Classification schemes, &c.

Idled away an evening recently pondering classification schemes, both existing (e.g., Colon, Bliss,) and bespoke, for various titles in the library, and wondered what systems anyone else used, if any. Colon Classification seems asexual (The Kamasutra is nowhere to be found in its Appendix of Classic Indian works!), Bliss 2d ed. positively graphic in contrast, and L.C. somewhere in between.

I have started wondering about an Authority File of 'Tags'/ Key-words/ Subject headings instead (not fixing a work to a particular subject which could be too broad), but wonder what others do for 'Tags', if anything. Any thoughts anyone?

Best wishes, 'Ketaabdaar'.

I would love to help but I have no idea what you are talking about. Please explain further as I have asked before what tags people use for various erotica. I have started using "pulp erotica" for a few books I own read in the 70's

Similarly puzzled by the opening post!

2> The construction of a list of tags seems to be very 'ad hoc', varying from attempts to allocate books using a scheme that is widely recognisable, all the way through usage as a personal tool to help the classifier find his/her way around his/her collection. The two aims apear to be incompatible. 'Pulp erotica' is similar to my 'pulp fiction', erotica being a main plank of my research, which I distinguish from my 'non-research' collection.

But then so much of my research collection is erotic literature (pulp being the lowest grade) that I use a large number of fairly detailed descriptors to help me find my way around it.

I'm not sure a 'universal' classification can suit all user needs.

Please accept my apologies for the confusion. I was curious merely to know if any others classified their libraries, with available schemes (and could evade such schemes’ lexical limitations), to achieve a class-mark order for browsing. Some schemes (e.g., Bliss Classification) specify great detail for sexual behaviour (e.g., 'flagellation'), others use ‘Moral Degeneration’ for prostitution (Colon Classification), with no other subject terms specified.

Alternatively, do others use detailed tags? I have tried this with one title: Cabanes’s ‘Erotikon’ (1933). Thus, Library of Congress would be HQ25, I have seen it at 392.6 in Dewey, and I can ‘force’ it into Y73(S5) for Colon Classification. Bliss 2d ed. would be KRM ..., perhaps. All these are a general ‘Anthropology – Sexuality’. However, a work’s tags offer a wide vocabulary for each subject examined therein (c.f. my catalogue record if interested).

It was only an exercise of academic amusement. I will spare you thoughts on ‘Facet Analysis’ :) . I had not seen another posting about this; apologies for any duplication.

Wow. I'm unfamiliar with the classification schemes you memtion. I just use tags to remind myself what a book is about so I can find a selection if I'm in the mood (or not) for a particular subject.

The tagging I use is entirely ad-hoc, and as much for my own information as anything. (I think I appropriated 'spankiana' from a Delectus catalogue) I'm cursed to work in I.T. and have come across the kind of classification schemes you refer to - amused to realise they can be applied to erotica. Be most interested in further thoughts on this matter. Personally, I'm all in favor of specifying great detail in sexual activities, and indeed of Bliss!

Thanks to you all for sharing your musings, and apologies for my delay in replying. I have idled away a few after-noons compiling a (semi-serious) list of tags for a few titles, and will try co-ordinating them. I confess I am rather proud of "Corpses -- Mutilation -- Battlefields thereupon". Any thoughts from professional cataloguers using the above schemes for works on sexuality, &c., would be interesting to read. I think 'Tags' are a more useful guide to a book, rather than trying to force it into a single subject with a class-mark, so will work on them further. 'Adieu to Bliss!'

I just stumbled across this dormant thread/topic, relating to how various classification schemes cope with erotica.
Myself, being obsessive-compulsive and stubborn, I've used UDC as long as I can remember (that's what I mean by stubborn), and I decided that the UDC's special analytical subdivision -993 was appropriate for erotica. (I can't cite chapter and verse here; I don't have the relevant source to hand). So erotica in English is classified at 820-993, in German at 830-993, &tc.
Works for me ...