Collection / Anthology title = unique Work title

I am wondering whether a collection or anthology title should have its own “Work” in addition to the individual contents of the book.

To give an example: The Illustrated Man by Ray Bradbury which consists of eighteen previously published short stories. Should a Work be generated for The Illustrated Man?

Probably. I don’t know much about BookBrainz though, I know on Open Library anthologies get their own works.

If I remember the book correctly, the short stories are themselves part of a story told by this tattooed man. Is that correct?

In this particular case, considering the arrangement of the short stories is itself within some literary device, it would be its own Work, with relationships to the short stories (“Work A is part of The Illustrated Man”).

In the case of an anthology or collection whose content is simply short stories back-to-back, it wouldn’t be a separate Work.
Instead it would be a separate Edition Group with accompanying Edition[s], with relationships to the various Works (“Edition contains Work A”, etc.)

The Illustrated Man is a collection of previously published unrelated short stories that Bradbury tied together using the frame device of “The Illustrated Man” who acts as the narrator. It is not a fix-up novel like The Martian Chronicles. However, in retrospect it was not a great choice to support my argument.

What I was trying to establish is there are plenty of collections and anthologies that either contain previously published material, a mixture of both previously published and new material, or completely new material. These collected titles are famous within their own right and have been reprinted multiple times. Some examples include:

Men Without Women by Ernest Hemingway
Skeleton Crew by Stephen King
A Haunted House and Other Stories by Virginia Woolf
Dangerous Visions edited by Harlan Ellison

IMO it is remiss not to consider them as distinct works.

The problem at present with creating an Edition Group for a collection is that it does not appear in the author’s database. To locate the collection title, a user needs to know the title of one of the works it contains to locate the Edition Group and the Edition.

The only other method is to do a search for the collection title.

As an example, I created an Edition Group for Skeleton Crew by Stephen King, an Edition and a Work that it contains, The Mist.

It does seem a bit clunky.

That’s the main problem I see in all this. The “book” as we think of it is the Edition Group, not the Work.
Especially in the case of these collections, the right way to go is as you describe, and Edition Group with its Edition(s) and the Work(s) they contain.

However, with that approach, clearly on the Author’s page we should have a “Books by this author” section that lists Edition Groups attributed to the Author, rather than specific Editions.
The system we are putting in place to attribute Editions to Authors —Author Credits— should maybe apply to Edition Groups instead…

@Leftmost_Cat do you have an opinion on this?