EDITORIAL: These mistakes are inexcusable (01/31/93)

EDITORIAL

These mistakes are inexcusable

The Library of Congress has just released its 1993 "Literary Companion," a planning and scheduling calendar, much like those most businesspeople utilize. As a theme it identifies the historical, literary significance of each day of the year. On two dates, two literary figures with ties to Ukraine are noted. But a couple of glaring and unforgiveable errors occur, which reinforce just how little heed the United States government pays Ukraine.

Rightfully, the Library of Congress notes in the calendar that March 9 is the birthdate of Taras Shevchenko, the great Ukrainian national bard. However, Shevchenko's birthplace is identified as "Morintsy, Russia," and he is identified as "a Russian poet and artist who will become known as the father of Ukrainian national literature." Why would a Russian become the father of Ukrainian national literature? Researchers at the Library of Congress should have immediately noticed the red flag shoot up, if they truly were seeking accuracy.

Another writer, Shmuel Yosef Halevi Agnon, an Israeli novelist and short story writer, is acknowledged on his birthdate, July 17. His place of birth is stated as "Buchach in Austria-Hungary" (true enough in 1888). But then the calendar parenthetically explains that this geographic area is "now Poland." Perhaps in the 1920s this statement could have been argued, as that part of Ukraine was then geopolitically under Polish administration. Today, one look at a map, even one printed before the dramatic changes of 1990-1991, shows the Buchach region clearly is not Polish.

We wondered where they get this unbelievable stuff. Margaret E. Wagner, who is credited with the compilation and captioning of the "Literary Companion," was contacted at her Washington office by a Weekly staff member. She said the Library of Congress uses several sources. For the Shevchenko entry, she said she used Gale Research's "Holidays and Anniversaries of the World," which was published in 1985. First, it is unfortunate that the Library of Congress uses such a source, hardly a scholarly compilation, for one of its own publications. Also, that the Library of Congress did not use a second source as a back-up is, in itself, incredible for a research organization held in such high esteem.

Furthermore, the issue of "Holidays and Anniversaries of the World" the library used was published in 1985. It is difficult to believe that the Library of Congress could be oblivious to the massive changes that have occurred in Ukraine and the surrounding areas in the last several years. We hope they were not showing the contempt some people believe the U.S. government holds for this independent state, one that has caused the U.S. a bumpier road than it had planned in dealing with the new world order.

Questioned why she did not consult the Ukrainian division in the Library of Congress, where more accurate information is readily available, Ms. Wagner said, "I do go to the departments on occasion, but I have been relying on shorter ways lately, such as reference works." She added, "the problem is we are working on deadlines which are sometimes not recognized by other divisions." We think this was an occasion on which Ms. Wagner should have taken the long way because her system only "shorted" the Ukrainian nation.

To her credit, Ms. Wagner acknowledged the errors and said corrections to the database would be made immediately - but they would now show up in print until next year's publication. She also mentioned that entries often are changed yearly and may be omitted. However, she did add that she would "make an attempt to retain the entries and publish them next year with the proper information." But a year is too long to wait to correct an error in a popular publication whose 1992 edition sold 16,000 copies.

Our quick perusal of the two entries of interest to us revealed two major factual errors. How many more gaffes exist in the calendar? We can only question the validity and accuracy of all the entries.

We think the Library of Congress methods in this case are inexcusable and show at least indifference, if not utter disregard for Ukraine and its people. And this from what is generally considered an information and research citadel of the world! If they can't get it right, why should we hope others finally will?

Please write the Library of Congress and demand a reprinting of the 1993 "Literary Companion" or at least some public acknowledgement and correction of this error. Demand that an errata insert be included now - not next year. Correspondence should be addressed to: Ms. Margaret E. Wagner, The Center for the Book, The Library of Congress, Washington, DC 20540.

| Home Page |