1GraceCollection
There is a long tradition of adapting classic texts for consumption by children, and our library has quite a few of these. Everyone seems to catalogue these differently, and I'm interested in experiences/opinions on how other people do or would catalogue these types of books.
For example, I have before me a copy of Treasure Island. This book was originally written by Robert Louis Stevenson, and 'specially adapted' (according to the back cover) by Deirdre S. Laiken so that it can better be understood by children. I don't have a copy in front of me to compare, (and haven't the time, anyway,) but I imagine almost none of the words are Stevenson's, although we can all agree the story is his.
When using 'add books' to get versions like this from a library, I usually find that the person who 'adapted' the text is imported into LT as the 'main' author, and the author of the original text (and often the illustrator, if the book is illustrated) are imported as the secondary author(s). I tend to disagree with this. In my mind, the person who adapted the text (Laiken in this case) has almost 'translated' the language of the book into something a child can understand, and has often abridged the text as well, but the fundamental story and ideas (unless they have done a terrible job of adapting) are still the same as the original text, and therefore belong to the original text's author.
So, the person who adapted the text is a secondary author in my library, and the original author remains the main author. I note in the 'publication' field that it is a version adapted and abridged for children, and usually it has been separated from the work of the original text (which I won't change either way, as I don't feel I'm qualified to define when an edition needs to be separated or combined).
What I struggle with, is what to call this person. Due to the nature of the fields, I can't say 'adapted by Deirdre S. Laiken.' I have 'Deirdre S. Laiken' listed, and I have to determine what to call her, or else make a decision to give her no specific role at all. 'Adapter' doesn't seem like a role to give a human person, it just makes me think of electronics. 'Editor' theoretically could apply, but in my mind suggests a much more passive and smaller role in the text than what has actually been done. 'Translator' sort of fits in spirit, but most of these texts were published in English originally and adapted to another English version, which is besides the fact that in most cases, these works have also been abridged significantly in addition to the language being simplified. Leaving the field blank feels disingenuous. Right now I have them listed also as 'author,' but that doesn't feel right either.
I know that LT is what you make it and that there is no 'right' answer, which is why I'm asking for opinions: If you have books like this, or if you hypothetically did have some, how do/would you solve this issue? Do you have a magic word you put in the 'other' spot that fits this role? Do you also put the author of the original text as the 'main' author, or does the adaptation author go there for you?
For example, I have before me a copy of Treasure Island. This book was originally written by Robert Louis Stevenson, and 'specially adapted' (according to the back cover) by Deirdre S. Laiken so that it can better be understood by children. I don't have a copy in front of me to compare, (and haven't the time, anyway,) but I imagine almost none of the words are Stevenson's, although we can all agree the story is his.
When using 'add books' to get versions like this from a library, I usually find that the person who 'adapted' the text is imported into LT as the 'main' author, and the author of the original text (and often the illustrator, if the book is illustrated) are imported as the secondary author(s). I tend to disagree with this. In my mind, the person who adapted the text (Laiken in this case) has almost 'translated' the language of the book into something a child can understand, and has often abridged the text as well, but the fundamental story and ideas (unless they have done a terrible job of adapting) are still the same as the original text, and therefore belong to the original text's author.
So, the person who adapted the text is a secondary author in my library, and the original author remains the main author. I note in the 'publication' field that it is a version adapted and abridged for children, and usually it has been separated from the work of the original text (which I won't change either way, as I don't feel I'm qualified to define when an edition needs to be separated or combined).
What I struggle with, is what to call this person. Due to the nature of the fields, I can't say 'adapted by Deirdre S. Laiken.' I have 'Deirdre S. Laiken' listed, and I have to determine what to call her, or else make a decision to give her no specific role at all. 'Adapter' doesn't seem like a role to give a human person, it just makes me think of electronics. 'Editor' theoretically could apply, but in my mind suggests a much more passive and smaller role in the text than what has actually been done. 'Translator' sort of fits in spirit, but most of these texts were published in English originally and adapted to another English version, which is besides the fact that in most cases, these works have also been abridged significantly in addition to the language being simplified. Leaving the field blank feels disingenuous. Right now I have them listed also as 'author,' but that doesn't feel right either.
I know that LT is what you make it and that there is no 'right' answer, which is why I'm asking for opinions: If you have books like this, or if you hypothetically did have some, how do/would you solve this issue? Do you have a magic word you put in the 'other' spot that fits this role? Do you also put the author of the original text as the 'main' author, or does the adaptation author go there for you?
