A man who knew whereof he spoke. Commentary on Dunkin, P. (1962) The development of technical services training.

In "The Development of Technical Services Training," Paul Dunkin writes "I BEGIN with Robert Frost." I, for my part, shall begin with Paul Dunkin.Paul Shaner Dunkin (1905-1975) was:* Educated in Classics and Library Science;* Senior Cataloger at the Folger Shakespeare Library, and then its Chief of Technical Services;* Professor of Library Science at Rutgers;* President of RTSD (ALA's Resources and Technical Services Division, now ALCTS);* Editor of LRTS ( Library Resources and Technical Services), succeeding its Founding Editor, the legendary Esther Piercy;* Awarded the Margaret Mann Citation in 1968; and* Named one of the 100 Most Important People in Library Science. (http:// en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_S._Dunkin)He was, in other words, a man who knew whereof he spoke when it came to Technical Services. In the beginning of "The Development of Technical Services Training," Dunkin poses a series of questions, some more rhetorical than others. Is Technical Services an intellectual concept or an administrative device? Can the routines and rules of Technical Services be taught in school? Should they be? What is the relative place of theory and practice in education? As he asks in this paper "Do we want the ant's-eye view or the prophet's dream?" (p. 126).While not answering any of these directly, it is clear he thought too much attention was focused on practice, and not enough on theory-though there was room, and need, for both. Describing the history of the development of Technical Services training (note that the article's title refers to "Training," not "Education"), he observes that it was first associated with public libraries and only subsequently with universities. It was first practical and clerical. It only subsequently becomes theoretical and general. It focused on cataloging, selection/acquisitions, serials, and bibliography-especially cataloging. He concludes this part of his historical flyover with the following: "Broadly speaking, after some thirty-five years devoted to the practical details of the technical services, they have spent another thirty-five years groping, sometimes blindly, toward the theory of technical services" (p.129).Turning his attention to the textbooks that accompany the Technical Services curriculum, Dunkin notes that they run the gamut from "straightforward instructions" (Akers), to theoretical/practical combinations (Mann), to encyclopedic surveys (Tauber). All, he observes, go out of date quickly, going so far as to describe a volume like Tauber's Technical Services in Libraries (on which the present author was raised, as it were) as "alas . . . out of date the minute it is published" (p. 129). [The volume remains in my personal library, nevertheless.] He is especially critical of the plethora of cataloging and classification tools. While he praises Cutter (1904) for including catalog "objects" (i.e., objectives), rules for accomplishing those objects, and reasons for those rules, he criticizes ALA (1908, 1941, 1949) for an increasing focus on rules, with inadequate attention to the reasoning behind those rules. While complementing Library of Congress (1949) for including principles, he criticizes their rules as needlessly complex (which might explain their eventually becoming overwhelmed by LC's own rule interpretations). Finally, he finds fault with Lubetzky's revision of the 1949 LC rules because it too omitted the reasons behind the rules. The Sears and LC lists of subject headings are, he notes, just that- lists-and the classification schedules are no better. ". . . in spite of the trend toward theory in the schools," he concludes, "the textbooks remain largely how-to-do-it manuals" (p.130).And so . . . fast forward to the present. While a lot of what Dunkin had to say in 1962 is still true enough-the lineage from Osborn's "The Crisis in Cataloging" (1941) to Greene and Meissner's "More Product, Less Process" (2005) is pretty obvious, at least in intent-the world that library technical services now inhabits is so very different from that it inhabited 50+ years ago. …