Back to school…again, already

I can’t help it.  I’m excited.  I just registered to take a course (in the Fall) on gender and space in ancient Greek cities.  After reading a lot about this but never actually “studying” it, I’m looking forward to going beyond the world of Greek vases and getting more into architecture/archaeology.  I’m not really looking forward to reading the Odyssey for the 4th time.  Don’t get me wrong, I like the Odyssey.  But…I could wait another 4 years before going back to it.  Enrolling in this course is part of my (at the moment) tentative plan to pursue the much-disputed, oft-coveted second Master’s degree.  Or I might just take it for fun.  Remind me of this when it’s getting dark at 4pm, I’m working full-time, and trying to write term papers and sit through 3 hour long classes again.  Oh, and check out this tribute to rosy-fingered dawn.

“Plan d’une Maison Greque” engraved by A.Tardieu and published in Voyage du Jeune Anacharsis en Grece, 1825. (available for sale from http://www.antiqueprints.com)

Advertisements

Visualizing the LCSH monster update: Jan-Feb 2010

150 Animal jumping [May Subd Geog] [sp 85005205]
* 450 UF Animal leaping
* 450 UF Jumping behavior in animals
* 450 UF Leaping behavior in animals

Humans jumping animals: “Gaito Loka becomes a man during his initiation ritual, sometimes called cattle jumping. Male friends and relatives hold the animals in place as the jumper runs along their backs. Afterward, the young Hamar man must adhere to a strict diet including blood, milk, and honey until he marries.” – National Geographic

151 Woodward Avenue (Mich.) [sp2010001688]
451 UF M‑1 (Mich.)
451 UF Michigan Highway 1 (Mich.)
550 BT Roads—Michigan

Detroit image from www.oldcitypics.com

150 Boring sponges [May Subd Geog] [sp2010001908]
450 UF Bioeroding sponges
450 UF Excavating sponges
550 BT Marine borers
550 BT Sponges

150 Guitar and synthesizer music [May Subd Geog] [sp2010000529]
450 UF Synthesizer and guitar music
[Youtube=”http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x1mV_5-bRPo”%5D

150 Spiders in the Koran [sp2010001811]

150 Ninja in popular culture [May Subd Geog] [sp2010001722]
550 BT Popular culture
150 Chinatowns in motion pictures [Not Subd Geog] [sp2010001122]
550 BT Motion pictures
[Youtube=”http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VGLinT-Pdyo”%5D

150 Remorse in art [Not Subd Geog] [sp2010001322]

photo by Emre Ucar in “Paint it with blur” Flickr pool

150 Stop‑motion animation films [Not Subd Geog] [sp2010000786]
450 UF Object animation films
450 UF Stop‑action animation films
450 UF Stop‑motion animated films
450 UF Stop‑motion films
550 BT Animated films
vegetables and Star Wars to encourage us to buy organic!
[Youtube=”http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ocLbfdaONrs”%5D


150 History painting [May Subd Geog] [sp2008007183]

680 Here are entered works on narrative painting that depicts several figures enacting a scene usually drawn from classical history or mythology, or from the Bible.
550 BT Painting

150  Bats—Mortality   [May Subd Geog]   [sp2009010998]
* 550    RT White‑nose syndrome

150 Buildings—War damage [May Subd Geog] [sp 85145172]
* 550 RT Architecture and war

photograph by Donald Weber from “The Lost War” story, via the Black Snapper photography magazine archives

150  Drinking of alcoholic beverages—Marketing  [sp2010000413]

150  Enemies in art   [Not Subd Geog]   [sp2009010830]

150  Gravity in art   [Not Subd Geog]   [sp2009010556]

from Kaat Van Tiggel’s Flickr photostream

150  Traffic accidents in motion pictures [Not Subd Geog]   [sp2009009535]
550    BT Motion pictures

Weird, overdue, or especially unique headings:

150 Art objects in art [Not Subd Geog] [sp2010001816]

150 Bananas in popular culture [May Subd Geog] CHANGE GEOG [sp2006007645]
* 680 Here are entered works on the representation of bananas in popular culture.

150 Gifted Hawaiian children [May Subd Geog] [sp2010001320]
450 UF Gifted children, Hawaiian
450 UF Hawaiian gifted children
550 BT Gifted children—United States
550 BT Hawaiian children

150 Office buildings—Wales [May Subd Geog] [sp2010001151]

150 Gelatin—Flavor and odor [May Subd Geog] [sp2010000403]
450 UF Gelatin—Odor
550 BT Flavor
550 BT Odors

150 Ruins in motion pictures [Not Subd Geog] [sp2009007969]
* 550 BT Motion pictures

150 Communication in hairdressing [May Subd Geog] [sp2010000047]
550 BT Hairdressing

150 Embassy buildings—Decoration [May Subd Geog] [sp2009011095]
053 NK2195.E43
550 BT Decoration and ornament

150 Sex—Anthropological aspects [May Subd Geog] [sp2010000055]
550 BT Anthropology

A back-of-the-book index to images of ancient Greek vases

Before I dive into this, here’s my experimental image index that is discussed in this post. You can see some sample pages from the text using Amazon’s “look inside” feature.

Background
Over the summer I took a class on indexing and abstracting. As part of my final project, I indexed some of the images of Greek vases in the book The History of Greek Vases, by John Boardman (London: Thames & Hudson Ltd, 2001). It seems kind of quaint to produce a back-of-the-book image index; maybe that’s just because I’m too steeped in digital stuff. Indexes are crucial for print materials, and I know it would have been useful to my art historical research to have the subjects, vase types etc. indexed. However, this probably isn’t the most practical of endeavors. Any good index to the text would probably index image captions, or the locators would at least get you close enough that you could find that one image you remembered that showed Perseus with a detached Gorgon head in hand. This exercise was more just to see what would happen if indexed multiple attributes but proceeded as if I were just creating a traditional subject index to a text. What would the index look like? What would the cross-references be like, and how would the image index differ from an index to the text?

Method and Meanderings
I didn’t index drawings, maps, or photographs of sections of vases; I focused on images depicting vases in their entirety, and on the descriptive information about them that was included in captions. The locators in my index are for page numbers, although each image was numbered in the text. It just seemed easier to navigate to a page than to an image number.

When deciding what aspects of the images to index, I took inspiration from the access points used by the Beazley Archive at Oxford University. Some of the elements by which one can search the Beazley pottery database are:

  • Fabric
  • Technique
  • Shape name
  • Date range
  • Inscription type
  • Inscription
  • Artist name
  • Scholar name
  • Decoration description
  • Collection name
  • Publication name

There are even more than that, and it’s pretty impressive. Not all of these categories would be useful for my purposes (a back-of-the-book image index), but several of them (inscription type and vase shape name, for example) are especially useful for various types of art historical research in this field.

I looked at the VRA Core 4.0 metadata schema and noted which of its elements might correspond to those used by the Beazley Archive. The Beazley’s “fabric” element combines VRA’s “cultural context” and “style/period” elements. “Technique” corresponds to VRA’s “material” and “technique”. VRA does have an element for “inscriptions”, but it’s not clear to me if the “type” attribute for the “text” sub-element could be used to indicate the type of inscription (e.g. epoisen or egraphsen signatures). I was mainly using VRA Core as a point of reference, to get an idea of the types of attributes generally deemed important in creating descriptive metadata for images. (at the time, I didn’t know about Cataloging Cultural Objects, but since VRA Core is based on it I don’t see that as a big deal). I also considered the facets of AAT, and what they indicate about elements that can be combined (e.g. style and period).

The attributes I finally chose to index were:

  • artist name
  • vase shape
  • technique
  • decoration
  • inscription
  • subject (both “things” depicted (e.g. warriors) and mythological figures (e.g. Achilles))

I don’t think any of the vases in my sample set ended up having inscriptions. I chose to index only these six elements because I had a limited amount of time to devote to this. If I was indexing images in an online setting I would definitely want to use more access points.

It was difficult to differentiate between imagery that could be both a subject and a decorative element. Many of the vases I was indexing were decorated with rows of animals in a repeating pattern. This is a common motif, so I needed to decide on a policy for how to index it. At first I was making very specific subheadings indicating the type of vase on which the pattern was appearing, but then I realized that this was creating too much work, and it probably wouldn’t be all that useful. It was also starting to conflate the “fabric” and “technique” elements with the “subject”, and I wanted to keep them separate in hopes of having a less chaotic index.

So, for a vase that had a motif of lions in a row, I decided to just give the locator after the heading (“lions, 30-31”). However, if there was a vase with a lion in any other, non-decorative context, I made a more specific subheading (“lions – being hunted, 20”). I worried that it would be confusing to have some locators listed after the heading, and then a subheading with more locators. So I decided that if any subheadings were required, I would instead list the decorative appearances of the subject with the subheading “as decorative element”. Hopefully more examples will make this clearer:

Sphinxes were only used as decorative elements in the vases I indexed. So the entry for sphinxes is:

sphinxes, 20, 33, 41, 45, 46

Lions were used as decorative elements on some of the vases, but sometimes they were part of the narrative scene. So my entry for lions is:

lions
  being hunted, 20, 23, 30-31
  as decorative element, 29, 33

Problems / Discussion
Many of my locators appear multiple times within the same entry for a couple of reasons. First is the fact that one page could contain multiple images of different vases with the same subject matter, technique, or fabric. Second: most vases have multiple sections of varying imagery. I may have been indexing too deeply, but I thought that failing to index all the different aspects of the subjects depicted would be akin to giving the researcher a list of undifferentiated locators. A good example of this is the heading for “warriors”. Since I was creating a heading for “hares – being hunted by warriors” it made sense to have “warriors – hunting hares” instead of just listing all the pages for warriors. Why not give the user as much information as possible? Additionally, my entry for “hares” has duplicate locators because in one section of the same vase (on page 33) the hares are a decorative motif, and in another section they are part of a narrative scene in which warriors are hunting them. (confused yet?!)

As mentioned above, deciding to index both “subject” and “decorative elements” caused problems for me when the two were hard to differentiate. I wanted my imaginary user to be able to use the index to find lion freizes and not have to go through a bunch of locators just to find irrelevant images of lions NOT in freizes. But then again, I always expect too much of my information resources.

In hindsight, I think my index would be more useful if I had created separate indexes for each attribute I was indexing. But there are pros and cons to having the index divided by facets instead of in one long alphabetical sequence. One of the books I examined had one index for mythological figures and one for objects that are commonly attributed to specific gods/goddesses (I thought this was awesome). The book I was indexing had three separate indexes: (1) Artists, Groups, and Wares; (2) Mythological and Divine figures; and (3) General (three indexes in a mere 3 pages!). Though it makes sense to divide the index this way, it could lead to confusion if it spanned more than 3 pages. A user could be looking for Odysseus in the wrong index and not know it unless each page was very clearly marked with a header (I think I remember committing this error as an undergraduate). Another benefit to having one long alphabetical index is that it didn’t force me to always differentiate between the aforementioned troublesome decorative elements and subjects, which overlap so often on the same pot.

In real life, it would probably be best to keep the index as simple as possible, only providing sub-headings when the list of locators for certain topic/shape/artist got excessively long. Nevertheless, if my methods in this exercise could be used on a larger scale, the index would be very useful. Of course that’s unrealistic because of how time-consuming it is, and how “everything is online” now. Back-of-the-book image indexes aren’t unheard of, though. I inspected the indexes in the back of Boardman’s book and another book on Greek art. One of them only listed very general topics (“women” or “fighting scenes”). The other gave some sparse subheadings (and I think this one was the better index overall, though neither of them had any “see” references!).

Conclusion
Indexing a set of images in a book is a good way to become familiar with the basic issues of image description and index construction. It requires decisions that appear simple on the surface, but force you to carefully consider the nature of your subject and the needs of your potential users. You’re forced to make decisions about what to index, how deeply to index, and how to best express what you’re indexing…and those are all just as important in the online environment. So this is a good exercise for a rainy day when you need a rest from computer eye strain.

Also, I think it would be interesting to survey scholarly texts in any image-focused field and try to get an idea of how people deal with images in back-of-the-book indexes. Projects for the future!