may indeed prove economical and convenient, but
standardization of an elaborate system is progress in the wrong
direction.
This outline of a large, complex, and unsolved problem of paramount
importance is very inadequate. I would propose that a committee be
constituted, to articulate with the present committee on a code for
classifying, to set to work upon a fuller investigation of this
great question of the feasibility of better and more economical
classification and notation. If librarians do not provide better
classification for libraries, then the users of libraries will very
likely in the not remote future provide for better librarians.
In the subsequent discussion, opened by Dr. Richardson and by a paper
written by Mr. W. S. Merrill, chief classifier of the Newberry library,
Chicago, exception was taken to many of Mr. Bliss' criticisms of
present classifications. It was pointed out that the D. C., with all
its faults, was yet eminently practical, as evidenced by its widespread
use. Mr. Cutter stated that the E. C. classification for zoology,
which Mr. Bliss had specially criticised, had been made in just the
way Mr. Bliss himself regarded as the soundest, i. e., it had been
condensed from material furnished by an eminent scientist; as to its
being over minute, it was expanded only half as much as the scientist
had proposed. Mr. Charles Martel, chief of the catalog division in the
Library of Congress, Dr. Andrews, librarian of the John Crerar library,
Chicago, and others also expressed their belief in close classification
as a safeguard against confusion and unscientific grouping.
Only a few minutes remained for a paper on "Art in the college
library," by Mr. FRANK WEITENKAMPF, chief of the art department, New
York public library.
ART IN THE COLLEGE LIBRARY
The problem of art in schools has been frequently discussed. The matter
of art in colleges, apparently, has not been so much considered. The
cases, however, seem to be dissimilar only in degree, not in kind.
In fact, not a little of the material that has been suggested for
schoolroom decoration would be equally in place in the college. For
instance, names such as those of Gozzoli or Luca della Robbia, on the
=Craftsman's= list for schools could just as well be suggested for the
college. Also, the average student is probably first to be reached
best by recognition of the fact that there are other interests beside
the purely aesthetic. In other words, good use can be made of the
subject picture, the best possible being chosen. Dr. W. D. Johnston,
librarian of Columbia University, where exhibitions "have always been
an important auxiliary of lectures" and have included exhibitions of
graphic arts, states that these last "are selected and displayed less
with a view to artistic than pictorial value." But he adds that more
and more attention is given to artistic value, and that in his belief
the most valuable exhibits of an artistic nature are those "displayed
permanently on the walls of halls, seminar rooms and lecture rooms. On
the other hand, those which are exhibited temporarily should, if well
selected, and well announced, do much to broaden taste."
The permanent display of pictures which illustrate with distinction
certain broad principles of taste, is of undoubted necessity. But
the use of the temporary show must not be lost sight of. The oft
seen easily becomes the oft unheeded; familiarity breeds contempt.
Periodical changes therefore seem advisable, as evidence that there
is "something doing." Loans of good prints from private sources, if
advisable, might be utilized to excellent effect. For instance, if the
library happens to own, or can borrow, a copy of such a publication
of color reproductions as the Medici prints, or "Meister der Farbe"
or "Alte Meister" (the latter two issued by Seemann of Leipzig),
a number of plates from the same might be placed on exhibition
for, say, three months. This might be followed by a six-weeks'
black-and-white show of good etchings from a private collection, or
from the stock of the nearest museum or print dealer. After that,
perhaps, a show of Greek art. The guiding principles should be: Keep
the exhibit within reasonable bounds as to numbers, make selection
with as much discrimination as circumstances will permit, and see
that what you offer is made palatable. Dr. E. C. Richardson of the
Princeton University library tells me that there a large collection
of art photographs is drawn upon for permanent exhibition, the latter
rearranged "every now and then" in order to exhibit fresh material, and
that there have been a number of special exhibitions. (Incidentally,
this university has a great variety of undergraduate courses in art.)
The matter of proper presentation is important. Not what is seen, but
what is digested, counts. Good labels are a necessity; summary, with as
little dryness as possible, informative, so that the student may see at
a glance why a given picture was shown, and what are its good points.
If relation to studies can be brought out in these exhibits, all the
better. That naturally suggests the possibility of an occasional
display of pictures illustrating a given period or personality in a
given country. In the recently-printed little volume, "Art museums
and schools," containing four lectures by Stockton Oxson, Kenyon Cox,
Stanley Hall and Oliver S. Tonks, the significance of the museum to
teachers of English, art, history and the classics is considered, and
the documentary value of art is properly emphasized. "In order to
teach the classics," says Prof. Tonks, "you must know more of ancient
life than is to be gleaned from the literature by itself." Viewed in
this light, the old Greek vases and other art objects take on a new
significance. But the ultimate object of all this must not be lost
to sight, the cultural influence sought, the promotion of interest
in art as a matter not apart from, but a part of, our daily life, a
contribution to general culture. It is well to make it clear that a
certain amount of appreciation of art can become as much a matter
of course as certain elementary rules of good breeding. "Art," says
Croly, in his "Promise of American life,"--"art cannot become a power
in a community unless many of its members are possessed of a native
and innocent love of beautiful things." These considerations, again,
suggest the occasional exhibiting of plates illustrating decorative
and applied art, say color plates such as those in Wenzel's "Modern
decorative art," or "Dekorative Vorbilder," or similar books, if
procurable, or black-and-white plates from books or art magazines. A
judicious use of the library's books is advisable, not through lengthy
lists in which the bibliographical instincts of the librarian might
find vent. Reference to two or three books on a subject--whetting
the appetite by displaying them at the same time as the plates
exhibited--may lead to an occasional reading at spare moments. It may
help also to show the fallacy of the "I don't know anything of art,
but I know just what I like" attitude. You can not understand anything
worth understanding without some trouble, any more than you can play
football or bridge without some practice.
The matter of hanging must depend, naturally, on local conditions:
amount and distribution and shape and location of available wall
space or other space, financial resources, character of student body,
etc. The simplest method is, of course, to suspend the pictures by
clips from horizontal wires, but it is not under all circumstances
the safest. Pictures may be fastened to a wooden background (usually
covered with burlap or other textile) on the wall. In that case, care
must of course be taken that thumb-tacks do not pass through the print.
The shank of the tack passes close to the picture upon the outermost
margin of which its head will then press. Mr. E. R. Smith of the Avery
library at Columbia University, lays strips of bristol board over the
spaces between the pictures, and overlapping the margins of the same;
the tacks pass through these strips. Pictures fastened to the wall
may be covered by sheets of glass held in place by strong tacks, or
perhaps the brass-headed upholsterers' nails. Where prints are shown
unprotected it may prove well to mount them, unless they are printed
on thick and strong paper. (At the Newark library they use mounting
board bound at the edge with buckram and further strengthened by
pigskin corners; this is for prints which circulate among teachers.)
Where frames are used with the intention of periodical or occasional
change of exhibits, the back can be held by the familiar "button"
device which can be easily swung aside so as to admit of changing the
picture without extracting nails. Mr. Paul Brockett of the Smithsonian
Institution, tells me that there the glass doors of bookcases have been
used for exhibiting pictures. At the same place, wing frames--that
space-saving device of a dozen frames with glass centered on a
standard, and having a certain swing in either direction--have been
used. Moreover, these frames were units which could be hung on the
standard or placed against the wall. In some of the New York public
library's branches, such frames radiate directly from the wall, to save
space. A similar device is seen in a certain type of display fixtures,
in which the swinging frames reach to the floor, and which may be seen
in operation in the lithographic exhibition of Fuchs & Lang, Warren
St., New York City. There is no protecting glass here, however, and
I presume that the use of this contrivance would be safe only in
exceptional cases. Hints to exhibitors may be found in articles such as
the one on "Mounting, framing and hanging pictures," by Miss Mabel J.
Chase, assistant supervisor of drawing, Newark, N. J., in the =School
Arts Magazine= for December, 1912, or in one on "Planning and mounting
an exhibit" in the number for March, 1913, by George W. Eggers, who
lays stress on the fact that "Every exhibit should definitely tell
something." Still continuing the examination of this magazine, one
notes in the issue of April, 1913, an article on the "Decoration of an
assembly hall in R. C. Ingraham Grammar school, New Bedford, Mass."
That relates to a permanent exhibit, and describes the distribution of
pictures and other objects in such a manner as to make a harmonious
arrangement of the whole room. But there are other periodicals, and
there are readers' guides and other indexes and bibliographical aids,
and this is not the place for lists.
Now, as to the material to be used for the exhibition. Outside of
the resources offered by the library's own collection and the loan
possibilities indicated, there are various dealers and other agencies
to be taken into account. In the state of New York for instance,
the division of Visual Instruction of the Education department has
a circulating collection of pictures furnishing ample material for
educational extension lectures and for study clubs. This consists
of "Braun, Elson, Hanfstängel and Hegger carbons, Copley prints and
bromides and Berlin photogravures." These wall-pictures are lent to
schools and libraries, framed without glass, for a fee of 50 cents each
per year. In other states, I presume state library commissions could
give advice. There are the artistic lithographic drawings in color
issued by B. G. Teubner of Leipzig at five and six marks apiece, the
plates of Seemann's "Meister der Farbe" can be purchased separately,
and dealers such as the Berlin Photographic Co., George Busse, the
Detroit Publishing Co., Braun Clement & Co. and others could no doubt
give lists and advice. Importing book-dealers, French and German, must
be considered. Not all of the material furnished by these concerns is
equally cheap, but a certain amount of the higher-priced sort will
serve for permanent exhibit.
Part 6, devoted to the art department, in John Cotton Dana's "Modern
American library economy," is a very useful guide, not only in
its record of accomplishment at Newark, but also in its hints as
to sources, its list of addresses. Miss Ethelred Abbot's "List of
photograph dealers" (Massachusetts Library Club, 1907) is properly
emphasized for its usefulness, as is also the "Bibliotheca pædagogica."
For permanent exhibits the reproductions of certain examples in
architecture, painting and sculpture which have become classical, are
of obvious value. And here, too, the reason for inclusion may well
be emphasized to the student, not only by proper labels but also by
reference at the proper time in the classroom and lecture hall. Such
classics in art will not infrequently be found reproduced better in
black-and-white than in color. Should the library decide to procure
color work by modern artists, such as the Teubner prints referred
to, or the similar ones issued by Voigtländer or by the Künstlerbund
of Karlsruhe, care must be taken to select such as are of general,
and not merely local, interest. Say for example, the well known
"Field of grain" by Volkmann. Such modern work also has the advantage
of emphasizing the fact that there is work worth while being done
today. It likewise shows the healthy tendency to enlarge acquaintance
with home production, home scenery, home customs. We find that, for
instance, in Germany, in Sweden, to a certain extent in England, and
elsewhere. Much of the foreign endeavor in this direction has found
its use in schools, but it involves some big principles in point of
view which make a certain amount of its results of use in the college
as well. But we should similarly pay attention to the best American
work. Noteworthy attempts by American artists to interpret American
life and the beauties of our scenery deserve support. One notes with
interest the attempt made by the American Federation of Arts' Committee
on Art in the Public Schools to call attention to American examples in
the fine arts by calling for an expression of opinion as to the best
works produced by our artists. T. W. Stevens reported that the Chicago
Institution, furthering the utilization of students' work in the
decoration of public school walls, "encouraged the adoption of subject
pictures for decoration; especially subjects in American history."
The help of the art department, where the college has one, may well
be enlisted. (Parenthetically let me state that E. Baldwin Smith in
his recent report on "The study of the history of art in the colleges
and universities of the United States," Princeton, 1911, summarizes
his statistics in the statement that of 1,000,000 students, 163,000
have any art courses at all offered them.) Not only have we such rich
collections as those of the Avery Architectural library at Columbia,
the Fogg Museum at Harvard, or Yale University, but collections of
casts, photographs and books will be found at the disposal of the art
departments of a number of other colleges. Such resources might be
drawn upon so that some modicum, at least, of art influence may be
extended to the rest of the institution. If the direct co-operation of
the art department is secured it must necessarily be adapted to the
needs of the case with a clear understanding of the fact that general
students, and not art students, are to be served. The statement of
Dr. Leigh H. Hunt, associate professor of art at the College of the
City of New York is of interest here. His 6,000 boys, says he, would
like to begin with the human face. They do not necessarily lean to the
saccharine, but perceive human interest shown without the aid of the
direct anecdote. They stand Memling and Ghirlandajo. "The boys love
color," he continues, "and are easily led to love refined color. They
admire the early English water colorists--Cox, DeWint; also, Japanese
prints." After becoming interested in such refined color, they get a
liking for monochromes--delft blue landscapes, sanguines and sepia
drawings.
Efforts such as those I have indicated seem particularly called for
where the college is away from art influences. But they should not
be put aside even where the college is located in a larger center
with an art life. Rather should the resources near at hand be turned
to advantage. I have seen the statement that over 30 per cent of our
museums are connected with educational institutions. Also, in a large
city, there are numerous art exhibitions, most varied in character. But
the very extent of all these opportunities may serve to keep away the
student who has so many other duties and attractions. And, as Prof.
Hunt points out, boys living at one end of a large city not only whirl
past all such possibilities on their way to college, but in New York,
using the subway, they pass under it and not through it. What is wanted
is the direct, unavoidable presentation of art to those who are not yet
sufficiently interested to seek art for themselves.
In the whole matter the ever-necessary exercise of common sense
is commendable. Enthusiasm for the cause must be moderated and
adapted to the point of view of the student. The didactic element
should be unobtrusive. The student should be interested rather than
admonished. Above all he should be led to see that a certain love
and appreciation of art is not a "highbrow" affair but a proper,
necessary and pleasure-giving part of the equipment of the cultured
man. As proper and a matter of course as the avoidance of a necktie
of shrieking colors, or as the use of the table knife for cutting
only. Farther discussion of this subject, as well as decision as to
the practicability of the ideas advanced, must be left to those who
have a more intimate acquaintance with the problems, conditions and
difficulties involved than can be had by one who has to deal with the
readers in a large public library.
Mr. Goodrich called attention to the library of the University of
Michigan as one place where ideas like those of the paper had been
carried out, made a plea for color prints as against the everlasting
black and brown, and suggested the possibilities of pottery and
textiles in the way of giving life and cheer to the delivery hall. He
referred by way of example to the beautiful drapery curtains in the
John Hay library reading room--a vast relief from the ordinary roller
shade and just as effectual.
At the end of the session, the nominating committee brought in the
name of Mr. W. N. C. Carlton, librarian of the Newberry library, to
succeed Mr. Keogh on the committee on arrangements; Mr. Carlton was
unanimously elected. His term will be three years; the other members
of the committee, Miss Askew and Mr. Goodrich, remain the same as this
year. The session then adjourned until Friday night.
COLLEGE LIBRARIANS' ROUND TABLE
The round table for college librarians was held on Friday evening, June
27th. F. C. Hicks, of Columbia university, presiding.
Miss JOSEPHINE A. RATHBONE, of the Pratt Institute school of library
science gave a talk on
WHAT COLLEGE LIBRARIANS CAN DO FOR LIBRARY SCHOOLS
In a recent lecture on administrative problems of the college library
given to the students of the Pratt Institute library school the
lecturer pictured the ideal college library of the future, with a
staff consisting of specialists, each with a knowledge of his subject
equal to that of instructors or professors plus a library school
training, whose recompense should be on the same scale as that for
the teaching of those subjects. I remarked afterward that before that
vision could come to pass the college librarians should have to act as
feeders for the library schools, turning toward librarianship promising
material from which the library schools could make the college library
specialist of tomorrow. Hence this paper.
There has been a good deal of discussion in the Professional Training
section about specialization in library schools--the desirability of
having special courses to prepare librarians for technical libraries,
for professional libraries, for legislative reference libraries,
etc., etc., but I am convinced--and my conviction deepens with my
increasing experience--that the time for specialization is before the
library school course and not during it. Theoretically it does not seem
possible that the same library course should be able to fit students
for such different lines as children's work, municipal reference
work, cataloging, branch library work, the scientific department of a
university library, a botanical garden library, and the librarianship
of a town library, but actually that is just what happens; recent
graduates of our school are filling just such positions and each one
found that her library training plus her previous education, experience
and temperament enabled her to fill the special position satisfactorily.
Now what the college librarian can do for the library school and
hence for the library profession, is, it seems to me, to make it
known among college students that there are opportunities for the
specialist in library work--to disabuse the mind of the man or woman
who wants to pursue economics or sociology or some branch of science
of the idea--almost a fixed idea it would seem--that a specialist in
order to continue in his specialty must necessarily teach it, that
teaching offers the only pied a terre, the only means of support for
the student. Students of sociology and government are beginning to find
their way into organized welfare work, it is true, but library work
should be presented to them as a means of social service, of at least
equal importance with settlement work or organized charity. That it
could be so presented I am confident, and by whom if not by or through
the agency of the college librarian?
Schools and colleges are devoting an increasing amount of attention to
vocational guidance. Will not college librarians make a point of seeing
that the possibilities and diversified opportunities of librarianship
are presented to the students each year? If they do not care to do this
themselves, librarians or members of library school faculties might be
found in the vicinity who would be glad to do it.
Once the subject of librarianship is presented to the student and
the desirability of entering upon the work through the gateway of
library school training is pointed out (I assume that no time need
be spent arguing this point--but if I am wrong I shall be glad to
discuss the matter with any dissenters later), the college librarian
can further the cause by being prepared to advise students as to
their choice of a library school. The college librarian should supply
himself with the circulars of the several schools and should inform
himself concerning the reputation, advantages, requirements, and
specialties of the different schools. We all agree that there is no
one best library school (except our own), but that each of them offer
special opportunities that make them adapted to the particular needs
of different students. To direct the inquirer to that school that
will best fit him for the particular kind of work he inclines toward
would be to serve the profession, the schools, the colleges, and the
individual student. Will not the college librarian take this function
upon himself and enrich the profession not only with the quiet bookish
student who will develop into the old-fashioned librarian for whom
there is still room, but with the specialist, the executive, the
vigorous and enthusiastic altruist who wants to serve the world by
positive, constructive, social work?
The following paper, prepared by Mr. ROBERT S. FLETCHER, librarian of
Amherst College, was read by Mr. N. L. Goodrich, of Dartmouth:
THE COLLEGE LIBRARY AND RESEARCH WORK
There was published in 1912 a "Union List of Collections on
European History in American Libraries, compiled for the Committee
on Bibliography of the American Historical Association by E. C.
Richardson, Chairman."
In the preface to this exceedingly valuable work occurs the following
extract from the Report of the Committee, December, 1911:
"It is clear from this situation that no library is
self-sufficient--even Harvard lacking 930 sets, and all but 12 lacking
on the average of 2,153 out of 2,197 works. Even as good colleges as
Amherst and Williams, having but 26 and 17 respectively, lack 2,171
and 2,180 respectively out of 2,197, while probably 700 of the 786
institutions doing work of college grade in the United States are worse
off than these."
I need hardly say that this is merely a statement of fact and in no
sense a criticism or arraignment of any library mentioned or implied.
Furthermore, it is undoubtedly true that analysis and reflection
will render this statement much less startling than it appears at
first glance. Whether we can explain and account for it to our entire
satisfaction is a question which seems to me rather doubtful. Let me
quote a little more from this same source:
"The most significant fact of the statistics of last year remains,
however, substantially unchanged--the fact that only ten or a dozen
libraries have as many as 10 per cent of the collections, and that out
of 786 institutions which profess to do work of college grade, only
about fifty libraries have as much as 1 per cent. The actual situation
is even much worse than appears from the figures, since two or three
inexpensive volumes of illustrative source books for classroom use are
in the list through inadvertence, and undoubtedly swell the record of
the minor institutions. It is safe to say that a majority even of the
institutions included in the Babcock list have less than one-tenth of
1 per cent of these sets, and yet these are titles which have been
gathered from actual references and are the books which are liable to
meet any men engaged in historical research at every turn."
If we assume that research work belongs only to the university--that it
has no place in the college--we may dismiss these figures as possessing
no significance for us, save as they throw some light on the inferior
quality of the collections built up by most of our American libraries.
If on the other hand we believe that the smaller institution should
encourage its teachers to do research work, and should, so far as its
resources allow, provide the facilities for such work, then I believe
that a study of the conditions responsible for the situation set forth
in the Committee's report cannot fail to be of some value. And while I
hold no brief for the research worker I am strongly of the opinion that
the college which does encourage original research can not but gain a
higher quality of teaching, and at the same time acquire a collection
of books which, if not notable, shall be at least thoroughly good.
It may be claimed, and in that case must be granted, that such a
question as this is practically an academic one, and so pretty largely
outside of the librarian's province. That is true, however, only
so long as you leave the question unanswered--or answer it in the
negative. An affirmative answer would bring the matter home directly
to every college librarian in the country. The college which believes
in research and encourages its faculty to do it, must have a librarian
not only in sympathy with the movement, but one skillful in finding
ways and means to make it a success, since in most cases the funds
at our disposal for the purchase of books would seem to preclude the
possibility of such a thing.
Before going further into the discussion of this phase of the question,
let me return for a moment to the report from which I quoted. One or
two conclusions may justly be drawn from the figures therein presented.
In the first place I think we may safely infer that the situation as
regards History, so strikingly set forth, is repeated, and probably
in an even worse form, in all the other departments of knowledge.
Certainly we should not expect a library which was so weak in the
research material of History, to be any stronger in Philology or the
Sciences, or in Philosophy and Economics.
The second conclusion follows naturally from this, that the average
college library--for it is with the college library that this paper
concerns itself--has built up its collection with practically no
emphasis on the acquisition of such material.
To say that this general condition exists solely because of the lack of
funds is to my mind neither a real explanation, nor a real excuse. It
exists primarily because there has never been any pressure from members
of the faculty to bring about a different condition.
If we seek a reason for it we shall find it in the fact that
research work has by tacit consent been left almost entirely to the
university. Its place there--its vital importance in the university
scheme of work--has never been questioned. Making all allowance for
the difference in conditions I still cannot see why a thing that is
confessedly of so much benefit to the university should not also be of
help to the college. At the risk of getting a little off the track,
and for the sake of making what I mean as plain as possible, it seems
necessary to devote some space to a definition of the term research
work. I am writing, of course, from the standpoint of an outsider, who
expresses a purely personal opinion on a subject which interests him.
There can be no hard and fast definition of such a term as this--at
least not from a librarian.
I shall suppose then, that research work is of two kinds, both
important, but one of them much more important than the other. The
first and most common kind is that ordinarily done by the graduate
student in the university. It is the gathering of material--the
collection of information on some particular phase of some particular
subject--and is not only of value in itself, but when taken together
with the work done by other students along related lines becomes
part of the structure on which scholarship is built. We may call it
analytical research work. The other kind is that done by the man of
clear vision and wide outlook, mature enough to see that the analytical
work is merely material for a bigger thing--call it what you will--the
man who can take the information others have collected and impart
it in the form of culture. This is synthetic research work. Now the
university has much of the former, some of the latter. The college has
need only of the synthetic. If its place in the educational world is
to be permanent, its contribution to education must be cultural. The
type of teacher it needs, and I believe must have, is the man who has
done, or is capable of doing, synthetic research work. In his hands
teaching takes on a vitality, a spontaneity, a genuineness that no one
else can give it. That the book collection of the average college would
be sufficient for the needs of men like this is out of the question.
There would inevitably arise a demand for the purchase of works of
an entirely different kind--a demand that would have to be at least
partially met. This demand would be for research material, by which I
mean the results of research work, and the problem of such a college
library would become a problem in discrimination--the decision as to
what of this material it should try to obtain.
It ought not to be difficult to draw a clear distinction between
analytical and synthetic research material. Illustrations of the first
will readily occur to you, one as good as any being the usual thesis
submitted for the doctor's degree. All "source" material is necessarily
analytical--is the result of a careful, painstaking, often laborious
search for information: information that may illuminate some dark
corner of the field of knowledge. But it is never itself illumined by
the spark of genius, nor wrought by the loving hand of the artist. It
is merely the wood and the stone out of which a complete structure may
some day arise.
Now how does the synthetic conception of research apply to History?
A modern German writer has compressed the whole significance of it
into a sentence: "The writing of History," he says, "is just as truly
a =will toward a picture= as it is a knowledge of sources." In other
words synthesis of the kind referred to is always the work of the
artist, and in the nature of things becomes thereby a contribution to
culture. Gibbon's "Decline and fall of the Roman empire," Lamprecht's
"History of Germany," Rhodes' "History of the United States"--these
are all synthetic: each one existed first as a picture in the mind of
the artist, not merely as an array of sources from which the facts of
history might be drawn.
"But," you say, "all libraries buy these books and others like them
as a matter of course." Yes, we do, but I think the trouble is that
we do not make books of this sort our standard, if indeed we have any
standard beyond a favorable review or a request from a patron. It is no
more true that the result of all synthetic research is cultural than
that the result of all artistic endeavor is beautiful. Results here are
just as uneven as anywhere else, with much that is good and perhaps
even more that is bad, and it is when we come to discriminate that we
are apt to go astray. Now a teacher such as I have in mind would keep
abreast through the better periodicals of all that was being done in
his particular line, and if facilities were furnished, would buy what
he knew he needed--monographs, bibliographies, biographies, and some
larger works--things that would not only give his teaching a vitality
and freshness otherwise lacking, but would help to hasten the day when
his own contribution to the world's culture should see the light.
Assuming, then, that a college accepts this view, and proposes to
encourage its faculty to do research work, what are the practical ways
in which the library can not only co-operate, but further such an
undertaking? For I believe there are several. A preliminary statement
as to the functions of the college library would seem to be essential.
These have often been set forth for us in detail, and I shall only
enumerate them here. The first and most important function is, of
course, to meet the needs of the students and teachers as they arise
in the regular college work. Along with this is the supplying of books
for general reading, outside of the curriculum. Most of these books
are bought for members of the faculty, who are thereby enabled to keep
in touch with the latest developments in their own and other fields,
and to avoid the possibility of mental stagnation from too close
association with a particular subject. I believe much more might--and
should--be done in the way of developing a taste for general reading on
the part of the students, but that is another story.
Apart from these what are the functions of the college library? To be,
so far as it can the centre of culture for the community in which it
is located: to aid the local public library in its work with woman's
clubs, and high school pupils: to lend books freely to other libraries.
And in our own case there is the added opportunity of being of some
assistance to another institution in the same town.
Now these things are all important, and the librarian who does not
realize it, who fails to utilize to the utmost the possibilities
they contain for intellectual and social betterment, is not worthy
of his hire. But the point of view I take in this article compels me
to consider them as secondary. The college library exists first of
all to supply the book needs of its own students and faculty, and for
nothing else. The expenditure of its funds, always insufficient, must
be limited to this chief function. It is probable that all these other
things I have enumerated can be done without any financial loss to the
library, but where any of them means a diversion of library funds it
becomes unjustifiable.
I said above that there are several practical ways in which a
library--more properly, perhaps, a librarian--can not only co-operate,
but further a movement to encourage research work on the part of
members of the faculty. My remarks are of necessity limited to my
observation of conditions in the institution with which I am connected,
and are not to be considered general in their application. At the same
time, I am inclined to think that these conditions are reproduced, at
least to a certain extent, in most college libraries.
The assistance which the library can render must, of course, be very
largely financial. Only by releasing funds from present uses, or
by increasing these funds, can we hope to buy material of the kind
referred to.
I am convinced, in the first place, that we can save money in the
purchase of books, and this not through better discounts, or any
choice of agents, but through more care in the selection of the books
themselves. In other words, submit all lists of proposed purchases to a
more rigid scrutiny. Make all titles answer such questions as "Is this
book going to be of real value to this library?" "Is its usefulness to
be more or less permanent, or merely temporary?" "Could not our need
for it be met by borrowing from another library?"
In our own case, at least, I fear a number of books are recommended
by professors or others, and bought by the library, which could not
survive any such test. This naturally applies not so much to department
books as to those of a general nature, for in the last analysis the
teacher must be the judge of what he needs to help him in his work.
Secondly, we ought to save money--I think a considerable sum--on our
periodicals. And here the saving effected by dropping some from the
list is a double one; not only the subscription price, but the cost
of binding. I realize that I am treading on dangerous ground in this
matter, and that most professors would say to drop all the books if
necessary, but none of the periodicals. And I could wish for enough
space to elaborate my side of the question at some length, instead
of touching on it only briefly. For I believe it to be of real
importance--a thing that every college library must face and decide
at some time or other. Here at Amherst we spent last year over 40
per cent of the income from our book funds on periodicals and their
binding--a proportion which I cannot believe to be justified. Is
there not such a thing as a "periodical" habit, into which all of us,
librarians and professors alike, are apt to fall? We keep periodicals
on our lists because they have always been there--were there before
we came--although on reflection we are sure that no one ever uses
them--not even the professor at whose instance they were ordered. In
the first place, of course, he =expects= to use them, sometime if not
now. Or he is sure that he =ought= to--that they would give him just
the impetus he needs in his work. Or perhaps (and I should whisper
this) he likes to have it known that the department is taking these
things "couldn't get along without them." Now the periodical that
cannot prove its right--in terms of usefulness--to be on the shelves
of a college library has no place there. And the significance of this
for us is the fact that in being there it is keeping something else
out! What we spend for it, and for others like it, would enable us to
make at least a beginning on the acquisition of our synthetic research
material.
These are two of the ways in which it seems to me a librarian in
sympathy with this movement could further it. Another, possibly worth
mentioning, is to refrain from binding miscellaneous pamphlets and
other unbound material, mostly presented to the library, and which we
are apt to think may some day serve a purpose. Part of it may--most of
it can well be thrown away and the binding money saved.
"But," you say, "even in the aggregate these things do not mean very
much; perhaps one or two hundred dollars at the outside--one or two
or three research collections a year for your library." No, they do
not mean very much, by themselves, or in the purchasing power of
money they are instrumental in saving. But they stand for something
definite and logical; they are indicative of a determination on the
part of an institution to get men of a certain type for its faculty,
and to provide them with facilities for doing the broadest and biggest
work possible. I may be mistaken, but I am inclined to think such an
institution could find more money as it needed more. And the librarian
skillful in discovering ways and means would not be contented with his
yearly appropriations, but would succeed in interesting trustees and
friends of the college to a point where interest would be translated
into deeds.
Now there is, of course, another side to all this, and we should be
short-sighted indeed not to recognize it. The college library which
spent any considerable share of its funds for research material which
really belongs only in the university library would have no means
whatever of justifying itself--would be worse off than an institution
which had no research material whatever. How may we guard against this
danger? I must take it for granted that the sort of teacher I have
been considering would choose his research material wisely and with
the right perspective. In case he failed to do this I should expect
the librarian to tell him so. And back of the librarian should be a
real library committee; so constituted as to represent the different
departments as fairly as possible; having charge of the allotment
of book funds; advising and helping the librarian in the shaping of
the library's policy; the court of last resort when an expensive and
somewhat doubtful set was being considered--I can conceive of such a
committee as being one of the greatest factors in the success of this
whole undertaking. Let at least two types of teachers be selected for
it. The one a man whose chief interest centers in the personal and
human side of his students; who puts them first to the extent that his
work is with them rather than with books or scholarly endeavor. The
other the man I have defined as the synthetic research worker, broad
in his sympathies toward his students, but a man who realizes both the
need of the age for culture, and his own ability to contribute to it
something worth while. By a fusion of such types as these the rights of
all would be conserved--the needs of all met so far as possible.
Just a word more by way of summary and I shall be through.
I believe the book collection of the average college library is much
below what it might be in point of quality. A possible way of changing
this situation for the better is to encourage members of the faculty
to do research work. This would also result in a higher standard of
teaching--or so at least all the teachers with whom I have talked
assure me. It is not necessary to assume that research is essential to
scholarship, but merely that it adds something to a man's efficiency
and power that can be gotten in no other way. The college librarian, if
he cares to, can play an important part in bringing these things about.
You will doubtless find this scheme--represented here only in
outline--rather idealistic, but so, I take it, are all educational
schemes. I can only hope that you will find also some soundness in
its theory--some small addition to the constructive criticism of a
condition which I believe to be fundamentally wrong.
Miss MINNIE E. SEARS, head cataloger of the University of Minnesota
library, presented a paper on
CATALOGING FOR DEPARTMENT LIBRARIES
Before beginning the discussion of cataloging for department libraries,
let me say that as it is a subject which is still in the experimental
stage and not yet capable of generalization, the statements made in
this paper are based, partly upon information collected from certain
university libraries in which this problem is now being worked out, and
partly on my own experience in organizing the department catalogs of
the University of Minnesota. The other libraries quoted are those of
the University of Chicago, Columbia, Illinois, Johns Hopkins, Michigan,
Missouri and Wisconsin.
In considering the problem of cataloging for department libraries,
we may start with a definition and an assumption. For the purpose
of this discussion it may be said that a department library is not
a mere handful of reference books on a subject, but a more or less
comprehensive collection of books on the subject shelved and used
separately from the collections of the main library; and it may be
assumed that the necessity for a separate catalog of such a collection
is admitted by all.
Assuming this, the first question that presents itself is that of the
form of the department catalog. Shall it be an author, a classed or a
dictionary catalog, or, since in most cases the department library is
a small open-shelf collection, will it suffice to have a shelf-list
only, serving also as a classed catalog? The shelf-list would offer the
simplest and cheapest solution of the difficulty, but the day when it
was accepted as a solution of the entire problem has passed. Not one
of the libraries consulted suggests the shelf-list alone as a possible
arrangement. An author catalog, at least, is needed in addition, and
the majority of these libraries report dictionary catalogs in some
of the department libraries, if not in all. Chicago University is to
provide for the department libraries outside of Harper building an
author catalog and a shelf-list, where printed cards are available,
and an author catalog only for the department libraries within Harper
building. Columbia, Michigan, Illinois and Minnesota have dictionary
catalogs for all department libraries. Missouri has dictionary catalogs
in 3, and Wisconsin in 2 department libraries, while Johns Hopkins
is to have dictionary catalogs in all department libraries which are
outside its main building.
A more difficult question is that of the scope of the catalog. How
exhaustive is it possible, or even desirable, to make it? It must, of
course, include all books in the department library itself, but shall
it also record all books dealing with the same subject to be found
elsewhere in the university? Such completeness of record would be
the ideal arrangement, and would, undoubtedly, meet with the hearty
approval of the university departments. But will not the cost be
prohibitive to many libraries, even in this day of printed cards and
multigraph? To be of value, such elaborate cataloging should be done
thoroughly and systematically and above all, once undertaken, should
never be allowed to lapse, or confusion will be the result. The fuller
information about related materials in other parts of the library can
always be obtained from the main library catalog, if that record is a
union catalog of department libraries as well; and if the department
librarian is in telephone communication with the reference librarian
at the main library, the information can be obtained almost as quickly
as if it were included in the department catalog. We may, therefore,
conclude that the department catalog complete for its own library
but not including related material in other libraries, is the most
practicable form under present conditions, although the ideal form is
the more complete catalog which expense at present generally prohibits.
The third point which our problem raises is that of variations in
cataloging from the rules followed in the general library catalog. The
first important variation which suggests itself as possible is in the
treatment of analytics. Shall analytics be included in the department
catalog, and if so, shall they be the same as those in the general
catalog? On this point the practice of our eight libraries varies
somewhat. Chicago University is not planning to include any analytics
in its department catalogs, and Johns Hopkins includes only a few.
Illinois, Michigan and Minnesota, in the main, duplicate for their
department catalogs the analytics made for their main catalogs and, as
a rule, include no additional analytics. The Columbia practice is more
ambitious, as that library includes in its department catalog analytics
(mainly articles in periodicals) which are not included in its general
catalog. An article in the =Columbia University Quarterly= for March,
1911, states that the department catalogs have analytics for all
important serials that bear upon the work of the departments whether
shelved there or in the general library, that is, the department
library catalog attempts to serve both as catalog and index. These
cards are intended for temporary use only, to be removed when the
demand for them ceases.
In most university libraries it would be impossible to keep up
systematically such elaborate catalogs, and it is not clear that such
indexing--for it is indexing rather than cataloging--would be desirable
in all places. A catalog can never be made to take the place of a
reference librarian, or of an intelligent use of the important annual
and other subject indexes to the literature of a subject, such as
=Psychological Index=, the various =Jahresberichte=, etc. Moreover,
every reference or department librarian naturally does more or less
in the way of keeping up card indexes or bibliographies, which are
frequently revised and the old material discarded as new and better
material takes its place. Such reference indexes are simpler and more
practical than serial analytics in a department catalog, since they
do not call for expert revision and absolute uniformity of subject
headings. On the whole, the tendency of present opinion and practice
seems to be that important analytics which are useful in the general
catalog are useful in the department catalog also, but that beyond
that it is better to encourage the use of the printed indexes and the
keeping of an informal reference index for material not yet included in
the printed aids.
A more important possibility of variation, where the department catalog
is dictionary in form, is found in subject headings. Will the same
headings that are found satisfactory in the main library catalog serve
equally well in the department catalog as used by specialists? Too
much emphasis can not be laid upon the fact that any variation of this
kind greatly increases the cost of the cataloging, as the assigning
and revision of two sets of subject headings, one for the general and
one for the department catalog, will mean that that part of the work
is greatly increased, though not doubled. The correct assignment of
subject headings presents enough difficulties under any circumstances,
and the catalog supervisor should hesitate to multiply these unless
there is strong reason for doing so. In libraries which have adopted
the Library of Congress subject headings, those headings, with minor
variations, will, for most subjects, be found satisfactory in the
department as well as in the general catalog. Law will at once occur
to all as a subject for which it may be desirable to run two sets of
headings. We have done this at the University of Minnesota, using the
special Library of Congress law headings in the department catalog,
and the regular Library of Congress headings in the general catalog.
A point to be carefully considered in adopting more than one set of
subject headings, moreover, is the possible confusion of mind that may
be produced in the student, the exigencies of whose work require him to
use more than one of the library catalogs. Such records are certainly
much easier to use when there is uniformity of subject entries, and the
adoption of several different sets of subject headings will certainly
cause confusion, even to members of the library staff, much more to
students.
After the questions of form, scope, and contents of the department
catalog, comes the practical question of how best to get the work done.
It can be done in either of two ways, by the regular cataloging force
of the university or by the department librarians. In most university
libraries the cataloging staff is small in comparison with the amount
always to be done, and the work of keeping the general catalog up to
date taxes all its powers, and leaves no time for extra records such
as department catalogs. On the other hand, does not the department
librarian have more or less time which, when properly arranged, could
be given to cataloging under the direction of the head cataloger?
We have found this to be the case at the University of Minnesota.
Until three years ago our department libraries were all under the
supervision of the various departments, and hence in a more or less
chaotic state. Some of these have not yet emerged from chaos. In these
three years, however, we have evolved a system by which this work is
done by the department librarians, or, in one case, by an assistant
in the department library. It has so far proved a perfectly workable
system for our given conditions. All the department librarians so far
appointed have been either library school graduates or people with
equivalent library training, and in addition to that, in some cases,
with special knowledge of the subjects of the departments. One of the
first duties of the department librarian, on taking charge of his
library, has been to organize it, classifying and cataloging it under
the supervision of the head of the catalog department, but doing the
work in the department library. The question has been raised as to how
the department librarian could do the reference work and other work
of his library, and at the same time catalog the department books for
both the department and general catalog. Of course the cataloging will
be intermittent and more or less interrupted, as our rule is that the
work for the public must be done first. Until, however, the books of a
department library are in order and properly listed, no satisfactory
reference work can be done with them. Our own experience has certainly
been that the reference work of our department librarians has been
strengthened by their work of cataloging. The general library gains
also from this work of the department librarian, as the latter does
the cataloging of his books for the general catalog at the same time
as that for the department catalog, and so the growth of the general
library catalog is greatly promoted, without a corresponding tax upon
the resources of the catalog department. In as far as possible the
work is revised by the head cataloger or a reviser, in the department
library, but in some cases of difficult revision it has been found
necessary to transfer the books to the catalog department for revision
there. At present, whenever printed cards can not be obtained, all
cards are actually made by the department librarian, but as soon as we
are able to adopt the multigraph, rough copy only will be supplied by
that assistant.
After the department library has been thoroughly organized and
cataloged, the department librarian goes on with the lighter task
of cataloging the current accessions of his library for both the
department and the general catalog.
Some of the advantages of thus having the work done by the trained
department librarians are:
1. It adds several workers to the cataloging force of the library, and
thus makes it possible to do much more in the way of providing needed
departmental catalogs. This fact has been of great importance with us
at the University of Minnesota, where, with the present cataloging
force alone, it would have been impossible to provide these catalogs.
Besides, there is the advantage to the general library of getting the
cataloging of these same books done for the general catalog.
2. The department librarian should have, and generally does have,
special knowledge of his subject, which is of assistance in cataloging,
especially in classification and the assignment of subject headings.
3. As the work is done in the department it is easy for the department
librarian to consult the professors whenever necessary or desirable.
4. There is a real advantage to the department librarian in the added
familiarity with the department books which he has gained in cataloging
them. This is particularly true in the case of the librarian who,
in the beginning, is not a specialist in his subject, but even the
specialist may gain some knowledge from this handling of the material
which will help him in the service of his readers. Moreover, if he has
actually made the catalog, he can use it more intelligently himself and
instruct his students better in the use of it.
Our scheme has certain disadvantages as well as advantages. Some of
these are:
1. There is danger that not enough cataloging research work will be
done when the cataloging is done in the department library, because
many of the important catalog and bibliographical aids are not
accessible outside the catalog department--for example, the depository
or union catalog of printed cards.
2. There is danger that the existing records will not be consulted
enough, because the general catalog is not easily accessible and can
only be consulted on special trips to the main library.
3. When the work is thus decentralized, there is much greater
difficulty in obtaining from the various assistants work which is even
fairly uniform. No one who has had experience in trying to manage such
work will minimize this difficulty. For this reason, the revision is
more difficult, and must be done with the greatest care, especially in
the matter of subject headings.
4. It is sometimes more difficult to get good cataloging from those
whose first interest does not lie in this branch of the work, and who
are not closely associated with the regular catalogers, and familiar
with the many traditions of a catalog department. For this reason
we have found at Minnesota, that it is an advantage to have a newly
appointed department librarian work in the catalog department for a
time before taking up the work in his library.
We have found, however, that with us the advantages outweigh the
disadvantages, particularly the one great advantage that it has been a
practical way of accomplishing work which could not have been done by
our present cataloging department.
Summary
A tabulated summary of the replies received from the libraries
circularized has been prepared, but as it is too detailed for reading
here, I will omit it, and present, instead, a few conclusions which
may fairly be drawn from this summary. While practice is not uniform
on any one point of department cataloging, certain tendencies toward
uniformity are clearly evident.
1. In the matter of department librarians there is clearly a tendency
towards the appointment of trained workers having, whenever possible,
some special knowledge of the subject of their departments as well.
This, of course, is important, if the cataloging is to be done in the
department libraries. All these libraries feel, also, the need for
some kind of department catalogs, although the number of such catalogs
already established varies from three at the University of Wisconsin to
twenty-three at Columbia.
2. There is a pretty general agreement that the dictionary catalog
is the most desirable for department libraries. Columbia, Illinois,
Michigan, and Minnesota report dictionary catalogs in all organized
department libraries, and Johns Hopkins in all department libraries
outside the main building. Wisconsin and Missouri report dictionary
catalogs in certain department libraries, and Chicago reports author
catalogs and shelf-lists. All the libraries using dictionary catalogs
report the use, in the main, of the same kind of subject headings in
department as in general catalogs, except for certain special subjects,
such as law, or for certain highly specialized collections, such as the
Avery Architectural library at Columbia.
3. There is a somewhat greater variation in the scope of material
to be included. So far, only two libraries, Columbia and Michigan,
report any department catalogs covering more than the material in the
department libraries, but Missouri and Minnesota report that they
intend, eventually, to have their department catalogs include all
books on the subject in the university. In the matter of analytics the
majority practice is to include the same analytics in both general
and department catalogs, although Chicago uses no analytics at all in
department catalogs, while Columbia, at the other extreme, includes
more analytics in department catalogs than in the general catalog.
4. Present opinion seems to be pretty evenly divided on the subject of
whether the actual work of cataloging should be done by the department
librarians or by the regular cataloging force, although there is
perhaps a tendency to have this work done by the department librarians
wherever there are trained workers in charge of the department
libraries. Universities in which the work for department catalogs
is done by the department librarians, report that the department
librarians catalog these same books for the general catalog as well.
In conclusion, let me repeat that if the cataloging is done by the
department librarians, too much emphasis can not be laid upon the fact
that it is absolutely essential to have all this work done under the
supervision of the head cataloger, with the most careful revision.
Otherwise there will be as many varieties of cataloging as there are
department librarians.
In behalf of Dr. W. Dawson Johnston, of Columbia, Miss Isadore G. Mudge
read the following
PROPOSAL FOR A CATALOG OF UNIVERSITY SERIAL PUBLICATIONS
One of the desiderata of our exchange departments, as well as of our
reference departments, is a catalog of American university serial
publications. This should give in addition to the general title, a
full table of contents, and an index of the same. It may be prepared
by one library, or cooperatively by the library of each institution
issuing such series, and published by a central institution, as the
bibliography of American historical societies was published by the
Smithsonian Institution, or published as the trade list annual is, each
institution printing its own catalog and forwarding it to a publisher
to be indexed, bound with the catalogs of publications of other
institutions, and so published.
The desirability of such a catalog as a record of American university
publications was presented to the Executive Committee of the
Association of American Universities at its last meeting. The Committee
voted to recommend to the Association the passage of the following
resolution:
"Resolved, That the Association of American Universities recommends to
each of its constituent universities the preparation of a catalog of
its serial publications and the printing of the catalog in a form which
will permit the publication of the several catalogs as a collected
work, so arranged and indexed as to make it a useful work of reference."
If the members of the College Section are similarly interested in such
a catalog, similar action on the part of the section may be desirable.
I present this suggestion with some diffidence because although the
catalog will save librarians much labor in the long run the preparation
of it would involve a large amount of extra labor in the immediate
future. In spite of this, however, I hope that it will receive your
favorable consideration.
After some discussion it was voted that the proposal be referred to
the executive committee of the College and Reference Section for
consideration.
The meeting then adjourned.
REFERENCE LIBRARIANS' ROUND TABLE
The meeting of the Public Library Division of the College and Reference
Section was held on the evening of June 27. It was called to order by
Edwin H. Anderson, who turned it over to Miss Sarah B. Askew of the
New Jersey public library commission, who acted as chairman for the
evening. The first speaker was Miss MARILLA WAITE FREEMAN, librarian of
the Goodwyn Institute library of Memphis, who spoke on
SCIENTIFIC MANAGEMENT, AND THE REFERENCE DEPARTMENT AS A BUREAU OF
INFORMATION
What we call "reference work" has been a little in disrepute of late,
and there has been some discussion as to the amount of time which may
legitimately be spent in helping the curious inquirer to learn how
many of the Louis's died a natural death, or whether Helen of Troy
wore locks of Titian red. But it is only in the large library that
there can be any limitation of what we call the reference department
to the handling of such academic quibbles. It is true that in the
large library the technical department, the business branch, the art
department may limit and thin the quality of work left to the reference
librarian, till she (or he) may feel that only the dry bones of the
day's research are hers (or his). But in the small library there is
no such limitation, and the reference librarian, who may also be the
head librarian and the chief cataloger, may come in touch each day with
every sort of human interest, from the eager desire of the office clerk
to get back to the soil by the road of raising rice in Arkansas or
apples in Idaho, to the yearning for economic independence and artistic
expression in the soul of the girl who comes to pore over books on
design.
To one who is fully awake to the human side of things, there can
never be any dull monotony in the life of the reference librarian.
I have often wished I had time--and genius--to write the Romance of
a Reference Library. It would cover as many pages, and be almost as
thrilling as the Thousand-and-One-Nights. I wish I had time to tell
you, the Molly-Make-Believe Episode of Goodwyn Institute library, or
the Tale of the Telegram from the Nicaragua Revolution.
Now in the small library where one reference assistant must be so many
things to so many people in the course of one day, there is special
need of scientific management of time, labor, methods, resources.
Fortunately, the reference assistant has few =statistics= to trouble
with. The only record that seems essential is that of questions asked
and topics looked up. A pad of paper, dated, kept at one's elbow, and
questions jotted down almost as they are being asked--this gives an
interesting basis for monthly and yearly reports, and makes something
to show for the day's work much more interesting than mere figures, and
does furnish certain figures, especially if we add, after each topic,
approximate number of books, pamphlets and magazines used in getting
information or material desired.
From these daily sheets interesting deductions can be made,
classifications of different kinds and sources of questions asked, what
classes of people are users and which are non-users of the library,
on what lines the library needs to build up its resources, in what
directions it needs to advertise better. Red pencil checks may be
placed against more significant topics, for quick summarization at
the end of the month. If the question is for school or club work,
or likely to recur again, take a pencil and small pad, write Panama
canal tolls or labor laws affecting women, or whatever the subject may
be, at the top of the pad, and make rapid note of magazine articles,
books, etc., looked up. Much time is lost in looking up the same
things over and over again, sometimes by one assistant, and sometimes
by another. Lists jotted roughly down while material is being looked
up, or directly after, may be copied by typewriter on catalog cards
and filed alphabetically in a special tray of the catalog case, where
they will be quickly available for the next call. For debates, the
material listed on cards should be grouped roughly under "general,"
"affirmative" and "negative." It saves time, also, in collecting books
on the reserve shelf for a debate, to mark the places by clipping to
the page a slip labelled "affirmative" or "negative." Of course, for
debate work the first aid to scientific management is the use, so far
as possible, of the work done by others in such invaluable little
manuals as the Debaters' Hand-Book series, and the debate pamphlets of
the Universities of Wisconsin, Texas, Iowa and others, supplemented by
the latest magazine articles in the Readers' Guide.[11]
[11] A brief list, entitled "Debaters' Aids," was distributed in
connection with this paper.
The same economic principle applies, of course, to every other class
of subjects looked up. Make use of work done by others, whether in the
form of bibliographies, indexes, reports and publications of special
organizations, or what not. Two small indexes which save much time in
the small library are the Pittsburgh Library Debate Index and their
Contemporary Biography. Though the latter is now ten years old it is
still extremely useful to those libraries which are so fortunate as to
own copies.
Another economy of time and money is the using of book-lists printed by
other libraries or organizations, checking on them the titles in one's
own library, putting the library stamp upon them, and distributing
them to the class of users interested. Goodwyn Institute library has
recently done this with the booklet entitled: "What to read on business
efficiency," issued by the Business Book Bureau of New York.
An important psychological point is always to get one good piece of
material before each =researcher= promptly, then other material may be
gathered more deliberately. If several people are waiting at once, give
each one reference to start on rather than serve one in detail while
all others wait their turn. Perhaps this is a small and obvious trifle
to dwell upon, but it is a bromidium that trifles make success, in
reference work as in anything else.
Returning to the wisdom of using others' work, I must emphasize the
importance of collecting the material put out by all sorts of special
organizations. We know that every subject now has its literature, from
"votes for women" to the extermination of the house fly or the loan
shark. And much of this matter, often in pamphlet or leaflet form, is
obtainable free or at small cost. Frequently such literature is the
latest and most authoritative word upon any subject.
In our scheme of scientific management, therefore, the small library,
perhaps even more than the large, can not afford to do without
collecting such literature. The pamphlet collection is indispensable.
It means work, but in the end by its live usefulness it saves time. By
scientific management and intensive use a small library with a good
pamphlet collection can get better results than one three times as
large whose resources are not up-to-date and thoroughly made use of.
First, a word as to the filing of such material; second, as to sources
for securing it. I cannot attempt to offer any new solution to the
vexed problem of pamphlet disposal. I will merely state briefly how
Goodwyn Institute library handles its pamphlets. We have found the
system of filing in pamphlet boxes most convenient and practicable.
A box is lettered with D. C. number or inclusive numbers, and with
subject or subjects included, as 334.6 Agricultural credit. Pamphlets
are counted as received, but not accessioned. If important, catalog
card is made under subject, or author, rarely under both. If of slight
or only temporary value, they are merely marked with class number, and
placed in box without cataloging. Sometimes merely a general catalog
card is made to show that the library receives all the publications
of an organization, as with the National American Woman Suffrage
Association, or with the American National Child Labor Committee. In
these cases there would be both author and subject card. Any specially
important publication of the association would be brought out by
separate card. A check on the pamphlet would indicate whether or not it
had been cataloged.
For the small library which has not time to catalog individual
pamphlets, it would be sufficient to make one general card for each
group, giving class number and subject heading, as: "325 Immigration;
for material (or for additional material) on this subject, see pamphlet
collection," or merely, "See also pamphlets."
Goodwyn Institute clips also the local newspapers and a few others
for matters of local or special interest, mounts the more valuable
clippings on manila sheets, 8x10 in size, numbers them, occasionally
catalogs an important one, and files them with pamphlets on the same
subjects. To keep the collection from becoming obsolete, or occupying
too much space, it should be gone over once a year, and old pamphlets
and clippings and their cards withdrawn and destroyed. With many
constantly changing subjects in agriculture, engineering, current
problems, etc., it becomes instinctive with the reference assistant
to bring forth first to the would-be investigator the pamphlet box or
boxes on that subject, then the more recent magazine articles, and only
last the books.
In Goodwyn Institute library the pamphlet collection is supplemented
by a vertical file, arranged alphabetically under the same headings as
the pamphlets. In this file are placed letters, circulars, typewritten
lists, and the like, not advisable to be placed in the pamphlet boxes.
A practical plan for indexing this material is a general card on each
subject included, to be filed at end of regular cards in cataloging:
e. g. "Levees; for additional material, see vertical file." For the
very small library the vertical file is perhaps the most convenient
arrangement for disposing of pamphlets and =all= unbound material in
one place.
Some of the larger libraries bind in inexpensive form all pamphlets
which are considered worthy of preservation, but for the small library
this seems necessary only in the case of pamphlets of unusual value or
size.
Now as to some of the sources of the pamphlet and ephemeral literature
which is so valuable. I can not do better than to remind you again of
two lists with which you are probably already familiar. The first is
"Social questions of today, selected sources of information, compiled
by the Free Public Library, Newark, N. J.," 1911. It may be obtained
from the Editor of Special Libraries, State Library, Indianapolis,
for ten cents. It includes the names and addresses of organizations
interested in social questions, such as the American Civic Association,
the Russell Sage Foundation, the Vocation Bureau of Boston, and an
index of subjects covered by the publications of these organizations,
such as the cost of living, prison reform, sex hygiene, vacation
schools.
The second list is entitled "The library and social movements; a list
of material obtainable free or at small expense." It may be had from
the A. L. A. Publishing Board for five cents. This list includes
material on all sorts of sociological questions, from co-operative
stores to workingmen's compensation. From these two lists a good
working collection of up-to-date, inexpensive pamphlet material on
social problems may be obtained. Among recent organizations, born since
these lists were published in 1911, are the Drama League of America,
the American Commission on Agricultural Co-operation, the Southern
Sociological Congress. All these put out valuable and inexpensive
reports and publications. It would be a boon to small, and even large
libraries, if the A. L. A. Publishing Board would father a new list
including and enlarging the material of the two 1911 lists, and adding
the most important new organizations and publications which have since
come into being.
The recently published index to Special Libraries, Vol. 1-3, makes
available, in that indispensable little journal much valuable material
on current questions, and sources of information.
For all subjects, technical, scientific, historical, sociological,
covered by the U. S. Government publications, and these subjects are
innumerable, a convenient guide to selection is offered by the brief
classified price-lists furnished by the Superintendent of Documents.
The suggestions in the little weekly Government Publications, published
by M. E. Greathouse at 510 12th St., N. W., Washington, at fifty cents
a year, are also helpful, as are the notes in the A. L. A. Booklist,
which now lists many government documents. The "Interesting Things
in Print" column in Public Libraries should be carefully scanned, as
should the "Periodical and other literature" department of the Library
Journal.
To get upon the regular mailing list of as many organizations as
possible saves much time spent in writing for individual publications.
And even where there is a membership fee, as of $2.00 per year to the
Drama League of America, for example, it will bring far more valuable
returns in twelve months than the same amount expended in books.
The first labor of writing for and handling a collection of pamphlet
literature seems considerable, but when properly organized its daily
up-keep is not difficult and its presence in a library goes far to make
possible the scientific management of the queries and problems which
come each day to the reference desk.
May I rather say the information desk. We librarians are so at home
with our own terminology, have talked so long and familiarly of
reference desks, reference work, the reference library, that I doubt
if we ever realize the foreignness of our language to the shy visitor
within our gates. "Ask in the reference room" means worse than nothing
to him, but the simple legend "Information desk" will draw him like the
kindly and familiar face of a friend.
The idea that a modern library is, or should be, a central Bureau of
Information for its town or city is one that we first have to get
thoroughly into our own heads, and then impress upon our public. In
the effort to find the simplest and most effective way to present this
idea to our Memphis public, we tried running the following card in the
street cars:
What do =You= want to Know?
You have 12,000 Books, Trade Journals, Magazines on all
subjects, and an Information Bureau for =Your= use
absolutely =Free= in Goodwyn Institute Library.
We were able to make specially advantageous terms with the street car
advertising company, whose representative had himself made use of
the resources of the library, and we have been running this card, or
similarly worded ones, for over a year. The results, sometimes direct,
sometimes indirect, have been very interesting. The card has brought
us many business men, and other street car users, who, seeing our
invitation daily, recall it from the depths of their subconsciousness
when they do want to know. The card is often taken quite literally, as
in the case of the young Russian from Odessa, later from St. Louis,
who read the sign in the street car which brought him from the railway
station. He came straight to the library and to the information desk,
told his story briefly and succinctly, and asked how he could find a
position as house boy, for which he was qualified. The Jewish Rabbi
happened to be in the library at the moment. He called up the head of
the Jewish Charities, who on hearing that the lad was from Odessa,
said: "Why, that is my native place! Send him along and I will surely
find him something." And he did.
Another bright-eyed youth, who worked with a moving-picture corporation
in the daytime, but had his evenings free, came in to ask if we had
d'Espuy's "Architecture antique." He was overjoyed when he saw it and
other folios on the subject, said he was wanting to go on with the
study of architecture at night, and had seen our street car card. "That
card's a fine stunt," he added. Then there was the case of the two
young men who had come down the river by boat from Iowa, looking for
work as extra Christmas clerks. They were sent up to us by a policeman,
from whom they asked information. We sent them to the Y. M. C. A.
Department of Employment, and one of them afterward came back to tell
us they had both gotten a job. We do not at all mind being teased a
bit about our "Employment Bureau," so glad are we that the policeman
and the man-on-the-street should instantly think of Goodwyn Institute
library when asked for any information which he cannot give. We
desire to be regarded as a sort of central clearing house for general
information, even when the question is of so primitive and vital a
nature as how a man shall earn his next meal, and to this end we take
as our motto "Nothing human is alien to us."
We think it is within our legitimate field to tell the man not that
he has come to the wrong place, but to tell him the address of the
right place, and sometimes even to give him a note or do a moment's
telephoning that will connect him with the right place, and will make
him feel that the library's "What do =you= want to know?" means him.
The point I wish to emphasize is: Never let a man go away without
either the information for which he has come, or the knowledge as to
where he may find it. This does not mean that we must spend precious
time in looking up irrelevant questions, or in attempting to handle
matters which some other library or organization could deal with more
efficiently. It does mean that it is our business as a Bureau of
Information to know just where that question can be most effectively
handled, and then to direct the inquirer there.
Thus if a man desires a certain address in Los Angeles, we send him
to the Cotton Exchange, one block away, which has a full line of
directories, open to the public; if a certain government monograph
which we do not possess, we refer him to the Cossitt library, which
as a government depository has a full collection of public documents;
if other than a very simple legal reference, we refer him to the law
library, mentioning its hours and restrictions.
If the information desired may be secured by letter, we often give
a reader the necessary address and let him write himself. We ought,
of course, to save the library's time in this way whenever possible.
Yet frequently the information or material to be secured would have
a future value to the library itself, or to the city, and whenever
this is the case, this advantage, together with the reader's grateful
appreciation of the library for getting him what he wants when he
wants it, surely justifies us in writing the letter ourselves. Thus,
Goodwyn Institute library has recently secured much information
and literature on smoke abatement experience of other cities, for
engineers suddenly forced to apply modern methods by a stringent city
ordinance. Assistance has been given in the same way to the Mississippi
Valley Levee Association; to a committee appointed to present a
county insanity commission bill to the state legislature; to the city
engineer, on the practice of different cities as to grade-crossings and
railroad track elevation; again to an individual reader who wished to
learn what diseases are native to South Carolina in distinction from
those supposed to be cured by residence there; to a local manufacturer
on the process of making paper from cotton stalks; to a student on the
death rate and prevalence of tuberculosis among negroes; to another on
the best methods of alfalfa raising in West Tennessee.
The use of the telephone is encouraged for information needed quickly.
If a busy business man wishes to know the name and address of the
U. S. Consul in Peru, the 1910 population of Guthrie, Oklahoma, the
meaning of a troublesome phrase in a Spanish letter, he appreciates
knowing that he can get a prompt reply by calling up the library.
The St. Joseph library makes this feature of its information service
effectively known by attractive blotters and leaflets sent to business
men.
We are all familiar with the insistent demands of club members and of
school children, set sometimes, the former by the club system, and the
latter by the school system, to subjects beyond their grasp. Of the
vexed problem of distributing our crowded hours judiciously among all
these demands, Miss Bacon has written most lucidly in her delightful
paper on "What the public wants," in the May (1913) Library Journal.
Certainly we do have to learn to discriminate as to the time and
attention we give to each demand upon us. Yet each is important
to the man, woman or child, who makes it, and however briefly and
expeditiously we may dispose of it, let us make the questioner
feel that he did well to come to us, that we are for the moment
concentrating upon his problem, and that we are giving him the best
assistance in our power, even if it be only an address, or a telephone
number, or the name of the book in which his question will be answered.
Let me repeat that it is all largely a matter of making our library a
clearing house of information, of connecting the man with the answer to
his question, rather than of necessarily answering it ourselves. And to
this end, and by these means, may the small library be as useful as the
large.
The next speaker was Miss SARAH B. BALL, librarian of the business
branch of the Newark free public library, who spoke on
WHAT ANY LIBRARY CAN DO FOR THE BUSINESS INTERESTS OF THE TOWN
Have you ever felt discouraged over the purely potential value of
your reference books, because they seem to remain forever potential?
Have you ever turned the pages of the World Almanac and sighed over
perfectly good answers which you could give to questions that nobody
asks you? Every reference librarian present knows what I mean. When is
wheat harvested in Burmah? Who is the secretary of sanitation in Cuba?
How long does it take a letter to go from New York to Melbourne, via
Vancouver? Are grapes more nutritious than plums? What are the dues in
the Knickerbocker Club? What three nations have dominions on which the
sun never sets? How many shipwrecks last year on the U. S. coasts?
These questions are being asked by somebody and being answered in a
fashion by somebody. Very often that "somebody" is the editor of the
query column in the newspaper. The newspapers of the country have
educated the people to turn to them with their questions. How many of
those questions could be answered just as well or better by the public
library? How often the newspaper itself turns to the public library for
the answers? Here is truly an unnecessary duplication of work and a
loss of time. Here is also a high-road to popularity and an opportunity
for usefulness to a community clearly seen by newspapers and worth
cultivating by public libraries.
While we are making laws, librarians might conspire to put through a
city ordinance to compel all questioning people to call on the public
library as the =first= source of information. As that is manifestly
impossible, something must be done to attract the business and trade
interests of a town to the public library as a bureau of information.
Why? Because the citizens pay taxes to support an institution--the
public library--that they may be, by that institution, helped to become
not simply better, but also wiser; not simply wiser, but also better
informed; not simply better informed in general, but also better
informed in city affairs; not simply in city affairs, but also in the
affairs of each industrial unit. In a word, the city supports a library
that the library may help it to become more harmonious, better governed
and more productive.
As the institution is supported for specific purposes, it should not
only be prepared to fulfill these purposes; it should also let it be
known to all that it is thus prepared.
It should let those who support it know that it can not only help one
who seeks general culture; but can also help one who seeks knowledge
of city management in any of its countless aspects, or knowledge
of methods of productive or distributive processes in any of their
countless forms.
Possibly the first thing to do in thus letting its practical powers
be known is to introduce into its vocabulary the phrase "business
department" or "information department." A wider range of questions
comes to a library that uses the words "information" or "business
department" instead of "reference department." The words "public
library" do not convey to the mind of the average person a suggestion
of a tenth of the resources for information that are locked up in the
collections of printed things which our cities now maintain.
An inquiring Newarker once said to me "Why should a public library
advertise itself? Surely everyone knows where it is and that it
contains books."
"Yes," said I, "but, do you yourself know what those books contain?
Would you go to the library to learn the elevation above sea level of
the street corner on which you live, or for the width of the street?
Would you go there to plan your next business trip by using the maps of
the cities you will visit, so that time will not be lost in going from
one factory to another? If you are trying to sell a patented ticket
punch, do you go to the library for the names of purchasing agents of
railroads? If you have lost the address of a business correspondent do
you telephone to the library or do you set the whole office force on
edge hunting for the lost letter? Would you turn to the library for the
date of Wilson's Chicago address, or the launching of a new battleship?"
He went away wiser; and left me quite pleased with myself.
Many public libraries have undertaken the task of collecting
manufacturers' catalogs from all parts of the United States. Our
experience indicates that this is a heavy expense with comparatively
slight return. Would it not be better to spend the same amount of time
and money compiling information about the industries of one's own town?
It is a hopeless task to represent adequately the manufacturers of
the United States. It is not a hopeless task to compile information
about local manufacturers that will prove of great value. No business
directory gives the specific information that is a daily need among
the business men of a community. The directory gives, for example,
a list of paper-box manufacturers, but does not indicate those who
make egg boxes, hat boxes, jewelry boxes, etc. It lists the jewelry
manufacturers, but is useless if you want the names of those who make
22-karat wedding rings. Many manufacturers and dealers are sending to
distant cities, through habit, for articles made equally well and at
the same cost within their own city, for no other reason than that
they lack detailed information of the products of their own city. In
some places the Board of Trade is the natural clearing house for this
information. This is as it should be.
But what about the towns that are without Boards of Trade or whose
Boards of Trade are not equipped to give this information? It is
safe to say that there are not ten cities in the United States
where one can find on file for the use of the public complete and
specific information about the industries of that city. To secure
this information is not an easy task. It requires circular letters,
follow-up letters and possibly personal calls; but the value of thus
creating an interest in the public library among those citizens who
are paying the heaviest taxes, coupled with the real importance of
the information itself, makes it an undertaking of peculiar value to
a tax-supported public library. Fortunately the smaller the city the
fewer the manufacturers and the easier the task, so that here indeed is
a piece of work that may well be undertaken by libraries of many towns
and cities.
We have grown in Newark, from being the conventional and rather
academic library, to one that has quite large sources of civic and
manufacturing and commercial and financial information. The question
now is, how shall we get the people to realize the change? We are
somewhat in the position of a dry goods store which has transformed
itself into a department store, but is visited largely by those who
seek only dry goods. We need to advertise our groceries, hardware,
furniture and china.
If library architecture would only permit of show windows, as do all
our Newark branches, the task would be greatly simplified. What a
show window has meant to the business branch can be seen any day.
A passerby is first attracted by the bright color of a map showing
the London subway system. He pauses to read the old familiar words:
"Trafalgar Square," "Tottenham Court Road" and "Ludgate Circus." Beside
it is a new directory of the clothing trade, or a book on insurance,
a pamphlet on civil service, or a new trolley guide. Finally, his
curiosity aroused over the kind of a business house that can have
such diversified interests, he looks up at the gold-lettered sign on
the window and reads with puzzled expression, "Business Branch and
Reading Room of the Free Public Library." Often he peers curiously in
to see what kind of people are inside, and, seeing a room full of men,
comes boldly in and asks for--a directory of Spuyten Duyvil, or some
other obscure place. The window display has broadened his idea of the
resources of the public library, which he had hitherto thought of as
having nothing to interest him.
Where a library can afford it there are many advantages in establishing
a business department. It keeps together closely related subjects, it
is very helpful to business men, and it helps in advertising. If a
permanent business department is impossible, there is much to be gained
by a temporary showing of all that can be gathered relating to business.
All libraries have more of this material than we perhaps realize,
surely more than the public realize. By bringing it together and
displaying well-printed signs concerning it we are following sound
advertising principles. The man who sees a sign in the library, "Our
business is answering questions," will not be so absurdly apologetic
over "bothering you" with his wants, and will use the resources of the
library to better advantage than the man who thinks it is only for
lending books.
Other signs that may be used with good effect are these:
"Have you an idea? Patent it. The library will tell you how."
"You support this library. Do you use it?"
"Why guess about things? Your Public Library can give you the facts.
Telephone or write."
"A valuable export trade is yours if you follow the consular reports in
the Public Library."
"Follow the work of the Legislature. The bills are on file at the
Public Library."