Establishing Best Practices Cataloging Unpublished Screenplays with RDA
Establishing Best Practices: Cataloging Unpublished Screenplays with RDA Laura Evans Metadata/Cataloging Librarian Binghamton University evans@binghamton. edu
Introduction • The John Mc. Laughlin Collection at Binghamton University • Almost 400 unpublished film screenplays • Many with unique handwritten notes, autographs, stamps, etc.
The Problem • The problem with screenplays • Lack of guidelines or examples • What descriptive information should be included in the record? What access points? • Need to navigate and interpret RDA
Research Questions • How have other libraries cataloged unpublished screenplays using RDA? • Are rare material or archival standards being used with RDA for this material? • Are they treated as published or unpublished? • Is material type “t” or type “a” encoded for the header? • What information is included in field 264, and is publication, production, distribution, or manufacture indicated? • What notes are included in the 500 fields? • What access points are included?
Methodology • Look at RDA records for unpublished screenplays via search in OCLC Connexion • Dx=rda AND su=motion picture plays; language of cataloging limited to English. • Search returned 1356 matches. • Excluded records for films, published screenplays, and those I had cataloged
Results • 460 records • 27 different institutions • 75% of the records come from Northwestern or Oklahoma Records per institution • Libraries Australia: 11 • Concordia University: 2 • San Diego State University: 1 • California Institute of the Arts: 1 • Yale: 15 • UC Berkeley: 1 • Dartmouth: 1 • Emerson College: 1 • University of Michigan: 3 • Goddard College: 1 • Harvard: 7 • Northwestern: 205 • Middlebury College: 1 • Minitex: 1 • Duke: 2 • UNC Chapel Hill: 1 • University of Oklahoma: 142 • University of Oregon: 1 • Ohio State: 1 • University of Pennsylvania: 2 • Margaret Herrick Lib. : 1 • Texas State, San Marcos: 14 • Brigham Young: 3 • University of Missouri, Kansas City: 39 • Folger Shakespeare: 1 • University of Victoria: 1 • St. Louis University: 1
Themes • Inconsistency among and within institutions • RDA generally stands alone • Nature of the material is unclear to catalogers. Manuscript or nonmanuscript? Published or unpublished? Of 27 Libraries: Of 27 used Libraries: 11 “t” 1 used DCRM(B) 19 used 2 used DACS “a” 3 used “a” and “t” 1 used “p” and “t”
Themes Of 27 Libraries: • There are questions 5 used 260 about RDA, especially regarding the 264 field • Notes abound 1 omitted field 12 used 264 _0 (production) 16 used 264 _1 (publication) 1 used 264_2 (distribution) or 264 _4 (copyright)
Themes • Access points are generally more consistent than descriptive information • But not always Of 27 Libraries: 8 include access point for film studio or production company 11 have at least one record without relationship designator Of 27 Libraries: 25 use 730 uniform title for the related motion picture 23 provide additional subject access 7 of 7 who note screenplay is based on book provide author/title access
Establishing Best Practices, or, What Next? • Guidelines should be very specific, because details matter • The link to my guidelines (Google Doc): http: //bit. ly/1 u. SHht 0 • More investigation and discussion needed
Questions? evans@binghamton. edu
- Slides: 11