Chanel No. 5 as a MARC21 record

I didn’t have time last week to test any perfumes because I was preparing to give a lecture to the École de bibliothéconomie et des sciences de l’information (the library school) at the Université de Montréal on perfume classification.  Specifically, I was comparing the Société Française des Parfumeurs classification with the Michael Edwards’ Fragrances of the World taxonomy.  Approximately 50 professors, researchers  and students attended and I had a great time putting it together and sharing what I had learned of perfume classification over the past few years… fascinating subject.

Part of the presentation included cataloguing Chanel No. 5 as a MARC21 record (in French) which will probably only interest 1 or 2 people on the planet!  So… here is the result of my work.  I must say that an expert cataloguer helped me through this… (in fact, Gaston did 99% of it).  He prefers to remain anonymous but I’ll thank him here.

This record is absolutely free for anyone who would like to add Chanel No. 5 to their library collection and is looking for a pretty nice MARC21 record to go along with it.  Beauty!

100 1#  $a Beaux, Ernest,$d 1881-1961.$e parfumeur
245 10  $a Chanel No 5$h [parfum] :$b eau de toilette /$c [parfumeur Ernest Beaux, éditrice Gabrielle Chanel]
260 ## $a Paris :$b [Parfums Chanel,$c 1921].
300 ## $a 1 flacon (100 ml) dans une boîte.
700 1# $a Chanel, Gabrielle,$d 1883-1971.$e éditeur

P.S.  I know there shouldn’t be blank spaces within the record but I added them to make it more readable.

February 15th addendum – Two corrections to my MARC21 record were sent to me by a highly respected scholar and Director of the Library School.  The record has since been corrected.  I removed the periods after No. and ml.   “Merci beaucoup Monsieur Arsenault!”

Leave a comment


  1. Lucie

     /  February 15, 2012

    Non mais…. j’ai beau avoir passé la moitié de ma vie dans le monde des biblios, je reste encore baba devant ce MARC21 qui fait quasiment penser à des hiéroglyphes égyptiens plutôt qu’à quoi que ce soit d’utile en 2012!! Vivement le retour de tes posts pleins de volupté et où sont sollicités tous nos sens.

    • Haha. Les étudiant(e)s on ri hier quand ils ont vu la notice. Mais la partie sur la classification les a plus intéressé. Malheureusement, j’ai manqué de temps parce qu’avec les mouillettes qui circulaient, je pense qu’on aura pu avoir un super bon débat sur les deux taxonomies (SFP et Michael Edwards) parfois contradictoires.

      Merci pour le commentaire!

  2. I have absolutely no idea what any of this means. :-\

  3. Larry

     /  February 15, 2012

    Have you gone off the deep end? What in heavens name is the point of this? Yikes.

    • Hi!

      Wellllll? It was part of a presentation to library students. It seemed appropriate at the time. I’ll get back to the serious business of perfume review next week.


  4. Meg (Olenska)

     /  February 15, 2012

    BRAVO! I shared a link to this blog post with my colleagues at the library, several of whom work in cataloging and/or are fellow perfume enthusiasts. It was much appreciated and enjoyed! (For those who were unfamiliar with Michael Edwards, I described him as the fragrance world’s version of Linnaeus AND Melvil Dewey. 🙂

    • Oh yes! Michael Edwards is such a genius. It’s such a privilege to read his books (I own two) and see the vision of the man! I don’t always agree but I love seeing how he classifies perfume!

      Thanks for the comment!

  5. Isabelle

     /  February 17, 2012

    Salut Normand!
    J’ai beaucoup aimé ta présentation à l’EBSI. Je serai restée tout l’après-midi pour t’entendre discuter des classifications. Et j’aurais bien aimé avoir le temps de fouiller dans le livre de Michael Edwards. Merci et à la prochaine!

  6. Michael Edwards is such a great man , I have two books of his ,i must say that hi is really dedicated and genius man. it is always pleasure to read s his books.
    thanks for sharing

  7. Patrick

     /  July 14, 2012

    And, now in Dublin Core!

    Chanel No 5 eau de toilette
    Beaux, Ernest
    Parfums Chanel
    Chanel, Gabrielle
    1 bottle in box

    I don’t like Dublin Core, no, not at, not even one tiny bit. I find it lacks the (obsessive-compulsive!) precision and accuracy one can get with the MARC21 bibliographic record. I don’t use it much, thank goodness, so my take on your MARC21 record may be a bit sketchy… 🙂


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: