College and Research Libraries instance, because of the vast amount of ma- terial currently being published, references to periodicals and documentary sources were omitted, except for those in narrative form. There is a difference also in its arrange- ment, which is a single alphabetical list by author. In his introduction, Mr. Schlebecker cites avoidance of the duplication of entries as the deciding factor for this choice. The reader, however, will regret the absence of the subject, period, and state subdivisions of the 1930 work, and that it was not pos- sible to devise some way, such as brief cita- tions referring to the primary entries, to re- tain the more convenient topical arrange- ment. This drawback is partially compensated for by an extensive title and subject index, consisting of useful entries such as Nine- teenth Century, Southwest, and New Deal as well as the names of works included in the main alphabet. The index would have been improved by further breakdown of subject headings such as "Federal farm aid," which may require the reader to refer back to as many as 200 separate entries, and also by an alphabetical rather than a random ar- rangement of subdivisions under headings such as "Biography," a procedure followed inconsistently in some instances, e.g. under the heading "Autobiography." Another fac- tor which must be kept in mind is that the names of authors listed in the main alphabet are not repeated in the index, except as a secondary author or editor of another work. The choice of titles is interesting and varied enough to satisfy almost anyone. Nevertheless, in spite of the author's reluc- tance to use the term preliminary or selec- tive, the bibliography must be considered representative rather than complete, and ad- ditional titles for inclusion will immediately come to mind. There are, for example, the highly interesting Rural Life studies issued in the 1940s by the U.S. Bureau of Agricul- tural Economics, which describe the diverse cultures of six rural communities. Perhaps the difficulty is in applying the yardstick for inclusion, that at least half of the work must be about farming. Approximately 15 percent of the entries are annotated, a particularly helpful feature because of the way the bibliography is or- ganized. A few errors have crept into the Recent Publications I 163 annotations. For example, the time and lo- cale of Gladys Hasty Carroll's As the Earth Turns have been incorrectly attributed to late nineteenth century in the state of Con- necticut, whereas the mixture of automobile and horsedrawn traffic on the roads, and the introduction of a minor character who was a commercial pilot, dates the story much closer to its copyright date of 1933, in a set- ting which is clearly Maine. The introduction states that 71 percent of the titles included are new since 1930. It is probable that most users will consider the Schlebecker work as supplementary rather than as a replacement for the earlier bibliography. Recommended for students of agricultural history and for everyone who enjoys reading about country life.-Catharine ]. Reynold.Y, University of Colorado. Nemeyer, Carol A. Scholarly Reprint Pub- lishing in the United States. New York: Bowker, 1972. 272p. $12.50. Reprinting of older books and journals is a publishing phenomenon which thrived in the United States particularly in the 1960s because of the enormous educational growth, the subsequent need for instant li- braries, and the free and rather indiscrim- inate How and use of funds. Carol N em eyer estimates that between 85,000 and 120,000 titles in hard copy and probably several millions in microform have been made available again by a highly di- versified group of approximately 300 Amer- ican publishers. It is a market of indeed staggering proportions, which has created considerable confusion both with producers and buyers, especially when the economic conditions began to change about two years ago. To uncover and describe typical aspects in the motivation and activities of these pub- lishers was the main objective of Nemeyer's survey, done between 1968 and 1971 as work toward a doctoral degree at Columbia. For practical reasons numerous limitations had to be set on the scope of the survey; so many in fact that it is sometimes hard to distinguish which generalizations touch upon the nature of the reprint trade and which were predetermined by the choice of limitations. One of the most severe restric- tions of the survey is N em eyer's (under- I ~ 164 I College & Research Libraries • March 1973 standable) determination to refrain from expressing opinion on the information re- ceived through questionnaires, interviews, and correspondence. Presumably, the book before us is an edited and partly expanded version of the dissertation. It is, however, still very much the report on the specific survey complete with all annexes, and the question should be raised whether an ab- stract in the form of a long article would not have served the purpose of the uninformed reader better. It seems the irony of ironies that the recently sharply increased publica- tion, in book form, of surveys and disserta- tions in the library field is taking place in a period when other learned disciplines are criticized by librarians for having done just that. Mter a description of the background and the design of the survey, Nemeyer gives a brief overview of the history of copying, ending with a fascinating chapter on the various government sponsored reprinting ef- forts during World War II. The author then reports on the survey, viewing the many as- pects of reprinting through the opinions of publishers and librarians, with a statistical analysis of published bibliographical tools. There are no specific conclusions other than the expressed need for more cooperation between the two identified market elements (where are the real consumers: the read- ers??) and the recommendation that reprint publishers should join the A.A.P. A series of appendixes and indexes conclude this volume, of which we should mention the di- rectory of reprint publishers. There is undoubtedly no task more diffi- cult than writing history while it is happen- ing and N em eyer deserves full credit for a courageous and largely successful effort. Many future studies will be needed be- fore a clear economic and behavioral pic- ture can be developed. The most intriguing question remains unanswered for the time being: Did the demand create the supply; was it the supply which led to the demand, or were both elements at work? Despite all previous comments, N e- m eyer's book is required reading for all in- terested in and concerned about the effect of modern publishing on the needs of the scholarly community.-Hendrik Edelman, Cornell University Libraries, Ithaca, New York. Patrick, Ruth J., Guidelines for Library Cooperation, California: System Develop- ment Corporation, 1972, 200p. $12.00. This book accompanies the Directory of Academic Library Consortia as a joint product from a United States Office of Edu- cation contract with the Systems Develop- ment Corporation. The purpose of the study was to "develop a fund of descriptive and prescriptive information about activities of academic library consortia in the United States with the ultimate aim of providing guidance for libraries that are forming or planning to form consortia." The phase of the project reported herein was based on a case-study analysis of ££teen selected academic library consortia using field interviews. Although the information is slight in some respects, the book is de- signed to be a handbook or "cookbook" for consortia design, and in that respect it will be very useful. Network definitions and structures are vague at best, and suggestions on making a start are welcome. There are so many little details that tend to get lost in the excitement of planning large cooperative projects-yet these details will suddenly be- come obstacles in accomplishing the larger task. It has been stated that libraries cooperate more readily when they are poor. As the Guidelines properly point out, it takes mon- ey to cooperate. The work involved is be- yond the routines of normal operation; the funding of meetings and travel has to be supported. It is difficult to assemble people because the meetings are voluntary rather than required, and if monies are not avail- able to support early efforts, contributed time may be difficult to obtain on a sus- tained basis. The section on evaluation, though brief, is especially useful in that it outlines tech- niques and purposes of this device which is too often neglected by network planners. In 1969, G. Flint Purdy outlined the range of cooperative activities that could be undertaken by library networks. This article, appearing in Library Quarterly, must by now be considered a seminal treatment in the organizational form of these functions. Several subsequent studies, including the Guidelines, have used his outline, although the inclusion of that network profile here is •