Colleagues
The issue of a "blank book" was discussed during the development of the RDA/ONIX Framework for Resource Categorization, upon which the RDA carrier and content type value vocabularies are based.
The context discussed then was the categorization of book-like publications that were more or less blank, such as diaries, sketchbooks, notebooks, etc. that are intended to carry content added after purchase (that is, as modifications of an item). The conclusion was that such publications were out of scope for (bibliographic) resource categorization, and would only be catalogued as a specific item exemplifying a manifestation (carrier type) embodying an expression (content type) that was a modification of the item.
A later discussion by the RSC on artist's books, including blank books and book sculptures, took place in the context of the LRM. The conclusion was that such resources embodied only the expression of the "artist's" work. A book sculpture of a scene from Treasure Island does not embody the English text of Stevenson's work because that expression has been effectively destroyed by the modification of the original manifestation to produce the book sculpture; in this case the content type is three-dimensional object, not text (see Wikipedia article on "Scottish book sculptures". The manifestation embodies a work that is not Stevenson's, although it could be considered to be derived from it or inspired by it. At the opposite end and following a consistent analysis, a blank book also has a content type of three-dimensional object that realizes the artist's work.
This is consistent with the Wikipedia article on "Artist's book" which emphasizes form (i.e. carrier) over content and draws analogies with sculptural objects.
If the volume in question is "not intended to be viewed as an object the way a sculpture would be", what is its intended use? Does the item/manifestation bear a statement about its intended use? It is important to avoid false semantic reasoning: all "sculptures" have a content type of three-dimensional form, but not all three-dimensional forms are sculptures. The terminology in RDA is intended to avoid such analogies.
RDA also avoids using "exception" semantics in value vocabularies: terms that depend on the recording of "other" terms, including their absence. In particular, the carrier and content type vocabularies are exhaustive: all possible categories are covered so there is no need for "other", and "no content type" can be generated for display by a simple data processing algorithm.
If such an algorithm cannot be applied to implementation scenario C "bibliographic/authority data", then RDA provides a note element or unstructured descriptions to record the data, on the clear understanding that such data can only be used for display and keyword extraction.
I think Cage's 4'33" is a bit different. RDA/LRM is only focused on recorded expressions that can be embodied in manifestations, so it is recordings of 4'33" that are of interest. The Wikipedia article states that (a performance of) the work "is marked by silence except for ambient sound, which is intended to contribute to the performance". All recorded performances therefore contain ambient sound in a musical context. A publisher will not get away with a "recording" that is just 4'33" of blank tape, disc, etc. Users of multiple recordings of this work are experiencing the ambient sound content, and presumably find it useful to distinguish them in some way (for example, by how long it takes to hear a cough from the audience :-)
------------------------------
Gordon Dunsire
------------------------------
Original Message:
Sent: Apr 16, 2026 07:20 AM
From: Ebe Kartus
Subject: Content type for blank books
Hello Adam,
An interesting question.
If we are recording data for the 'item in hand', the manifestation, then all we can do is record what we have. If there is no content - then there is no content. We can't record what isn't there. So we have a carrier of 'volume' and media type of 'unmeditated' and that it all.
Looking at the part of the Definition and and Scope of the element:
'A categorization that reflects the fundamental form of communication in which the content is expressed and the human sense through which it is intended to be perceived."
If the pages are blank then there is no expressed form of communication. The artist may be trying to convey a meaning with just blank pages but unless that is communicated to the user in some other way, an individual can interpret or read into blank pages what they personally wish.
I see that you didn't choose this option. However, if the artist is trying to convey an individual interpretation then 'unspecified' would be valid as they themselves have not specified the content but left it to the interpretation of the user.
Regards,
Ebe Kartus
Original Message:
Sent: 4/15/2026 2:42:00 PM
From: Adam Schiff
Subject: Content type for blank books
Yesterday a question came up about what content type to use for a blank book that one of our catalogers was cataloging. The resource is an artist's book consisting of a volume of blank pages. There is no text.
In the RDA content type value vocabulary, there does not seem to be an appropriate term to record for content type that is essentially no content. The only possible term found there is three-dimensional form, but the resource is not sculptural in nature. The definition of "three-dimensional form" is "A content type that consists of content expressed through a form or forms intended to be perceived visually in three-dimensions." The blank book is not intended to be viewed as an object the way a sculpture would be.
In the MARC content type list, two other terms could possibly be appropriate: other and unspecified. We decided that other was probably the best choice to use for the blank book, but it isn't totally satisfactory either, because it implies content other than any of the other terms listed. What really might be needed is a term denoting no intellectual or artistic content at all. The same could be used if one were cataloging a blank audiocassette or any other carrier that contains no content.
Should RDA or MARC contain a content type for no content? Or do you think other from the MARC list is the most appropriate term to use in this situation?
------------------------------
Adam Schiff
Principal Cataloger
University of Washington Libraries
He/Him/His
------------------------------