College and Research Libraries Cooperative Collection Development for Rpre Books Among Neighboring Academic Libraries Martha M. Smith Coordination in rare book acquisitions occurs on a unilateral basis when one librarian does not select certain books because a neighboring collection has extensive holdings in the same area. Few attempts, however, have been made to cooperate in rare book collection development on a multilateral basis whereby librarians jointly agree to select books in assigned subject areas . This article studies the characteristics of a multilateral cooperative selection program for small rare book collections and describes the success of such a program at the University of North Caro- lina-Chapel Hill and the University of North Carolina-Greensboro. he phenomenal technological innovations developed in re- cent years have enabled people to access a vast quantity of in- formation more quickly than ever before. Microforms enable a research library to house more books and journals; com- puters instantaneously compile and print a subject bibliography or display selected abstracts of articles. Thus, in an age when high priority is given to convenient space- and time-saving devices, one might think that microforms and computers would have superseded in popularity the tradi- tional form of recording facts and ideas- books. But despite the efficient control and dissemination of information by these modern tools, they can be only "used," that is, skimmed or consulted partially. Books, however, can be "read," that is, studied and reflected upon, underlined and annotated. The book, therefore, will remain instrumental to scholarship. 1 Especially worth reading are the books that record man's most significant ideas and actions. Rare book collections pre- serV-e these titles and others that, for vary- ing reasons, are considered special. One may find a title's several issues or edi- tions, perhaps the author's annotated copies, that reveal steps in the develop- ment of a philosophical idea, a poem, or a literary character. Here also are original accounts of events, now a part of history, and contemporary analyses of them. Such books are influential because they spark in us an awareness of our predecessors . It is "the historical sense," wrote T. S. Eliot, that ''involves a perception, not only of the pastness of the past, but of its pres- ence.' ' 2 Intellectual sensitivity is a charac- teristic of the mature scholar, who, through the study of books, produces new ideas or integrates old ones into fresh in- terpretations for the benefit of present and future generations. Rare book collections play an important role in research because they preserve these books for study. Conditions during the 1980s have pre- sented rare book librarians with formida- ble obstacles to surmount in order to en- sure the growth and sometimes the very Martha M. Smith is assistant librarian for the Eighteenth-Century Short-Title Catalogue/North American Project, College of Arts and Sciences, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge 70803-5111 . 160 Cooperative Collection Development 161 existence of their collections. Static or de- clining budgets and increased competi- tion for books, due to the limited availabil- ity of established rarities, pose major problems for librarians with collections of under 100,000 titles. Librarians may solve some of these problems by the same meth- ods used in building general collections- cooperative collection development and resource sharing. Indeed, little-used li- brary materials, those "resources held in reserve," present themselves most read- ily for sharing, and cooperation among special subject repositories and archives has been endorsed already. 3 Some rare book curators, content with indepen- dence in building their collections, may re- ject the idea. Yet modification of self- sufficiency into cooperation is essential if research libraries are to meet their respon- . sibilities to higher education. 4 Interdepen- dence seems to be inescapable. Moreover, ''functional independence . . . is really in- consistent with the character of knowl- edge itsel£."5 The more important goal is not the acquisition of a greater number of books, but rather improvement in the availability of a greater number of books. 6 One can then operate more effectively with available monies or while coping with a stationary or decreasing acquisi- tions budget. 7 A cooperative collection development program divides acquisition responsibili- ties among libraries. Out of this grows re- source sharing or use of materials at one library by the pa#ons of other participat- ing libraries when . such materials are not . available .at their own institution. For most libraries1~r;;~source sharing is accom- plished bY' irtterlibrary loan; books move from library to library as they are needed by readers. Special collections materials, however, cannot be sent by interlibrary loan. Because of their value or fragility, rare books are kept in one location, elimi- nating the risk of loss or damage that might occur in sending them between li- braries. It is the researcher who moves from library to library to study them. In view of this situation, resource sharing to meet scholars' needs in rare book collec- tions may be best achieved through coop- eration among neighboring libraries; proximity of materials greatly reduces the cost and inconvenience of travel for the re- searcher. The ACRL Rare Books and Manuscripts preconference (Philadelphia, July 1982) was entitled ''Growth in the Face of Ad- versity: The Business of Special Collec- tions in the 1980s." Attendees heard David Starn address this theme in the key- note address, urging collaboration rather than isolation among special collections in order to preserve their usefulness and value. In this article, guidelines for coop- eration in acquisitions for small rare book collections are offered. These guidelines and the success of the cooperative pro- gram at the University of North Carolina can serve as an example from which oth- ers may profit. A BRIEF HISTORY One means of coordinating selection in library collections is on a unilateral basis. This occurs when Librarian A does not ac- quire a certain book because Librarian B at a neighboring collection has already de- veloped extensive and more complete holdings, which it would complement better. No discussions or written policies are shared by the two curators. Librarian A is coordinating acquisitions by default with those of Librarian B. 8 This practice has existed in the past among regional special collections. In 1948 Lawrence Pow- ell stated that the Clark Library at UCLA seldom purchased a book published be- fore 1640 because of the strong collection of these imprints held by the nearby Hun- tington Library. 9 In recent years, the Uni- versity of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (UNC-CH) has deferred to Duke Univer- sity in the purchase of Aldines, books published by Aldus Manutius and his family in Venice, 1490-1590. While UNC- CH's Rare Book Collection would like to build up its sixteenth-century holdings, such a title might be more valuable if added to Duke's handsome Aldine collec- tion. UNC-CH can then acquire another sixteenth-century rarity and possibly also have the Aldine available six miles away for its researchers. 10 Numerous other rare book librarians today will admit to select- ing while being mindful of a neighboring 162 College & Research Libraries institution's collections. A second means of coordinating book selection is multilateral cooperation in which librarians at separate institutions actively coordinate their acquisitions and mutually benefit from their efforts. 11 In the words of one librarian, it ''requires more energy, communication and commit- ment. " 12 Under multilateral cooperation, the librarians discuss and divide among themselves responsibilities for book selec- tion in specific areas. The agreement is for- malized in writing. Flexibility is built in by permitting necessary duplication and change of collecting fields. Neighboring rare book collections using the multilateral approach may benefit in several ways. In- dividually, each collection continues to grow in size while competition for titles on the market is reduced; jointly, rare book li- brarians are able to preserve research ma- terials encompassing an improved breadth and depth in subject collection levels. Use of the collections may increase, and the libraries are able to affirm to their respective institutions their importance in maintaining research and teaching stan- dards and to establish among outside re- searchers a reputation of being a locale where one may study a subject exten- sively. Some suggestions for multilateral coop- eration in rare book acquisitions were made during the 1960s and 1970s. In the introduction to his short-title catalog of books printed between 1641-1700 and held in Australian libraries, W. J. Cam- eron proposed a coordination of acquisi- tions among Australian libraries in seventeenth-century British literature. He suggested that participating libraries as- sign responsibilities for gathering the works of individual poets, dramatists, and essayists according to each institution's preexisting strengths. The library with the largest holdings on a famous writer like Milton would be given the sole responsi- bility for collecting his works. Writers who collaborated might be collected by only one library; for example, Nathaniel Lee's plays would enhance a group of John Dry- den's writings because the two worked to- gether. If more than one library had devel- oped collections of a specific author or March 1985 genre, responsibility wo~d be assigned to the library that could assemble the best collection of supportive materials. 13 Another suggestion for multilateral co- operation was made in 1970 for the special collections of seven New England institu- tions comprising the Connecticut Valley Libraries (CONV AL). Investigation re- vealed that the libraries at Amherst, Bow- doin, Dartmouth, Smith, Trinity, Wil- liams, and Wesleyan had collected incunabula and/or private press books on the history of the printed book and book arts. Consequently, it was suggested that the special collections librarians might meet and exchange information on private presses holdings. Libraries could be se- lected to obtain complete runs of certain presses' work. 14 The idea, however, was not implemented, and nine years later, the librarians at the institutions explained its failure in several ways. The tradition of independence and competition among the colleges, the long distances between the libraries, and a keen desire to have books immediately available for teaching . undergraduates were barriers to a division of collecting fields. Furthermore, certain books most appropriately housed. at one collection were considered useful at all the libraries, and librarians were reluctant to refuse gifts solely because they might du- plicate private press books held else- where. Finally, the librarians relied heav- ily on gifts and financial contributions designated for certain kinds of purchases, thereby allowing a collection's scope, to a certain extent, to be defined by the inter- ests of the donors. 15 GUIDELINES In 1979 a cooperative collection develop- ment policy was drawn up for the Rare Book Collection at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and the Depart- ment of Special Collections at the Univer- sity of North Carolina at Greensboro (UNC-G). It will be discussed later in de- tail, but experience shows that a program may be implemented successfully follow- ing the guidelines listed below. Further suggestions may be found in the draft of a guide for coordinated collection develop- ment approved by the Resources Section Cooperative Collection Development 163 of ALA's Resources and Technical Ser- vices Division. 16 There are five guidelines that should be treated as prerequisites to the formal agreement. First, proximity of the cooperat- ing institutions is essential. 17 As mentioned above, distance was an obstacle for the CONY AL libraries. Closeness facilitates personal meetings of the librarians negoti- ating the policy. More important, it fosters concurrent use of the collections by re- searchers in the area. On coordinated vis- its, patrons have a greater number of books at their fingertips while keeping at a minimum the high travel costs, both in time and money, of research. A positive attitude on the part of the librari- ans is the second prerequisite to an agreement. Especially important are a willingness to cooperate and to contribute and a mutual respect among the participants for each other .18 Enthusiasm to experiment and to try new approaches should be demon- strated. 19 Each librarian should suppress desires for selfish independence and re- place them with the realization that by working interdependently with another library, the librarian can assemble the rari- ties into a more valuable collection. A book's usefulness increases when it is ac- quired not as a rarity to place beside others on a shelf but as a book that contributes a new dimension to other sources available in the libr'!!f on a specific author, subject, or theme. 20 Similarly, a small number of books at one collection will increase in worth and in usefulness when related to books on the same or on a complementary theme at a neighboring library. Support of the plan by library administrators is a third prerequisite. It is preferable to se- cure the endorsement of the rare book li- brarian's immediate superior and/or the library director in the beginning. Then the discussions and writing of the policy will more likely fit into the library's overall col- lection development program. If the plan is not endorsed at an early stage, the agreement should be sanctioned after it is written. Should personnel within the ad- ministration change, continued support should be obtained. Administrative sup- port will help to ensure the continuance of the policy should different librarians take charge of the special collections. It also might encourage donors to give funds to each library to develop collections concur- rently. Fourthly, each participating librarian should recognize the criteria used in collecting books. These should not be sacrificed dur- ing the subsequent discussions outlining the acquisition areas of the agreement. One criterion may be derived from who in the local academic community uses the collection and how they use it. Does the collection serve as a pedagogical or as a re- search collection? The former supports an undergraduate curriculum or character- izes a small segment of material within a larger collection that is especially useful in teaching. The latter is demanded by well- developed university programs to sup- port the original research expected of graduate students and faculty. Another criterion may be based on how much sup- port is given to immediate and future use. All librarians acquire titles for faculty members' current needs as influenced by research trends. But atthe same time, they should be selecting for tomorrow's scholars and anticipating future research trends. The ability to identify significant yet little-known works will enable a librar- ian to provide sources with new research potential. 21 The fifth prerequisite to the cooperative dis- cussions is for each participant to survey the collection. This study should produce a summary of a library's development and an analysis of the scope, possibly citing specific titles. With this knowledge, each curator will know what areas to share or to offer as complementary to the other coop- erating institutions and what gaps to fill with holdings at the other libraries. The curator will also be able to form ideas on · new collecting areas that might be adopted in developing the scope and qual- ity of the cooperative endeavor. Once the five prerequisites have been met, the next guidelines include a joint discussion among the librarians, outlining the collecting areas, conditions, and pro- cedures to be specified in a written policy. As in all cooperative agreements, reci- procity is important, and each part~ . should have something to contribute. 164 College & Research Libraries There shoUld be a recognition of each col- lection's unique strengths and the collect- ing areas each librarian wishes to continue to develop exclusively. Specific subjects at each library that complement each other should be noted and marked for contin- ued development. Subjects of mutual in- terest should be singled out and the re- sponsibility for them divided to avoid unnecessary duplication. Selection re- sponsibilities in new areas should be as- signed in order to enhance further the to- tal plan. The conditions of the agreement should also be discussed. Flexibility should be one goal of the working policy. The divi- sion of collecting areas should not impose a set of confining regulations but should offer guidelines in order to develop the subjects effectively. It should be under- stood that collecting areas can and should be modified to match shifts in research and teaching interests. 23 Equally impor- tant is to set the level of duplication which is desirable and not to be eliminated. 24 Du- plication is justified by use of a title or by its appropriateness to each collection's emphasis. Also, potential gifts should not be subject to the policy's guidelines. Therefore, duplication of titles due to do- nations is permissible. Various procedures should be specified for maintenance of the agreement. An ex- change of holdings information between the libraries is one characteristic of suc- cessful resource sharing programs. 25 Knowing what another collection contains would help the librarian to eliminate un- necessary duplication, to decide the best location for a title, or to help a patron. Lists of books acquired in certain areas prior to the cooperative efforts or lists, compiled periodically, of titles acquired under the policy's guidelines would also be useful. Annual reports should be exchanged. Pro- cedures for publicizing the joint holdings should be outlined. Each curator and staff should be responsible for talking to stu- . dents, faculties, and visiting scholars to make them aware of the variety and depth of material offered. Written publicity is equally important. Finally, it should be specified that the li- brarians meet periodically to review the March 1985 I viability of the cooperative program. Weaknesses can be identified and adjust- ments made to correct them. These review sessions may include reassignments of se- lection responsibilities due to shifts in teaching and research interests. Open dis- cussions will allow each librarian to hear the others' desires and may reinforce the adaptability of the agreement, thereby strengthening its bonds. A WORKING POLICY In the fall of 1979, discussions were held between the curator of the Rare Book Col- lection at UNC-CH and the curator of Spe- cial Collections at UNC-G to initiate coop- eration in the collecting of materials on the history of the printed book. Both libraries had been building their own resources in the subject prior to this time, and the prox- imity of the institutions-they are only fifty miles apart-supported development of a policy for a cooperative program. In 1929, UNC-CH began collecting ma- terials on the origin and development of the book. Clay tablets, papyri, medieval manuscripts, incunabula, sixteenth- century imprints, nineteenth- and twentieth-century private press books, and books about books were acquired to strengthen sources for research on the book. Eventually, the collection was able to boast ownership of some of the earliest examples of color printing, typography, and bibliography as well as a significant collection of Victorian bookbindings. Surveys in 1972 and 1973 of Special Col- lections at UNC-G revealed superior ex- amples of private press books, books illus- trated by artists, and works on illustrative techniques such as wood engraving and li- thography. These holdings, in addition to statistics indicating heavy use of the col- lection by art students, encouraged fur- ther development in the books arts. Con- sequently, the library began to acquire more artists' books, books about books, a large group of English and American pri- vate press books, and American turn-of- the-century small publishing firms' mate- rials. A cooperative collection development policy covering the history of the printed book was drawn up for the two libraries. 26 Cooperative Collection Development 165 The policy's objectives were (1) to gather books that would instill in students an ap- preciation of man's greatest intellectual ideas and how they have been preserved and passed down through the ages, (2) to · show the development of the book as an art form, and (3) to encourage research and scholarship in the history of the printed book. The agreement specified that books would be selected to meet both present and future needs and that they would support the orientation of the insti- tution of which each collection was a part. UNC-CH, with a well-developed gradu- ate program, was to select primarily mate- rials for advanced research; UNC-G was to concentrate on acquiring materials for use by the students and faculty of its pri- marily undergraduate curriculum. The policy recognized well-developed collect- ing areas as they existed at the time andes- tablished for each library new areas com- plementary to current holdings as well as to those of the neighboring institution. The agreement outlined in detail the ar- eas for which each library was responsi- ble. A summary is offered here. UNC-CH elected to gather books in the following ar- eas: the development of the book during the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries in Eu- rope and Great Britain, including the work of prominent printers and pub- lishers; the book as a vehicle for scholar- ship and transmission of knowledge; technological developments in bookmak- ing; book forgeries and facsimiles illustrat- ing printing techniques; Victorian book- bindings; private press books published by proto-private presses of the fifteenth through the eighteenth centuries; out- standing examples from private presses of the eighteenth through the early twenti- eth centuries; and private press books written about books or by authors already collected. UNC-G chose to concentrate on the book arts in the mid-nineteenth and twentieth centuries, encompassing the following areas: private press books, pri- marily those printed by English and American presses but including select French ones and those exhibiting fine printing, decoration, and illustration; books illustrated by artists; aesthetic as- pects of bookmaking; and small, turn-of- the-century American publishing firms. American trade bindings produced be- tween 1840 and 1900 and children's illus- trated books of the nineteenth and twenti- eth centuries were also included in UNC-G fields. A comparison of the complementary ar- eas shared between the two libraries illus- trates how this combination was designed to provide a wealth of material. In the area of private press books, UNC-CH's acqui- sitions of fifteenth to eighteenth century publications and UNC-G's imprints from the mid-nineteenth century to the present day would offer stunning coverage. In the field of printing and bookmaking, UNC- CH' s concentration on technological de- velopments would balance UNC-G's re- sources on aesthetic qualities in books. In the field of bindings, UNC-CH would gather Victorian examples produced in England between 1830 and 1900, and UNC-G would collect trade bindings made in the United States during the same period. During the five years since the policy's implementation, the librarians have sought to follow policy ~idelines in ex- panding their collections. 7 Both librarians have received positive feedback on the program from their administrations. Book dealers were informed of the agreement. There has been profitable contact between the two curators; consultation before the acquisition of titles, for example, concern- ing the purchase of Dard Hunter's study of his father entitled The Life Work of Dard Hunter (1981); the referral from UNC-CH to UNC-G of a book dealer offering a splendid nineteenth-century American binding for sale; the reporting of UNC-G' s private presses to UNC-CH; and an ex- change of information on bindings and of annual reports. Both collections' holdings have been reported to the editors of refer- ence books and online bibliographies. One will find reports from the collections side by side in Rare Books 1983-84. 28 A search of the Eighteenth-Century Short- Title Catalogue database will retrieve different titles at each library that were printed by Horace Walpole at his Strawberry Hill Press. Each librarian has referred re- searchers, including library science stu- 166 College & Research Libraries dents, art students, bookbinders, and pa- permakers, to the other institution. A mutual review of the collecting areas pro- duced some shifting of responsibilities due to new research trends and brought on a further refinement of the division of fields. UNC-CH is seeking now to limit its acquisitions of private press books but to expand its collection of Victorian bindings to include the production and materials of nineteenth-century books. UNC-G rede- fined its European private press acquisi- tions to encompass books from German private presses and to concentrate on books illustrated specifically by French artists. Other changes for UNC-G include a greater emphasis on nineteenth-century children's books and on twentieth- century English private presses. Previous March 1985 standing orders with private presses have been maintained although the selected ac- quisitions of other presses have been re- duced. Finally, cooperation is being ex- tended to detective fiction acquisitions with Wake Forest University in Winston- Salem, North Carolina, also participating. Both librarians feel that the value and usefulness of their special collections have been enhanced by the agreement. To- gether, the libraries offer a gold mine of sources for research in the history of the printed book. Perhaps with this example of thriving cooperation, other small collec- tions will combine forces to present to the public larger selections of materials for study, books to give rise to new pleasures in the pursuit of knowledge. REFERENCES 1. Scholarly Communication: The Report of the National Enquiry (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Univ. Pr., 1979}, p.32. 2. T. S. Eliot, "Tradition and the Individual Talent," in his Selected Essays (New York: HBJ, 1950}, p.4. 3. Rose Mary Magrill, "The Concept of Resource Sharing," Canadian Library Journal 35:356 (Oct. 1978); Susan E. Davis, "Collection Development and the Special Subject Repository," Bookmark 39:102-103 (Winter 1981); and F. Gerald Ham, ''Archival Choices: Managing the Historical Record in an Age of Abundance," American Archivist 47:13-15 (Winter 1984). 4. Patricia Battin, "Research Libraries in the Network Environment: The Case for Cooperation," Journal of Academic Librarianship 6:72-73 (May 1980). 5. Warren J. Haas, "Managing Our Academic Libraries: Ways and Means," College & Research Li- braries 40:110 (Mar . 1979). 6. Gordon R. Williams, "The Function and Methods of Libraries in the Diffusion of Knowledge," Library Quarterly 50:74 Gan. 1980). 7. Jay K. Lucker, "Library Resources and Bibliographic Control," College & Research Libraries 40:145 (Mar. 1979); and Allen Kent and others, Use of Library Materials: The University of Pittsburgh Study (New York: Dekker, 1979}, p. 191. 8. Interview with PaulS. Koda, Rare Book Collection, Wilson Library, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, N.C., September 6, December 1, 1979; and Anna H . Perrault, " Cooperative Acquisi- tions: Not an Easy Thing to Do," LLA Bulletin 44:17 (Summer 1981). 9. "Policy and Administration," in Rare Books in the University Library (Chicago: Association of Col- lege and Reference Libraries, 1949), p.8. 10. Interview with PaulS. Koda, Rare Book Collection, Wilson Library, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, N.C., September 26, 1979. 11. Ibid., September 6, December 1, 1979. 12. Perrault, "Cooperative Acquisitions," p.17. 13. W. J. Cameron, comp., A Short-Title Catalogue of Books Printed in Britain and British Books Printed Abroad 1641-1700 Held in Australian Libraries (Sydney: Wentworth Pr. , 1962}, p.xiv-xix, passim. 14. Robert L. Balliot, "A Program for the Cooperative Acquisition and Use of Library Materials of Seven New England Liberal Arts Colleges (CONV AL) Based on an Analysis of Their Collections," Bureau of Research, no . 9-A-046 (Washington, D.C.: Bureau of Research, Office of Education, U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, June 1970), p.23-24, 71. 15. Robert L. Volz to the author, November 20, 1979; RalphS. Emerick to the author, November 27, Cooperative Collection Development 167 1979; and John Lancaster to the author, November 21, 1979. 16. Paul H. Mosher and Marcia Pankake, "A Guide to Coordinated and Cooperative Collection De- velopment," Library Resources & Technical Services 27:417-31 (Oct./Dec. 1983). 17. Robert B. Downs, ''Problems in the Acquisition of Research Materials,'' in The Acquisition and Cata- loguing of Books, ed. William M. Randall (Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Pr ., 1940}, p.66; and Bernard Naylor, "Steady-State and Library Cooperation," in Steady-State, Zero Growth and the Academic Library, ed. Colin Steele (Hamden, Conn.: Linnet Books, 1978}, p.123. 18. Ralph T. Esterquest, "Aspects of Library Cooperation," College & Research Libraries 19:204 (May 1958); and Jacqueline W. Felter, "Library Cooperation: Wave of the Future or Ripple?" Bulletin of the Medical Library Association 63:6 Oan. 1975). 19. Charles A. Nelson, Richard H. Logsdon, and Scott Adams, ''Library Cooperation: Panacea or Pit- fall?" Special Libraries 56:572 (Oct. 1965). 20. PaulS. Koda, "Collecting Rare Bo ks for a University Library," Library Acquisitions: Practice and Theory 1:140 (1977). 21. Ibid., p.145. 22. Lucker, "Library Resources," p.145; Magrill, "Concept," p.355-56; Downs, "Problems," p.66. 23. Downs, "Problems," p.66. 24. Ibid. 26. A copy of the policy may be found in Martha Marshall Smith, "Cooperative Collection Develop- ment in Rare Books among Neighboring Academic Libraries" (M.S.L.S. paper, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, 1979}, p.22-26. 27. The following summary is based upon a written survey completed by PaulS. Koda, the rare book librarian at UNC-CH, and Emilie W. Mills, the special collections librarian at UNC-G, August 1982, and upon Emilie W. Mills to the author, July 13, 1984. 28. Rare Books 1983-84: Trends, Collections, Sources, ed. Alice D. Schreyer (New York: Bowker, 1984), p.260. er .····· write us at: · · National( Librqry of Canada ·. 395 . Well~gton Street, Ottawa, Ontario KIA ON4 Canada