How are people handling E and F?

DiskuteraLC Classification Challenge

Bara medlemmar i LibraryThing kan skriva.

How are people handling E and F?

Denna diskussion är för närvarande "vilande"—det sista inlägget är mer än 90 dagar gammalt. Du kan återstarta det genom att svara på inlägget.

1philosojerk
jan 15, 2008, 6:05pm

E's and F's are broken down in the schedules by number and not letter, but it seems like it would be cheating to read just one E book and one F... what are y'all doing in these cases?

2carlym
jan 15, 2008, 7:06pm

I'm just listing one E and one F, because for E in particular, I've already read a lot of books in this area. I see this challenge as a way to broaden my reading and to seek out books that I wouldn't otherwise have read, so reading more in those areas won't further that goal.

3lorax
jan 15, 2008, 7:55pm

Everything is further broken down by number, so I don't think it's cheating at all to list just one E and one F and call it done, IMO.

4philosojerk
jan 15, 2008, 8:01pm

Hmm... maybe I shouldn't have said "cheating."

My point is... E, for example, is "History of the United States." Seems to me there's a lot more to the history of the U.S. than I'm going to get out of one book! I mean, one book about the Civil War does not a comprehensive history of the U.S. make. So maybe I'd like to ask... for those who are trying to do more than one book from E and F, how deep into the breakdowns are you going?

Thanks.

5lorax
jan 15, 2008, 8:13pm

But then why single out E and F? There's a lot more to astronomy than can possibly be covered by a single book in QB, or to the history of Asia than a single book in DS could hope to address. The point, at least for me, isn't to say you know everything there is to know about a category, but that you've learned a little bit about areas you previously knew nothing about.

There'd be little point in me diving into the subclasses of QB; I already know a lot about astronomy. I'd rather spend my energy exploring the plethora of areas of history in D* I know nothing about.

But the challenge is a personal one, so do whatever you like with it!

6vpfluke
jan 15, 2008, 10:50pm

In one site I was looking at E's are broken into 2 groups:
11-143 America (mostly Native American)
151-904 United States, mostly chronological for the nation as a whole

F has 4 groups:
1-975 U.S. local history
1001-1145 British North Amer (Canada, etc)
1170 French America (very small category)
1201-3799 Latin America

7dcmdale
jan 15, 2008, 10:56pm

Well... I have only posted one E and one F. I've read a lot more in those letters, but I guess that I have been going with reading the LoC "letters" (with the notable exception of the 3 letter "K's"). I agree with you that when you compare the volume of material in E and F, which are not broken down, to U and V which are, it seems a little strange. It would be interesting to know the rational. QA76.76, which encompasses a significant part of the literature on computers, and TK5105.5, computer networking, show another side of the problem--large subject areas buried in the scheme. (Don't shoot me if I got the numbers wrong from memory, please).

I am taking the position that I am taking the LoC Classification as I found it with all its warts. If I get done with the letters, then I might consider expanding to some of the less well represented sub-areas.

8kaelirenee
Redigerat: jan 16, 2008, 9:06am

I, too, am just reading one in every heading/subheading with the exception of the Three-letter Ks. I have roughly 100 categories that I've never touched. I'm only reading the one book for British history, and they certainly have a longer history that's spanned more of the globe. Plus, if you choose your books carefully, you can get a great deal of a specific history with this list. Don't forget, U and V are both military headings, so there is quite a bit of American history in there. Plus, C has a few headings with lots of American history (I'm reading one book on the history of the Great Seal). AND, J and K have lots of American history smattered in with their political science and law.

I'm particularly interested in medical history and medical folklore. I've managed to find lots of books on these two topics throughout the classification schedule. But I'm also learning things that have come in handy (if for no other reason than to improve my chances at winning Trivial Pursuit) by branching out into other disciplines.

That being said, there aren't any strict rules to this-if you really like American history or feel the need to learn more and read more in it, by all means, have fun! I've felt the urge to do that with some of the Qs and Zs!

9vpfluke
jan 16, 2008, 3:02pm

I think the rationale for numbers in the E classification is that LOC can just add number for a couple of centuries and still have numbers left over as time progresses. I think E 904 is for the current Bush administration period.

For F, with 50 states, and more than 26 countries in the Americas, I guess they figured numbers would be easier. I guess they could have used letters for region (like New England in the U.S., and like the Caribbean for the Americas)

10DromJohn
Redigerat: jan 16, 2008, 4:57pm

Come on, read a KFG for me, says DromJohn who sees thousands to choose from outside my door (and who isn't doing the challenge). We have a special KFG section and then put others on Reserve, at Reference, and in storage.

11kaelirenee
jan 17, 2008, 9:29am

I'm not even reading KFT1201-why would I want to read the law for another state! :D Though I'm sure every single one of those books is a real page-turner...

12dcmdale
jan 17, 2008, 10:13am

10> I've read plenty of KFC, but I wouldn't want to commit to reading something from all of them. I worked in a legal research firm during the mid-70's and wrote appellate briefs for most jurisdictions west of the Mississippi, but I haven't been counting "used reference materials as a tool" for my own purposes. I have only been counting "cover to cover." Just me. I understand why others count it differently, especially if for tools that they use constantly (thinking about Almanacs for Reference Librarians).