Hi Heidrun, The relevant instruction is 6.27.1.3. The first exception "Corporate bodies as creators" addresses cases where "one or more corporate bodies and one or more persons or families are collaboratively responsible for creating a work that falls into one or more of the categories at 19.2.1.1.1". The instruction now clearly states that the corporate body has precedence over persons or families when the access point for the work is constructed. RDA therefore acknowledges that a corporate body and a person can work together as creators. For that reason, I agree with you that it is odd that in the example you quote the persons involved are not listed as creators. This is an issue that might be worth raising with the RDA Examples Group through your JSC representative.
LC has also prepared training material on art catalogs available here (http://www.loc.gov/aba/rda/Refresher_training_dec_2011.html) that you might find useful to understand how RDA deals with museum catalogs. Daniel Paradis Bibliothécaire Direction du traitement documentaire des collections patrimoniales Bibliothèque et Archives nationales du Québec 2275, rue Holt Montréal (Québec) H2G 3H1 Téléphone : 514 873-1101, poste 3721 Télécopieur : 514 873-7296 daniel.para...@banq.qc.ca http://www.banq.qc.ca Avis de confidentialité Ce courriel est une communication confidentielle et l'information qu'il contient est réservée à l'usage exclusif du destinataire. Si vous n'êtes pas le destinataire visé, vous n'avez aucun droit d'utiliser cette information, de la copier, de la distribuer ou de la diffuser. Si cette communication vous a été transmise par erreur, veuillez la détruire et nous en aviser immédiatement par courriel. ________________________________ De : Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca] De la part de Heidrun Wiesenmüller Envoyé : 3 mai 2013 02:23 À : RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca Objet : [RDA-L] Creators of museum catalogs Talking about creators: One thing I find very puzzling is the treatment of collections in a museum. Maybe I only have these problems because the German rules for main entry for corporate bodies are completely different from the Anglo-American tradition. So, perhaps you can help me here. Bowman says in his "Essential cataloguing" (which was the very first book on AACR2 I ever read), p. 100: "What happens if the item falls under rule 21.1B2 but also appears to have a personal author? The rules tell us nothing in themselves, but the answer becomes apparent when you start to look at the examples that follow. From these it becomes obvious that entry under corporate body, if it applies, takes precedence over personal authorship. This means that, for example, a catalogue of a collection in a particular museum, provided that it emanates from the museum, will be entered under the heading for the museum even if it has a personal author." He gives the following example: Pre-Raphaelite drawings in the British museum / J.A. Gere Main entry is under the British museum, with an added entry for Gere. So far, so good. But now when I look at RDA 19.2.1.3, there is a very similar example under "Works of an administrative nature": Furniture from British India and Ceylon : a catalogue of the collections in the Victoria and Albert Museum and the Peabody Essex Museum / Amin Jaffer ; assisted in Salem by Karina Corrigan and with a contribution by Robin D. Jones ; photographs by Mike Kitcatt, Markham Sexton and Jeffrey Dykes. - Salem, Massachusetts : Peabody Essex Museum The creators are given as: Victoria and Albert Museum Peabody Essex Museum Now, I don't have a problem with the fact that the museums are seen as creators. But I don't understand why there is no third creator, namely the personal author Amin Jaffer. Shouldn't this also be a case of "persons, families, or corporate bodies [being] jointly responsible for the creation of a work" (19.2.1.1)? I don't see how this case is any different from others where the creators perform different roles. My speculation is that perhaps in RDA's system it is simply not possible for a corporate body and a person to work together as creators, i.e. that 19.2.1.1 should be read as "either more than one person or more than one family or more than one corporate body jointly responsible for the creation of a work". But if this is the case, then it should have been clearly stated. Also, I really can't see a reason why it shouldn't be possible to have a collaboration of a corporate body and a person in the creation of a work. And there is another question: If Amin Jaffer or J.A. Gere in Bowman's example are not considered to be creators, then what else could they be? My feeling is that their contribution is at the level of the work, and not at expression level. So the only possibility would be to consider them as "other persons associated with a work" (19.3.1), i.e. grouping them with "persons, etc., to whom correspondence is addressed, persons, etc., honoured by a festschrift, directors, cinematographers, sponsoring bodies, production companies, institutions, etc., hosting an exhibition or event, etc." This really doesn't seem suitable at all. Or should they be seen as contributors (i.e. on expression level) after all? If so, which relationship designator could be used? Any ideas? Heidrun -- --------------------- Prof. Heidrun Wiesenmueller M.A. Stuttgart Media University Facultäy of Information and Communication Wolframstr. 32, 70191 Stuttgart, Germany www.hdm-stuttgart.de/bi
