Interior Design, Interior Architecture and Interior Decoration

[leah...@gmail.com]

Hello,

I am a professional Interior Designer and have been looking at how books are classified about Interior Design in our libraries. I am disappointed to discover that most books about Interior Design are lumped into the Decorative Arts Subcategory of  747:Interior Decoration. 

I find the categorization in the dewey decimal system to undermine the profession and all of the technical knowledge that relates closely to Architecture. Interior Design is an important element of architecture and it must be distinguished from interior decoration. 

It seems there is an array of assignments of some books in my library, to name a few titles and DDS codes at the San Francisco Public Library :

• Italian Interior Design  is 729 ; whereas
• Interior Design in Japan is 747.

• Post-War Interior Design is 729; whereas
• Interior Design of the 20th Century is 747.

• CAD for Interiors: Beyond the Basics is 729; and
• Rendering in SketchUp: From Modeling to Presentation for Architecture, Landscape Architecture, and Interior Design is 729; whereas 
• SketchUp for Interior Design: 3D Visualizing, Designing, and Space Planning is 747
  

The NCIDQ is the professional standard for Interior Designers certificate program, and their definition of Interior design is:

Interior design encompasses the analysis, planning, design, documentation, and management of interior non-structural/non-seismic construction and alteration projects in compliance with applicable building design and construction, fire, life-safety, and energy codes, standards, regulations, and guidelines for the purpose of obtaining a building permit, as allowed by law. Qualified by means of education, experience, and examination, interior designers have a moral and ethical responsibility to protect consumers and occupants through the design of code-compliant, accessible, and inclusive interior environments that address well-being, while considering the complex physical, mental, and emotional needs of people.

 

In comparison I found that Amazon.com has a section for Interior Design under the category of Architecture, and also a separate "Design and DIY" section under Crafts/Hobbies/Home. I think the latter is where books pertaining to DIY Home design should remain in the 740's, whereas more historical or technical books should fall under 720's. The books listed in green and red above should likely all fall under the 720's, and not 740's. 

I'd love to learn how these sections might be reorganized to demonstrate that the field of Interior Design is often more related to architecture field than Decorative Arts.

Thanks!

Leah

740's

740 Drawing & decorative arts
741 Drawing & drawings
742 Perspective
743 Drawing & drawings by subject
744 Not assigned or no longer used
745 Decorative arts
746 Textile arts
747 Interior decoration   <<<<<Where most ID books seem to be classified. 
748 Glass
749 Furniture & accessories

720's

720 Architecture
721 Architectural structure
722 Architecture to ca. 300
723 Architecture from ca. 300 to 1399
724 Architecture from 1400
725 Public structures
726 Buildings for religious purposes
727 Buildings for education & research
728 Residential & related buildings
729 Design & decoration    <<<<<<Where more ID books should be classified

[Alex Kyrios]

Good observations, Leah! Interdisciplinary works on interior design indeed belong at 729, and it's been that way at least since Edition 20 (1989). But when we see works being given the wrong number so much, it's a sign that some changes could help.

My guess is that there's two main factors at play here: (1) individual works may use the phrase "interior design" in an informal or literal way, separate from the profession, such that 747 really is more appropriate, and/or (2) classifiers are having trouble distinguishing between professional interior design and interior decoration. We can't do much about the former, but we can probably help with the latter!

There's a see reference at 729 for 747, which means that 747 is logically a subset of 729, even though it's a different number. Does that sound right to you? There's also a note at 747 pointing users at 729 for "interior architecture (interior design)". How else might we help clarify?

One more thing occurs to me: in theory, when a topic is moved in the DDC, libraries should "reclassify", and move works to the new number, so works on the same topic don't end up split between the old and new number. But we know that realistically, libraries are often trying to do a lot with little (and this is before the pandemic!), and may instead opt to keep works together by continuing to use old numbers, even for new works. I'm fond of saying that there is no "Dewey police", that libraries know their users best and can deviate from standard Dewey where it serves their users. Perhaps SFPL is doing something like this?

Best,

Alex Kyrios

Editor, DDC

[Barbara Paciotti]

My suspicion is that the classifiers are following the first-of-two rule, that when 2 or more subjects are in the same book, choose the first (lower) Dewey number for the book.

Alex brings up a good point that I always try to make, that there aren't any Dewey police, so if a book will serve your patrons better with a different Dewey number, then go ahead and make the change.

BrP