Re: MAC Discussion Paper 2024-DP03
As an art cataloger, I was especially intrigued by the German MARC-L comments on Discussion Paper 2024-DP03 (inserted below). Their response to question 6.2 noted that they have been looking at role operators beyond simple subject. That is, a term that is more than merely "about" an entity or topic. The German comments wondered if subject specialists were looking at anything like motif (or Motiv in German). I am not aware of similar discussions in the art cataloging community but we do have a perhaps related concern. Some recent subject heading proposals for themes in art that are conceptual rather than representative have not been accepted by the LCSH Editorial Meeting. I think they are like the motif relationship that the Germans are working on. The resource may be about the topic but not include explicit representations of that topic.
These thoughts are still circling in my brain and I look forward to the discussion of MAC papers next week at the SAC meetings.
Sherman Clarke
ARLIS/NA liaison to SAC
former VRA liaison to MAC
********************
Comments from the German-speaking MARC community on MARC-L about MAC papers (excerpt):
Discussion Paper No. 2024-DP03:Addition of Relationship Subfields in Fields 647 and 648 in the MARC 21 Bibliographic Formathttps://www.loc.gov/marc/mac/2024/2024-dp03.html We support the approach taken by this paper.From our perspective, this paper makes some very good and promising points in refining the aboutness aspects of a resource. Thus, it resonates with our intention to have some additional MARC relator codes assigned by the Library of Congress and its NDMSO, in order to designate further types of relationships in the 6XX region.So, of particular interest to us is question 6.2.: "Are there other relationships appropriate for use in subfields $e and $4 in fields 647 or 648 that would further support this proposal?" We think that, indeed, there are: The DACH Committee on Cataloging, and its Working Group on Subject Cataloging (online at https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://wiki.dnb.de/x/HsXOCw__;!!EDx7F7x-0XSOB8YS_BQ!d29TR_LNdiquuZ7XzoOnJBOXk73PC2L-J70DDDX3s_ov1Pu49jV06zeeJk0bSJd6gOuAkx1qG_aAYJTdxz2OcekEoFI$ , mostly in German language) has developed plans to implement the so called "role operators". A role operator opens up aspects of the conceptual essence of a resource and provides perspectives by refining the pure aboutness of a work. The "depicted" and the "setting" relationships, as mentioned and discussed in the paper, are a starting point here, and are already defined as MARC relator codes "dpc" and "stg", respectively. The most elaborated and prominent new type is the "motif" relationship: A "motif", or "Motiv" in German, is a central theme or dominant idea in a work, particularly in a textual work. A work may not strictly be written _about_ a specific entity, but it can have an entity as a _motif_. There are many types of entities which can play a motif role in relationship to a resource, e.g. concepts / topical terms, named events, geographic entities, but also persons, corporate bodies, and even conferences. The "perspective" of a work can be seen and documented as another role operator and specific MARC relationship: A novel is written out of the perspective of a historical or fictitious person, based on a specific mind set, from the standpoint of a single point in time, or from a single geographic region. Another role operator to be covered may be the "method" relationship, and additional ones are under discussion. Similarly, and by comparison, the audience characteristics aspects have already been covered by specific MARC fields (385 and 521).So, we welcome this paper and see it as an opportunity for a broader discussion with participation by the MARC community and the cataloging and information community as a whole. We wonder whether subject catalogers (e.g. represented in the ALA Core Subject Analysis Committee) are discussing similar approaches, and would be interested in an exchange of ideas.In MARC, the listed 6XX fields may by default be handled as strict and easy subject fields, _unless_ they are containing a $e/Sj or a $4 subfield.