reviews.indd


482 College & Research Libraries September 2008 

book—and certainly including the two 
examples of the University of Pittsburgh 
and the University of Arizona—is of a 
very large library connected to a large 
institution. Very little, if anything, is 
said of libraries at smaller colleges going 
through structural transitions. They may 
face similar challenges as those larger 
libraries, but certainly smaller libraries 
have other challenges particular to them. 
Since two of the authors are affi  liated with 
one of the libraries described in detail, 
it makes perfect sense for them to focus 
on a situation that they know intimately. 
Their broader study, however, would 
have benefited from input from academic 
librarians serving smaller populations. 

The final chapter, “Positioning the 
Academic Library for a Vibrant Future,” 
is, unfortunately, mildly disappointing, 
for it leaves the impression that the final 
chapter was hastily assembled. While the 
authors do offer insight on how librarians 
can cope with the rapidly changing field 
of academic librarianship, their attempt 
at summarizing the book’s overarching 
argument is too abbreviated and leaves 
the reader wishing for a more cumulative 
summary. 

These weaker elements, however, 
should not obscure the incisive discus-
sions that form the greater part of Beyond 
Survival. The unifying thread weaving 
through all of the chapters is the clear 
need for libraries to be user-focused 
and to seek out what their users need 
and want rather than assuming that the 
libraries and their staffs know what is 
best for their clientele. This user-focused 
philosophy, more than anything else, is 
the key element that causes the central 
arguments to adhere, and it’s the reason 
this book is worth reading. If users are 
changing, yet the library sees no need to 
do so, is the library effective in its mission 
to serve these users? All too oft en, librar-
ies forget that they exist for a community 
of users and choose to prescribe services 
with little input form their patrons. The 
need to correct such thinking helps drive 
many of the transitions described in the 

book. So important is this issue that the 
authors dedicate chapter eight, “Standing 
Up to Scrutiny,” to determining whether 
or not an academic library is successful in 
focusing on its users. 

Despite the aforementioned weak-
nesses, the authors are largely success-
ful in explaining the need for change in 
academic libraries and the ins and outs 
of how to go about such change. As time 
goes on, more and more academic librar-
ies will find themselves facing decisions 
on how to go about changing with the 
times, and the mix of theory and practi-
cality in Beyond Survival can serve as an 
important resource.—Stephen Pelton, The 
State University of New York at Buffalo. 

Understanding FRBR: What It Is, and 
How It Will Affect Our Retrieval Tools. 
Ed. Arlene G. Taylor. Westport, Conn.: 
Libraries Unlimited, 2007. 186p. alk. 
paper, $45 (ISBN 9781591585091). LC 
2007-13558. 

FRBR, or Functional Requirements for Bib-
liographic Records, is a conceptual model 
created by the IFLA (International Federa-
tion of Library Institutes and Associations) 
Study Group on the Functional Require-
ments for Bibliographic Records. The study 
group was formed in 1991, and FRBR was 
first published in 1998. Its purpose is to cre-
ate a hierarchical structure of bibliographic 
records (as opposed to current cataloging 
practice, which uses a flat structure), via 
which the relationships between related 
titles will be clear to the user. 

The same IFLA committee responsible 
for FRBR later charged a subgroup to create 
a similar conceptual model for authority 
records (Functional Requirements for Au-
thority Data, or FRAD; this subgroup was 
working on its fi nal draft as of this writing). 
In 2005, another IFLA group, the Working 
Group on Functional Requirements of 
Subject Authority Records (FRSAR) had 
begun to do the same for subject authority 
records, extending the FRAD model. 

Understanding FRBR consists of thirteen 
chapters, each written by experienced cata-
logers and specialists in their subfi elds. The 



first six chapters provide introductory and 
background material on FRBR’s develop-
ment; the last seven discuss the application 
of FRBR to various classes of materials. The 
book is not intended to be an instructional 
text; rather, it is designed to provide an 
introduction to the conceptual model and 
to illustrate how it can facilitate improved 
access to resources via the clear delinea-
tion of the relationships between said re-
sources. Arlene Taylor, the editor, has over 
35 years of experience in cataloging and 
classification as a practitioner, a teacher, 
and a researcher and has published widely 
and extensively in the field of cataloging 
and bibliographic description, including a 
comprehensive introduction to cataloging 
and classification. 

The first six chapters clearly illustrate 
the concepts at the base of FRBR. Taylor’s 
introductory chapter discusses the means 
by which the card catalog provided for 
collocation of related works by one cre-
ator via filing rules and how this does 
not translate to online catalogs. FRBR, she 
notes, can bring this organization and col-
location to the online environment. Taylor 
goes on to describe the FRBR concept and 
its structure, the model of analysis on 
which it is based, and the user tasks that 
its implementation can facilitate. The sub-
sequent five chapters discuss the structure 
of FRAD and its relation to FRBR; FRBR, 
and the history of cataloging (this chapter, 
by William Denton, is a delightful and in-
formative read that provides a broad per-
spective on the history of the organization 
of bibliographic information); the history 
of FRBR research and its impact on the 
further development thereof; the concept 
of “bibliographic families” as groups of 
related works; and—the most direct area 
of professional concern—the incorporation 
of FRBR concepts into the new cataloging 
code now being developed: RDA (Re-
source Description and Access). 

This last is especially important, as 
RDA is slated to be released and imple-
mented in 2009. The Library of Congress 
Working Group on the Future of Biblio-
graphic Control, in its final report, recom-

Book Reviews 483 

mended that RDA not be implemented 
until FRBR is more fully understood 
and tested; however, it is yet unknown 
whether the Library of Congress will fol-
low this recommendation. Most libraries 
follow LC’s policy decisions; therefore, if 
RDA is released for implementation at its 
scheduled date, not only the workfl ow of 
catalogers but the design of any ILS and 
the public display of bibliographic infor-
mation in the OPAC will be affected. 

As noted above, the remaining seven 
chapters address the application of FRBR 
to nonprint and/or nonmonographic 
classes of materials. It is encouraging 
that the authors thereof do not shy away 
from criticism of the FRBR model, either 
in general or as it specifically applies to 
classes of materials; this book is not a 
blanket acceptance of FRBR but an hon-
est assessment thereof. Sherry Vellucci, 
in the chapter on FRBR and music, notes 
that FRBR is “an important step to meet-
ing the needs of this complexity [of the 
“musical bibliographical universe”] in 
a music catalog” and that “FRBR is the 
first conceptual model to acknowledge 
the structural complexities that are such 
a large part of the music bibliographic 
universe.” 

Several chapters, however, note the 
limitations of FRBR as it applies to other 
areas of cataloging. Alexander C. Thur-
man notes that FRBR would have to 
be a supplement to archival control as 
exhibited in finding aids or collection-
level MARC records, as FRBR concepts 
cannot sufficiently represent the collec-
tion, which is the “central unit of archival 
organization.” Steven C. Shadle indicates 
that the structure of FRBR is not easily 
adaptable for serials cataloging but that 
its introduction is an opportunity for 
serials cataloger to reexamine their prac-
tices. Murtha Baca and Sherman Clarke 
note that the FRBR model would, in the 
cataloging of works of art, architecture, 
and material culture, chiefly be of use in 
determining groupings of resources in a 
more relational structure, although, due 
to the fact that these are actual objects 



484 College & Research Libraries 

and not abstract items, there are better 
avenues for their cataloging. 

Others are still more critical: Mary Ly-
nette Larsgaard not only notes that FRBR, 
as it stands now and until ILS vendors can 
incorporate FRBR into their soft ware, will 
not work well for cartographic materials but 
begins her conclusion by stating “[w]hen 
FRBR was issued, among the fi rst posi-
tive comments that I read were not just by 
noncatalogers but by nonlibrarians, which 
made for feelings of caution.” Martha Yee, 
an expert in the cataloging of moving-image 
materials, discusses not only the potential 
difficulties in the application of the FRBR 
model to these materials but also those of 
the implementation of FRBR and RDA in 
general: “… we may be left with rules that 
are useful to no one and purchased by no 
one.” The book does end by noting that 
everyone concerned must be involved in the 
process, so that all varying opinions can be 
heard and considered. Steven C. Shadle, in 
his closing chapter on serials, notes: “I en-
courage everyone to get out there and kick 
the tires in whatever way possible!” 

Understanding FRBR is clearly written, 
well illustrated (many of the concepts 
are clarified by very helpful diagrams), 
and well indexed; additionally, chap-
ters feature extensive bibliographies, 
many of which provide the URLs to the 
IFLA groups’ documents. While it may 
seem that this book is of interest only to 
catalogers, the application of FRBR will 
change the structure of the catalog and 
the systems used to store and display 
it; therefore, it is an important text for 
systems librarians, reference librarians, 
and anybody else interested in the future 
of the organization and display of biblio-
graphic information.—Deborah DeGeorge, 
University of Michigan. 

William H. Sherman. Used Books: Mark-
ing Readers in Renaissance England. 
Philadelphia: University of Penn-
sylvania Press, 2008. 259p. (ISBN 
9780812240436). LC2008-271368. 

Long in the making, this timely book, 
by a young American scholar now at the 

September 2008 

University of York in the U.K., should 
be required reading for special collec-
tions librarians. Its subject is one that has 
come to the fore in the history of reading: 
marginalia. While there have been several 
shelves’ worth of more focused studies 
on the reading practices of individuals 
and communities, few have attempted 
Sherman’s mission: to survey the fi eld as 
a whole. Sherman’s principal laboratory 
was the stacks of the Huntington Library, 
where he was given direct access to that 
institution’s formidable holdings of STC 
titles. (Note to colleagues: good things can 
happen when we bend our access poli-
cies.) Since cataloging typically does not 
disclose with any consistency the pres-
ence or absence of marginalia, Sherman 
had to do so for himself, the old-fashioned 
way, one book at a time. Needless to add, 
he handled a lot of books in the course of 
his project. If nothing else, Sherman’s sub-
ject is a solid affirmation of the enduring 
value of the artifacts we steward. Books 
are more than texts, Sherman reminds us. 
The artifacts in our stacks are redolent of 
meaning and evidence that is only dis-
cernible through inspection. EEBO and 
ECCO, take note. 

So, what did he find? If Sherman set 
out to provide a map of a new fi eld of 
study, what he learned was that there is no 
map, no grand narrative, no overarching 
theoretical perch. What he encountered 
in handling thousands of books were 
decidedly independent-minded readers 
responding to texts and using books in 
personal, opaque, and quirky ways. If 
we needed more proof that Renaissance 
readers were not passive slaves to texts, 
here it is. Sherman’s core finding—that 
about 20 percent of all the STC books he 
handled contained marginalia—is hard 
to evaluate in and of itself: is that a lot? a 
little? But that 20 percent does reveal the 
extent to which printed books were sites 
of engagement and activity, sometimes 
creative, sometime routine. Here we find 
readers annotating texts, doodling, prac-
ticing penmanship, recording recipes and 
family information, customizing artifacts