College and Research Libraries


is quite capable of the solution of that 

problem whenever it is given sufficient 

money and authority to put a specific pro-

gram across. T h e distribution of a much 

more limited number of publications to the 

people w h o w a n t and need them is appar-

ently a much more difficult problem, call-

ing for the best judgment and planning 

of which archivists, librarians, and scholars 

are capable. 

T h e A m e r i c a n L i b r a r y Association and 

its Committee on Public Documents have 

l o n g been at w o r k on the problem, not 

w i t h o u t some success in certain specific 

fields, but no m a j o r attack on the problem 

as a whole has in recent years been allowed 

a considered hearing in either congressional 

or bureaucratic halls. T h e most recent 

such attempt is reported elsewhere in this 

issue. Its probable success is not yet 

known, but even if all of its recommenda-

tions come to pass for the duration of the 

w a r and are allowed to stand during the 

peace that is to f o l l o w , the resultant plan 

of document distribution w i l l not yet be 

the best of all possible plans. 

T h e time for the development of such 

a plan is probably not yet. T h e chaotic 

maldistribution of government publications 

which now obtains in this country and 

others must probably become a good deal 

worse, a good deal more tangled and im-

possible to handle before the learned pro-

fessions assemble w i l l i n g hands and ample 

f u n d s to upset the w h o l e apple cart and 

begin anew. Such beginning anew must 

start w i t h a current and comprehensive 

bibliography broadly planned on a sound 

basis of adequate and permanent docu-

mentation of all items as they are pub-

lished, must f o l l o w through w i t h ample 

stocks of all publications to meet k n o w n 

and anticipated demand, must provide im-

MARCH', 1943 

mediate and complete distribution of all 

or selected documents to the libraries and 

archives k n o w n to be f u l l y equipped in 

space, administration, and personnel to 

care for them properly, and must make 

available immediately on publication or on 

application those documents which indi-

viduals, scholars, and farmers alike need 

and w a n t for the prosecution of the many 

activities government publications are de-

signed to assist. Such a distribution pro-

gram w o u l d somehow cut the gordian knot 

of sales versus free distribution, somehow 

resolve the apparently irrepressible con-

flict between printing and processing, and 

silence once and for all the vociferous 

critics of " w a s t e f u l distribution." T h e 

statement on " G o v e r n m e n t Publishing in 

W a r t i m e " is a step in the right direction; 

many more such steps and a f e w leaps and 

bounds are needed if the millennium in 

document production, documentation, and 

distribution is to be achieved in our time. 

—LeRoy Charles Merritt, State Teachers 

College Library, Farmville, Va. 

Subject Guide to Reference Books. H e r -

bert S. Hirshberg. A m e r i c a n L i b r a r y 

Association, 1942. xvi, 26op. $4. 

THE PRIMARY PURPOSE of t h i s b o o k can best be given in the author's o w n 
prefatory statement that it "attempts to 

provide an alphabetic subject guide to the 

books needed by libraries for the answering 

of questions frequently asked. It is de-

signed to be a ready reference tool for 

the librarian's desk and to point the w a y 

to or recall sources of information in books 

commonly held as w e l l as some less w e l l 

k n o w n . " T o this purpose it is admirably 

suited. 

I t is an alphabetic list of topics covered 

at lengths w h i c h vary f r o m the five titles 

165 



cited under " A r t P r i c e s " or the four under 

" S l o g a n s " to the twenty pages devoted to 

" B i o g r a p h y , " w e l l organized under f i f t y 

subheads. M a t e r i a l on about half the 

topics is subdivided, most commonly into 

bibliographies and reference sources but 

in some cases under headings more spe-

cifically related to the subject. Perhaps 

a score of subjects are as elaborately di-

vided as " B i o g r a p h y , " w i t h the plan of 

organization outlined at the beginning of 

the unit. T h e selection of subjects w a s 

based on analysis of reference inquiries 

in the public libraries of C l e v e l a n d and 

A k r o n and the library of W e s t e r n Reserve 

University, and further influenced by the 

existence or nonexistence of reference 

books in a field. 

A c c o r d i n g to the index, nearly t w o thou-

sand titles are included, some 450 of them 

not in M u d g e . (See A p p e n d i x A . T h e 

eleven months' advantage of this volume, 

which includes "latest available editions 

and new titles up to December 1 9 4 1 , " 

over the second M u d g e supplement, 1938-

40, w o u l d account for a f e w of these.) 

Perhaps a score of general reference books 

—encyclopedias, yearbooks, periodical in-

d e x e s — a r e entered under each of a dozen 

or more different headings (the palm is 

borne off by Lincoln Library, forty-one 

entries, the World Almanac running up 

w i t h thirty-one), but the mean number of 

appearances per title is still probably not 

over two, and 70 per cent appear but 

once. Annotations for a repeated item 

differ from subject to subject, indicating 

its special usefulness in each connection. 

M r . Hirshberg's second purpose, to 

provide an aid for teaching reference in 

library schools, is ably defended in his 

preface. I believe no reference librarian 

and f e w teachers of reference w i l l dispute 

his claim that the best preparation for 

practical w o r k is the "inductive method" 

of learning books by actual use to meet 

specific needs, and certainly his subject 

breakdown into more than t w o hundred 

small units makes for specific and practical 

acquaintance w i t h the titles cited under 

each. It seems inevitable, however, that 

in his o w n teaching M r . H i r s h b e r g must 

deal w i t h these small subjects in larger 

constellations such as he presents in his 

"Classified L i s t of U n i t s " (p. x i i i - x v i ) . 

I think it equally certain that most library 

schools give half to t w o thirds of the 

reference course to a subject approach, de-

v o t i n g only an introductory term to the 

mastery of basic types ( a m o n g the general 

tools) whose characteristics and peculiari-

ties recur again and again in subject 

reference books. T h e chief difference be-

tween the t w o methods, then, w o u l d be 

in the amount of emphasis placed on 

"historical and bibliographical facts, neces-

sary in a bibliography like that of 

M u d g e , " on recognition of types of refer-

ence material in many subject fields, and 

on practical problem w o r k . 

T h e realistic question facing most refer-

ence instructors is whether the ideally best 

method is the simplest and most workable 

in the average library school situation. 

T h e first-year course in general is ad-

mittedly burdened to the limit w i t h detail 

w h i c h must be mastered, cataloging and 

reference being chiefly responsible, and any 

legitimate simplification of that detail 

seems justified. R e d u c i n g the number of 

titles learned or examined in reference is 

desirable, and classifying both general and 

special-subject reference tools by types has 

proved mnemonically helpful. Short of a 

controlled experiment, presenting the same 

material by the t w o methods to matched 

166 COLLEGE AND RESEARCH LIBRARIES 



groups, one has only subjective opinion 

to o f f e r ; but it seems probable that the 

more conventional w o u l d prove as effica-

cious as the inductive in learning t w o 

thousand books, of which 70 per cent (this 

by statistical sampling of the index) are 

mentioned in connection w i t h but one sub-

ject and therefore seen but once. 

A n o t h e r difficulty in the w a y of the 

more practical method is that it requires 

an immense amount of problem w o r k . T h e 

preparation of f r u i t f u l exercises to cover a 

couple of hundred small subjects is time-

consuming for the instructor and must 

be freshly done each season lest books 

become so w o r n or soiled at given pages 

as to reduce their value as both problem 

and practical reference material. T h e 

time needed for any kind of check upon the 

results of numerous problems is also large 

and, w i t h o u t aid in revision, not to be 

undertaken lightly. M o r e o v e r unless 

reference classes are small or resources and 

space permit of duplicate or even multiple 

copies of books to be consulted, search in 

a large number costs students much time 

and energy. In short, where a library 

school depends on a reference collection 

not of its o w n but of its parent institution, 

lacking duplicate copies and used by other 

students and staff members, instructors 

may w e l l find themselves unable to apply 

the inductive method to an extent which 

could make it effective. 

T h e s e comments are not to be construed 

as negative criticism of M r . Hirshberg's 

pedagogic method. W e s t e r n Reserve L i -

brary School trains first-year classes of 

eighty or more students, and it is im-

probable that all the conditions under 

which they w o r k are ideal. It w o u l d be 

most interesting to f e l l o w teachers of 

reference to hear in more detail how a 

veteran at the game achieves his in-

dubitable success, and w e shall look eagerly 

for the appearance of the workbook to 

accompany the present guide, which he 

tells us is in progress. In the meanwhile 

the guide w i l l be a considerable aid to col-

leagues in their own teaching of subject 

reference w o r k , by whatever basic method 

they present the m a t e r i a l . — J e a n n e t t e H. 

Foster, Drexel Institute School of Library 

Science, Philadelphia. 

MARCH, 1943