3 messages.---------------Johnnie
 
 
-----------------------------------------------------
 
 
 
>Date: Thu, 15 Aug 1996 09:04:14 -0700 (PDT)
>From: Phil Hoehn <[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: Re: define "atlas"
 
My off-the-cuff definition would be a book composed primarily of maps.
"Atlas" impiles to me (at least insofar as geographical atlases is
concerned) that it is primarily maps and other cartographic info.
Publishers, however, don't seem to share this view, e.g., the many Facts
on File cultural atlases.  Several times when I've been in doubt, have
waited until LC supplies a call number for a given title; if it's not in
"G" I assume it's more text than maps
 
Phil Hoehn
Map Collection, Earth Sci. & Map Library, Univ. of Calif., Berkeley
[log in to unmask]
 
On Wed, 14 Aug 1996, Map Library wrote:
 
> ----------------------------Original message----------------------------
> Perhaps this has happened to many of you when you are purchasing atlases?
> You look at the title and think, sure that would be good for the collection.
> Recently, I ordered "Atlas of Eastern Europe in the 20th century" and when
> it arrived I was very disappointed. It is not what I would call an atlas but
> rather a text with some maps. For $90 Cdn, I returned it.
> So, how do you define an atlas? Simply a bound book of maps? Or a certain
> percentage of the entire book?
>
> Cheryl Woods
> Map Curator
> University of Western Ontario
> London, Canada
> Serge A. Sauer Map Library
> Department of Geography
> University of Western Ontario
> London, Ontario
> Canada
> N6A 5C2
>
> [log in to unmask]
>
> 519-661-3424
>
 
 
--------------------------------------------------
 
 
 
>Date: Thu, 15 Aug 1996 08:00:27 -0400
>From: [log in to unmask] (Velma Parker)
>Subject: Re: define "atlas"
 
 
Cheryl,
This situation is all too common.  We have run into the same thing far too
often.  We have a rule of thumb that if the number of pages containing
maps is half, or close to half of the total number of pages of text
(excluding indexes and appendices) then we will consider it an atlas.  How
close it has to be to half is a matter of judgement.  This partly rests on
the quality and usefulness of the maps.  Some works have such small maps
that they are not that useful.
Sorry to be so vague, but it is not an easy problem.  Maybe we should fine
publishers for the misuse of terms.  (Just joking!)
 
Velma >
 
Velma Parker
National Archives of Canada
[log in to unmask]   Internet: [log in to unmask]
(613)996-7611  Fax: (613)995-6575
 
 
----------------------------------------------------
 
 
 
>Date: Wed, 14 Aug 1996 11:31:13 -0400 (EDT)
>From: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: RE: define "atlas"
 
 
   Back over ten years when I was officially leaving the map world, there were
what I started to call "quasi-atlases" which had maps as important parts of the
book, but not the central part.  Wurman's ACCESS GUIDEs spring to mind.  They
"pushed the envelope," but didn't rupture it.  The FLASHMAP books were atlases,
whatever one may think of them.  Now, I think, things have pushed beyond what
we would rightly call atlases.  "Atlas" has now become a marketing device or
tag to sell books which have a few maps.  I don't think we - or anyone - can
dictate a definition to publishers, just pan the items in reviews.  I think the
ACCESS GUIDEs have evolved beyond the atlas stage, but this might be argued.
What I think is essential is that the text, however extensive, supports and
leads back to the maps.  If the maps are supplemental illustrations to the
text, it isn't an atlas.  The worst examples, I think, as far as a series goes
are those Facts on File all starting with ATLAS OF THE ....  The text is
primary and the maps, however good, support the text.  And they often aren't
more than adequate.  A series which does fall just within is ATLAS OF WORLD
HISTORY, with its separate volumes.  Those Penguin historical atlases (which
have just started to be re-issued with better maps) were within the fold.  Hey,
it is possible for there to be good maps in those non-atlases and bad maps in
real atlases, remember.  The two volume ANCHOR ATLAS OF WORLD HISTORY is an
atlas because the text is related to the maps.  And so is that atlas of world
languages (exact name escapes me at the moment) with the text leading back to
the plates graphically depicting the geographic spread of languages.
 
   This doesn't help the problem, but I couldn't resist spouting off.
 
                                   J. B. Post