[DCRM-L] MSS editions To bracket or not in cataloging manuscripts

[Noble, Richard]

In the discussion of "To bracket or not in cataloging manuscripts" Erin has
addressed a tangential topic that also implies a further question.

Regarding Erin's Question: RDA instructs (2.5.1.1 Scope) that "For
resources in an unpublished form, statements indicating the version of the
work contained in the resource are treated as edition statements. Some
examples of a resource in an unpublished form are manuscript drafts or
videorecordings that have not been commercially released or broadcast."
That's pretty direct, and certainly applies to a statement such as
"Production draft" in her example (cf. the example under 2.3.2.3, "Draft,
May 2000"). It should no doubt be taken into account in a revised DCRM for
mss.

Further Question: I have recently cataloged a couple of mimeographed
Hollywood scripts much like Erin's example, one as OCLC type t, the other
as type a. I'd be interested in the thoughts of others regarding the
appropriateness of the designation in such cases. I'm now leaning towards
type a for both of these items, especially since I could not see any
rationale for duplicating the record for *Nothing sacred*, from which I
copy cataloged for Brown, having RDAddled the record in upgrading it from M
to I.

http://josiah.brown.edu/search~S7?/twhite+christmas/twhite+christmas/1%2C18%2C60%2CB/marc&FF=twhite+christmas+motion+picture&3%2C%2C3

http://josiah.brown.edu/search~S7?/tnothing+sacred/tnothing+sacred/1%2C5%2C7%2CB/marc&FF=tnothing+sacred+motion+picture&1%2C1%2C


My sense is that designation of a "resource" (such language ...) as type t
creates the expectation that it is inherently unique, and that the record
for it is not appropriate for copy cataloging/addition of holdings, only
for derivation as the basis of another master record for a similar
resource. What I had in hand, as in the case of Erin's example, is
inherently *not* unique, though the copy in hand differs in some resepcts
from others. We have the script as originally delivered. I reckoned that in
the case of an inscribed, extra-illustrated copy (inscribed by Selznick,
with three actors' headshots) that the variation was copy-specific. I'm
less certain regarding the Ohio State copy, which does exhibit
characteristics of a "continuing resource" (the addition of a week's worth
of revision pages, apparently without change to the cover designation).

 So what's the real difference between a "manuscript" text and an
"unpublished" text? The use of a duplicating medium? (What about ribbon and
carbon copies?) Is copy-catalogability a proper criterion for choosing a
record type?

Bibliography of published books is so *easy* compared with this stuff ...

RICHARD NOBLE :: RARE MATERIALS CATALOGUER :: JOHN HAY LIBRARY
BROWN UNIVERSITY  ::  PROVIDENCE, R.I. 02912  ::  401-863-1187
<Richard_Noble at Br <RICHARD_NOBLE at BROWN.EDU>own.edu>


---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Erin Blake <EBlake at folger.edu>
Date: Sat, Sep 7, 2013 at 3:09 PM
Subject: Re: [DCRM-L] To bracket or not in cataloging manuscripts
To: DCRM Users' Group <dcrm-l at lib.byu.edu>


I think one of the issues that was giving some people pause was that it can
be desireable to describe a manuscript that presents itself as a book the
same way that a book is described, so not even having the option of Area 2
for an edition statement was a problem. Deborah mentioned in person that
DCRM(B) could add an appendix on using DCRM(B) to catalog manuscripts.

I imagine this would be useful for typescripts such as screenplays, which
present themselves formally and are mechanically reproduced. Though
unpublished, they’re circulated by a corporate distributor. For example,
you could end up with something like:
As you like it by William Shakespeare [manuscript] / screenplay by Kenneth
Branagh.
Production draft.
[S.l.] : HBO Films & Shakespeare Film Company, 14/03/05.

The appendix would be analogous to DCRM(S)’s projected appendix on
manuscript serials, and DCRM(G)’s appendix on cataloging material with
title pages as graphic material rather than as books.

Erin.


----------------
Erin C. Blake, Ph.D.  |  Curator of Art & Special Collections  |  Folger
Shakespeare Library  |  201 E. Capitol St. SE, Washington, DC, 20009  |
eblake at folger.edu  |  office tel. 202-675-0323  |  fax 202-675-0328  |
www.folger.edu
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserver.lib.byu.edu/pipermail/dcrm-l/attachments/20130909/70d2f45c/attachment.html>