On 29/01/2014 11.29, Heidrun Wiesenmuller wrote:
Here’s an extract from such an authority record (in a MARC based format) for an exhibition about an Austrian artist, Franz West, in Vienna:
111 Ausstellung A Tribute to Franz West $d 2013 $c Wien
But yesterday I stumbled upon the provisions for art catalogs in the LC-PCC PS for 126.96.36.199.1, which say:
“Consider art exhibitions to be corporate bodies in their own right only if they recur under the same name (e.g., Biennale di Venezia, Documenta). For the remaining cases (the majority) in which the art exhibition itself is not a corporate body, consider other corporate bodies (e.g., museums or other bodies related to the event) as possible creators under these guidelines.”
– Does this principle only refer to art exhibitions or to exhibitions of any kind (e.g. an exhibition about a historical topic)?
– Is this a general practice followed by the whole Anglo-American world?
– If so, why doesn’t RDA explicitly say that only this type of exhibition is considered a corporate body?
– And finally: What’s the rationale behind this restriction? Leaving the question of main entry aside, I think it’s quite useful to have authority data for exhibitions.
While I was not privy to the reasoning, the rule is lifted verbatim from the venerable LCRI 21.1B1
(by the way, another part of this same rule gives a N.B. about “working sessions” which did not follow the practices or needs of an organization I worked for, and they followed other practices).
I can think of two reasons for the exhibitions.
1) In the case of art exhibitions, often there is not the “magic word” that is needed to constitute the idea of a corporate body, or there was not the definite article, “the” instead of “a”. In other instances, e.g. the case you give, I looked up the website (all I can do) and found “In der Ausstellung a tribute to Franz West …” In the English version, it is “In the exhibition ‘a tribute to FranzcWest,”…http://www.artkonzett.com/a-tribute-to-franz-west.html.
Therefore, as a cataloger trained in the U.S., I would interpret this to mean that the word “Ausstellung (exhibition)” is not a part of the name, and therefore the exhibition itself is unnamed. To make this into a corporate name, I would think you would have to qualify it as we do with “Apollo 17 (Spacecraft)” and we would have “A Tribute to Franz West (Exhibition)” if that were allowed, which it is not under the LCRI.
2) I would ask if an art exhibition is a group of people, such as a conference or even a football game? It could be argued that an art exhibition brings together a group of works of various kinds and this makes it an event, which are subjects. Therefore, you provide that access through 6xx $vExhibitions. Of course, the exhibition could also bring people together for an actual conference, e.g. “World of Archaeological Wonders Conference and Exhibition (1999 : Borobudur Temple, Magelang, Indonesia)“