Goodreads Librarians Group discussion

note: This topic has been closed to new comments.
353 views
Additions to Librarian Manual > Adaptations and Abridgements

Comments Showing 1-25 of 25 (25 new)    post a comment »
dateDown arrow    newest »

message 1: by vicki_girl (last edited Dec 14, 2010 08:42AM) (new)

vicki_girl | 2765 comments Suggested update to the librarians Manual regarding Abridgements and Adaptations. New text in bold.

do combine:
Different publications of the same book.
Different formats of the book (hardcover, paperback, audio).
Editions/translations of the book in other languages. Even though many translations differ significantly, we've made the decision to combine them all, and have people note the differences in their reviews.
Abridgments, i.e. a work that contains the author's original text, with some parts removed to shorten it.


don't combine:
2-in-1 books or boxed sets that include the given book.
Cliff notes or other works about the given book.
Adaptations and Retellings, i.e. a work that tells the same story but with comepletely new text (with little to none of the author's orginal words).

Some examples of Adaptations and Retellings, that are not combined, include:
1) Graphic novels
2) "Young readers" adaptations which generally tell the entire story in simpler language, possibly with some illustrations.
3) "Picture book" adaptations, with minimal text and a generally broad overview of the plot.
4) Plays adapted from the original work.
5) Radio Dramatizations, where a radio play was scripted (i.e., rewritten) from the original work, then performed by actors.

For adaptations, the adaptor should be listed as the primary (first) author. If the original author adapts his/her own work, then he/she remains as the primary author. However, the adaptation still should not be combined with the original work.



message 2: by rivka, Librarian Moderator (new)

rivka | 44992 comments Mod
vicki_girl wrote: "Should something also be added about putting the adaptor as the primary author, to minimize accidental re-combining?"

That sounds good. However, sometimes an author adapts their own work (especially in the case of graphic novels).


message 3: by vicki_girl (new)

vicki_girl | 2765 comments Updated based on your comment Rivka.


message 4: by rivka, Librarian Moderator (new)

rivka | 44992 comments Mod
Looks good!

Now for me to find time to work on the manual! Maybe Sunday . . .


message 5: by ^ (new)

^ | 86 comments I've just created a new edition record for CS Lewis's 1955 ABRIDGEMENT of his work "That Hideous Strength" (1945). I then combined that new edition record (Pan Books, 6th printing 1965) (paperback) with the edition record for the original work (hardback, publ. 1945 Bodley Head).

Being somewhat new to this, I'd be grateful if some kind knowledgeable person would please kindly check that I've either done the right thing; or let me know where I've gone wrong, and what I should have done.

Many thanks

Sub Nomine


message 6: by Cheryl (new)

Cheryl  (cherylllr) | 362 comments Plz forgive me; I'm new to Librarians... is there a discussion somewhere of the idea of combining abridgements with originals? I'm personally appalled at the idea and would like to say so....


message 7: by rivka, Librarian Moderator (new)

rivka | 44992 comments Mod
That policy comes from the PTB, not from librarian discussions. (And it has limitations.)


message 8: by Cheryl (new)

Cheryl  (cherylllr) | 362 comments So, could WeaselBox and I open a discussion to fuss at the PTB? Assuming the answer is yes, where - here in Librarians or in Feedback?

(I do see the 'Young Readers' abridgements exempted by being under Adaptations and thus not-to-be-combined, but imo that is not sufficient.)

Thank you.


message 9: by rivka, Librarian Moderator (new)

rivka | 44992 comments Mod
I suggest that if you feel the need to "fuss", that you start with a thread in Librarians.


message 10: by vicki_girl (new)

vicki_girl | 2765 comments While there are some opposing viewpoints, I believe the text in my original post reflects the current policy.

Any estimate on when this may be added?


message 11: by vicki_girl (new)

vicki_girl | 2765 comments I was also thinking about adding some info regarding short story collections, and not combining things like 'Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde' and 'Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde and Other Stories'.

Thoughts?


message 12: by Violetta (new)

Violetta | 479 comments vicki_girl wrote: "I was also thinking about adding some info regarding short story collections, and not combining things like 'Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde' and 'Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde and Other Stories'.

I agree with you there. I've run into several instances where I thought I had the proper book on my digital bookshelf, and have scrolled through the 126-or-so editions of that book looking for the cover image, only to find that I was looking at the "and Other Stories" editions instead of the separate story edition.

Now while it would have been convenient to this method to have actually found the book I was looking for, it wouldn't have been a pure cataloging. It would just have been laziness on my behalf, for not having double checked with an ISBN. If a person needs to search for a compendium of stories, it is just as easily (if not actually easier) done from the author page as by scrolling through various editions.


message 13: by ^ (new)

^ | 86 comments Violetta wrote: "vicki_girl wrote: "I was also thinking about adding some info regarding short story collections, and not combining things like 'Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde' and 'Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde and Other Stori..."

Agree. Books which are of the type "... and other stories" are anthologies. They can comprise works of either one author or of multiple different authors.

ISBN checking isn't an option if the book was published before the ISBN system was introduced.


message 14: by Bob (new)

Bob | 15 comments ^ wrote: "Violetta wrote: "vicki_girl wrote: "I was also thinking about adding some info regarding short story collections, and not combining things like 'Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde' and 'Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyd..."

I have done a lot of work combining/separating short story anthologies of this kind (including, recently, Dr. J and Mr. H). It's a huge pain to figure out which stories are included when you don't have an actual copy of the book. It would be helpful to state in the manual a suggestion that when a librarian has succeeded in distinguishing an "and other stories" from the stand-alone story and/or other "and other stories/tales/yarns" collections, the librarian should add a list of the included stories to the book's description. That way, other librarians, as well as interested readers, can easily determine what's included in a given edition-entry. Does this make sense to you-all?


message 15: by Peter (new)

Peter (pete_c) | 388 comments Bob wrote: "It would be helpful to state in the manual a suggestion that when a librarian has succeeded in distinguishing an "and other stories" from the stand-alone story and/or other "and other stories/tales/yarns" collections, the librarian should add a list of the included stories to the book's description. That way, other librarians, as well as interested readers, can easily determine what's included in a given edition-entry. Does this make sense to you-all?"

Very much so. I already do it for any collection of stories that I've added a record.


message 16: by Peter (new)

Peter (pete_c) | 388 comments vicki_girl wrote: "Suggested update to the librarians Manual regarding Abridgements and Adaptations. New text in bold.

do combine:
Different publications of the same book.
Different formats of the book (hardcover, paperback, audio).
Editions/translations of the book in other languages. Even though many translations differ significantly, we've made the decision to combine them all, and have people note the differences in their reviews.
Abridgments, i.e. a work that contains the author's original text, with some parts removed to shorten it."


What about new editions that have all new content added?

I am thinking primarily of later editions (especially of nonfiction) where the author (or publisher) decided to add new chapters (sometimes by a secondary author). I would think it should be the same as adding other stories to a stand-alone story. However, I can see how it could be considered the same as an abridgment; the original version would be considered the abridgment of the later version.


message 17: by Peter (new)

Peter (pete_c) | 388 comments vicki_girl wrote: "Suggested update to the librarians Manual regarding Abridgements and Adaptations. New text in bold.

do combine:
Different publications of the same book.
Different formats of the book (hardcover, paperback, audio). "


I would like to suggest amending to include ebooks specifically.
Different formats of the book (hardcover, paperback, audio, ebook).

I have had to combine electronic editions with printed editions quite often.


message 18: by Keith (new)

Keith (kgf0) | 352 comments Peter wrote: "What about new editions that have all new content added?"

My understanding, subject to revision by the PTB or employees (I'm only a Super) is that it depends on the nature of the content added. E.g., don't combine the "complete and uncut" edition of The Stand with the original edition (though it looks like someone went ahead and did that anyway, sigh). But if the someone adds a new preface to the 3rd edition, that should be combined with the 1st & 2nd Ed, since the essential text is the same (with the editions properly labeled in that field, and perhaps ensuring that the description notes something like "With a new preface by so-and-so").


message 19: by rivka, Librarian Moderator (new)

rivka | 44992 comments Mod
Keith wrote: "don't combine the "complete and uncut" edition of The Stand with the original edition"

I disagree. We combine abridgments (as opposed to adaptations).


message 20: by Keith (new)

Keith (kgf0) | 352 comments Hm, I understood that about an abridgement (i.e., taking something long and making it shorter, like Reders Digest Condensed Books), but I didn't realize we were doing it for the reverse case as well. It seems like The Stand in particular, which is more than twice as long, is really a different book. But like I said, "My understanding, subject to revision...." My understanding is hereby revised.

Follow-up question: what of cases where a novel is based on the author's short story, like (IIRC) Ender's Game? Where's the cut-off between new edition and new book? How do we tell when something is an uncombinable adaptation (e.g., YA version) vs. a combinable abridgement? Do we just leave it alone until someone has enough access to the volume itself to determine whether it is fewer words vs. smaller words?


message 21: by rivka, Librarian Moderator (new)

rivka | 44992 comments Mod
Keith wrote: "Do we just leave it alone until someone has enough access to the volume itself to determine whether it is fewer words vs. smaller words?"

Often. With online search inside features (like on Google Books), sometimes that doesn't even require a physical copy.


message 22: by Keith (new)

Keith (kgf0) | 352 comments OK, got it. Thanks for the clarification. (Nothing worse that making edits one thinks are right, only to have someone else change it back, only to find one has been doing it wrong all along.)


message 23: by [deleted user] (new)

Should be
http://www.goodreads.com/book/edit/36...
merged with the other 2 volumes edition of "The Count of Monte cristo"?
The first volume of the linked editions has 95 pages, the second 111, while the whole french edition has around 700 pages.


message 24: by vicki_girl (new)

vicki_girl | 2765 comments I would say no for that one Luisa, as it appears to be an adaptation.

The worldcat entry states "adapt. Vincent Leroger", which to me means "adapted by"
http://www.worldcat.org/title/comte-d...

Also, in worldcat, the record notes that the book is part of the "Lecture Facile" series. Googling that seems to indicate that is an "Easy Reader" edition for teaching French.

The Librarian note should probably be edited to say "adaptation" instead of an "abridgement".


message 25: by [deleted user] (new)

Thanks Vicki_girl, I changed the librarian note.


back to top
This topic has been frozen by the moderator. No new comments can be posted.