Author Archives: ReadWriteLib

Myth 1) Copy is always correct and can be used “as is”.
* Debunked!: While most records are good and useable, trusting that copy can just be grabbed and put into a catalog without changes can lead to dirty catalogs and misinformation. Even though I’m still new to cataloging, I’ve seen lots of unique errors in copy records that make me cringe, especially when OCLC shows that multiple libraries have touched the record. Simple errors from mistyping a name or word in a title to misclassification of call number or subject headings. I’ve also seen mistakes is nearly every MARC field–wrong or unneeded 043, odd 260s, and don’t get me started about 5xxs. All copy needs to be reviewed and checked before it is used, to better help the patrons.

Myth 2) It takes a certain type of person to catalog.
* Debunked!: Catalogers don’t need to be anti-social, strict rule-following, cat-crazed, computers-preferred-over-people people. What does it take to be a cataloger? It’s about skills and abilities. Obviously details are the core of cataloging–representing, verifying, and exacting the item’s information. Also, there’s a certain rhythm to cataloging, being able to deal with the mundane, pretty straight-forward description, and yet not get too wound up about (or bogged down in) analysis of the item. Balance is key. Navigating the rules and creatively thinking about the item and its record takes a talent and a sense but also experience. Remaining curious and interested in learning more and questioning how to represent items and content is also key. It’s more a mind-set and capabilities rather than a personality that represent catalogers.

Myth 3) Cataloging is a solitary job.
* Debunked!: This couldn’t be further from the truth. Don’t believe, sign-up for cataloging listservs! Catalogers love to talk, discuss, and help each other out. (Perhaps another myth included should have been that cataloging is black and white.) These listservs are very popular and discussions carry on, sometimes for a very long time. Cataloging communities are important and beneficial to cataloging. It’s great when libraries and organizations have multiple people cataloging who can and do pick each other’s brains and bounce ideas off each other, debating what to do and how to best serve their patrons with the cataloging records. And for those who are solo catalogers, there are the listservs and conferences and professional connections. Collective knowledge, besides experience, is beneficial to cataloging.

Myth 4) Computers could and should do cataloging.
* Debunked!: Sure, the possibility exists but when it comes down to it, humans still do much more that what computers are capable of with cataloging. Catalogers add value because we assess the item for what it is and what it’s about. Sometimes the item itself isn’t clear-cut and takes interpretation. It might use new lingo for an already well-document topic or put a spin on an old idea. Plus, descriptive cataloging alone requests a certain assessment level since items might be missing a title page, or mention a series in passing within the prelim pages, or have more on a title page than just an author and a title. It’s these gray areas that humans still excel at. Then there are subject headings and boy does it take skill to understand and apply those! And sometime even post-coordination can’t account for some items and topics. As humans, we care and in cataloging that can make all the difference in creating records.

Myth 5) Cataloging is unnecessary now with internet capabilities and full-text searching.
* Debunked!: First off, the internet is not organized and search engines use algorithms to produce lists that are likely relevant to the search but usually require vetting and sorting by the user. Also, not everything is tagged nor in full-text on the web. Nor in library catalogs. Here at UMich, the Google Book scan is not just a hot topic but a real issue since the school is now part of the lawsuit with several authors and publishers. If full-texts were available for every item in a catalog, it’d be way too overwhelming and there would need to be a system in place to rank and gage each item in relation to the search. However, as mentioned above in a previous debunking, writers don’t always do their topics justice. A book might saw it’s about cats but perhaps it focuses on the natural enemies of cats and hardships that befoul them, meaning a lot of other terms are going to be contained in that book and might skew a search result. Or what about the idea that new lingo is used to talk about the same idea, which would result it in probably getting missed when searching the more popular terms. This is where, again, librarians are crucial because of our human ability to asses and think things through in ways computers can’t. A library is a library with or without books/items due to the knowledge and expertise of its librarians, plain and simple.

Myth 6) Vendor records are terrible.
* Debunked!: This had to make the cut since I work for ProQuest and create vendor records. Look, I chose to work there because my records will be disseminated to libraries who pay for our content. I love what I do even more knowing that my good cataloging will make it easier for libraries and their patrons to find our items. Catalogers in libraries can produce bad records, just as vendors can. Bottom line, it comes down to the individuals doing the cataloging. It doesn’t matter if the person is a paraprofessional, a degreed librarian, old or new to the profession, working in a library or for the government or in a corporation. All that matters is that the cataloger cares and puts in the effort to create and use the very best cataloging records. This is what I strive for everyday and what makes me so passionate about what I do. At the end of the day, where I work or what I catalog doesn’t mean as much as why.

So, take a moment to admire the craft and art form that is cataloging and the MARC record–and if you spot any errors, please make the catalogs a better place by leaving cataloging in a better condition than when you found it.

Alright, after today’s loss again Sparty, UMich fans might need a pick-me-up. At least for the LIS speciality at SI, this should take your mind off it for a bit and give you something to laugh about. (Look, how can you beat a team that comes prepared for am all out battle when we just thought it was a football game? Anyway, on to cataloging–Go Blue!)

When I came across this subject heading, I was perplexed and could hardly believe it was true. It makes sense but it’s still goofy and makes me laugh even now. And probably will as long as it’s a sub. head. and I’m a cataloger.

What I want to know is why was “stuffed foods (cooking)” created?

Seriously, doesn’t “ravioli” or “cannoli” or “taco” just need a self-referring subject then maybe a type of culinary food that it belongs to? Do we really need “stuffed foods (cooking)” as a catch-all? It seems any especially broad heading, for sure. There are 29 items in the LC catalog that use it, though mostly they are about wraps so why isn’t there a “wraps” headings instead? Alas, that is not the case. From a quick glance, the only item that is entirely about stuffed foods as a category is Stuff it! by Lora and Max Brody.

The subject heading works great when it comes to the authorities, though, since it collects various foods. Not everything has a narrower term, which would be helpful for ravioli, wraps, etc. that get left out otherwise. Or should that be leftover?

LC Authorities screenshot for "stuffed foods (cooking)"

A cool thing about this one is that it was part of the switch when “cookery” became “cooking.” And so did some of its narrower terms, yet not all of them. As catalogers know, and probably many librarians in general, too, even patterns aren’t always followed in cataloging when these are set up. For some reason, only a couple of the terms are qualified further rather than all. This is the whole list, too, which feels to me that it is lacking some obvious narrower terms but again, that’s what happens. Where are the “samosas” and “wraps” and would “corn dogs” count? I’m sure someone has written a book about corn dogs–especially State Fair ones from all around the US? *quick Amazon.com search* Well, Amazon shows a couple of corn dog books but nothing like a State Fair food tour of them…hmm, this might need to be remedied; as you may have figured out, I love a good corn dog now and then. And turkey legs. Next summer, I might just have to visit my parents in MN during Fair time. Yum!

Alright, I’ll stuff it on stuffed foods for now. Just remember this sub. head. next time when you’re cataloging a book about stuffed peppers and mushroom caps–you’ll know just what to use!

Ever found a subject heading to scratch your head over, or laugh about, or ponder its creation? That is the reason behind this new feature on my blog, titled “There’s a Subject Heading for That?!” We all come across them, whether in use as a patron or in practice as a librarian, especially us catalogers. Really, subject headings are one of the best (and worst) parts of being a cataloger. Mainly I love sub. heads, but there are days, and headings, that perplex and stump. Some times they bring together a topic succinctly in one heading and some times there is no amount of post-coordination that can corral what an item is about. Hope you enjoy this new segment!

“Bullying in the workplace”

Came across this subject heading this week, and while it’s very useful, it made me a little sad to find it. It’s a sub. head. because enough people wrote works about it, and its prevention, to necessitate it’s own 650. However, this one doesn’t surprise me. There are 43 items in the LC catalog with it, and several geographically subdivided items.  What’s more, I searched “work environment” for the same item and it turns out that “bullying in the workplace” is a narrower term–guess I should have seen that coming–along with other interesting terms. Included are, of course, “sex in the workplace”, “gossip…” and “dress code…” but some that stood out were “personal internet use…”, “conflicts of generations…” and “sex role…”. “Naps (sleep)…” and “music…” also have their own terms. It’s an interesting mix of narrower terms, to be sure, and I didn’t list them all here so check it out on LC Authority File. The one term that seems missing that feels like it should be included in this list is a subject heading for sexual harassment or harassment in general. Oddly enough, it merits it’s own subject heading with no broader nor narrower terms–only giving a see also note for “sex role in the workplace” and specifying in its scope note that it is used for office as well as general harassment. Seems odd, then, that bullying gets it’s own narrower term, separating it from the rest of bullying. How is that distinction different from harassment in the workplace? Alas, the complexities of subject headings!

Bookstores vs libraries

On Monday, the first Borders bookstore closed in Ann Arbor, MI. CNN ran a lengthy, in-depth story on just how much the bookstore meant to the area, the customers, and the workers. The sentiments and memories in the story seemed on par with a library closing–childhood nostalgia, book recommendations, staff answering questions, people studying. Bookstores and libraries always seemed pitted against each other, to me, since they offered very different things. I go into a bookstore with a purpose, a certain item that I am looking to buy, but with a library I expect to browse the shelves with or without an item in mind, maybe find a good study spot, and know that at the reference desk my research and paper topic questions can be answered. Borders No. 1 seemed to have been it’s own kind of special; I went in a couple of years ago to blow birthday money (on what else? I am a librarian!) and it was fine but seemed like any other bookstore–perhaps the real charm and customer service predated me, as the article articulates. Of all the bookstores I’ve been in, they feel like a store in which I’m expected to buy something or linger for just a bit. At libraries, the study spaces are ample, and not just a comfy chair here or there but tables and desks and seclusion among the stacks, with power supplies near by. In a library, I want to make a home-away-from-home and stay to heart’s content, but more importantly, the library encourages this and now also tends to encourage group study as well.

Ever since the economic troubles, libraries have been under scrutiny even more, with many closing or being on the verge. LISNews has a great picture of University of Western Ontario librarians on strike. One has a sign that says “A library without librarians is just a bookstore” and another “Couldn’t do innovative, excellent research with a librarian.” While bookstores and libraries have similarities and differences, these two statements get at the heart of the matter: librarians offer knowledge and research expertise to help patrons find what they are looking for, or get them on the right path to find it. Sure, bookstore staff can give reading recommendations and probably tell you who wrote what and when, but it is librarians who are steeped in searching and resources, taking patrons from a shot-in-the-dark Google search to reliable databases and trustworthy sources. If anything, librarians are needed now more than ever in the Internet Age because information is so pervasive and freely available but needs to be sifted through to find what’s substantial and what’s correct. The buzz-phrase “information literacy” conveys this idea but I think it’s simpler and older than that–good and bad information and sources have been around probably since human communication began, maybe we are more overloaded now than ever but I don’t see this an a new concept and a new issue; patrons may think Google is a great place to start and has the answers they need but before the internet, I’m sure people consulted neighbors, friends, and family in the same way. Librarians make the difference, and always have.

Physical books vs e- and audio

In addition to thinking about bookstores and libraries this week, formats have also been inundating my thoughts, mainly because I’m currently using them all. “The death of the book” has been a trendy topic for a while now, but if we really think about things, reading seems to be making a comeback now more than ever. While The Guardian has a great article with facts and figures, for those of you interested, I wanted to address the issue from my personal experience as to the viability of each of these formats.

My prediction: books are not dead and will not die, ever.

Why not? First they are stable–once printed, always there. Paper is getting better, ink is made smarter, and both combine to make longer lasting books. Whereas technology is in flux and can be fickle…WordPress just auto-saved my draft! Case and point. What works today with technology might not 10 years, 5 years, even 2 years from now. That’s one of the problems with digital content and preserving it for the future.

Second, and here’s my grumble about e-books, physical books are, well, physical. I can page through them, easily hold my place and jump ahead to see where the chapter ends, or thumb back to find that scene I read a few pages ago. E-books, whether on a device or online, need time to load the next page. Sure there are electronic bookmarks and chapter jumps that make reading similar to a physical book but it takes more time and effort. Currently book three of the Hunger Games is on my iPad but remains at the same spot as it was a few months ago, and I’ve read a few physical books since then. I want to feel what I am reading, see my paper bookmark progress through the work, and take the book with me places. With e-books, they are on a device or my computer, it’s not just the text anymore like a physical book. These devices and my computer are a portal to so much more and why would I read on them if I can do other things? (As a side note, I’ve had an iPhone for a few years now and have had to train myself not to pick up my phone and check the moment an e-mail comes in. Technology is demanding my attention, inserting itself into my life and wanting me to do things NOW. My FaceBook app displays a little read number on the homescreen, showing me how many people have interacted with me since I last went into the app. Enough! I want a book to be a book, nothing more!)

Third, e-books just aren’t overtaking physical books. To begin with, a device is needed and they are still expensive. Though you might have to wait, a library provides materials of all sorts to everyone and all that’s needed is a library card. I think e-books have breathed new life into reading and books but they aren’t going to overtake them. Other fads have made reading cool again, too, like Twilight. Harry Potter did to some extent but Twilight boomed and made teen girls want to read. Vampire and zombies books (yes!) are popular and in demand. Sure, movies and tv shows are also jumping on this trend but it seems books have a renew respect. It’s like the Goosebump craze that my generation was a part of–if books get kids to read, why not let them have what they want. Neither Twilight (I did read the first) nor the Goosebump series (I read a few) are harmful, in my opinion.

Finally, people like to read. This is probably why the e-readers have taken off. Holding something and reading words is the essence of reading. Audio books have been around for quite a while, and even with iPods and mp3 players, they are no where near being a threat to physical books. There is a vast difference between reading something for yourself and being read to. For me, things stick better when I read because I set my own pace and can return to passages. An audio book just goes. The narrator controls everything, the voices, the pronunciation, the pacing, the emotions. As a reader, I find myself infringed upon with audio books. Let me explain. If you know me, have been keeping up with my blog, or read my About Me Page, you’ll know that my husband lives three hours away in Wooster, OH. I figured that for these trips audio books would make the drive easier and more enjoyable. It’s true, they are great. However, there are some snags. Distractions, and on the road they are frequent because I’m watching and interacting with other drivers, cause me to miss what’s going on sometimes. This means that I lose plot and character names, which when a person is only referred to by pronouns, takes some quick thinking to figure out who is being talked about and doing what. Also, the experience may be completely different from if I had read the book myself. One book I wanted to finish was Terry Goodkind’s last book in his Sword of Truth series. The narrator does a good job but there are some things I don’t like. First is pronunciation. Kahlan, a main character, become Kaylynn, rather than my preferred Kahlawn. And he acts instead of reads, so he shouts when a character shouts, and rushes text when it’s an action-packed or suspenseful moment. Plus, gory details stand out even more since I normally brush over them and I can better control the images in my mind from text than words. It’s like when Harry Potter was made into the movies–everything changes for readers because each reader had their own interpretation and readings that now were inundated with movies that made certain decisions that the reader once had control over.

In the end, I prefer my physical books best. My shelves are overflowing and I always want more. Plus, with a public library just down the road from me, I’ve found a new love for public libraries–I was always a school/academic libraries kid. If you love e-books or audio books more, here’s to you. I’m just glad that more people are into reading and books, for whatever reason.

Apparently this is a Gilmore Girl’s reference that I didn’t know about (a college guy friend wore the shirt often): Reading is sexy. And let’s keep it that way!

Alright, you caught me with a triumphed up title–though not entirely.

My previous post didn’t mention AutoCat but part of the reason for writing it came from the listserv. There has been much talk, and some borderline catty posts the past couple of weeks about qualifications for a job posting. This week, the discussion turned into questioning some job postings to the listserv since some of the members believe that there was a lack of value to the job for what it was and was asking of applicants. Then today, posts poured out about if/should catalogers work the reference desk and why reference librarians weren’t in turn then expected to work hours in tech services.

Such huge issues that dared to turn sour at first actually mellowed and became quite fascinating and thought-provoking. Wanting to post to AutoCat but knowing I had much more to say than just a few lines, I jotted down notes at work–on the back of my sudoku calendar page today–to wait for a proper post tonight. Tomorrow morning, I’ll email the listserv a link to this post and we’ll see if anyone comes to visit and for a read. Here’s hoping! Please comment if you do and feel inclined to say something!

Should tech services librarians work reference? I tend to agree with those AutoCat posters who said each job type offers a lot of responsibilities, enough to not have people cross over. Unless it’s a really tiny library or branch that can run on less people with multiple hats, I believe public and tech services should not cross schedule librarians in departments. That being said, there is much to learn from each other.

I propose open communication between the different departments and librarians and paraprofessionals to explain to each other “this is how I do what I do and why”. Sounds like a huge undertaking? Not really. Informal talks, the briefest of presentations, work tours/demos, brown bag lunch discussions–any of these ideas could be used to stimulate and educate the staff about what goes on and why in all areas of the library. We are a team, after all, so why not understand each part of the process and have an overall picture of what everyone does? With a holistic view of the library, everyone will be valued and seen as valuable if their part and job is tied into the story of the workplace as a whole.

What would be discussed? There are highs and lows to every position, great challenges and rewards. At ALA in DC, NCSU explained their unique yet template-reliant course pages–how sweet and helpful would those be at the reference desk? Each English page can have standard content yet unique material related just to that course such as database links. And the University of Michigan’s library website added patron tagging abilities to pages, even record pages–how great would that be if students and staff and patrons were encouraged to really attempt to tag during each use, with relevant information. The possibilities for subject headings give me goosebumps, but that will be the topic of another post. The point is to get across to everyone on staff what is vital for each position, and in getting people to assess and explain their job will engage them to be more thoughtful and hopefully propel them into the future with more passion and drive to be a part of something greater, which everyone on the team values. (Perhaps I’m seeing too many business motivational and team building items lately–wanna know about difficult people and how to deal with them?!)

Why is this important and is there value in understanding all aspects of the library? Yes, a resounding yes. I know from personal experience. During undergrad, I worked in tech services during all four years doing numerous tasks that eventually lead to me being initiated into working with records and inserting closed author dates. Also, during the summers I worked the Circ Desk, then got a second job shelving during the year as well. At the Law Library, during grad school at UMich (GO BLUE!), I did citation research and database/website upkeep, interned for acquisitions, and cataloged. I had a sense of public and tech services from many aspects and I am so much better for it. First, I learned what I did and didn’t enjoy, as well as my strength and weakness, and perferences. Sure, I can work a Circ Desk but I get nervous and bored, to be honest, waiting for patrons, so I didn’t pursue jobs at reference desks. The tech services jobs reenforced that I was detail oriented and really cared about getting things right so that patrons could find just what it was they were looking for. Without having actually gotten experience cataloging, though, I wouldn’t have felt confident applying for full-time catalog positions; I was pretty sure that I’d be good at it but it wasn’t until I cataloged as a student job that I knew it would be something to keep me engaged and excited to go to work everyday. And it does–I love working for ProQuest as a Catalog Librarian.

While I’ve already set out how to work with current staff to create a shared knowledge about the inner (vital) workings about the library, there’s an even more effective way to ensure a brighter future for librarians and libraries…catch them in school and give them the taste and knowledge then. I made my own path and learned value and lessons from every position I had as a student, whether I liked the job or task, or not. Look, no one likes doing inventory with old shelf list cards–but I knew how to read a card and how to remove those poles from the trays (and I took a little fencing in college so don’t mess with me around a card catalog for sure!)

Why not give student workers a Tour of the Library by having them work hours in each aspect of the library? Maybe at a reference desk they can shadow experienced staff to get a sense for how different librarians interview then help a patron. If there’s no way for a student to even do copy cataloging, why not spend those hours going through the basics of a MARC record and the standards of cataloging your library uses? Hours on a Circ. Desk is a no-brainer (i.e. easy to train and let a student work the desk) and teaches customer service and prioritizing time with tasks and service. And who doesn’t love shelving? I did so much of it but I appreciate books in order and have an eye for, and pull now, books that aren’t You never know when you’ll find a missing or out-of-place book, or hidden movies–boy, do I have stories. The point is, having been in all these areas and seen what goes on, I have a genuine appreciation for everyone who has a part in making things work. Heck, I even did some scanning for a day one summer for ILL in undergrad but it was way too dull for me to pay attention–I value anyone who can get in a zone and do that right, since ILLs tend to be popular.

Perhaps it’s my natural disposition to find meaning and lessons in what I do, otherwise it’d be impossible for me to have gotten through some of the tasks and jobs I’ve done. Yet I believe a rotational position for students, either undergrads who are thinking about librarianship or just applying because they don’t want to work in dining services, and especially graduate students in library school, should be part of their learning. I gained and saw so much from my various experiences. Also, talking with other students who are doing the same is important too. While I never worked a reference desk, my husband Steve, now a reference librarian at the College of Wooster, did and he shared many of his insights with me. He was lucky to work at two very different desks with stark, contrasting patrons and needs, so he had a vast knowledge about what can occur and how to deal with things at a reference desk. I also shared my stories about work with him, which helped me digest and articulate things, while getting feedback and questions to engage me further. Dialogue, not just thinking, is important to understanding.

Reiterating a point from last week, we as librarians need to ban together as one, not just for the patrons and funding and support but for ourselves and the sakes of our libraries. We must understand and value each position and person in the library staff, seeing how all the pieces work together in order to make them run smoothly.

It’s Friday. I’m sitting in the Andrews Library at the College of Wooster, waiting for Steve to finish work at five and even though my weekend’s already begun, this post is on my mind–time to write. The novel I’m half way through will just have to wait a bit longer.

This week, I used a subject heading that, at first encounter, seemed odd and likely wrong. “Psychology, Industrial” doesn’t create any possibility of self-explanation as other sub. heads but before I deemed it ill used for the record, I went to the LC Authorities. Turns out, it is quite a catch-all that was perfect for the item, however, I doubt a patron (let alone this cataloger) would ever have searched for it. Here’s a screenshot of the narrower terms:

It is a useful sub. heading for this type of topic but again it’d really only be useful after the patron, or librarian, was already aware of its meaning and use. It’d be great help once you’d found it, though. I remember Prof. Edmund Kern at Lawrence University telling me, during a meeting about a paper for him, that the trick was finding the sub. headings that were about what you wanted and then searching them, sometimes turning up other related sub. headings to search as well.

As interesting as I find this subject heading, what does this have to do with anything other than my item and fond memories of my alma mater? Well, Annoyed Librarian’s recent post got me thinking and things just clicked this week. Why do people become librarians? While AL’s post is about the loss of tenure for academic librarian positions, there are a few paragraphs about failed academics becoming librarians:

“One thing I’ve noticed about people with PhDs is that they’ll put up with anything to stay in academia. They don’t listen to reason before getting their degrees, and by the time they’ve spent ten years at their underfunded university earning a degree they’re not suited for anything else.

But librarians? Most librarians theoretically have skills that are marketable outside of academia, and except for the ones that are failed academics who still don’t listen to reason and think they’ll get cushy jobs, those librarians aren’t necessarily wedded to academic librarianship. If they’re good enough to get jobs at all, they can probably gets jobs elsewhere.

I guess there are all the librarians who believe library schools and the ALA that there is a librarian shortage will still be desperate, like all the PhDs who mistakenly thought the world would owe them a job just because they wrote a dissertation on an extremely obscure topic.

Depending on how the profession goes, it might even be the same group of people, who go back to library school thinking, “no, this time, I really will get a job!” Because that’s exactly what librarianship needs, more people who failed at other things before “settling” for librarianship.”

I’ve left AL’s hyper links in but please visit the post, linked before the quote, for the whole piece, which is worth the read.

The idea of “failed academics” becoming librarians isn’t new and it was a topic talked about among students at library school, at least for me. Are failed academics tainting the field? Do they detract from those of us (i.e. me and my husband, Steve) who chose to become librarians as our first profession?

No to both questions. On the contrary, I believe people with other degrees who then become librarians offer much value to the profession.

For starters, they have specialized knowledge that can be helpful for researchers and students in certain topics. During my time as a student worker at the UMich Law Library, I wasn’t allowed to work reference because only Law students worked the desk, besides the Law librarians with JDs. Also, I’ve seen job descriptions in which, such as a Science librarian position, a PhD was required and an MSI/MLIS was optional. Sure, library service skills are easier to learn and people can be trained, where as specialized topical knowledge can make a difference in helping a patron find information or know where to start looking. This raises the question, are library degrees even needed? Having earned mine in April, I’m in the camp that deems they are, but could be a whole other post.

Also, some people are more passionate and find their niche in something only after they’ve tried another thing. There’s a plethora of reasons why we all do what we do, when we do it, and why. Who says those “failed academics” won’t make great librarians who can really help people well since they know their subject and sources throughly? Perhaps I’m being optimistic in my assessment but let’s take the best case possible. Why wouldn’t you want a people with Chemistry, Biology, and Astronomy degrees working the reference desk at a college or university? Having various degrees represented on library staff makes sense. It’s not always possible, but if it is and there are interested people for the jobs, why not?

MasterChef season 2 just finished–did you catch it? It’s still on Hulu, if not. The premise is home cooks from America (though the series is international, but the American one gets Ramsay!), without any formal training complete against each other. Suzy, a neural engineer, said she’s going to pursue becoming a chef and cooking from now on, finally having found her true passion in life. So why can’t libraryland just embrace paraprofessionals, first-career librarians, “failed academics” who became librarians, and all those in between that make up the library field that so desperately needs to ban together especially now when library funding and support keeps waning each year? We may provide free services and information but if we don’t speak up as a whole, things will just keep slipping. This isn’t to say that nothing is being done–there are certainly many libraries and communities fighting for maintaining and increasing funding and support–but there could be more comradery amongst the different types of librarians and libraries.

Lastly, AL ends by asking if we should dissuade people from becoming librarians, telling the readers to “think very carefully”. At the end of the day, I got a job and so did my husband. Many of our fellow library graduates are still looking, and interviewing for the lucky ones. The economy is tough right now, for everyone. If you want to go into librarianship, do it. Just do what makes you happy and earns you a living–that’s my philosophy. While Steve and I both landed jobs, we live three hours apart and commute on weekends to hangout, and Skype during the week. It’s not an ideal arrangement but we are both working at jobs we love, that make us happy, so for now the arrangement works.

It’s 5 pm, the library is closing, and in moments the lights will automatically go out here at the Andrew Library. I hope you’ve enjoyed this post, it’s been on my mind throughout the week but now that it’s on the screen, it’s time to post and sign out, then enjoy my weekend with Steve in Wooster!

My one month working for ProQuest passed without much notice, which is delightful since it means I enjoy work and have been kept too busy to notice how long I’ve been there. Cataloging, yes, I’m a dork, gives me joy.

Why do I love cataloging? It’s technical yet artsy, rigid yet fluid, structured yet variable. Each item is unique yet patterns and combinations exist. Once you figure something out it’s likely that you can use it again, in some way. It’s much like a puzzle, though there are many ways to do a record and interpret subject headings.

So, what’s happened this month? Besides cataloging e-books and streaming videos, I posted to Auto-Cat–twice! Also, ProQuest has continued the “Summer of Service” idea annually and so I volunteered on the company’s behalf at a local library. I weeded and withdrew nonfiction children’s books, as per the librarians there, which went into the book sale pile. In fact, I’m going back tomorrow with a colleague to do a couple more hours. There are lots of volunteer opportunities and drives at ProQuest, making me even happier to work there.

One last insight, for now–from AutoCat it’s easy to see many of the flaws and shortcomings and opinions in cataloging but yesterday I came across a brilliant subject heading that I just love.

I appreciate it’s eloquence, as a writer/reader, and it’s conciseness, as a cataloger: cultural competence.

One description from the LC Authorities for the phrase is: A set of congruent behaviours, attitudes, and policies which come together in a system, agency, or among professionals and enable that system, agency, or those professionals to work effectively in cross-cultural situations.

This made my cataloging so much more fulfilling yesterday because I was searching for how to nail this idea, or post-coordinate as the case is usually. Finding this made my day, perhaps even month. When subject headings are bad, they can be very bad but when subject headings are good, they can be very good!

Radical Cataloging : Essays at the Front, edited by K. R. Roberto

Not a new book but one I’ve been working on (we will get to that) since it seemed essential for expanding my knowledge as a new cataloger. What better way to learn about the field than through reading experienced catalogers discuss their work and the related successes and struggles.

This book has had one of my bookmarks in it since…well UMich finally locked me out so I can’t check my account, even though I still have this and a Spanish vocab book–hey they let me have my master’s degree so, sadly, they must not be too concerned about my two library books still checked out (though my undergrad never would have let me have my diploma if I had had books checked out then). It’s been at least since December this book has been in my possession and slowly but surely my bookmark has inched it’s way forward but remains stuck on 209 of 303. Usually the last hundred pages are a cinch for me–it’s where all the action is, the story is coming to a quell or close, and resolution is ever nearing. However, this is not the case with this book because, as the subtitle stipulates, it is a collection of essays.

The essays are, on the whole, enjoyable and intellectually stimulating but perhaps that is part of my issue with the work right now. I have been a student for 19 consecutive years–no preschool for me, just daycare. Con-sec-u-tive. And why, in my last semester of grad school did I decide to pick this work up?: to better myself as a cataloger and get up-to-speed on the issues and highlights so far. It’s a great collection of essays to do so with, just every time I picked up the book, it took effort to pick up where I left off and finish an article though it was more work, sometimes, to start the next. And that wasn’t just once but nearly every time I removed my bookmark in an attempt to proceed.

Why such problems getting through this book? Well, maybe I should answer why I didn’t just stop and return it months ago when it was clear that my desire to read it did not outweigh the roadblocks read it presented: I do not abandon books, no matter how much I dislike them. Okay, this is no longer true but was until last year when I realized, perhaps in a moment of salient adulthood, that life is too short to struggle through a work I didn’t enjoy, that it didn’t matter how many other people enjoyed the work if I didn’t, that it was okay to not finish a book–blasphemy! Don’t let my inner little girl hear that–I forced myself growing up to read every stinking word on a page before I could start a new, better novel. Since last year, I’ve put down The Time Traveler’s Wife and The Story of Edgar Sawtelle. The Life of Pi is boarder-lined but remains on my bookshelf with its bookmark still calling me to resume my place, for now. Sadly, this essay collection might be the next outcast on my, sadly, growing “started-but-didn’t-deem-worthwhile-to-finish list”. Perhaps I’ll pick this one back up later to finish it when I’ve had time to gorge on novels.

Reasons Excuses for not finishing:

1. Having just finished my master’s degree, this feels too much like schoolwork than enjoyment.
2. LC bashing makes me cringe–most essays don’t have any or much but some are rants and a couple really grated on me with the rashness with which they were clearly written. Since I spent a week with the lovely people in the Policy and Standards Division at LC (yup, they write the red books and hold the infamous weekly meetings!), I feel most criticism is unwarranted but critique can be useful if done in a productive and constructive manner. Opinions are always valid, I just prefer more tact.
3. Some essays are very specific to the point where it’s hard to relate and care if you don’t catalog the same materials or topics.
4. Though organized into sections, there really is no cohesive organization to the book which makes for a jumbled reading from very separate and specific essays to more general to vague to well-cited to literature reviews to op-ed essays. There is no storyline nor logical progression.
5. Right now, I want to devour all the novels waiting for me that I now, supposedly, have time to read since I’m a full-time worker who doesn’t work overtime, doesn’t bring home work, and has free weekends.
6. Change is coming (whispers of RDA blow past my ears every now and then). Will these criticisms and issues still be relevant if a new metadata schema is implemented?
7. There will always be problems and kinks with standardizing subject headings, or any fields for that matter. People will write and create works on new topics in new ways, combining information, making “messy” items that won’t fit into a rigid structure.

Reasons for keeping the book this long and why I want(ed) to finish it–hey, had it been recalled, I would have returned it!:

1. Catalogers are important and do critical work for libraries and any collections (since I work for ProQuest as a Catalog Librarian, better give a shout-out to more than just “libraries”).
2. Standardization of terms is useful and necessary, even if it isn’t perfect. Tagging and folksonomies (<–just taught my computer this word!) aren’t any better and if anything they are more imperfect; at least with standardization, terms are decided and references are used. Now, a combination of both might get at topics in ways that subject headings are too clunky with right now, but also allowing LC-approved catalogers to help with creation of terms would speed things along and help right many wrongs/oddities. We catalogers are smart and caring, and more than willing to help explain and make things better–just check out AutoCat to see proof!
3. Most of the essays are informative, especially about niche topics and issues. I had no idea “women” were so marginalized in subject headings for the longest time, and how minorities still are, in some cases. I felt like I was really learning a lot about the history and progression and progress yet to be made in cataloging.
4. My inner little girl keeps nagging me to finish, especially since I have found such value in most of the essays thus far.
5. No one has recalled it yet so I might as well hang on to try and finish it until someone else requests it–though there is a flaw in this plan, since some people (me included) do not recall items but rather wait until they are returned and available. Minnesota-nice, in my case; don’t want to take some thing away from someone if they still need it.
6. One of the catalogers at LC recommended this book to me when I was there. Seriously, that’s how I learned of it. She said it was good food for thought and the essays were interesting. (Partly why all the LC bashing in some of the essays bug me even more than it might most readers).
7. I feel like a need another reason so my excuses don’t outweigh these reasons but it’s the summer and the internet at my place doesn’t reach the porch well so I have to sit at my desk inside tying this up, and I’ve been writing this post for a while (as you probably can imaging if you made it to this point), and all I want right now is some sunshine and Law and Order: SVU on the porch–funny how that works out there. My books tell me I shouldn’t have ordered Netflix but with a laptop and a sunny porch, it’s hard not to relax with a plot-driven, neatly wrapped-up storyline in just 45 minutes. I heart novels but it’s difficult to resist a smart, sharp tv show or movie. I’m all about story, and characters.

Alright, I’ve had enough and you (if you are still with me!) certainly have. Next time I’ll post about my favorite novels and story-driven shows and movies, since it’s summer we can do an enjoyable post right? Plus, I have another post idea lined up but want to work on it a bit before posting.

Last, what drove me to (finally) write this post? Meredith Farkas, librarian blogger of Information Wants to be Free. Her recent post about how to be a better blogger caught my attention and gave me to push I needed to get this post down and out. It’s certainly long and thoughtful, two checks in her opinion. Check it out–she’s a great librarian to read and keep track of, among others.

I’ll let you know if I do finish this book some time soon.

Lately life’s been up in the air. My husband and I, both recent MSI graduates, landed jobs but in different locations, which has meant a lot of extra work.

Today was my first day at ProQuest as a Catalog Librarian. The day went well and I look forward to working with all the wonderful people there and building my professional career. Cataloging is both an art and a skill that every place does differently, though there are some standards; I’ll enjoy learning all the preferences and methods used at ProQuest–nerdy, I know but hey, I’m a cataloger. They are bound to keep me busy, that’s for sure, but I’m more than ready for the challenge.

Steve had his second day as the Emerging Technologies Librarian at the College of Wooster today, which I’m sure went well since we have yet to talk today. Wooster is in Ohio and is an adorably cute town with local–as well as chain–restaurants and stores since it seems to be a mini-hub for the region. He’s in a nice neighborhood and it’ll be fun to get to know the town. Their Main Street branch public library is amazing, btw.

With Steve in Wooster, that leaves me in Ann Arbor. AADL received props for being a well-used library. We are all set when it comes to libraries, with great public ones and area college/university libraries. In wanting to both build our careers, we took the jobs in different locations and are three hours apart. That means weekend commutes to see each other and one huge perk is getting to know two great towns. As UM students, we ran around Ann Arbor a bit but now without homework, there’s no excuse not to enjoy this city to its fullest. Thank goodness for Skype!

So that’s what’s been keeping me busy this past month. Now that life’s finally settling down and a new routine is beginning, it shouldn’t be another month before I get a post up–then again, the weather is so nice that it’s hard to justify sitting at a computer during my free time…

Reviewing: This Book is Overdue!: How Librarians and Cybrarians can Save us All by Marilyn Johnson

A short, sweet, quick read about all the cool things and creative ways librarians are using to help patrons and provide better service to information. It’s a collection of vignettes, each chapter focusing on a different aspect of librarianship and telling individual librarians’ stories to convey the diversity in the field and approaches to serving patrons and accessing information. The Connecticut Four make an appearance, Second Life gets a cameo, and chap books collections get discussed.

Recommended for: Anyone who wants to expand their understanding of librarians beyond the stereotypes—Giles, Marian the librarian…—but especially people considering librarianship as a career. First year library students, in particular, would benefit because it’s such a broad scope and encompasses such a variety, so that they know what’s out there.

*Note: This “Recently Read…” will be a new featured blog post that I plan to update with the current professional readings that I am keeping up with, as a way to engage what I’ve read further and to encourage discussion on it, as well as share finds with other library professionals. Hope you enjoy and please let me know if you have recommendations for me!