Typology of Creator Objections to Subject Cataloguing of Their Works

Abstract

The Library of Congress Subject Headings is a standardized system for indicating the topics of works held in the library. Since LCSH is built using literary warrant, based on the terminology and proportions of published works, it is appropriate to assess it according to how accurately its terms match the works it is applied to. This creator-centric analysis focuses on areas in which LCSH is more likely to fail, given previous critiques of its biases and outdated language. In a pair of interview studies, creators shared their assessments of the subject cataloguing of their works. One study used works about Indigenous Peoples and the other used items from an LGBT2QIA+ community library. I analyzed the interview transcripts to identify different kinds of objections creators made to the subject cataloguing and how they made these objections. Creators objected to terms included in the records when the terms used were the wrong level of specificity, a poor match to the language used in their works and in their scholarly or creative fields, or misled the reader as to the content of their work. Creators objected to omissions from subject indexing when they expected particular terms to be used by their peers and readers, when they expected the genre or approach to be listed in the record, and when the record left out colonial actors or conflict. Applied to a system built on the principle of literary warrant, the objections from creators reveal major flaws in the term list and its application to published works. The types of errors noted suggest a need for better resourced cataloguing work, including professional development, more time to produce a record, support for nominating new terms, and capacity for local subject indexing and vocabulary management. Other types of errors reveal different understandings on the purpose and scope of subject indexing and imply areas for greater library outreach and transparency.