Sanford Berman: a Living Legend or the Devil Incarnate?

"Cataloging should be fun. And challenging.
And useful."
Sanford Berman, 1981
From the introduction to Joy of Cataloging

Sanford Berman is a passionate man, a believer in correctness not for politics’ sake but for tolerance, inclusion, moral and ethical fairness and, above all, for ease of access to information. He is a consummate cataloger, and a promoter of peace who truly seems to relish a good professional battle. There are very few fence-sitters on the topic of Sandy Berman:

President Kennedy once said, "Some people see things as they are and ask 'Why?' I dream things that never were and say 'Why not?'" This describes Sandy Berman perfectly, because where many people ask "Why?", he has always been one of the few who says, "Why not?" Earl Lee, in his contribution to Berman’s festschrift.

“Sandy Berman is a major pain in the ass. He runs a horse-and-buggy cataloging operation in Minnesota and he thinks he can tell us how to do our jobs. He's an insufferable, self-righteous, unrealistic, naïve, head-in-the-clouds idealist who knows nothing about the real world of grind-it-out bibliographic data.” (Dodge & DeSirey, 1995)

"His thoughtful, irascible, and idealistic message heartily supports us all - each and every one. Three cheers for Sandy, who may not be every consumer's preference, but is a national phenomenon which makes me, for one, proud to be a librarian" Bill Katz (Dodge & DeSirey, 1995)

So what inspired one lone cataloger in a Minnesota library to take on the Goliath of the Library of Congress Subject Heading division, pushing for change throughout his 40 year career? Why devote so much time and energy to writing letters, articles, essays and books, to speaking at conventions and seminars? After all, the Library of Congress subject headings have been around for over 100 years, and countless librarians have contributed to the continuous process of creating and changing LC subject headings. If it’s good enough for them, isn’t it good enough?

To understand Berman’s quest for the Holy Grail of cataloging – a clear, unbiased, uncluttered catalog with complete, simple access to all holdings - we must consider his background, his view of the mission of libraries, and his philosophy of cataloging.

Born in Chicago and raised in Los Angeles in what he describes as a ‘secular Jewish liberal’ atmosphere, Sandy Berman grew up in an atmosphere of political activism. He graduated from UCLA with ‘highest honors’, receiving a B.A. in Political Science and earned his Masters in Library Science from the Catholic University of America in Washington, D.C. in 1962. One of his professors there first introduced him to the joys of cataloging. “It was”, Berman said, “a whole new world. I never realized cataloging could be so fascinating, challenging and dynamic. I loved it.”

He worked in a succession of military and university libraries, traveling all over the world, before accepting the post of Head Cataloger at the Hennepin County Library in Minnesota, where he spent the bulk of his illustrious - and often contentious - career.

It was while working as an assistant librarian at the University of Zambia that Berman first learned from colleagues that the term ‘kafir’ – an accepted Library of Congress subject heading – was akin to the derogatory term ‘nigger’ in America. When he investigated further, Berman found numerous examples of approved subject headings that were racist, demeaning or so obscure as to be useless to patrons. So began Sandy Berman’s lifelong crusade for plain, unbiased, patron-friendly cataloging language.

A rose by any other name…

Berman is a fervent opponent of cataloging by outsourcing and proponent of in-house cataloging partly because of his experience with poor records – records made virtually useless due to the lack of accuracy and the questionable quality control of corporate cataloging. He wrote that “Many topics are still not recognized by the Library of Congress (try searching for Corporate Welfare). LC Cataloging in Print (CIP) makes mistakes. Sometimes big ones, like Chris Kreski’s Life lessons from Xena, warrior princess: a guide to happiness, success, and body armor, which got soberly classified under self-help psychology, and was assigned the descriptor, SUCCESS—PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECTS” (Berman, 2000). Other delightfully obscure LC subject headings include ‘Electric lamp, incandescent’ (for light bulb) and ‘Sepulchral sculpture’ (for gravestones). These are examples of what Sandy Berman has aptly dubbed ‘bibliocide by cataloging’: materials made invisible – to all intents and purposes ‘killed’ – by inaccurate or archaic cataloging records.

There’s no bib-ness like “show” bib-ness…

Berman’s overriding principle of cataloging is that it must be user-friendly.

He is passionate – if sometimes irreverent – about creating records that, as S.R. Ranganathan’s famous rule states, ‘save the time of the reader’. “Cataloging should identify and make accessible a library’s resources – in all formats. That identification and access should be swift and painless. The language and structure of catalog entries should be familiar and comprehensible. Catalogers should recognize that they do what they do to serve the public. That’s whom they are working for” (Berman, 2000).

The following criteria inform all of Berman’s work:

Clarity: the format and content of information in the catalog should be understandable to patrons. Information (and punctuation) that is superfluous, coded, abbreviated or otherwise made unintelligible to the general populace should be made clear or dropped. As Berman says, “There’s no need to make the patron feel like an idiotic jerk.”

Unbiased terminology: Cataloging information should reflect the actual content of the work, and terms used to describe age, sex, or ethnic groups should be those preferred by the groups themselves, rather than the often derogatory terms assigned by others.

Completeness: Records should include a number of descriptors; by the thorough and thoughtful consideration of a work, a cataloger should be able to offer several subject-added entries and cross references to other relevant or helpful materials.

Some samples of subject headings created by Berman and HCL staff:

(Copeman et. al., 2003)

These examples show that the Library of Congress did indeed make many changes as proposed by Berman – though in most cases, years passed before changes were accepted. Berman and his “Sandynistas” were often on the leading edge, even decades ahead of the Library of Congress. Because he so often found LC headings objectionable, Berman and his staff undertook the mammoth task of creating and assigning new subject headings for the Hennepin County Library system. At a staff meeting, Berman said, “we catalog for the people who use the library and for our colleagues who help people to use the library”. They established the HCL Cataloging Bulletin as a means of disseminating information not only among their own member libraries, but also to other wide-flung institutions. Along with the ground-breaking work in cataloging, Berman was instrumental in developing another novel idea: a list of subject headings for works of fiction that would make these works more accessible for those who only had an idea of the type of story they wanted, or were searching for a book they had read but couldn’t remember the author or title. The Library of Congress was opposed to the idea, but Berman pursued this brainchild, and the Novelist was born.

While Berman’s ideas and ideals are often brilliant, and always worthy, are they practicable? Some have proven to be, others are yet untried. Some, despite their proven worth, have been and often still are resisted by what Berman refers to as establishment ‘bizness-oriented wannabees’. There is often truth in what he says, but his frequently harsh and unyielding stance has, in the past, inadvertently forced people who may have been allies into a position of conflict. Berman – focused as he was on the needs of patrons – rather undiplomatically ignored the valid concerns of other professionals. For instance, in examining the work involved in the change or addition of subject headings and classifications Mary Kay Pietris, Chief of the Subject Cataloging Division at LC from 1978 to 1992, found that even minor changes could be dauntingly labor-intensive.

“Let me give you an example. When we decided to take the hyphen out of folklore, it meant 6000 bibliographic records had to be changed… it meant writing it on every piece of paper. Is it worth making changes at the Library of Congress level and causing split files? Why bother making the change?"

Yet from Berman’s - and, I suspect, the patron’s - perspective, the amount of work involved in re-evaluating records is not an excuse for retaining out-dated, misleading, biased or even incorrect headings. If the goal is to make the catalog useful to library users, then we are duty-bound to do whatever we can to meet that goal.

With the current technologies available today, perhaps it is not an impossible task to begin addressing the issues that Berman raises. The very technology that he

so often professes to despise may offer a glimmer of hope; records that were laboriously changed by hand may now be updated more efficiently, and with a minimum of human error. Technology is not perfect (and data can be corrupted), but computers are much more effective in handling massive amounts of data in a routine way. If the point of making changes is to advance the cause of patron-friendly cataloging, then why not make use of the tools at hand? In this area, perhaps, Berman might accept – even approve of – computerization.

I think that I shall never see a catalog record that I can read…

(Berman, 1981, p. 9)

As illustrated by the preceding ‘Bermanized’ catalog record, a record may be made much more user-friendly without sacrificing brevity, clarity or informational practicality. Berman has vociferously and frequently offered suggestions for creating records that are both comprehensive AND comprehensible:

·        Drop the archaic, unnecessary, user-confusing conventions (like slashes, brackets, dashes and other pointless punctuation).

·        Use natural, common language for points of access.

·        Drop the irrelevant spine length information.

·        Include more cross references and access points employing

terms that people may actually use to find the material.

However, though most of his proposed changes are reasonable and logical, the value of replacing all terms that Berman insists are derogatory or oppressive in nature is uncertain. To replace a heading like ‘Eskimos’ with the lesser-known ‘Inuit’, or ‘Gypsies’ with ‘Romanies’ would seem to me to be the greater evil, making subjects less accessible to those who don’t know the ‘politically correct’ or currently accepted terminology. Language is fluid, ever-changing; that which is the preferred term today may change tomorrow. How, then, do we infuse flexibility into the system, and allow for growth while maintaining long-term stability?

In a nutshell: advanced technology. While I agree with Berman that computers and technology are not the end-all solution to every issue, I do think that we can harness their power for our good. We can put our creative intelligence to work, devising more intuitive and human-friendly programs to organize, disseminate and preserve the enormous amount of material available. There are problems in any system and nothing is completely infallible, but we can always strive to improve (even replace, if feasible) any system that no longer effectively serves our needs.

Berman contends that people search by subject, and would not think to search by keyword. But in a rapidly expanding technological environment, many do search in just that way. And keywords could more easily be added/deleted/changed than standard subject headings, with less confusion. An entry under the subject heading of ‘Inuits’, for example, may have the added keyword fields ‘Eskimos’ ‘Native Peoples’ ‘Native North American Peoples’ etc. If a term comes to be considered objectionable or obsolete, it could easily be removed from all applicable keyword fields. This is not to say such changes would not be a major task, but they would at least be within the realm of possibility.

Still, keywords alone do not produce the range of options available on a given topic. Perhaps the patron could use information on the history, health, social customs or art of the Inuit, but doesn’t think to use these terms.

Post-coordinated string searching features – the kind that search engines like Google use - could be adapted in combination with the pre-coordinated strings used in LCSH and OPAC browse displays. Both of these components would be essential for establishing a unique and valuable search program. Thomas Mann wrote that “the first problem is that web-type search engines do not…recognize arrays of relevant options. Browse displays of pre-coordinated strings are the only mechanism we have for providing vocabulary control of free-floating elements.” He argues that, because Boolean searches alone often miss appropriate resources, we need both systems. But what if a ‘best of both worlds’ option were available? The creation of a system that simultaneously searches by pre- and post- coordinated strings would serve to interconnect records – and so provide both focused and encompassing access – in a way we can only dream about.

The fog creeps in on little WORLDCAT feet…

The seemingly innocuous event which became the Sandy Berman version of the “shot heard around the world” was the decision of the director of Hennepin County Library to join the OCLC. In essence, this decision meant scrapping Berman’s universally acclaimed cataloging system, and ‘re-engineering’ catalog records to comply with the requirements of AACR2, OCLC, LCSH and MARC21. Though he had concerns about the transition, Berman drafted a memo stating that, though he felt AACR2 was not user-friendly, he was sure that all involved could collaborate on the transition, and he invited them to join him in “making library catalogs more user-friendly and…less mystifying” (Gilyard, 2000). That particular memo – and the administrative brouhaha which followed – proved to be Berman’s undoing. When the dust finally settled - after a formal reprimand, a flurry of letters, reassignment to a dead-end task, outcries of protest,an outpouring of support from friends and associates throughout the library community and beyond - Sandy Berman resigned. If he had any solid ideas for collaboration, he never published work on the subject.

A Berman Axiom: THERE IS NO SUBSTITUTE FOR RIGOROUS, CRITICAL SUBJECT CATALOGING AND INDEXING.

“More than any other, Sandy liberated information. If he had information to share, he did. There was a passion about his involvement and work accomplishments. Even the abrupt end to his career was handled with personal integrity by standing firm at a great cost for what he believed in. He will continue to serve as a role model for generations of librarians to come.” - Byron Anderson

What were Berman’s objections to the plan for HCL to join the OCLC? The benefits for the library – and, consequently, for the patrons – would seem incalculable.

According to Charles Brown, the HCL director, the pending changes would:

• Expand users’ access to the full range of HCL’s rich resources and the ever-increasing range of global information resources as well.
• Enable importation of catalog records for government documents, e-books and journals.
• Conform to internationally accepted standards while maintaining some of the value-added features of the existing HCL catalog.
• Offer faster and more convenient access to government documents and web resources.
• Provide users with more information about holdings in reference and periodicals, onsite and via the Internet.
• Offer the option to initiate integrated searches of multiple databases from the HCL catalog.

Charles Brown, Director

Hennepin County Library

This all sounds wonderfully progressive. But what does this mean, in terms of the everyday ‘nuts and bolts’ operations of the library, and the impact on patrons?

To Sanford Berman, such monolithic standardizing can only produce a ‘dumbing down’ effect. According to Sandy, these changes will:

• Diminish, not expand, accessibility of materials. Example: If a patron searches for information on NAFTA, the LC standard following AACR2 rules yields the heading: “CANADA, TREATIES, ETC. 1992 OCT. 7.” without any ‘see-references’ to this utterly odd descriptor. What good are multiple databases or available holdings, if people can’t FIND them?
• Produce split sequences on shelves (due to HCL/OCLC Dewey disharmonies) that will render browsing frustrating and futile.
• Effectively destroy the HCL catalog, which has become a model and professional benchmark nationally and worldwide.
• Deny catalog-searchers the immense benefits of explanatory notes and “see-also” references which connect users to other, potentially relevant sources.

• Devastate HCL’s commitment to diversity through the destruction of thousands of headings sensitively fashioned to ensure equitable treatment of religious, ethnic, sexual and multicultural materials.
• Promote the further commercialization of the public library, leading down the path of service to wealth and property, abandoning the traditional mission as bastions of democracy – accessible, neutral, egalitarian – free sources of information and dialogue of all kinds. When the Big Boys take over, and the bottom-line mentality rules, it is these giant conglomerates who will decide what’s fit to be read, or seen, or published.

Berman’s last assertion becomes frighteningly predictive in light of current trends. Though giants like Amazon or Borders can initiate progress, the corporate culture demands a profit. This is not necessarily a bad thing for corporations, but for a public library model, such a creed would be disastrous. The selling of library space and ‘naming rights’ makes the library little more than a marketing partner for businesses. The reduction of public funding and expanding reliance on private donations gives corporations unprecedented power. Can any entity accept huge donations without feeling some type of obligation to the benefactor – especially if further funds are likely to be needed? These are concerns that all libraries and their supporters must consider before hopping on the vendor or corporate ‘funding express’. We must take care that, in our desire to offer the latest and greatest, we do not betray our mission to serve all our patrons, regardless of race, creed, social or economic status.

Of catalogers and kings…

Sanford Berman is unique. Brilliance, energy, true concern for the less fortunate, professional skill, willingness to confront mediocrity and convention, and tireless dedication: rarely do all these qualities converge in one individual. But while we may never reach his stature, we can contribute to his efforts to de-mystify and advance current standards and methods, create better systems, reclaim the democratic quality of libraries, and fight for those whose voices are rarely heard.

A “Bermanized Bibliographic Oath” for public librarians:

“I pledge to uphold the principles of a free and democratic society, with equal access for all, regardless of race, religion, gender, age or social class. I will promote equal access to all materials, regardless of substance, without judgement. I will encourage the patron’s independence by using normal everyday language and syntax, by providing references to alternate resources, and by constant vigilance in updating any confusing or incorrect information. I will treat every patron with respect, and offer aid unstintingly to any who need it. I recognize and acknowledge the public responsibility of my position, and will support the “Library Bill of Rights” in practice as well as in theory.”

Sanford Berman’s impact on the field of cataloging, and the library profession in general can’t be summed up in a page or two. His career has spanned the decades from the ‘love and peace’ activism of the 60’s through the raucous 70’s, the upwardly-mobile and next-generation years to reach into the new millennium. Though his professional career ostensibly ended with his ‘forced retirement’ from the HCL, he remains active and vocal, fighting for fairness and equality, demanding attention for those on the fringes whom society often chooses to ignore. Berman has been honored with a number of awards by those who recognize his dedication, including the following:

What, now, will become of Sanford Berman’s lifelong work? He has had more impact than he probably realizes, but less than he would like. Of the HCL subject authorities, Sheila Intner wrote, “I have no doubt an HCL Subject Authorities publishing project will eventually materialize…I hope, in the form of a book that librarians of all stripes can hold in their hands to consult. We need all the help we can get.”

Below is a partial list of Sanford Berman’s published work.

Library journal, v.95, no.7 (April 1, 1970), p. 1289-93.

"Let it all hang out; a think-piece for Luddite librarians," Library journal, v. 96, no.12 (June 15, 1971), p. 2054-58.

Prejudices and antipathies; a tract on the LC subject heads concerning people (Scarecrow Press, 1971), 249 p.

Compiler, Women/Sexism/the Feminist Movement; a roster of material at the Makerere Institute of Social Research Library: April 1972 (MISR Library, 1972). 12 p.

"Libraries to the people!," in Celeste West and Elizabeth Katz, eds., Revolting librarians (Booklegger Press, 1972), p. 51-7.

"Don't Look for Oil in the Catalog: Tips to Library Users from the Inside."

Northern Sun News, Winter 1990/91, pp. 3, 13.

Talking the Talk and Walking the Walk: What Libraries Say The Do But Frequently Don't a talk by Sanford Berman, April 17, 1997, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign,School of Library and Information Science.

Reprinted articles, reviews, etc.

Library journal, Sept. 1, 1974, p. 2033-35;

Jewish Librarians Caucus newsletter,  

March 1976, p. 4-6,

July 1976, p. 6,

April 1977, p. 14-17; 

Interracial books for children bulletin, v.6, nos. 3/4 (1975), p. 16;

Unabashed librarian, no. 19 (Spring 1976), p. 16;

CALL, July/Aug. 1976, p. 12-13;

Haverhill (Mass.) Public Library, Technical Services Dept., Staff manual (1977), p. 7+

Jewish Librarians Caucus newsletter, v.3, no. 1 (Winter 1978), p. 4;

Bill Katz, ed., Library lit. 7--- The best of 1976 (Scarecrow Press, 1977), p. 138-41

Library lit. 9--- the best of 1978 (Scarecrow Press, 1979), p. 138-53

For more complete information on Sanford Berman and his work, please visit his website at: http://www.sanfordberman.org/

Bibliography

http://www.slais.ubc.ca/courses/libr517/02-03-wt2/projects/berman/

http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Sanford%20Berman

http://www.libr.org/Juice/issues/vol5/LJ_5.9.html

http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/Cafe/7423/sandy.html?

Berman, Sanford. Let it all hang out. Library Journal June 15, 1971: 2054-58.

Berman, Sanford. “Why catalog?” The Unabashed Librarian 2000. 116: 11

Berman, Sanford. Berman's bag: Must "The Poor" always be among us? The Unabashed Librarian 2000. 117: 5-10.

Berman, Sanford. A long struggle to force libraries to serve the poor. Street Spirit January 2001: 12

Berman, Sanford. “Libraries dumbing down?” New Breed Librarian Feb. 12, 2001.

http://www.newbreedlibrarian.org/archives/01.03.jun2001/feature2.html

Dodge, Chris and Jan DeSirey, ed. Everything you always wanted to know about Sandy Berman but were afraid to ask. McFarland & Co., 1995.

Gilyard, Burl. Cover Story ‘Sandy Berman’s last stand’. City Pages, Vol. 20

#971: 7/14/99. http://www.citypages.com/databank/20/971/article7781.asp?page=2

Intner, Sheila S. “Can Libraryland thrive without Hennepin Count Library’s Subject Authorities?” Technicalities 22 # 3 May/June 2002: 5-7

Mann, Thomas. Why LC subject headings are more important than ever. American Libraries. Vol. 34 #9 Oct. 2003: 52-4

Roberto, Katia, ed. Kiss my filing indicators #1 The Sandy Berman rocks my socks issue. 1999. http://www.sarcastra.net/sandy/zine1.html (Oct. 24 2004)