“Theoretically, the division of every subject into just nine heads is absurd. Practically, it is desirable that the classification be as minute as possible without the use of additional figures, and the decimal principle on which our scheme hinges allows nine divisions as readily as a less number” (Dewey, 4).
As the above quote illustrates, Dewey was aware of the absurdity of just nine main subject heads but he defends it on the grounds that it is a most practical choice- which lead me to wonder why Dewey’s Decimal Classification (DDC) system has proven so durable and influential.
Jill Sherman writes in her biography of Dewey that, “as of 2009, it [DDC] was used in more than 200,000 libraries worldwide. And in the United States, the DDC was used in about 95 percent of all school and public libraries” (Sherman, 10). It was influential in the development of Paul Otlet’s Universal Decimal Classification. And yet, Dewey’s critics are numerous, too.
“His system is too inflexible - use Ranganathan or Bliss’s system of faceted classification.” “Use UDC or LOC because they’re more academically rigorous. But a close reading of each of this week’s authors will offer some evidence why Dewey’s system was so successful and continues to be so.
In his DDC centennial article, Comaromi offers a number of reasons for the success of the DDC including: 1) “intellectual cohesion”, 2) “simple notation”, 3) “stability”, 4) “helpful index”, 5) endorsement from the U.S. Bureau of Education, 6) lack of competition, 7) use of DDC numbers on title slips, and 8) the practical and measured (stability-of-numbers) expansion of his system (Comaromi, 23).
As Hulme writes, “a class heading is warranted only when a literature in book form has been shown to exist, and the test of the validity of a heading is the degree of accuracy with which it describes the area of subject-matter common to the class” (Hulme, 447). This has the effect of mapping the current state of what books exists to the elements of the classification scheme. Practical and economical. Key traits of the early DDC and source of the Western book emphasis of the early DDC.
Finally, Svenonius in her defense of the relevance of classification in the information age, provides evidence for the value of the DDC as both a switching language (Svenonius, 80) and as a “perspectival classification” that is indispensable online for contextualizing search terms and browsing (Svenonius, 78).
Dewey wasn’t a great theoretician in the mold of a Bacon or Hegel and combined liberally from the pioneering works of others. But he was a practical system builder of the first order and created a classification system that was both usable, understandable, stable, and supplemented with an index and useful library technology. The DDC thrives because of accidents of history and the practical focus of its creator. I agree with Comaromi that “the second edition of the DDC was the premier achievement in the development of American library classification” (Comaromi, 24).
Dewey rules.
Comaromi, J. P. (1976). The historical development of the Dewey Decimal Classification system. In K. L. Henderson (Ed.), Major classification systems: The Dewey centennial (pp. 17-31). Urbana-Champaign, IL: University of Illinois.
Dewey, M. (1876). A classification and subject index, for cataloguing and arranging the books and pamphlets of a library. Hartford, CT: Cass, Lockwood & Brainard Company.
Hulme, E. W. (1911). Principles of book classification. The Library Association Record, 13(1), 444-449.
Sherman, J. (2010). Melvil Dewey: Library genius. Edina, MN: ABDO Publishing Company.
Svenonius, E. (1983). Use of classification in online retrieval. Library Resources & Technical Services, 27(1), 76-80.