College and Research Libraries


E . L e a r y , " D i a g n o s i s and Remediation," 

by R u t h Strang, and " T e c h n i q u e s of A p -

praisal," by J. W a y n e W r i g h t s t o n e , again 

concern themselves w i t h the mechanics of 

reading. F i n a l l y , the eleventh study, en-

titled " T h e L i b r a r y , " by E d w a r d A . 

W i g h t and L e o n C a r n o v s k y , "is con-

cerned primarily w i t h considerations of 

facilitating the union between the book 

and the reader." Here are discussed such 

familiar topics as " F u n c t i o n s of the L i -

b r a r y , " " P h y s i c a l P l a n t and E q u i p m e n t , " 

" L i b r a r y C o n t e n t , " "Instruction in the 

Use of the L i b r a r y , " " S t i m u l a t i n g Use 

of the L i b r a r y , " " M e a s u r i n g U s e , " 

" P e r s o n n e l , " and " T e c h n i c a l W o r k , " 

w i t h reference, of course, to high-school 

and junior-college libraries. 

A s a treatment of reading per se the 

total effect of this series of studies is 

highly impressive. It is w e l l , however, to 

go back to M r . Anderson's study and let 

ourselves be reminded again that the art of 

reading is not an end in itself. In the 

final analysis how w e l l or how much 

people, and particularly students, read, 

must always be subordinate to w h a t they 

read and w h a t they enjoy reading. 

Perhaps even an exploratory study might 

have given more attention to the latter 

q u e s t i o n . — J o h n J. Lund, Duke Univer-

sity, Durham, N.C. 

Notes Used on Catalog Cards, a List of 

Examples. O l i v e Swain. American L i -

brary Association, 1940. viii, 11, I02p. 

$ 1 . 2 5 ( P l a n o g r a p h e d ) 

T o MOST catalogers, this c a r e f u l l y 
selected list of notes to be used on catalog 

cards w i l l be a welcome addition to the 

small body of literature in their field, very 

little of which has been w r i t t e n concerning 

notes. O n e is reminded of the earlier 

lists, compiled by Robinson Spencer and 

by the T w i n C i t y Regional G r o u p of 

Catalogers, which have been so much in 

demand through the years. O n e can 

assume that this one w i l l be even more 

generally used than the others. 

T h e title indicates a broader scope than 

is actually covered by the list, w h i c h is a 

tool for the general cataloger and not for 

the specialist, and which excludes notes 

which w o u l d be used only in serial cata-

loging. T h e usefulness of the list w o u l d 

be increased considerably if notes for 

serials w e r e included. T h e arrangement 

is an alphabetical one, by headings under 

which one might look to find notes de-

scribing features of a b o o k ; as, C o v e r - t i t l e ; 

Dedications; Dissertations, A c a d e m i c ; 

Editions, etc. U n d e r headings, a further 

alphabetic order is followed in listing the 

notes. T h e same note may be given under 

t w o or more headings, as " P a r t of thesis 

( P h . D . ) — U n i v e r s i t y of Chicago, 1 9 3 8 , " 

which appears under the headings "Disser-

tations, A c a d e m i c , " and " S o u r c e . " E x -

planatory material, especially regarding 

the limitations of the use of some notes 

(as " F o r a device that cannot be identi-

fied," " F o r a d i a r y , " " F o r an o r a t o r i o " ) 

is given below the note itself, but some-

times it is omitted w h e n it might w e l l be 

there (as in the case of the note " A u -

thority for author's n a m e : C a t a l o g u e of 

the L i b r a r y of the H a r v a r d l a w school," 

which may need, for the beginning 

cataloger and student of cataloging, some 

explanation of the limitation of its u s e ) . 

T h e compiler's explanation of the 

choice of terms, and of the use of some 

terms, as given in the preface and f o l l o w -

ing some of the notes, w i l l be invaluable 

to the beginners. In any f u t u r e revision, 

an expansion of this feature w i l l increase 

many fold the usefulness of the w o r k . 

In the list itself, the examples are good 

DECEMBER., 1940 69 



ones—they are selected largely from notes 

on L i b r a r y of Congress cards, from the 

earlier printed lists mentioned above, and 

from the University of W a s h i n g t o n and 

Stanford University files ( b u t unfortu-

nately the source of each note is not 

i n d i c a t e d ) . I t w o u l d naturally f o l l o w 

that they do not all have the same set 

form, even the simplest ones. T h i s may 

be confusing to the beginner, w h o could 

probably use the list more profitably and 

more easily, could learn note terminology 

more readily, and f o l l o w one set form 

more uniformly, if the notes in " L i b r a r y 

of- Congress f o r m " w e r e so marked. 

In order to reduce production cost, the 

compiler's manuscript, instead of the 

customary typed copy for planographing, 

w a s photographed. ( I t might be pointed 

out here that it w a s a little disappointing 

to find that so f e w examples of notes 

describing the various near-print processes 

have been included.) O n examination, no 

typographical errors w e r e noted in the 

entire w o r k . 

M i s s M c P h e r s o n states, in her Some 

Practical Problems in Cataloging, that 

"notes on catalog cards present at one and 

the same time some of the most difficult 

features of cataloging, some of the. most 

interesting problems in handling a book 

technically, and some of the greatest out-

lets for self-expression which a cataloger 

may have the privilege of experiencing." 

M i s s Swain's list should prove to be of 

decided value in all three regards, but 

particularly in the last, both for the cata-

loger for w h o m w o r d i n g of notes is an un-

welcome opportunity for self-expression, 

and for the cataloger w h o is inclined to be 

too w o r d y , or lacking in clarity, in his self-

expression on catalog c a r d s . — I r e n e M. 

Doyle, Library School, George Peabody 

College for Teachers, Nashville. 

The Rockefeller Foundation; a Review 

for 1939. Raymond B. Fosdick. T h e 

Foundation, N e w Y o r k , 1940. 507p. 

Distributed w i t h o u t charge. 

Recent Trends in Higher Education in 

the United States: With Special Refer-

ence to Financial Support for Private 

Colleges and Universities. T r e v o r 

A r n e t t . G e n e r a l Education Board, 

N e w Y o r k , 1940. 8op. Distributed 

w i t h o u t charge. 

Annual Report: 1939. G e n e r a l Education 

Board, N e w Y o r k , 1940. i 7 i p . Dis-

tributed w i t h o u t charge. 

S O M E M A Y a s k w h y r e v i e w s o f t h e r e -

ports of foundations such as those listed 

above make their w a y into the columns of 

College and Research Libraries. T h e 

answer w o u l d seem to be that college and 

university librarians cannot intelligently 

administer their libraries w i t h o u t know-

ing the research and instructional objec-

tives of their institutions, w h i c h are at-

tained in large part by the aid of the 

great foundations. T h e history of re-

search and higher education in the U n i t e d 

States and elsewhere is to a considerable 

extent the story of the vision behind the 

grants of a h a n d f u l of foundations and 

corporations devoted to education and 

research. 

T h e Rockefeller Foundation report for 

1939 surveys the w o r k of the Foundation 

in the five fields in w h i c h it concentrates 

its e f f o r t s : international h e a l t h ; the medi-

cal sciences; the natural sciences; the social 

sciences; and the humanities. T h e r e are 

at least four reasons w h y librarians and 

others interested in higher education 

should be acquainted w i t h this report. 

T h e first is the method of reporting. 

M o s t librarians w h o have to w r i t e an 

account of their activities may study w i t h 

profit the style of this report, w h i c h 

70 COLLEGE AND RESEARCH LIBRARIES