Kate, Gordon,
Thank you so much for your detailed and helpful replies.
Your responses showed me that I took myself (and you!) down the garden path by phrasing my question in relation to manifestation statements guidance. But I now have more insight into manifestation statement guidance. Thank you! Also, I love that the discussion referenced the principle of representation, my dearest principle in resource description.
I should have led with a question about sources of information for reproduction attributes.
Gordon, your "the source of values of attributes for the reproduction, other than manifestation statement attributes, can include the manifestation statements reproduced from the original: the source of attribute values can be anything (with the exception of the source of manifestation statement attributes)" was 100% the info I needed.
Many thanks,
Melissa
Melissa Parent | Senior Librarian, Acquisition | Collection Development & Description
State Library Victoria | 328 Swanston Street | Melbourne VIC 3000
T +61 3 8664 7454 | mparent@slv.vic.gov.au
slv.vic.gov.au
Consider the environment before printing this email. This message and any attachment is intended only for the use of the Addressee and may contain information that is PRIVILEGED and CONFIDENTIAL. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please delete all copies of the message and its attachments and notify the sender immediately. Thank you.
Original Message:
Sent: 6/5/2024 12:58:00 PM
From: Kate James
Subject: RE: Manifestation statements for reproductions: advice sought
Gordon,
FYI, there are two different manifestations linked from that catalog record which caused me great confusion. This link is for a reproduction of a manifestation with a title page that says, "PRIDE & PREJUDICE by JANE AUSTEN With twenty-four coloured illustrations by C.E. BROCK": Manifestation 1 with Brock illustrations
This link is for a reproduction of a manifestation that says on the series title page "EVERYMAN'S LIBRARY EDITED BY ERNEST RHYS FICTION PRIDE AND PREJUDICE WITH AN INTRODUCTION BY R. BRIMLEY JOHNSON" and on the book title page "PRIDE & PREJUDICE BY JANE AUSTEN": Manifestation 2 with no illustrations by Brock
This mistake in linking two different manifestations to the same catalog record actually does an excellent job of demonstrating my point that it serves user tasks to use manifestation statements appearing in the digitized manifestations to help the user find and identify the particular manifestation they are looking for. It is clear that these reproductions are not the same manifestation and they are reproductions of two different manifestations once you start looking at the pages--the type is different, the pagination is different (xiv, 336 pages for Manifestation 1 and viii, 397 pages for Manifestation 2), etc.
The statement you cited is "Pride & prejudice / with coloured illus. by C.E. Brock." That information is in the catalog record, but it does not appear in the digitized book. It appears on the webpage that contains the catalog record and linked to both digitized manifestations and yes, one could catalog that, but that webpage is not a reproduction of a manifestation: Catalog Record: Pride & prejudice
Hathitrust |
remove preview |
|
Catalog Record: Pride & prejudice |
Published London : J.M. Dent, 1907. Summary A spirited young woman copes with the suit of a snobbish gentleman as well as the romantic entanglements of her sisters. Note On cover: Jane Austen's Novels. Physical Description xiv, 336 p. : ill. |
View this on Hathitrust > |
|
|
The more common situation is that a cataloger is describing the digitized version of Pride and Prejudice and they will be using information on the digitized pages and file metadata as sources of information. The definition of manifestation statement is "A statement appearing in a manifestation and deemed to be significant for users to understand how the manifestation represents itself." As we all know, the purpose of the manifestation statement is to provide information to the user about how the resource represents itself, with no expectation of veracity of data. This statement is within the digitized manifestation thus to record it follows the principle of representation and supports the user tasks find and identify.
I saw the sentence in Guidance: Manifestation statements that you quoted, but I assumed it meant something different. I assumed it meant that manifestation statements describing the original manifestation could not be used to describe the reproduction because not all reproductions contain reproductions of title pages, etc., from the original. Thus, the cataloger has to consider how the reproduction represents itself when determining whether to record manifestation statements to describe it. I realize there is a strong chance that you wrote the statement you quoted so you would know better than I want you intended. However, regardless of intent of that statement there is nothing in the definition of manifestation statement that would convince me that recording this as an instance of manifestation statement for the reproduction that has the Brock illustrations does not satisfy user tasks and is appropriate according to the element definition: "PRIDE & PREJUDICE by JANE AUSTEN With twenty-four coloured illustrations by C.E. BROCK."
In addition to digital reproductions, we may have photocopies that are reproductions. In such cases, the photocopy may have it's own title page added before the photocopied material or may only contain the photocopy of the original title page. Again, the principle of representation is followed by recording a manifestation statement containing data that is found on that photocopied title page. We tell the user it is a photocopy with other methods, including providing a relationship to the original manifestation.
Kate
------------------------------
Kate James (she/her/hers)
OCLC · Program Coordinator- Metadata Engagement, Global Product Management
6565 Kilgour Place, Dublin, Ohio, 43017 United States
------------------------------
Original Message:
Sent: Jun 05, 2024 09:51 AM
From: Gordon Dunsire
Subject: Manifestation statements for reproductions: advice sought
Melissa, Kate
The conditions are immediately preceded by the guidance:
"A statement that relates to the original manifestation is not treated as a statement of the reproduction manifestation."
If we refer to a statement that relates to the original as "original statement", it is only treated as a manifestation statement of the original manifestation.
If the original statement is included in the reproduction, typically when a title page, etc. is photographically or digitally reproduced, then it becomes a "reproduced statement" in the reproduction, and should not be treated as a manifestation statement of the reproduction manifestation.
RDA assumes that each manifestation is described separately and each has its own set of manifestation statements, created at the same time as the manifestation is published or produced. There will be obvious differences in the statements about publication details, but there may be differences in statements of series, copyright, identifier, etc. I just searched Hathi Trust and see that there are differences in statements of title as well; see Pride and prejudice for an example. The digital manifestation carries the statement "Pride & prejudice / with coloured illus. by C.E. Brock" while the original states "PRIDE AND PREJUDICE WITH AN INTRODUCTION BY R. BRIMLEY JOHNSON" and "PRIDE & PREJUDICE BY JANE AUSTEN". The reproduction is not an issue of the Everyman Library, but it is an issue of the HathiTrust Digital Library, etc.
We should not assume we know the intentions of the publisher or producer. If the digital reproduction carries a transcription of the original statement of title and responsibility we assume that it is intended to be a manifestation statement for the reproduction, but if it does not we should not make that assumption, even if there is no other statement of title, etc. except what is reproduced.
So the answer to Q3 is that the option does not permit the recording of manifestation statements for the original as manifestation statements of the reproduction. However, the source of values of attributes for the reproduction, other than manifestation statement attributes, can include the manifestation statements reproduced from the original: the source of attribute values can be anything (with the exception of the source of manifestation statement attributes).
------------------------------
Gordon Dunsire
Original Message:
Sent: Jun 05, 2024 08:20 AM
From: Kate James
Subject: Manifestation statements for reproductions: advice sought
Melissa,
This is my personal cataloger opinion only--I think the 2nd condition option "Record a statement that is related to the original manifestation as a statement for the original manifestation" means that you record a statement about the original manifestation that appears in the reproduction as an instance of Manifestation: manifestation statement or subtype. So in MARC, you could record that in field 881. However, when it comes to fixed field values like the date in the 008 field, then I think you can do the same thing you do now, e.g., use code "r" and use the reproduction date in date 1 and the original date in date 2. That is because those field fields are not unstructured description. Then I think you can follow that line of thinking about unstructured description to guide the rest of your cataloging decisions. If you want to talk more about this with me, you can email me at my work email (jamesk@oclc.org).
------------------------------
Kate James (she/her/hers)
OCLC · Program Coordinator- Metadata Engagement, Global Product Management
6565 Kilgour Place, Dublin, Ohio, 43017 United States
Original Message:
Sent: Jun 04, 2024 07:59 PM
From: Melissa Parent
Subject: Manifestation statements for reproductions: advice sought
Colleagues,
I'm working on modelling my agency's description of turned digital (digitized) resources using an RDA application of the IFLA-LRM in a MARC21 encoding environment.
I'm struggling to interpret the following options for recording manifestation statements in a model that describes the reproduction manifestation (the digitized/turned digital manifestation) using MARC21 and think I have three questions relating to the two condition options.
CONDITION OPTION Record a statement that is related to the original manifestation as a Manifestation: note on manifestation.
Does this option permit (as I think it does):
Q1. Record manifestation attributes of the reproduction manifestation in MARC21 tags/coding associated with manifestation attributes (identifier for the reproduction, publication details, carrier characteristics, access and use conditions)
Q2. Record the original manifestation attributes in a note (like MARC21 534)
CONDITION OPTION
Record a statement that is related to the original manifestation as a statement for the original manifestation.
I'm really uncertain about what this option permits. It's the option I'm really struggling with.
Q3. Does this option permit recording manifestation attributes of the original manifestation in MARC21 tags/coding associated with the manifestation when describing a reproduction manifestation?
Many thanks,
Melissa
Melissa Parent | Senior Librarian, Acquisition | Collection Development & Description
State Library Victoria | 328 Swanston Street | Melbourne VIC 3000
T +61 3 8664 7454 | mparent@slv.vic.gov.au
slv.vic.gov.au
Consider the environment before printing this email. This message and any attachment is intended only for the use of the Addressee and may contain information that is PRIVILEGED and CONFIDENTIAL. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please delete all copies of the message and its attachments and notify the sender immediately. Thank you.