Posting to Autocat
On 9/5/2015 12:30 AM, John Gordon Marr wrote:
… but if we can use “Controversial literature” in relation to religious works, we could at least employ its use under */any /*”names of individual [groups and ideologies] and uniform titles for works that argue against or express opposition to those groups or works” without being overly subjective.
We’d just be alerting patrons to the presence of controversy as to the factual validity of what they chose to read. Note that religion is just one particular form of ideology. One might say, relatively neutrally, that ideology itself is the major divisive element of societies.
Perhaps, although I would want to find out what others think about it. I guess this would also mean that the subdivision –Apologetic literature that would defend the group, would also be usable.
My first question is: what do we mean by groups? –Controversial literature already works for religious groups (http://www.loc.gov/aba/publications/FreeSHM/H1472.pdf), but should it be for e.g. ethnic groups,
Indians of North America–Controversial literature
or political groups
or should it apply not to the group but to the doctrines:
National socialism–Controversial literature
Should it apply to professional groups, e.g.
College teachers–Controversial literature
although here we would seem to run into the subdivisions already used: –Professional ethics and –Moral and ethical aspects, (e.g.
and it would normally be
Medical care–Moral and ethical aspects, but we are told to use Medical ethics)
A usage such as Physicians–Controversial literature would seem to be a different topic, since this would assume an attack on physicians while Physicians–Professional ethics would be something different.
Nationalities and related groups?
(these could be used for much of what is happening today)
Microsoft Corporation–Controversial literature
Dow Chemical Company–Controversial literature
Monsanto Company–Controversial literature
(but there is already –Corrupt practices)
And all of these would also have –Apologetic literature.
In sum, I sympathize with wanting to give this kind of access but when it comes to actually adding a heading, I hesitate because I worry that I would just be recording my own opinions. If the title of the book were clear and read something like: “I hate [fill in the group]”
“A hearty defense of [fill in the group]”
I might go along. But otherwise, a resource that strongly criticizes some kind of group, I think is best handled by the various forms of –Public opinion.
For instance, the book by Naomi Klein against excesses of the big brands:
No logo : taking aim at the brand bullies / Naomi Klein.
got the subjects
International business enterprises–Political aspects.
International business enterprises–Public opinion.
Brand name products–Political aspects.
Brand name products–Public opinion.
Of course, “Public opinion” here means her opinion.
Could we add here:
International business enterprises–Controversial literature