College and Research Libraries


which the author feels might deter union-
ization if they performed some of a union's 
functions. He adds, however, "ALA is en-
couraging other organizations to assume its 
role as spokesman for the nation's librari-
ans." This pithy statement demands a chal-
lenge-if any ALA champion is awake to 
make it. 

This book deserves special recognition 
on several scores. It pioneers an approach 
to collective bargaining among librarians 
-not the only approach, but a useful one 
which will probably now be repeated from 
library school to library school. Moreover, 
it has drawn on fields of knowledge outside 
of traditional library science to a degree 
that presages future effects of collective 
bargaining on the isolation of the profes-
sion.-]ohn W. Weatherford, Central Mich-
igan University, ·Mount Pleasant. 

Thomson, Sarah · . Katharine. Interlibrary 
Loan Policies Directory. Chicago: Amer-
ican Library Assn., 1975. 486p. $7.95. 
(LC 74-32182) (ISBN 0-8389-0197-2) 
If there is any one person to whom the 

current generation of interlibrary loan li-
brarians has reason to be grateful, it is Sal-
ly Thomson. · He! Columbia dissertation 
(later published as an ACRL . monograph) 
was the first substantial study of interli-
brary loan transactions in this country. The 
Interlibrary Loan Procedure Manual, which 
she published in 1970, makes it possible for 
the least experienced librarian . to properly 
execute interlibrary loan requests. Her most 
recent contr:ibution, the Interlibrary Loan 
Policies Directory, will in the future save 
numerous individual librarians the work of 
compiling the same data. 

The Directory, arranged by NUC code, 
contains information on the lending policies 
and practices . of .276 American academic, 
public, government, and special libraries. 
The libraries selected generally lend 250 
or more volumes a year to out-of-state li-
braries. Information given for each institu-
tion includes addresses of interlibrary loan 
and photoduplication services, photocopy 
practices and charges, and lending policies 
for periodicals · and other serials, micro-
forms , government documents, . dissertations 
and theses, genealogies, and technical re-
ports. The -information was . supplied by in-
terlibrary loan librarians . following a de-

Recent Publications I 429 

tailed form provided by Dr. Thomson. 
The only similar work is the Directory 

of Reprographic Services, issued by the Re-
production of Library Materials Section of 
the Resources and Technical Services Divi-
sion of ALA, which contains information 
on lending policies for dissertations and 
periodicals as well as information on photo-
duplication services. But · the RLMS direc-
tory, because of its lack of standards for in-
clusion, its inconvenient format, and its 
lack of detail, has not been very useful to 
interlibrary loan librarians. 

As long as libraries fail to agree on lend-
ing policies and practices, a directory such 
as Dr. Thomson's will be a necessity. The 
individual interlibrary loan librarian will 
still need to collect and compile some data 
since not all libraries could be included in 
this new directory. It does provide, how-
ever, a very substantial common core to 
which each library can add its own supple-
mentary list. 

In order to make it easier to add other 
entries and also to insert changes as they 
occur, it would be helpful if the next edi-
tion were issued in a more flexible format. 
It is undoubtedly too much to hope that 
this public display of their failure to agree 
will motivate librarians to reexamine their 
policies and make the publication of future 
editions unnecessaryl-Marjorie · Karlson, 
Head, Reference Department, University of 
Massachusetts at Amherst. 

Daily, Jay E. Cataloging Phonorecordings: 
Problems and Possibilities. (Practical Li-
brary and Information Science, vol. 1) 
New York: Marcel De~ker, Inc. , 1975. 
172p. $13.75. (LC 73.-90723) (ISBN 0-
8247-6196-0) 
When the Anglo-American Cataloging 

Rules (AACR) were published in 1967, 
Jay Daily evaluated Part III, "Non-Book 
Materials" (see his "Selection, Processing, 
Storage of Non-Print Materials," Library 
Trends 16:283-99 (Oct. 1967)). He was not 
at all pleased with the. new code and sub-
sequently issued his own code for dealing 
with nonprint materials. Some of his ideas 
can quite properly be described as radical 
and controversial. On the other hand, his 
criticisms of AACR represent something 
more than a personal idiosyncrasy. If Part 
III of the code were satisfactory, it is not