[DCRM-L] Cataloging known forgeries

[Eduardo Tenenbaum]

I'm not sure "attributed name" is appropriate here:
"Use for an author, artist, etc., relating him/her to a work for which there
is or once was substantial authority for designating that person as author,
creator, etc. of the work."

Perhaps "forger"?
"Use for a person or organization who makes or imitates something of value
or importance, especially with the intent to defraud."
This would better apply to Bob's second example of the fake Steinbeck
edition.

-----Original Message-----
From: dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu [mailto:dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu] On
Behalf Of Robert Maxwell
Sent: Wednesday, August 19, 2009 4:52 PM
To: DCRM Revision Group List
Cc: Fenning, Rebecca
Subject: Re: [DCRM-L] Cataloging known forgeries

What about the genre/form term "Forgeries" from printing & publishing? That
seems clearer than "false association copies". 

I suppose it depends on what your group of "forgeries" consists of. Are they
forgeries in the sense that the work is attributed to someone who didn't
actually write it? This sort of thing happened routinely in the ancient
world, but I wouldn't call that a forgery. Or are they forgeries in the
sense that somebody is trying to pass off something he just printed in his
basement as a 1st edition Steinbeck?

Robert L. Maxwell
Head, Special Collections and Metadata Catalog Dept.
6728 Harold B. Lee Library
Brigham Young University
Provo, UT 84602
(801)422-5568


-----Original Message-----
From: dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu [mailto:dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu] On
Behalf Of Schneider, Nina
Sent: Wednesday, August 19, 2009 2:41 PM
To: DCRM Revision Group List
Cc: Fenning, Rebecca
Subject: [DCRM-L] Cataloging known forgeries

Does anyone have experience cataloging known forgeries? The Clark has a
small group of these and I'm wondering if there is a "proper" way to
describe them.

Here is what we're thinking: cataloging according to DCRM(B) rules on
fictitious or incorrect information, using the relator code, "attributed
name" after our supposed author, and adding "False association copies"
from Provenance Evidence in a 655 field. Although these steps should
make it clear that we really don't have an Einstein pamphlet or letters
of Nathaniel Hawthorne, I just want to make sure we aren't missing
anything before we proceed.

Thanks for any advice!

Nina

+-------
Nina Schneider
Head Cataloger
William Andrews Clark Memorial Library
2520 Cimarron Street
Los Angeles, CA  90018

323-731-8529
nschneider at humnet.ucla.edu