My Google Fu is best

Librarians, brace yourselves.

The other day, I had a memory.  I wasn't really sure how it went.  There was a book, you see.  I found it in the public library of my home town, oh, probably 30 years ago, when I was but a wee snapper of whips.

This is the sum total of what I remember of it (besides that I enjoyed it).
1.  It was kind of like Mary Poppins, only the Magical Caretaker was a man instead of a woman.
2.  There was something about soda (or possibly pop) coming out of the taps.
3.  And a bathtub.  Something about a bathtub.  Possibly the pop was coming out of the bathtub taps.
4.  The title was possibly the name of the caretaker character, akin to Mary Poppins.

So, you know, even the things I remembered I didn't really remember.  But I went to Google with various relevant keywords and -phrases ("like Mary Poppins," "magic soda bathtub," etc.) expecting that I would be frustrated and eventually have to ask my Local Librarian (or the several librarian and librarian-adjacent friends I know on FB), set to make the necessary apologies ("No, I don't know what color the cover is.  Sorry.").  And sure enough, I saw lots of articles about Mary Poppins, ads for "Magic Soda Dispensers" and the like.  But I persevered, trying various combinations.  And sure enough-- "bathtub taps soda" (you gotta be specific) showed me (in second place after "9 Bathroom Cleaning Problems Solved | Reader's Digest")...

Mr. Pudgins, by Ruth Christoffer Carlsen.  Not only that, but my local library system even has a copy, and it is winging its nostalgic way to me as we speak.  I retire, victorious.

Dewey? Or Do We Not?

The Dewey Decimal system, though widely known of (if not actually widely known itself-- quick, anyone know the code for theodicy?  Didn't think so*) is far from the only classification system used by libraries.

Melvil Dewey himself was not an absolutist about his system, and in fact helped encourage a contemporary, one Charles Cutter, to develop an alternative called (somewhat unimaginatively) the Cutter Expansive Classification System.

At the time, Cutter was serving as a librarian for the Boston Athenaeum, a rather well-regarded institution as such things go.  It was specifically designed as a response to those who found earlier systems (some of Cutter's included) a little bit too complicated and unwieldy.  Rather than create an elaborate scheme that would include all possible subjects (a noble although clearly flawed endeavor-- after all, where did Dewey expect to classify all of the books on quantum computing?  Or, for that matter, urban fantasy featuring tough but sensitive women who like to pose with their backs to the audience holding a weapon in an outfit that does not quite reveal a tattoo?), Cutter created an "expandable" system, that could be adjusted based on the requirements of the library.

For example, a small local library might only need use the First Classification, which just groups books into A) Reference works and Other; B) Philosophy and Religion; E) Biography; F) History and Geography;
H) Social sciences; L) Natural sciences and Arts; Y) Language and Literature; and YF) Fiction.  Some of the libraries near me clearly still use this system as I have just realized while typing this paragraph, as it reveals that some of the books I had been somewhat surprised to find labeled "Youth Fiction" actually weren't.  Oops.  As the library size increases, other categories can be added as needed-- such as C) for Judeo-Christian matter.  Eventually, all of the letters are used.

Following the major classification codes, it gets a bit more complicated.  But basically, after that first class mark letter, you might see one or more secondary characters indicating a subclass.  Then you'll see a punctuation mark that indicates the size of the book.  Then there'll be another set of characters that are usually derived from the name of the author and the title of the book, although these are often converted to something called Cutter Numbers which I don't even but basically just serve to help fit all this information onto a book spine.

For example-- QA 76.76 H94 M88 breaks down as follows:  Before the punctuation, we have the category codes.  The first Q indicates science.  QA 76 is a subcategory; computer science.  The period indicates a normal sized book.  76 H94 indicate further subspecialties (Automation, HTML), and the final group indicates the author's name (Musciano).

So as you can see, at the top level, there's just as much possibility for complexity as the Dewey system.  But only if you need it-- otherwise, you might just see "YF.But StFr" (Jim Butcher's Storm Front).


*Knowing my friends, one of you will probably chime in with the correct number just to be a wiseacre.  That's ok, I don't mind.

A bible for the 21st Century

The 21st Century King James Version of the Holy Bible (copyright 1994) is not a "new translation," but rather a careful updating; specifically, in their own words, "words which are either obsolete or archaic, and are no longer understood by literate Bible readers, have been replaced by carefully selected current equivalents... The updaters have used as their principal authority in matters of English usage the greatest and most complete of all American dictionaries, namely, Webster's New International Dictionary, Second Edition, Unabridged, published by the G&C Merriam Co.*, and in print from 1933 to 1967."
That's the SECOND edition, folks.  The one written in 1934, and significantly superseded by the infamous Third Edition, written in 1961.  So to make a 21st century bible at the end of the 20th Century, they picked as their most appropriate dictionary one that had become obsolete thirty years earlier, having being written 30 years before that.

Now, to be fair, they do have a rationale-- for example, they were extremely impressed by the Second's overblown and unwieldy size and heavy use of the original King James Bible as source for illustrative quotes. Still, if your stated purpose is to make your version accessible and understandable by modern audiences, maybe you should use, I dunno, a current dictionary?  Just a thought.

*Now known as Merriam-Webster, Inc, aka the people who pay my tasty, tasty salaries, for those not keeping track at home.