Sara B. Metcalfe
ILS506-Information Analysis and Organization

When we were first given this assignment, I couldn’t figure out why were being asked to type out and organize a complete card set, in light of the fact that most libraries now have their catalogs online. As I finished entering the first record into MARC Magician, and began generating the cards, I began to get a sense of what this assignment was about. Though I had done mostly copy cataloging, and some very simple original cataloging (under the watchful eye of the library’s Cataloger) and had been exposed to MARC records through these experiences, I never fully understood how this information was actually implemented. After months of learning how to correctly enter information into a MARC record, it was fascinating to see how the information from the record was extracted, and used. MARC records finally made sense.

While organizing the cards, I was remembering the days when libraries still used card catalogs. It then occurred to me that libraries used to have two separate card catalogs. One for the main entries and non-subject related entries and the other for the subject entries. Manheim’s refers to this as a “two-way divided catalog” (p.66). The use of a dictionary catalog, where all of the information is together, seemed to make so much more sense than having to maintain two separate catalogs. It is also more efficient when looking not only for a book by a particular author, but about. For example, all of the books by Günter Grass, can be found with the books about Grass and his writings.

When the International Federation of Library Associations was drafting the "Statement of Principles adopted at the International Conference on Cataloging Principles, Paris, October 1961", they did not know to what capacity technology would affect libraries forty years later. In 2001, library catalogs continue to follow the same principles set out by IFLA in 1961 in regards to the author/title catalog. However, in many libraries, this information is no longer avaible in a card catalog format, but is now accessible through the internet on computers. This new technology allows users to access much more detailed information about the materials they are searching for. Online library catalogs can now tell the user not only if a particular work is held in the library, but if it is actually available for the user to check out. This is the one downfall of our catalog. Though the card may be in the drawer, the user has to go to the shelf location and physically search for the book to learn its true availability. Many libraries have gotten rid of their card catalogs in favor of this new technology, which is still relatively unstable. There are many days when the library server goes down in my own library, that I wish someone had the hindsight to keep the old card catalog stored in an inconspicuous location for such occasions.

As a catalog users, I believe simplicity is the key. I expect to be able to search principally by author, title, and subject. When unsure of any of these qualifiers, the keyword search, with the advent of improved technology, plays an important role when searching the catalog. As for the record itself, I see no need as a library patron, for the physical description of the material to be available, with the exception of whether the material contains illustrations, maps, etc. The inclusion of the publication date or edition number should be sufficient information. As a librarian, I utilize the physical description information frequently when trying to find the specific LC number for a particular book. I also believe the ISBN should be included on the card.

When doing research or searching for information, online databases that contain abstracts of articles, papers, etc. make the process so much simpler. Having to read through the whole document only to realize that the information you are looking for is not present is undanting. However, scanning a brief description of the material makes the process so much easier. Though the Library of Congress subject headings are very helpful, I believe the online catalog could be much improved with the addition of an abstract about the material. Perhaps utilizing the notes on a book jacket, or requiring authors or publishers to provide a brief description of the material. This could not be done for a card catalog, as the cards have limited space. But an online catalog could certainly manage it. Though this would make it easier for the library patron, it may become a headache for the cataloger if they had to manually key in the whole abstract.

It was fascinating to look closely at catalogs and their organization both as a catalog user and librarian who manipulates the catalog. And to consider how and why either of these two populations utilize this tool. It was also amazing to consider that the format and order of these catalogs which Charles Cutter developed and documented in his book “Rules of a Dictionary Catalog” in 1904, were redrafted by IFLA in 1961 and are still maintained today, almost one hundred years later, in this age of technology.