[1] He was named one of the 100 most important leaders in the field of library and Information science in the 20th century by American Libraries in December 1999, which praised his “subject approach to information” as “one of the most flexible ever conceived.”[1]: 40 Despite these praises, Bliss was “met with apathy and even derision in his efforts” during his lifetime.
The full four volumes of Bibliographic Classification appeared from 1940 to 1953 and “marked half a century of sustained effort” by Bliss.
This can be described as “For certain topics… two or more places would be provided and the individual library would select the one most appropriate to its needs.”[2]: 25 One critic described this as, “a handsome concession to rival school of thought.”[2]: 25 The reception of Bliss's classification system was mixed at best.
Susan Grey Akers, in 1936, wrote that Bliss's system “has possibilities which are interesting and thought-provoking.”[6] Grace O. Kelley, writing in 1934 said, “a field of investigation is here presented which… would go far toward lifting librarianship to a plane of scholarship easily ranking with other disciplines which glory in the possession of subject matter which they can call their own” [7]: 665 Bliss is often overlooked in the history of Library Science in favor of such giants as Melvil Dewey and S.R.
Nevertheless… no individual in the history of bibliographical classification has equaled the time spent by Bliss in ascertaining and weighing the needs of learning, in the penetrating analysis of other systems and the slow evolution of his own.”[2] He was compared to Melvil Dewey by Eugene Garfield: