Part 32

CHAIRMAN: I thought perhaps enough would be interested in this to raise the question in such a way that the Publishing Board would take it up. It may be cards are in existence that might be reprinted for this work.

Miss AMBROSE: There is a supplement to this catalog just about ready to come out. Would that include new editions or simply new books?

Mr. FLETCHER: The matter has been put off to such a large extent that the State Library at Albany has undertaken to publish this supplement; but it has been delayed. They intend to print it for their own state use, but allow the Publishing Board to distribute it to other places. As to a revision, I do not know whether it has been undertaken. I think that the original edition was not electrotyped, and that there are no plates existing to reprint it from.

CHAIRMAN: I will read a question from the Hartford Public Library on the arrangement of author, editor and translator in a card catalog--whether to be put in one alphabet or arranged separately?

Miss CRAWFORD: That hits upon a very practical experience which we had in Dayton. We arranged the works of an author under the author's own works; then the author as editor; and then author as joint author; and then the author as translator; alphabeting by the word which happened to follow the name of the author at the top of the line. We tried that for three or four years, and at the end of that time we ourselves in our own use of the catalog were so continually running up against our own arrangement as a thing which we never used and which was a constant blunder to us that last year we set about rearranging all the authors so as to bring them in one alphabeting order by the first word of the title, regardless of whether it was as author, editor or compiler. Of course when translator or editor of a specific person's work, that entry was placed after the others.

Mr. FLETCHER: That is our practice, after having used the other for some time. We now undertake to put all the works of an author in a general series, whether he is author, or editor, or collector, or whatever it be, if the work is significant as his work. We put those all in one alphabet, as if there was no such addition after his name, and then we put at the end the two notes which are in the nature of cross-reference. If a man is translator of somebody else's work we cannot very well put those in as his works. Everything else we put in one series.

Mr. PERLEY: In the library of the Institute of Technology, of Boston, we arranged the authors, joint authors, translators and editors all in one common alphabet. It seems to me in a library of this kind such an arrangement is especially good, because the public patrons of the library never seem to take very kindly to distinctions, however interesting they may be to the librarians; and it happens very often that the American translator is a good deal more important to the American reader than the original author from whom it was translated. And in the same way a joint author may take equal rank with the author in the main entry.

Miss CRAWFORD: 1 o: "Enter under highest title unless family name or lower title is decidedly better known." Will you keep the title in the vernacular in all cases? For example, will you always say "Fürst von" instead of the English form, and "Graf von," etc.?

Mr. HANSON: There is a varying practice as to that. I will say for the Library of Congress, where they are purely titles of honor or minor noblemen, we use the vernacular; but we have found it advisable for kings, in fact for sovereigns, to use the designation king, emperor, pope, etc., in English.

Miss KROEGER: Has anything been said about entering sovereigns and popes in the vernacular or English form? The rule says, "_May_ be given in the English form."

Mr. FLETCHER: I think we should generally feel, as Mr. Cutter expresses it in his rule, that this is a matter of progress; and before long our library committees will not tolerate "Henry" instead of "Henri" for king of France, or "Lewis" instead of "Louis." We are in a transition stage, and this "May be" means that it is considered allowable while we are in the transition stage to use the English form instead of the vernacular. But give names of sovereigns in the vernacular. The same thing is true of names of cities. Some librarians are leading us a little and giving Wien for Vienna.

Mr. PERLEY: It seems to me the use of the English form would largely depend upon the length of the custom. I think for the names of the Italian cities which have been given common English names since the Middle Ages we are justified in using the English forms, and the names of persons in the same way.

Adjourned without day.

SECTION FOR CHILDREN'S LIBRARIANS.[G]

The A. L. A. Section for Children's Librarians held two sessions during the Waukesha conference. In the absence of Miss Annie Carroll Moore, chairman of the section, the chair was occupied by Miss L. E. STEARNS, who presided as honorary chairman.

_FIRST SESSION._

The first session of the section was called to order at 2.15 p.m., Friday, July 5.

The secretary read a communication from the chairman, Miss Moore, who extended her cordial greeting to the Children's Librarians' Section, and expressed regret that she was unable to be present. She also expressed her satisfaction that the meetings should be conducted by one whose contributions to the work of children's librarians, both by the pen and the power of her magnetic personality, have been so far-reaching in their influence. Miss Stearns' paper given at the Lake Placid conference, 1894, she believed to be one of the most important contributions to the development of work with children, as it set people thinking and talking, and stimulated activity along the lines indicated. In regard to the establishment of a separate section of the A. L. A., Miss Moore said: "It is most encouraging and gratifying to feel that we have the support of those whose interest in library work for children precedes our own, and whose wise counsel may be counted upon in considering the problems which have arisen out of a practical experience.

"It has been the chief object in the construction of this first program to define certain phases of our work in order that we may proceed with a clearer vision of its significance and with a better idea of how we are to accomplish the results at which we seem to be aiming. It is hoped that succeeding meetings may be rich in profitable discussions of practical problems, but let us plan our programs with the utmost care, that we may gather a body of matter which shall prove valuable for the future as well as enlightening in the present.

"Most hearty thanks are due to all who have assisted in the making of the program, and to those who have volunteered to carry it to a successful issue.

"We feel especially grateful to the librarians at large who have so generously responded by the preparation of papers, or by participating in the discussions, to this special claim of ours upon their time and thought."

The secretary read a statement regarding

THE CLUB OF CHILDREN'S LIBRARIANS.

At the A. L. A. conference in Montreal in 1900 an informal meeting was held for the purpose of personal acquaintance and co-operation among those actively engaged in library work with children.

As a result of this meeting an organization was formed, to be known as the Club of Children's Librarians, of which Miss A. C. Moore was made chairman, and Miss M. E. Dousman secretary. In order to facilitate the work of the club it was decided to divide the work into departments, each department to be in charge of a chairman appointed by the chair.

The secretary of the club was instructed to inform the secretary of the American Library Association of the formation of the club and to offer its services in the making of the program for future sessions on library work with children, if so desired.

The result of this proposition was that at a meeting of the executive board of the A. L. A. it was voted that a section for library work with children be established, providing such section be acceptable to the officers of the Club of Children's Librarians. The section was accepted, and the program for the same was submitted by the officers of the club to the program committee of the A. L. A.

The establishment of a section devoted to work with children, as a result of the efforts of the club, is a matter of congratulation for all those interested in this branch of library work. Special thanks are due the chairman, Miss Moore, for her unremitting efforts in making the program for the sessions helpful and inspiring. Thanks are also due chairmen of committees for their zeal in collecting valuable material and for the presentation of practical and suggestive reports.

In view of the establishment of the Section for Children's Librarians, which makes possible the thorough treatment of children's library work, it seems desirable that the Club of Children's Librarians be no longer continued, its special purpose being accomplished; at the present meeting of the section it is hoped to perfect its organization and outline its plans for the coming year.

The first paper of the session was by Miss CAROLINE M. HEWINS, and in her absence was read by Miss HELEN E. HAINES. It dealt with

BOOK REVIEWS, LISTS AND ARTICLES ON CHILDREN'S READING: ARE THEY OF PRACTICAL VALUE TO THE CHILDREN'S LIBRARIAN?

(_See_ p. 57.)

The subject was discussed by Miss HAINES, who said:

Miss Hewins' criticisms and deductions are so sound that there is little to add to what she has said, except in the way of assent. The children's librarian who relies only upon what she can find in print to tell her what she ought to think about children's literature, leans upon a broken reed. In general, reviews in this field are valueless, owing to lack of discrimination and of good taste, and to indifference. The reason for this is the unimportance of the subject, from the standpoint of the average reviewer or literary editor. Miss Hewins has stated with entire fairness the conditions that control reviews of children's books. Christmas time--the "rush season"--is practically the only time when they are given attention, and then owing to the great mass of review copies to be handled, notices are most inadequate. Indeed, most of these notices are evolved from material supplied by the publisher with the book--the trail of the publisher is over them all.

There is not yet among children's librarians a sufficient "body of doctrine"--critical judgment, knowledge of books--to produce satisfactory library lists. Such lists are too often made up from hearsay, or through selection from other lists, which is almost always unsatisfactory. The most prevalent and serious defect in these annotated library lists is the use of too many words which mean nothing. In this work especially "the adjective is the enemy of the substantive." Even the Carnegie list, excellent as a whole and probably the best of the kind yet published, is crude in some respects, and would stand pruning. There is too frequent use of such phrases as "a wholesome book," "a cheery tale," "a children's classic," and there is too great a preponderance of American books, of commonplace "series," of books in what may be called the public-school rut. As an example of "what not to do" in book annotation, extracts may be given from a recent annotated list of children's books, which included the following:

Warner, S. The wide, wide world.

Miss Warner is one of the best friends a young girl can have as chaperone into the delightful kingdom of romance.

Weyman, S. The house of the wolf.

A modern English version of a curious French memoir written about 1620.

Church. Three Greek children.

Mr. Church is an accomplished restorer of the antique, and has a keen discrimination for points appealing to child-like magnetism.

Cooper. The spy.

A story founded upon fact. The same adventitious causes which gave birth to the book determined its scenes and its general character.

It will be seen that not one of these annotations conveys an idea of subject, quality, or treatment, while in two of them at least it is evident that the annotator knew nothing at all about the book.

Articles on children's reading are in general either sentimental or prejudiced, and they are not of direct practical use to the children's librarian. Reading such articles, however, is interesting and often suggestive. Their best feature is the hints they now and then give of some book or class of books that has pleased children, and that the librarian does not know or had not thought of.

Turning to specific points in Miss Hewins' paper, one is inclined to question the stringent criticisms of the "Pansy" books, the "Prudy" books, "Editha's burglar," and the like stories, that certainly do delight many children, though they may not be of a high literary plane. Nor do I believe in children's books carefully "written down" to their audience and never rising above their comprehension. "Words-in-one-syllable" books are obnoxious to a right-minded child. It is a good thing to be given now and then what is above our comprehension. What we don't quite understand holds a strong fascination. Nor do I believe that the "horrors" of the old fairy stories are particularly harmful--the thrills they impart have a subtle charm, and most children delight in "horrors." The difficulty is to steer between what is vulgar and coarse or trashily sentimental on the one hand, and the limiting of a children's collection only to "pretty-pretty" stories, innocuous but utterly without character or variety, on the other. Such a collection should be made as broad, as varied, as catholic as it can be, including old books, English books--Miss Yonge, Miss Shaw, Miss Strickland--not just current and American books.

In conclusion, the most important thing is to know the books themselves. This could not be possible for the librarian of a general collection, but it is possible, and ought to be indispensable, for the librarian of a special class of literature. A children's librarian can make herself familiar with the literature suitable for children, and should do so. Personal familiarity is better than all "evaluations" by other people. There should be a constant interchange of criticism and experience among those working in this field--it is as yet small enough to permit this. This should be largely personal and individual--not brought out as a public expression--until there is developed a better basis for critical and literary discernment in this subject than now exists. The most important thing to do is not to rush hastily into print--to "educate ourselves in public"--but to set to work to know our books, and through such knowledge to establish a fund of critical judgment and experience that will later make it possible for the utterances of children's librarians to carry weight in their own field of literature.

There followed a "collective paper," in three parts, each part being treated by a special writer. It dealt with

THE BOOKS THEMSELVES.

In the absence of Miss WINIFRED TAYLOR Miss EDNA LYMAN read Miss Taylor's consideration of

I. FICTION. (_See_ p. 63.)

Miss LYMAN also read the second paper by Miss ABBY SARGENT, on

II. FAIRY TALES. (_See_ p. 66.)

The third paper, in the absence of its author, Miss ELLA HOLMES, was read by Miss BERTHA M. BROWN. It reviewed

III. SCIENCE FOR CHILDREN. (_See_ p. 69.)

The general subject was opened for discussion by F. M. CRUNDEN, who said that he thought it was unwise to make a distinction between the reading of boys and girls, as it tended to differentiate the sexes.

He also believed in the reading and rereading of the classics and standard literature to children as a means of checking the craving for new books which is a characteristic evil of the American adult. The best means of judging the quality of a new book was to set it in comparison with an old one that had stood the test of time, so that familiarity with, and an ample supply of, the best literature was one of the most effective ways of raising the standard of taste as regards current books. He also said that the well-brought-up child will usually choose the best himself, though wise direction is necessary, for the books he reads influence his whole life. Reading aloud to children is of great value in bringing them to love books, and too strict a grading of books by age suitability is inadvisable, as many very young children enjoy books that at first thought seem beyond them. The boy who reads the best books will not choose the worst companions.

The program of the meeting was shortened, owing to arrangements of the local entertainment committee, so that the conclusion of the discussion on this subject was carried over to the next session. Before adjournment a nominating committee was appointed, made up of Miss Linda A. Eastman, Miss Edna Lyman and Mrs. Menzies.

_SECOND SESSION._

The second session of the section was held on the afternoon of Saturday, July 6. The meeting was called to order at 2.30, when discussion was resumed of the subject

THE BOOKS THEMSELVES.

Miss W. W. PLUMMER said:

I should much like to see tried Miss Sargent's plan for the story-hour, _i. e._, the argument of the story being given first in the attendant's own words, followed by a reading from some good version of the original, with judicious skipping. If this has been tried anywhere, we should be glad to know of it. We have given as a problem to our class of children's librarians the selection of one or two books of Homer, of the Odyssey preferably, to cut and edit for reading by or to children, and have always found that what was left made an exceedingly interesting story, that it seemed might be read just as it was. But, of course, such an exercise would require an unusually good and very intelligent reader to be a success.

_Fairy tales._

Belief, on the part of the author, at least while writing, is necessary if one would preserve the true atmosphere of the fairy story and communicate the right enjoyment to the child-readers. The fairy book in which the author tries to be "smart" and is continually thrusting in his own personality, is a failure. He must forget himself, leave the present century, and for the time be as credulous as the child himself.

_Fiction._

The vulgarization of the child is one of the dangers we must avoid. What if the boy's father does read the _New York Journal_ and the girl's mother, when she reads anything, Laura Jean Libbey? It is our business, as librarians for children, to see that by the time the child reaches the same age he shall like something different and better. And how can this be brought about if we let him steep himself in the smart, sensational, vulgar and up-to-date children's books that naturally lead to just such tastes in the adult?

We must also guard against false reasoning. Some authors whom we have probably never questioned will have to go, if thus examined. I am thinking, for instance, of a writer for girls who has been generally accepted. I examined her last book, the story of a little girl and her grandmother, apparently plain people, who moved into a summer village alongside of a family of fashionable city people. The question with the children of the fashionable family and their friends was whether they should or should not make a friend of the new girl--she was nice, but evidently not rich, not fashionable, not one of their kind. The counsel of the minority prevailed, and the children, boys and girls of 15 or 16, kindly admitted her to their circle, though not considering her their equal. How they held their breath at thought of their nearness to a great mistake when they found she belonged to a fine old family of another city, and had great expectations from the quiet grandmother! "See how it paid to be polite!" is the tacit morality of the book, which is full of the spirit of snobbery while professing to teach the opposite. It behooves us, therefore, to dip into books before purchasing or recommending. Nothing will take the place of knowing the books we handle and having our own opinion of them.

A thing we have to look out for is the intentional or unintentional imitation of the names of well-received writers, _e.g._, the Marie Louise Pool, author of "Chums," to whom Miss Taylor refers, is not the Miss Pool who wrote "Roweny in Boston" and "Mrs. Keats Bradford," that author having died two or three years ago. The person who uses the same name, rightfully or wrongfully, writes very different and very inferior books.

At the information desk we have made lists for various classes and types of person--but very often have had to lay these aside and make a special selection for the individual, after talking with him or her. This is as true for children as for adults--the books that appeal to one person do not appeal to another of seemingly the same type. Until the proper relation be established between the child and the librarian, he cannot be influenced very much in his choice of books. Sometimes this relation may be established in five minutes, sometimes in a week, a month, or a year; sometimes it seems impossible to do it, and some other personal influence must be waited for.

People sometimes say that the children's own tastes in reading should be our guide. This is true thus far: that if a child is reading books that do not seem good for him in our judgment, we should find out what it is _in_ these books that appeals to him; then look for the same thing in books that are better written and lack the objectionable features, and both librarian and child are satisfied. Children learn a great deal by absorption, and if the children's librarian can give them the sort of plot or incident they want and, at the same time, a book from which they may absorb good English instead of bad, high ideals and a high code of behavior instead of low ones, she has accomplished a great part of her task.

_Science._

With regard to nature books for children, I am glad that Miss Holmes has spoken frankly and pointed out to us the dangers we incur in rushing into the purchase of a new kind of book without investigation. The taking up of nature study and the study of art in the public schools has meant a great pressure upon libraries for books which teachers and pupils have heard of, but of the merits of which many of them as well as ourselves are unable to judge. In order to have books enough to meet the demand, our temptation is to buy entire series, every book we hear of in these lines, whereas our best plan would be to get them for inspection only, invite the inspection and criticism of some scientific person, or some one conversant with art and its literature, and reject what they condemn, putting in duplicates enough of the approved books to meet the large demand. A thing we need to beware of is the stampede--the wild rush to or away from a thing without reasoning, without stopping to think, just because other libraries we know of are engaging in it. The librarian needs at such times to keep cool, brace himself or herself against the rush, and when the dust of the crowd is over think things out and go ahead. And in these lines where special knowledge is necessary do not let us think ourselves infallible or even altogether competent; let us be humble enough to take advice and information from those who have a real claim to know.

J. C. DANA said:

The papers we have heard read tell us that we can put no dependence on book reviews; that the librarian must depend on herself. How can she do it? There are no laws or rules or principles of book selection. Even if there were, no librarian has time to read even hastily all the books for children.