On Tue, 8 Aug 1995 Ivy Strickler <[log in to unmask]> said:

>We are working on a new computerized catalog and have hit a new hitch. I
am
>including a layout which will take some of the fields from the "catalog
>card" and use them to produce labels for the objects, which will look
>something like this:

Before you can solve your problem, you must have a clear understanding of
what "title" means and an appreciation of the sometimes subtle distinction
between "title" and "subject."

If you use a phrase such as "Title Unknown," the assumption is that the
work has a title which you do not know.  The field "Title" generally
indicates that some name has been applied to a work by its creator, a
publisher, a critic, an owner, a journalist, a scholar, an exhibitor, etc.
-- a name that effectively identifies the work for its public.  Titles can
be "given," traditional, translated, historical.  Titles can be current
titles, approved titles, proposed titles, official titles, rejected titles,
titles cited in documents, and former titles.  Thus, titles can change by
circumstance and change over time; they can indicate attitudes towards
works, characterize and mischaracterize works, preserve the names of
patrons and owners or other aspects of an object's history.  (It is not
going to be the Gates Codex, I hear.)

The term "untitled" is often understood as indicating that the work is not
to have a name attached to it.  As such, "Untitled" is often incorrectly
treated as a title, but it actually is just the reason for a lack of title.
 "Title Unknown," too, is not a title but a description of a title
condition, and, as noted above, also conveys the assumption that the work
is believed to have once been titled.

On a wall label it is customary to use the phrases "Untitled," or "Title
unknown;" but, in a database it is best to keep these descriptions in a
field that modifies the field designated to contain the "Title," or to
include them within brackets.  Some museums may need to keep a record of
the multiple titles given to works over time in order to date and document
the sources of titles (i.e. to link to a bibliography and citation list)
and to attribute the reason or circumstance for each recorded title.

Many works have never been given titles, and are merely known by their
subject or by an "object name" or "object type."  "Virgin and Child" is a
typical example of the former; "Kouros" or "Nutcracker" for the latter.
Databases often distinguish between the "title" of an object and its
"subject."  In reality, the distinction, while obvious in some cases, can
either be subtle or irrelevant in other cases.

Correggio's Dresden panel painting often called (titled) "Holy Night" is an
Adoration of the Shepherds (subject).  Often works of art take the subject
line as a title.  Thus Parmigianino's "Self-Portrait in a Convex Mirror" is
rendered as the title while it is merely a description of the subject.

For "object type" _The Revised Nomenclature for Museum Cataloging_ takes us
no deeper than COMMUNICATION ARTIFACTS / ART / PAINTING -- a seemingly
unproductive categorization.  For "nutcracker" _Nomenclature_ takes us to
TOOLS & EQUIPMENT FOR MATERIALS / FOOD SERVICE T&E / NUTCRACKER -- a much
more useful description -- unless this particular nutcracker is the famous
one reportedly owned by Lev Ivanov, in which case it might be titled, "The
Ivanov Nutcracker."

The posed question concerns how one creates a wall label in the absence of
a title.  It seems to me that exhibit designers typically use title
information first, and if that does not exist, then the object is
identified by its subject or object type, attempting all the while to avoid
redundancy.  In some instances wall labels may reproduce the title and the
subject, and even the object type -- if that may add needed information, or
if one piece of information compliments another.

To distinguish between an object titled "Untitled" and one that just does
not have a title, I would recommend using the word "untitled" without
initial caps and within square brackets to indicate that the word is
unofficial and supplied.  Exhibit designers, of course, will not like that
suggestion, so I would suggest, as a second recourse, to leave the title
line out or to replace it with a subject indicator or an object type.

I just saw a small exhibit of botanical drawings by students working at the
Bronx Botanical Gardens.  Each drawing depicted roses.  The exhibit
designer decided not to render a subject line at all -- at first
surprising, I'd suppose, because a rose may be a rose may be a rose
anywhere except in a botanical garden.  Rather, instead of identifying the
subject matter, the label merely indicated the name of the artist and the
medium used.  And this was appropriate because the exhibit was not about
images of roses but about student accomplishments.  In this case, the term
"watercolor" is used as an object type (not exclusively as a medium).  The
term thus assumes the same role as the title/subject/object-type term on a
label.

In sum, while you may be able to program a database report engine to
produce labels suitable for general object identification, it is
exceedingly difficult to create automated labels for exhibit functions.
The context of the exhibit is the controlling factor here.  It is better
not to belabor the obvious: A one-man-show should not have the artist's
name on every wall label and in each catalog listing.

(I have not attempted to discuss the a tie-in between "subject" and
"iconography.")

As I read over the above, I see that I have not helped solve the problem,
but, rather, have made it more complex.  For that please accept my
apologies.

______________________________________

Robert A. Baron
Museum Computer Consultant
P.O. Box 93, Larchmont, NY 10538
[log in to unmask]