From: "D. Michael Martindale" Subject: Re: [irr-ed] Some clarifications Date: 29 Jan 2003 18:19:15 -0700 Christopher Bigelow wrote: > The summer issue could be the film issue, if someone wants to step up > and be the guest-editor in the driver's seat for it. (D. Michael, did > you already say you want to do that?) I don't know, guest editing the whole thing when I've only had two issues of experience just being film editor. Are you sure you want to subject Irreantum to that? > It is not too early to start > asking around and making assignments for this issue. Any Kushner > material could fit quite well with that, since the filmed HBO production > is the primary trigger of our coverage. Someone else will have to submit Kushner stuff, because that production has not piqued my interest at all and I haven't been paying attention to it or the discussion on AML-List about it. -- D. Michael Martindale dmichael@wwno.com ================================== Check out Worldsmiths, the new online LDS writers group, at http://www.wwno.com/worldsmiths Sponsored by Worlds Without Number http://www.wwno.com ================================== -- Irreantum Editor's Discussion List ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Harlow S Clark Subject: Re: [irr-ed] email addresses Date: 02 Feb 2003 21:36:28 -0800 I saw Tim last night at The Way We're Wired. His e-mail is slover31@attbi.com Harlow On Fri, 10 Jan 2003 23:46:30 -0800 "Travis K. Manning" writes: > I'm looking for Tim Slover and Emma Lou Thayne's email addresses. Do > any of you have them? I can't locate them. > > Travis Manning > Irreantum Literary Nonfiction editor ________________________________________________________________ Sign Up for Juno Platinum Internet Access Today Only $9.95 per month! Visit www.juno.com -- Irreantum Editor's Discussion List ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Travis K. Manning" Subject: Re: [irr-ed] email addresses Date: 03 Feb 2003 13:56:20 -0800 Harlow, Muches! Travis ----- Original Message ----- Sent: Sunday, February 02, 2003 9:36 PM > > I saw Tim last night at The Way We're Wired. His e-mail is > slover31@attbi.com > > Harlow > > On Fri, 10 Jan 2003 23:46:30 -0800 "Travis K. Manning" > writes: > > I'm looking for Tim Slover and Emma Lou Thayne's email addresses. Do > > any of you have them? I can't locate them. > > > > Travis Manning > > Irreantum Literary Nonfiction editor > > ________________________________________________________________ > Sign Up for Juno Platinum Internet Access Today > Only $9.95 per month! > Visit www.juno.com > > -- > Irreantum Editor's Discussion List > -- Irreantum Editor's Discussion List ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jonathan Langford Subject: [irr-ed] Kushner articles info wanted Date: 04 Feb 2003 11:28:42 -0600 Hi all, I'm trying to come up with a list of articles on Kushner so I can take advantage of Travis's offer to have them photocopied and sent to me. Below are partial bibliographic entries for two articles, one from Dialogue and the other from Sunstone. Can anyone give me page number for both articles, and the volume and issue number for the Dialogue article? Stout, Daniel, Joseph D. Straubhaar, and Gail Andersen Newbold. "Through a Glass Darkly: Mormons as Perceived by Critics' Reviews of Tony Kushner's Angels in America." In _Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought_ Summer 1999. Evenden, Michael. "Angels in a Mormon gaze, or, Utopia, rage, communitas, dream dialogue, and funhouse-mirror aesthetics." _Sunstone_ 17, no. 2 (Sept. 1994). Also... I'd also love to see the Sandy Straubhaar and John-Charles Duffy essays from the 1996 AML conference. Do they exist in the annual, and if so, could someone photocopy them for me or send a copy of the annual my way? If not, does someone have contact information for Sandy? (I assume I can contact John-Charles through the AML board list.) Thanks all, and especially to Gideon and Marny for their references! Jonathan jlangfor@pressenter.com -- Irreantum Editor's Discussion List ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Marny Parkin Subject: Re: [irr-ed] Kushner articles info wanted Date: 04 Feb 2003 15:36:06 -0700 >I'd also love to see the Sandy Straubhaar and John-Charles Duffy essays >from the 1996 AML conference. Do they exist in the annual, and if so, >could someone photocopy them for me or send a copy of the annual my way? >If not, does someone have contact information for Sandy? (I assume I can >contact John-Charles through the AML board list.) I can copy the pages from the annual for you. Or if you want to try Sandy first, she is at University of Texas at Austin and her email is . She or her husband may be able to give you the reference for the Dialogue article. Marny -- Irreantum Editor's Discussion List ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Christopher Bigelow Subject: RE: [irr-ed] Some clarifications Date: 04 Feb 2003 19:55:12 -0700 This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C2CCC2.0093E790 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" <<< I don't know, guest editing the whole thing when I've only had two issues of experience just being film editor. Are you sure you want to subject Irreantum to that? >>> It's mainly just thinking up ideas and making assignments and tracking stuff down. And theme issues don't have to take up the full issue, just however much good material the editors collect. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C2CCC2.0093E790 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" RE: [irr-ed] Some clarifications

<<<
I don't know, guest editing the whole thing when I've only had two
issues of experience just being film editor. Are you sure you want to
subject Irreantum to that?
>>>

It's mainly just thinking up ideas and making assignments and tracking stuff down.

And theme issues don't have to take up the full issue, just however much good material the editors collect.

------_=_NextPart_001_01C2CCC2.0093E790-- -- Irreantum Editor's Discussion List ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Christopher Bigelow Subject: [irr-ed] FW: [AML] Singles Ward Date: 04 Feb 2003 20:38:14 -0700 This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C2CCC8.037092F0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" The following makes me think we probably should reshape the best stuff from AML-List into a package on Singles Ward. -----Original Message----- Sent: Friday, January 31, 2003 4:02 PM [MOD: Kudos to Laraine for taking up the pen (keyboard?) in a thoughtful defense of _Singles Ward_. Sometimes, I worry that we on AML-List come across as too homogeneous in some of the views that are expressed. Sometimes, I think that's because people on a particular side of an issue are articulate and speak first, and so others may be reluctant to share their differing views. This isn't anyone's fault--it just happens, and I'm very glad, for example, that Eric Samuelsen and Richard Dutcher expressed their opinions of _Singles Ward_ in the vigorous tones they used. But it makes contributions like Laraine's all the more valuable. Please, all of you, remember: differing views are not only welcome, but essential. It's a key component of what makes this a good place to be. In my opinion.] In defense of The Singles Ward. I have to listen to my conscience and offer a more far-reaching defense of the film. Is The Singles Ward great cinema? Not really. Will it go down in the annals of film history as a masterpiece? Tarkovsky it ain't. But it breaks new ground in the genre of Mormon cinema, and I think that deserves some attention. I apologize for not taking the time to find proper attribution for the ideas I list here, though Eric Samuelsen and Richard Dutcher are implicated. These are some of the comments I've read that have had me thinking a lot the last week as I've been following this thread: 1. The characters are flat and evoke no sympathy, are even hateable. 2. It could be parody, but if it is, then it isn't funny. 3. One might want to leave the Mormon church or hang oneself out of embarrassment for its representation of Mormon culture. My responses: 1. I don't exactly find the characters hateable. In fact, I really related to Cammie, the female lead. In fact, I would aspire to be more like her. Why? Because she's got some genuine commitment to the church. But she's also pretty open-minded. She's grounded, works hard, is friendly and caring, and in spite of a sort of self-righteousness is willing to give Jonathan, the male lead, a chance when she sees his more charming qualities. She listens to him, she doesn't freak out when he tells her he's been divorced, she's willing to go listen to his comedy act and even enjoys it. When Jonathan goes rushing after her at the airport as she's leaving for her mission, she stays cool and makes the reasonable choice. And she articulates what I see as the central tenet of the film: it's not about expectations, it's about choices. Remember that line from the dialogue in the parking lot outside the comedy club, in the second half of the film? It's an important exchange. And it moved me. I really related, as a divorced woman in the church, to what Jonathan said with "hey, wanna go to the celestial kingdom, hop in, we can go together." That's probably why I got married, at too young an age for my own good. And I've been bitter about it for a long time. I bet a lot of church members get married for that reason. Expectations. A set of perceived norms. But Cammie points out it's not about complying to an externally imposed set of norms, it's about choices. This is the postmodern imperative. And Singles Ward operates as postmodern art in a number of ways. Hence, to my next point. 2. Frederic Jameson in some famous essay distinguishes between parody and pastiche. Pastiche, he says, is parody that's lost its sense of humor. And why has it lost its sense of humor? Because humor implies that there is a norm against which to judge the parody. Of course, a lot of people who read Jonathan Swift's "A Modest Proposal" a few centuries ago really didn't get it--they thought he was serious about eating babies and stuff. A lot of Singles Ward critics seem to think it tries to be a serious portrayal or psychological exploration of Mormon culture, somehow. But doesn't anyone else see this? It's pastiche. The film is borrowing all the cultural tropes of Mormon culture, especially singles culture, to expose it as flat. But it refuses to offer an alternative. It implies that all of Mormon culture is flat. The only alternative is in the imperative to make everything about choices. In the DVD, the menu screen displays all the cast members, and at the click of any menu item, the red VW from the film races by and all the characters fall over, exposed as cardboard cutouts. If there is an essence to "the gospel," or to Mormon Culture, or The Church, then, the film seems to say, it is ineffable, unrepresentable, unfathomable. Maybe it's real. But you can't portray it on the screen. These self-reflexive moments, moments that expose the medium a la Brecht, for what it is, making us aware of where we are (in a theater with sticky floors and squeaky seats, or on a living-room sofa with roommates guffawing here and there) pop up all over the place in the film narrative. From the huge pile of R-rated movies that Jonathan rents after he turns cynical and "wicked" when his wife leaves (I was rolling on the floor at that scene!), to the purchase of the large-screen TV, to the mention of Saturday's Warrior and God's Army (a nod to the tradition in which the film itself operates), to the multitude of cameo appearances from Mormon celebrities (whom we generally know from the screen time their faces have logged over the years), to the device that has Jonathan constantly address the off-screen space of the audience. One of the best moments in the film comes towards the end, when Jonathan has his all-night soul-searching experience up in the foothills overlooking the Salt Lake Valley. He steps out of the car, addresses the camera to explain how, for the first time, he realizes... He's interrupted by his roommates who just happen, inexplicably, to show up. They ask him who he's talking to. Jonathan shrugs it off, tells them he's practicing a new routine. One of them replies, "OK, but it sounded like a seminary video or something." Yeah! It makes fun of all the sappy Mormon media out there. Including church-produced videos. But perhaps independently-produced works. I would venture to say that certain elements of even Richard Dutcher's films are at issue here. Which takes me to my third, and last, point. 3. It's significant that we never get to hear what Jonathan finally realizes and what is the source of his transformation. I generally complain that church members always tend to talk about how wonderful the church is, and how much their neighbors are missing out, but never seem to get around to explaining how or why or what is so real to them. And in spite of the fact that Sonja Johnson, in her second book (after Housewife to Heretic, can't remember the name) legitimizes the theme of the "Suddenly, she realized..." syndrome that tends to be denigrated in Patriarchal Culture, I still have to wonder if there's any way to make the epiphany experience work on screen. Jonathan, in Singles Ward, never gets to say what he figures out. And that's good. Because what could he possibly say that wouldn't be trite, regardless of how true? And I think this could possibly be a response to Richard Dutcher, who stretches it sometimes, I think, in the sermonizing moments in his work. I mean, I was put off by the fact that Elder Allen in God's Army got his conversion in a single night. At least in Singles Ward there was no overwrought line like "Father!" to tell you what he figured out. Perhaps anyone who is not an insider would be puzzled by Singles Ward. But all sorts of Utah residents who are not church members would recognize the types they see in Mormon culture. And perhaps they would also recognize the type, the stereotype, of the person who chooses to leave Mormonism. Jonathan's wife experiences a crisis of faith and immediately turns to alcohol and cigarettes. Real life? No. But it's what Mormon culture seems to expect. I love the scene at the beginning of the film where she has a cigarette dangling from her lips as she stuffs her suitcase into the trunk of her car in the parking lot of BYU married student housing. Probably on her way to serial murder. What I love about Singles Ward is that it does not hold back on what it is. It doesn't try to pretend to be anything other than what it is: a commercial product meant for the Mormon consumer market which thrives on surface material. And it offers one more choice, an advocate for the infinite array of choices that is, ultimately, at the heart of the gospel. To be fair, I have been a lot more moved by watching Eric Samuelsen's and Richard Dutcher's work. It's more sophisticated. More inspiring. But Singles Ward should get some credit for its playfulness, and for incorporating, whether intentionally or not, a lot of key elements of avant-garde cinema. --Laraine Wilkins -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------_=_NextPart_001_01C2CCC8.037092F0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable FW: [AML] Singles Ward

The following makes me think we probably should = reshape the best stuff from AML-List into a package on Singles = Ward.

-----Original Message-----
From: lwilkins@fas.harvard.edu [mailto:lwilkins@fas.harvard.edu= ]
Sent: Friday, January 31, 2003 4:02 PM
To: aml-list@lists.xmission.com
Subject: Re: [AML] Singles Ward


[MOD: Kudos to Laraine for taking up the pen = (keyboard?) in a thoughtful
defense of _Singles Ward_. Sometimes, I worry that = we on AML-List come
across as too homogeneous in some of the views that = are expressed.
Sometimes, I think that's because people on a = particular side of an issue
are articulate and speak first, and so others may be = reluctant to share
their differing views. This isn't anyone's fault--it = just happens, and I'm
very glad, for example, that Eric Samuelsen and = Richard Dutcher expressed
their opinions of _Singles Ward_ in the vigorous = tones they used. But it
makes contributions like Laraine's all the more = valuable. Please, all of
you, remember: differing views are not only welcome, = but essential. It's a
key component of what makes this a good place to be. = In my opinion.]

In defense of The Singles Ward.

I have to listen to my conscience and offer a more = far-reaching defense of the
film. Is The Singles Ward great cinema? Not really. = Will it go down in the
annals of film history as a masterpiece? Tarkovsky = it ain't. But it breaks new
ground in the genre of Mormon cinema, and I think = that deserves some
attention. I apologize for not taking the time to = find proper attribution for
the ideas I list here, though Eric Samuelsen and = Richard Dutcher are
implicated. These are some of the comments I've read = that have had me thinking
a lot the last week as I've been following this = thread:

1. The characters are flat and evoke no sympathy, are = even hateable. 
2. It could be parody, but if it is, then it isn't = funny.
3. One might want to leave the Mormon church or hang = oneself out of
embarrassment for its representation of Mormon = culture.

My responses:

1. I don't exactly find the characters hateable. In = fact, I really related to
Cammie, the female lead. In fact, I would aspire to = be more like her. Why?
Because she's got some genuine commitment to the = church. But she's also pretty
open-minded. She's grounded, works hard, is friendly = and caring, and in spite
of a sort of self-righteousness is willing to give = Jonathan, the male lead, a
chance when she sees his more charming qualities. = She listens to him, she
doesn't freak out when he tells her he's been = divorced, she's willing to go
listen to his comedy act and even enjoys it. When = Jonathan goes rushing after
her at the airport as she's leaving for her mission, = she stays cool and makes
the reasonable choice. And she articulates what I = see as the central tenet of
the film: it's not about expectations, it's about = choices. Remember that line
from the dialogue in the parking lot outside the = comedy club, in the second
half of the film? It's an important exchange. And it = moved me. I really
related, as a divorced woman in the church, to what = Jonathan said with "hey,
wanna go to the celestial kingdom, hop in, we can go = together." That's
probably why I got married, at too young an age for = my own good. And I've been
bitter about it for a long time. I bet a lot of = church members get married for
that reason. Expectations. A set of perceived norms. = But Cammie points out
it's not about complying to an externally imposed = set of norms, it's about
choices. This is the postmodern imperative. And = Singles Ward operates as
postmodern art in a number of ways. Hence, to my = next point.

2. Frederic Jameson in some famous essay = distinguishes between parody and
pastiche. Pastiche, he says, is parody that's lost = its sense of humor. And why
has it lost its sense of humor? Because humor = implies that there is a norm
against which to judge the parody. Of course, a lot = of people who read
Jonathan Swift's "A Modest Proposal" a few = centuries ago really didn't get
it--they thought he was serious about eating babies = and stuff. A lot of
Singles Ward critics seem to think it tries to be a = serious portrayal or
psychological exploration of Mormon culture, = somehow. But doesn't anyone else
see this? It's pastiche. The film is borrowing all = the cultural tropes of
Mormon culture, especially singles culture, to = expose it as flat. But it
refuses to offer an alternative. It implies that all = of Mormon culture is
flat. The only alternative is in the imperative to = make everything about
choices. In the DVD, the menu screen displays all = the cast members, and at the
click of any menu item, the red VW from the film = races by and all the
characters fall over, exposed as cardboard cutouts. = If there is an essence
to "the gospel," or to Mormon Culture, or = The Church, then, the film seems to
say, it is ineffable, unrepresentable, unfathomable. = Maybe it's real. But you
can't portray it on the screen.

These self-reflexive moments, moments that expose the = medium a la Brecht, for
what it is, making us aware of where we are (in a = theater with sticky floors
and squeaky seats, or on a living-room sofa with = roommates guffawing here and
there) pop up all over the place in the film = narrative. From the huge pile of
R-rated movies that Jonathan rents after he turns = cynical and "wicked" when
his wife leaves (I was rolling on the floor at that = scene!), to the purchase
of the large-screen TV, to the mention of Saturday's = Warrior and God's Army (a
nod to the tradition in which the film itself = operates), to the multitude of
cameo appearances from Mormon celebrities (whom we = generally know from the
screen time their faces have logged over the years), = to the device that has
Jonathan constantly address the off-screen space of = the audience.

One of the best moments in the film comes towards the = end, when Jonathan has
his all-night soul-searching experience up in the = foothills overlooking the
Salt Lake Valley. He steps out of the car, addresses = the camera to explain
how, for the first time, he realizes... He's = interrupted by his roommates who
just happen, inexplicably, to show up. They ask him = who he's talking to.
Jonathan shrugs it off, tells them he's practicing a = new routine. One of them
replies, "OK, but it sounded like a seminary = video or something." Yeah! It
makes fun of all the sappy Mormon media out there. = Including church-produced
videos. But perhaps independently-produced works. I = would venture to say that
certain elements of even Richard Dutcher's films are = at issue here. Which
takes me to my third, and last, point.

3. It's significant that we never get to hear what = Jonathan finally realizes
and what is the source of his transformation. I = generally complain that church
members always tend to talk about how wonderful the = church is, and how much
their neighbors are missing out, but never seem to = get around to explaining
how or why or what is so real to them. And in spite = of the fact that Sonja
Johnson, in her second book (after Housewife to = Heretic, can't remember the
name) legitimizes the theme of the "Suddenly, = she realized..." syndrome that
tends to be denigrated in Patriarchal Culture, I = still have to wonder if
there's any way to make the epiphany experience work = on screen. Jonathan, in
Singles Ward, never gets to say what he figures out. = And that's good. Because
what could he possibly say that wouldn't be trite, = regardless of how true? And
I think this could possibly be a response to Richard = Dutcher, who stretches it
sometimes, I think, in the sermonizing moments in = his work. I mean, I was put
off by the fact that Elder Allen in God's Army got = his conversion in a single
night. At least in Singles Ward there was no = overwrought line like "Father!"
to tell you what he figured out.

Perhaps anyone who is not an insider would be puzzled = by Singles Ward. But all
sorts of Utah residents who are not church members = would recognize the types
they see in Mormon culture. And perhaps they would = also recognize the type,
the stereotype, of the person who chooses to leave = Mormonism. Jonathan's wife
experiences a crisis of faith and immediately turns = to alcohol and cigarettes.
Real life? No. But it's what Mormon culture seems to = expect. I love the scene
at the beginning of the film where she has a = cigarette dangling from her lips
as she stuffs her suitcase into the trunk of her car = in the parking lot of BYU
married student housing. Probably on her way to = serial murder.

What I love about Singles Ward is that it does not = hold back on what it is. It
doesn't try to pretend to be anything other than = what it is: a commercial
product meant for the Mormon consumer market which = thrives on surface
material. And it offers one more choice, an advocate = for the infinite array of
choices that is, ultimately, at the heart of the = gospel.

To be fair, I have been a lot more moved by watching = Eric Samuelsen's and
Richard Dutcher's work. It's more sophisticated. = More inspiring. But Singles
Ward should get some credit for its playfulness, and = for incorporating,
whether intentionally or not, a lot of key elements = of avant-garde cinema.

--Laraine Wilkins


--
AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of = Mormon literature
<http://www.aml-online.org/list/index.html>

------_=_NextPart_001_01C2CCC8.037092F0-- -- Irreantum Editor's Discussion List ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jonathan Langford Subject: Re: [irr-ed] Kushner articles info wanted Date: 04 Feb 2003 23:56:02 -0600 Marny, Thanks for Sandy's email address. I've sent her a message. Already received the paper from John-Charles, by the way. Eventually I will need the bibliographic information for their publication in the Proceedings volume, but for now, this is what I need on that front. Anyone have the page number for the articles I mentioned, or know how I could get them? Jonathan jlangfor@pressenter.com -- Irreantum Editor's Discussion List ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Travis K. Manning" Subject: Re: [irr-ed] Theme issues Date: 04 Feb 2003 23:46:39 -0800 Michael, Laraine Wilkins will defend Singles Ward. It's not brilliant. But it's constructive. It is an "other" voice. Travis ******************************** [MOD: Kudos to Laraine for taking up the pen (keyboard?) in a thoughtful defense of _Singles Ward_. Sometimes, I worry that we on AML-List come across as too homogeneous in some of the views that are expressed. Sometimes, I think that's because people on a particular side of an issue are articulate and speak first, and so others may be reluctant to share their differing views. This isn't anyone's fault--it just happens, and I'm very glad, for example, that Eric Samuelsen and Richard Dutcher expressed their opinions of _Singles Ward_ in the vigorous tones they used. But it makes contributions like Laraine's all the more valuable. Please, all of you, remember: differing views are not only welcome, but essential. It's a key component of what makes this a good place to be. In my opinion.] In defense of The Singles Ward. I have to listen to my conscience and offer a more far-reaching defense of the film. Is The Singles Ward great cinema? Not really. Will it go down in the annals of film history as a masterpiece? Tarkovsky it ain't. But it breaks new ground in the genre of Mormon cinema, and I think that deserves some attention. I apologize for not taking the time to find proper attribution for the ideas I list here, though Eric Samuelsen and Richard Dutcher are implicated. These are some of the comments I've read that have had me thinking a lot the last week as I've been following this thread: 1. The characters are flat and evoke no sympathy, are even hateable. 2. It could be parody, but if it is, then it isn't funny. 3. One might want to leave the Mormon church or hang oneself out of embarrassment for its representation of Mormon culture. My responses: 1. I don't exactly find the characters hateable. In fact, I really related to Cammie, the female lead. In fact, I would aspire to be more like her. Why? Because she's got some genuine commitment to the church. But she's also pretty open-minded. She's grounded, works hard, is friendly and caring, and in spite of a sort of self-righteousness is willing to give Jonathan, the male lead, a chance when she sees his more charming qualities. She listens to him, she doesn't freak out when he tells her he's been divorced, she's willing to go listen to his comedy act and even enjoys it. When Jonathan goes rushing after her at the airport as she's leaving for her mission, she stays cool and makes the reasonable choice. And she articulates what I see as the central tenet of the film: it's not about expectations, it's about choices. Remember that line from the dialogue in the parking lot outside the comedy club, in the second half of the film? It's an important exchange. And it moved me. I really related, as a divorced woman in the church, to what Jonathan said with "hey, wanna go to the celestial kingdom, hop in, we can go together." That's probably why I got married, at too young an age for my own good. And I've been bitter about it for a long time. I bet a lot of church members get married for that reason. Expectations. A set of perceived norms. But Cammie points out it's not about complying to an externally imposed set of norms, it's about choices. This is the postmodern imperative. And Singles Ward operates as postmodern art in a number of ways. Hence, to my next point. 2. Frederic Jameson in some famous essay distinguishes between parody and pastiche. Pastiche, he says, is parody that's lost its sense of humor. And why has it lost its sense of humor? Because humor implies that there is a norm against which to judge the parody. Of course, a lot of people who read Jonathan Swift's "A Modest Proposal" a few centuries ago really didn't get it--they thought he was serious about eating babies and stuff. A lot of Singles Ward critics seem to think it tries to be a serious portrayal or psychological exploration of Mormon culture, somehow. But doesn't anyone else see this? It's pastiche. The film is borrowing all the cultural tropes of Mormon culture, especially singles culture, to expose it as flat. But it refuses to offer an alternative. It implies that all of Mormon culture is flat. The only alternative is in the imperative to make everything about choices. In the DVD, the menu screen displays all the cast members, and at the click of any menu item, the red VW from the film races by and all the characters fall over, exposed as cardboard cutouts. If there is an essence to "the gospel," or to Mormon Culture, or The Church, then, the film seems to say, it is ineffable, unrepresentable, unfathomable. Maybe it's real. But you can't portray it on the screen. These self-reflexive moments, moments that expose the medium a la Brecht, for what it is, making us aware of where we are (in a theater with sticky floors and squeaky seats, or on a living-room sofa with roommates guffawing here and there) pop up all over the place in the film narrative. From the huge pile of R-rated movies that Jonathan rents after he turns cynical and "wicked" when his wife leaves (I was rolling on the floor at that scene!), to the purchase of the large-screen TV, to the mention of Saturday's Warrior and God's Army (a nod to the tradition in which the film itself operates), to the multitude of cameo appearances from Mormon celebrities (whom we generally know from the screen time their faces have logged over the years), to the device that has Jonathan constantly address the off-screen space of the audience. One of the best moments in the film comes towards the end, when Jonathan has his all-night soul-searching experience up in the foothills overlooking the Salt Lake Valley. He steps out of the car, addresses the camera to explain how, for the first time, he realizes... He's interrupted by his roommates who just happen, inexplicably, to show up. They ask him who he's talking to. Jonathan shrugs it off, tells them he's practicing a new routine. One of them replies, "OK, but it sounded like a seminary video or something." Yeah! It makes fun of all the sappy Mormon media out there. Including church-produced videos. But perhaps independently-produced works. I would venture to say that certain elements of even Richard Dutcher's films are at issue here. Which takes me to my third, and last, point. 3. It's significant that we never get to hear what Jonathan finally realizes and what is the source of his transformation. I generally complain that church members always tend to talk about how wonderful the church is, and how much their neighbors are missing out, but never seem to get around to explaining how or why or what is so real to them. And in spite of the fact that Sonja Johnson, in her second book (after Housewife to Heretic, can't remember the name) legitimizes the theme of the "Suddenly, she realized..." syndrome that tends to be denigrated in Patriarchal Culture, I still have to wonder if there's any way to make the epiphany experience work on screen. Jonathan, in Singles Ward, never gets to say what he figures out. And that's good. Because what could he possibly say that wouldn't be trite, regardless of how true? And I think this could possibly be a response to Richard Dutcher, who stretches it sometimes, I think, in the sermonizing moments in his work. I mean, I was put off by the fact that Elder Allen in God's Army got his conversion in a single night. At least in Singles Ward there was no overwrought line like "Father!" to tell you what he figured out. Perhaps anyone who is not an insider would be puzzled by Singles Ward. But all sorts of Utah residents who are not church members would recognize the types they see in Mormon culture. And perhaps they would also recognize the type, the stereotype, of the person who chooses to leave Mormonism. Jonathan's wife experiences a crisis of faith and immediately turns to alcohol and cigarettes. Real life? No. But it's what Mormon culture seems to expect. I love the scene at the beginning of the film where she has a cigarette dangling from her lips as she stuffs her suitcase into the trunk of her car in the parking lot of BYU married student housing. Probably on her way to serial murder. What I love about Singles Ward is that it does not hold back on what it is. It doesn't try to pretend to be anything other than what it is: a commercial product meant for the Mormon consumer market which thrives on surface material. And it offers one more choice, an advocate for the infinite array of choices that is, ultimately, at the heart of the gospel. To be fair, I have been a lot more moved by watching Eric Samuelsen's and Richard Dutcher's work. It's more sophisticated. More inspiring. But Singles Ward should get some credit for its playfulness, and for incorporating, whether intentionally or not, a lot of key elements of avant-garde cinema. --Laraine Wilkins ----- Original Message ----- Sent: Wednesday, January 29, 2003 4:00 PM > Christopher Bigelow wrote: > > > Sounds like a job for film editor D. Michael Martindale, if you're > > interested, D. Mike. > > > > Perhaps also Marny Parkin might want to compile some AML-List comments > > for her highlights. > > > > Come to think of it, I don't know if Michael got onto this list. You > > here, Michael? > > I'm here, feverishly wending my way through a backlog of about a > thousand e-mails. (I'm down to a mere 330 now.) > > Soounds like a possibility, but where on earth am I going to find > someone who will spiritedly and intelligently defend "Singles Ward"? > > -- > D. Michael Martindale > dmichael@wwno.com > > ================================== > Check out Worldsmiths, the new online LDS writers group, at > http://www.wwno.com/worldsmiths > > Sponsored by Worlds Without Number > http://www.wwno.com > ================================== > > > -- > Irreantum Editor's Discussion List > -- Irreantum Editor's Discussion List ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Marny Parkin Subject: Re: [irr-ed] Theme issues Date: 05 Feb 2003 09:16:31 -0700 Rhonda Knudsen also wanted to defend Singles Ward; you could maybe contact her as well. >Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003 15:46:01 -0700 >From: Knudsen family >To: aml-list@lists.xmission.com >Subject: Re: [AML] Singles Ward >Sender: owner-aml-list@lists.xmission.com >Reply-To: aml-list@lists.xmission.com > >Dutcher's in the video. His scene was the one on screen when I began >the video where I left off with my UVSC folklore course. I have tons >to say about the good aspects of this movie, but I'm afraid I'd be >asked to leave the list. I will say that I think this fairly well >represents LDS Singles culture, all the good, bad, and ugly in a >very condensed piece. I'm a fan. I laugh and laugh. So what, what's >wrong with light and fluffy and sophomoric at times? I read an >article in the Deseret News stating (not quoting) that many of those >of the Greek heritage from Greece were embarrassed with "My Big Fat >Greek Wedding," saying that their culture was not represented at >all. Of course not, this was American Greek, not Greece Greek. It's >all in the eyes of the beholder and the presenter. > >Ronda Walker Knudsen > > >-- >AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature > At 11:46 PM -0800 2/4/03, Travis K. Manning wrote: >Michael, > >Laraine Wilkins will defend Singles Ward. It's not brilliant. But it's >constructive. It is an "other" voice. > >Travis > >[snip] > > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "D. Michael Martindale" >To: >Sent: Wednesday, January 29, 2003 4:00 PM >Subject: Re: [irr-ed] Theme issues > > > > Christopher Bigelow wrote: > > > > > Sounds like a job for film editor D. Michael Martindale, if you're > > > interested, D. Mike. > > > > > > Perhaps also Marny Parkin might want to compile some AML-List comments > > > for her highlights. > > > > > > Come to think of it, I don't know if Michael got onto this list. You > > > here, Michael? > > > > I'm here, feverishly wending my way through a backlog of about a > > thousand e-mails. (I'm down to a mere 330 now.) > > > > Soounds like a possibility, but where on earth am I going to find > > someone who will spiritedly and intelligently defend "Singles Ward"? > > > > -- > > D. Michael Martindale > > dmichael@wwno.com > > > > ================================== > > Check out Worldsmiths, the new online LDS writers group, at > > http://www.wwno.com/worldsmiths > > > > Sponsored by Worlds Without Number > > http://www.wwno.com > > ================================== -- Irreantum Editor's Discussion List ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Christopher Bigelow Subject: [irr-ed] Focus of AML & Irreantum Date: 08 Feb 2003 16:19:50 -0700 This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C2CFC8.93D76190 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" I've been ranting and raving a little on AML-List about the AML's focus and Irreantum's focus, and in case any of you have missed that, I'm pasting my latest post below, because I'd like to find out where and how people would press back on me, both with regards to AML and to the magazine: Yeah, yeah, okay, I should have made it more clear that I was spouting out my own personal biases and my attempts to focus Irreantum, not attempting to represent the AML board, of which I am not even a voting member, just a staff member. And I should have made it more clear that I welcome people disagreeing with me as a handful have been doing, so I can learn and alter my biases as needed. I should have worded my post more as an opening exploratory salvo than as a declarative statement. I have absolutely nothing to do with the AML awards, only with Irreantum. And I'm by no means a dictator at Irreantum; often I don't even read the stuff the other editors gather until it's in the proofing stage, and I can count on one hand the number of pieces I've kicked back during the magazine's three years. I'm willing to admit that my use of the term "belletristic" isn't quite right and that certainly biography and other forms of nonfiction writing have literary value and dimensions. However, they are not primarily ART, I argue. I still think the AML would do better to narrow its exclusive focus rather than overlap any more than absolutely necessary with the Mormon History Assoc., Dialogue, Sunstone, FARMS, etc. I maintain that there is plenty of material within the strict genres of fiction (in all its many forms), puh-puh-poetry (swallow), fictional film, fictional drama, and creative nonfiction to keep us occupied as far as AML awards and publications, and that's the bias I'll probably continue to voice whenever we have discussions about focus. (And by the way, it's all I can do to use that nebulous term "creative nonfiction" rather than the term I greatly prefer: memoir. And by "memoir" I want to limit it to mean "autobiographical novel and short story," or at least primarily in that mode even if other forms of writing are mixed into it.) I've learned that keeping things simple, defined, focused, and clear is more powerful than being too nebulous. In fact, I've toyed many times with changing Irreantum's subhead to "Exploring Mormon Fiction, Film, Drama, Poetry, and Memoir" rather than just "Exploring Mormon Literature," and I may still do that some day soon, especially if the magazine keeps thickening in page count. Any nonfiction material we publish should be essays or reviews ABOUT fiction, film, drama, poetry, and memoir, and leave the rest of "creative nonfiction" and "Mormon literature" to Sunstone, Dialogue, BYU Studies, etc. What do you think of that, as least as far as Irreantum goes? I work as a marketing copywriter right now for a company that just can't get its focus straight. They have almost 200 products, they have three or more different main offices with competing cultures, and they have their toes in several different industries. They can't seem to decide their focus and identity very well. I see some potential overlap along those same lines with AML. I really want Irreantum, at least, to have a very distinctive focus and mission, and I get very uncomfortable whenever it starts to overlap with these other venues. Why go to the effort of duplicating what others are already doing as well or better? However, I'm certain that most, if not all, AML board members don't see it like I do, and that's fine. I can just tend my part of the garden the way I see fit, and other Irreantum editors can plant the occasional off-focus shrubbery in the mag if they really need to, although that's the first stuff I'll cut if the magazine gets too fat or the focus starts veering WAY off. Personally, I don't think I've ever read anything yet by Nibley. I don't read many books inside Mormonism beyond some fiction, although I avidly and fairly thoroughly read nearly all the Mormon periodicals (the main exception is the history one put out by the MHA). It seems like the books I've been reading most in the past few years are nationally published memoirs. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C2CFC8.93D76190 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Focus of AML & Irreantum

I've been ranting and raving a little on AML-List = about the AML's focus and Irreantum's focus, and in case any of you = have missed that, I'm pasting my latest post below, because I'd like to = find out where and how people would press back on me, both with regards = to AML and to the magazine:

Yeah, yeah, okay, I should have made it more clear = that I was spouting out my own personal biases and my attempts to focus = Irreantum, not attempting to represent the AML board, of which I am not = even a voting member, just a staff member. And I should have made it = more clear that I welcome people disagreeing with me as a handful have = been doing, so I can learn and alter my biases as needed. I should have = worded my post more as an opening exploratory salvo than as a = declarative statement.

I have absolutely nothing to do with the AML awards, = only with Irreantum. And I'm by no means a dictator at Irreantum; often = I don't even read the stuff the other editors gather until it's in the = proofing stage, and I can count on one hand the number of pieces I've = kicked back during the magazine's three years.

I'm willing to admit that my use of the term = "belletristic" isn't quite right and that certainly biography = and other forms of nonfiction writing have literary value and = dimensions. However, they are not primarily ART, I argue. I still think = the AML would do better to narrow its exclusive focus rather than = overlap any more than absolutely necessary with the Mormon History = Assoc., Dialogue, Sunstone, FARMS, etc.

I maintain that there is plenty of material within = the strict genres of fiction (in all its many forms), puh-puh-poetry = (swallow), fictional film, fictional drama, and creative nonfiction to = keep us occupied as far as AML awards and publications, and that's the = bias I'll probably continue to voice whenever we have discussions about = focus. (And by the way, it's all I can do to use that nebulous term = "creative nonfiction" rather than the term I greatly prefer: = memoir. And by "memoir" I want to limit it to mean = "autobiographical novel and short story," or at least = primarily in that mode even if other forms of writing are mixed into = it.) I've learned that keeping things simple, defined, focused, and = clear is more powerful than being too nebulous.

In fact, I've toyed many times with changing = Irreantum's subhead to "Exploring Mormon Fiction, Film, Drama, = Poetry, and Memoir" rather than just "Exploring Mormon = Literature," and I may still do that some day soon, especially if = the magazine keeps thickening in page count. Any nonfiction material we = publish should be essays or reviews ABOUT fiction, film, drama, poetry, = and memoir, and leave the rest of "creative nonfiction" and = "Mormon literature" to Sunstone, Dialogue, BYU Studies, etc. = What do you think of that, as least as far as Irreantum = goes?

I work as a marketing copywriter right now for a = company that just can't get its focus straight. They have almost 200 = products, they have three or more different main offices with competing = cultures, and they have their toes in several different industries. = They can't seem to decide their focus and identity very well. I see = some potential overlap along those same lines with AML. I really want = Irreantum, at least, to have a very distinctive focus and mission, and = I get very uncomfortable whenever it starts to overlap with these other = venues. Why go to the effort of duplicating what others are already = doing as well or better?

However, I'm certain that most, if not all, AML board = members don't see it like I do, and that's fine. I can just tend my = part of the garden the way I see fit, and other Irreantum editors can = plant the occasional off-focus shrubbery in the mag if they really need = to, although that's the first stuff I'll cut if the magazine gets too = fat or the focus starts veering WAY off.

Personally, I don't think I've ever read anything yet = by Nibley. I don't read many books inside Mormonism beyond some = fiction, although I avidly and fairly thoroughly read nearly all the = Mormon periodicals (the main exception is the history one put out by = the MHA). It seems like the books I've been reading most in the past = few years are nationally published memoirs.

------_=_NextPart_001_01C2CFC8.93D76190-- -- Irreantum Editor's Discussion List ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Travis K. Manning" Subject: Re: [irr-ed] Focus of AML & Irreantum Date: 08 Feb 2003 16:05:48 -0800 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_001D_01C2CF8B.F22E0060 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Focus of AML & IrreantumChris, So, you are thinking of renaming the sub-title of Irreantum for focus. = Fine with me. Though I still don't know how that focus will create a = better niche for us, with regard to, say, Dialogue, which publishes = poetry, fiction, personal essays/memoir. For that matter, BYU Studies = also has personal essays and poetry, as does Sunstone. I see several threads in your rant and I can't tell which is the = main/important thread. This email seems like more of a journal entry, = working out frustrations, than containing any sort of definitive = suggestion. Are you just trying to "pick a fight" on several fronts = because you had a bad day at work? I'm halfway joking, but halfway not. If the real issue here is How do we make Irreantum substantively better? = then perhaps we ought to have some professionals, outside our closed = group (or some in, some out) critique our mag within the context of = other Mormon literary mags. Let's make Irreantum stand apart, I agree. = I, myself, just started reading Sunstone, Dialogue, and BYU Studies a = couple months ago so am not intimately familiar with their content. = Yes, there seem to be many similarities: poetry, personal essays, book = and movie reviews, some fiction. How different do we want to be? How = similar? Instead of nixing all creative nonfiction, I'd like to see Irreantum do = more! What about more: nature writing, travel writing, oral history, = diaries/journals, radio commentary, literary biography, cross-cultural = writing, political writing, historical and science writing. Why can't Irreantum do things the other literary mags aren't. For = example: CD-ROM movie and music reviews, translations of all genre of = literary letters, transcripts from interesting interviews with artists = in all genre of art (painters, sculptures, pottery, etc.), new song = lyrics and actual music (don't know how to describe that technically), = color photos of other non-text art. Why can't Irreantum explore more = genres, reach out, skim the best of the best in other artisitic endeavor = for a versatile mag, which the other mags do not approach. Perhaps we = should move to a bigger size of page, to allow for more. Just mixin' it up, Travis Manning ****************** ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Christopher Bigelow=20 To: 'irreantum-ed@lists.xmission.com'=20 Sent: Saturday, February 08, 2003 3:19 PM Subject: [irr-ed] Focus of AML & Irreantum I've been ranting and raving a little on AML-List about the AML's = focus and Irreantum's focus, and in case any of you have missed that, = I'm pasting my latest post below, because I'd like to find out where and = how people would press back on me, both with regards to AML and to the = magazine: Yeah, yeah, okay, I should have made it more clear that I was spouting = out my own personal biases and my attempts to focus Irreantum, not = attempting to represent the AML board, of which I am not even a voting = member, just a staff member. And I should have made it more clear that I = welcome people disagreeing with me as a handful have been doing, so I = can learn and alter my biases as needed. I should have worded my post = more as an opening exploratory salvo than as a declarative statement. I have absolutely nothing to do with the AML awards, only with = Irreantum. And I'm by no means a dictator at Irreantum; often I don't = even read the stuff the other editors gather until it's in the proofing = stage, and I can count on one hand the number of pieces I've kicked back = during the magazine's three years.=20 I'm willing to admit that my use of the term "belletristic" isn't = quite right and that certainly biography and other forms of nonfiction = writing have literary value and dimensions. However, they are not = primarily ART, I argue. I still think the AML would do better to narrow = its exclusive focus rather than overlap any more than absolutely = necessary with the Mormon History Assoc., Dialogue, Sunstone, FARMS, = etc. I maintain that there is plenty of material within the strict genres = of fiction (in all its many forms), puh-puh-poetry (swallow), fictional = film, fictional drama, and creative nonfiction to keep us occupied as = far as AML awards and publications, and that's the bias I'll probably = continue to voice whenever we have discussions about focus. (And by the = way, it's all I can do to use that nebulous term "creative nonfiction" = rather than the term I greatly prefer: memoir. And by "memoir" I want to = limit it to mean "autobiographical novel and short story," or at least = primarily in that mode even if other forms of writing are mixed into = it.) I've learned that keeping things simple, defined, focused, and = clear is more powerful than being too nebulous.=20 In fact, I've toyed many times with changing Irreantum's subhead to = "Exploring Mormon Fiction, Film, Drama, Poetry, and Memoir" rather than = just "Exploring Mormon Literature," and I may still do that some day = soon, especially if the magazine keeps thickening in page count. Any = nonfiction material we publish should be essays or reviews ABOUT = fiction, film, drama, poetry, and memoir, and leave the rest of = "creative nonfiction" and "Mormon literature" to Sunstone, Dialogue, BYU = Studies, etc. What do you think of that, as least as far as Irreantum = goes? I work as a marketing copywriter right now for a company that just = can't get its focus straight. They have almost 200 products, they have = three or more different main offices with competing cultures, and they = have their toes in several different industries. They can't seem to = decide their focus and identity very well. I see some potential overlap = along those same lines with AML. I really want Irreantum, at least, to = have a very distinctive focus and mission, and I get very uncomfortable = whenever it starts to overlap with these other venues. Why go to the = effort of duplicating what others are already doing as well or better? However, I'm certain that most, if not all, AML board members don't = see it like I do, and that's fine. I can just tend my part of the garden = the way I see fit, and other Irreantum editors can plant the occasional = off-focus shrubbery in the mag if they really need to, although that's = the first stuff I'll cut if the magazine gets too fat or the focus = starts veering WAY off. Personally, I don't think I've ever read anything yet by Nibley. I = don't read many books inside Mormonism beyond some fiction, although I = avidly and fairly thoroughly read nearly all the Mormon periodicals (the = main exception is the history one put out by the MHA). It seems like the = books I've been reading most in the past few years are nationally = published memoirs. ------=_NextPart_000_001D_01C2CF8B.F22E0060 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Focus of AML & Irreantum
Chris,
 
So, you are thinking of renaming the sub-title of = Irreantum=20 for focus.  Fine with me.  Though I still don't know how that = focus=20 will create a better niche for us, with regard to, say, Dialogue, which=20 publishes poetry, fiction, personal essays/memoir.  For that = matter, BYU=20 Studies also has personal essays and poetry, as does = Sunstone.
 
I see several threads in your rant and I can't tell = which is=20 the main/important thread.  This email seems like more of = a=20 journal entry, working out frustrations, than containing any sort of = definitive=20 suggestion.  Are you just trying to "pick a fight" on several = fronts=20 because you had a bad day at work?  I'm halfway joking, but halfway = not.
 
If the real issue here is How do we make Irreantum=20 substantively better? then perhaps we ought to have some professionals, = outside=20 our closed group (or some in, some out) critique our mag within the = context of=20 other Mormon literary mags.  Let's make Irreantum stand apart, I=20 agree.  I, myself, just started reading Sunstone, Dialogue, and BYU = Studies=20 a couple months ago so am not intimately familiar with their = content.  Yes,=20 there seem to be many similarities:  poetry, personal essays, book = and=20 movie reviews, some fiction.  How different do we want to be?  = How=20 similar?
 
Instead of nixing all creative nonfiction, I'd like = to see=20 Irreantum do more!  What about more:  nature writing, travel = writing,=20 oral history, diaries/journals, radio commentary, literary biography,=20 cross-cultural writing, political writing, historical and science=20 writing.
 
Why can't Irreantum do things the other literary = mags=20 aren't.  For example:  CD-ROM movie and music=20 reviews, translations of all genre of literary letters,=20 transcripts from interesting interviews with artists in all genre = of art=20 (painters, sculptures, pottery, etc.), new song lyrics and actual music = (don't=20 know how to describe that technically), color photos of other non-text=20 art.  Why can't Irreantum explore more genres, reach out, skim the = best of=20 the best in other artisitic endeavor for a versatile mag, which the = other mags=20 do not approach.  Perhaps we should move to a bigger size of = page, to=20 allow for more.
 
Just mixin' it up,
 
Travis Manning
 
******************
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Christopher = Bigelow
To: 'irreantum-ed@lists.xmi= ssion.com'=20
Sent: Saturday, February 08, = 2003 3:19=20 PM
Subject: [irr-ed] Focus of AML = &=20 Irreantum

I've been ranting and raving a little on AML-List = about the=20 AML's focus and Irreantum's focus, and in case any of you have missed = that,=20 I'm pasting my latest post below, because I'd like to find out where = and how=20 people would press back on me, both with regards to AML and to the=20 magazine:

Yeah, yeah, okay, I should have made it more clear = that I was=20 spouting out my own personal biases and my attempts to focus = Irreantum, not=20 attempting to represent the AML board, of which I am not even a voting = member,=20 just a staff member. And I should have made it more clear that I = welcome=20 people disagreeing with me as a handful have been doing, so I can = learn and=20 alter my biases as needed. I should have worded my post more as an = opening=20 exploratory salvo than as a declarative statement.

I have absolutely nothing to do with the AML awards, = only with=20 Irreantum. And I'm by no means a dictator at Irreantum; often I don't = even=20 read the stuff the other editors gather until it's in the proofing = stage, and=20 I can count on one hand the number of pieces I've kicked back during = the=20 magazine's three years.

I'm willing to admit that my use of the term = "belletristic"=20 isn't quite right and that certainly biography and other forms of = nonfiction=20 writing have literary value and dimensions. However, they are not = primarily=20 ART, I argue. I still think the AML would do better to narrow its = exclusive=20 focus rather than overlap any more than absolutely necessary with the = Mormon=20 History Assoc., Dialogue, Sunstone, FARMS, etc.

I maintain that there is plenty of material within = the strict=20 genres of fiction (in all its many forms), puh-puh-poetry (swallow), = fictional=20 film, fictional drama, and creative nonfiction to keep us occupied as = far as=20 AML awards and publications, and that's the bias I'll probably = continue to=20 voice whenever we have discussions about focus. (And by the way, it's = all I=20 can do to use that nebulous term "creative nonfiction" rather than the = term I=20 greatly prefer: memoir. And by "memoir" I want to limit it to mean=20 "autobiographical novel and short story," or at least primarily in = that mode=20 even if other forms of writing are mixed into it.) I've learned that = keeping=20 things simple, defined, focused, and clear is more powerful than being = too=20 nebulous.

In fact, I've toyed many times with changing = Irreantum's=20 subhead to "Exploring Mormon Fiction, Film, Drama, Poetry, and Memoir" = rather=20 than just "Exploring Mormon Literature," and I may still do that some = day=20 soon, especially if the magazine keeps thickening in page count. Any=20 nonfiction material we publish should be essays or reviews ABOUT = fiction,=20 film, drama, poetry, and memoir, and leave the rest of "creative = nonfiction"=20 and "Mormon literature" to Sunstone, Dialogue, BYU Studies, etc. What = do you=20 think of that, as least as far as Irreantum goes?

I work as a marketing copywriter right now for a = company that=20 just can't get its focus straight. They have almost 200 products, they = have=20 three or more different main offices with competing cultures, and they = have=20 their toes in several different industries. They can't seem to decide = their=20 focus and identity very well. I see some potential overlap along those = same=20 lines with AML. I really want Irreantum, at least, to have a very = distinctive=20 focus and mission, and I get very uncomfortable whenever it starts to = overlap=20 with these other venues. Why go to the effort of duplicating what = others are=20 already doing as well or better?

However, I'm certain that most, if not all, AML = board members=20 don't see it like I do, and that's fine. I can just tend my part of = the garden=20 the way I see fit, and other Irreantum editors can plant the = occasional=20 off-focus shrubbery in the mag if they really need to, although that's = the=20 first stuff I'll cut if the magazine gets too fat or the focus starts = veering=20 WAY off.

Personally, I don't think I've ever read anything = yet by=20 Nibley. I don't read many books inside Mormonism beyond some fiction, = although=20 I avidly and fairly thoroughly read nearly all the Mormon periodicals = (the=20 main exception is the history one put out by the MHA). It seems like = the books=20 I've been reading most in the past few years are nationally published=20 memoirs.

------=_NextPart_000_001D_01C2CF8B.F22E0060-- -- Irreantum Editor's Discussion List ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jonathan Langford Subject: Re: [irr-ed] Focus of AML & Irreantum Date: 08 Feb 2003 18:20:49 -0600 Chris, I'm not on Irreantum's board at present, so I doubt that I should even be allowed a "vote." But for what it's worth, I think I agree with you pretty much to a T when it comes to what Irreantum's focus ought to be (and the AML awards, for that matter). AML-List is the most freewheeling of all the AML venues, but I don't think that its broad focus should be taken as defining the scope of the venues where money and the "AML brand name" are involved: i.e., Irreantum and the awards. I wouldn't change the "Mormon Literature" subhead for Irreantum: I think that shorter is better, and honestly, I think the "Mormon literature" communicates the narrower focus better and more clearly than spelling out the genres would do. I also think that it's only a small (but vocal) group who keep wanting AML to devote more attention to devotional/doctrinal/historical/etc. works. A bee in a few people's bonnets. It would be interesting to do a reader-use survey to find out what sections of Irreantum attract the most attention. If growing page count is an issue, I would start thinking very seriously about getting rid of AML-List highlights, unless feedback shows that this is a favorite with people. We've seen recently, I think, how pieces run on AML-List can be picked up and used as "core" items by those in different departments, or as relevant to specific themes. That function could certainly continue (with possible mini-highlights sections on specific discussions--call it an electronic panel discussion or something) as desired. I think some kind of survey of our core audience (conducted, perhaps, via AML-List?) might be very worthwhile. Anyway, I agree with you completely about Irreantum's focus on bellelettristic literature (for lack of a better term), though I would make sure to keep a focus also on the general LDS publishing world. To the degree there's overlap with Dialogue and Sunstone and BYU Studies, I would say that this would be because they're overlapping with us, rather than vice versa (being, in all three cases, really rather broader in their focus, though not necessarily audience, than we want to be). Jonathan jlangfor@pressenter.com -- Irreantum Editor's Discussion List ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "D. Michael Martindale" Subject: Re: [irr-ed] Theme issues Date: 09 Feb 2003 07:45:22 -0700 Travis K. Manning wrote: > Michael, > > Laraine Wilkins will defend Singles Ward. It's not brilliant. But it's > constructive. It is an "other" voice. Are you saying that you've been in touch with Laraine and she has agreed to write a piece defending "Singles Ward" or has agreed to let us use her AML-List entry? If so, I would ask that she submit it to me so I can include it in my submissions. -- D. Michael Martindale dmichael@wwno.com ================================== Check out Worldsmiths, the new online LDS writers group, at http://www.wwno.com/worldsmiths Sponsored by Worlds Without Number http://www.wwno.com ================================== -- Irreantum Editor's Discussion List ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Travis K. Manning" Subject: Re: [irr-ed] Theme issues Date: 09 Feb 2003 22:43:29 -0800 D. Michael, I have not been in contact with Laraine Wilkins. Just saw her comments and had the notion. Travis *************** ----- Original Message ----- Sent: Sunday, February 09, 2003 6:45 AM > Travis K. Manning wrote: > > > Michael, > > > > Laraine Wilkins will defend Singles Ward. It's not brilliant. But it's > > constructive. It is an "other" voice. > > Are you saying that you've been in touch with Laraine and she has agreed > to write a piece defending "Singles Ward" or has agreed to let us use > her AML-List entry? If so, I would ask that she submit it to me so I can > include it in my submissions. > > -- > D. Michael Martindale > dmichael@wwno.com > > ================================== > Check out Worldsmiths, the new online LDS writers group, at > http://www.wwno.com/worldsmiths > > Sponsored by Worlds Without Number > http://www.wwno.com > ================================== > > > -- > Irreantum Editor's Discussion List > -- Irreantum Editor's Discussion List ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "D. Michael Martindale" Subject: Re: [irr-ed] Focus of AML & Irreantum Date: 10 Feb 2003 13:35:54 -0700 Jonathan Langford wrote: > I wouldn't change the "Mormon Literature" subhead for Irreantum: I think > that shorter is better, and honestly, I think the "Mormon literature" > communicates the narrower focus better and more clearly than spelling out > the genres would do. What about "Mormon Literary Arts"? -- D. Michael Martindale dmichael@wwno.com ================================== Check out Worldsmiths, the new online LDS writers group, at http://www.wwno.com/worldsmiths Sponsored by Worlds Without Number http://www.wwno.com ================================== -- Irreantum Editor's Discussion List ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Christopher Bigelow Subject: RE: [irr-ed] Focus of AML & Irreantum Date: 10 Feb 2003 18:00:05 -0700 This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C2D168.EA016880 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Thanks for this feedback, Travis. Here's some responses: <<< So, you are thinking of renaming the sub-title of Irreantum for focus. Fine with me. Though I still don't know how that focus will create a better niche for us, with regard to, say, Dialogue, which publishes poetry, fiction, personal essays/memoir. For that matter, BYU Studies also has personal essays and poetry, as does Sunstone. >>> Today I'm thinking I'll leave the subhead alone. I do want Irreantum to become the preeminent fiction outlet, and I'd like to get all the best stuff on the memoir side of the personal essay spectrum. I'd like to see us become so preeminent in fiction that Dialogue and Sunstone let go of that rope and start directing fiction writers our way. (Wishful thinking, I know.) <<< I see several threads in your rant and I can't tell which is the main/important thread. This email seems like more of a journal entry, working out frustrations, than containing any sort of definitive suggestion. Are you just trying to "pick a fight" on several fronts because you had a bad day at work? I'm halfway joking, but halfway not. >>> It was an exploratory post, not a decision-making post. And yes, I'm surrounded by lack of focus in my life right now, not only at the company where I work but also in the freshman papers I was working with last week. Irreantum is the venue where I have the most potential control over matter unorganized, so maybe I'm channeling all my peevishness there. Sorry! I come across much less peevish in person even when passionate, so forgive me my e-mail excesses. <<< If the real issue here is How do we make Irreantum substantively better? then perhaps we ought to have some professionals, outside our closed group (or some in, some out) critique our mag within the context of other Mormon literary mags. Let's make Irreantum stand apart, I agree. I, myself, just started reading Sunstone, Dialogue, and BYU Studies a couple months ago so am not intimately familiar with their content. Yes, there seem to be many similarities: poetry, personal essays, book and movie reviews, some fiction. How different do we want to be? How similar? >>> I would love to get some critiques of Irreantum; there's been precious little so far, which sometimes makes me wonder if anyone is reading the mag. I don't see any of the other LDS mags as strictly "literary mags," and that's the niche I want Irreantum to fill. When people think of Mormon fiction and other literary arts, I want them to look to Irreantum first. <<< Instead of nixing all creative nonfiction, I'd like to see Irreantum do more! What about more: nature writing, travel writing, oral history, diaries/journals, radio commentary, literary biography, cross-cultural writing, political writing, historical and science writing. >>> I don't want to nix all creative nonfiction, but I want us to focus on that which most resembles fiction in style and technique, mostly in the memoir area. I'm most definitely NOT interested in most of the categories you list; other pubs are already handling those. I'm not interested in another general-interest Mormon intellectual publication. <<< Why can't Irreantum do things the other literary mags aren't. For example: CD-ROM movie and music reviews, translations of all genre of literary letters, transcripts from interesting interviews with artists in all genre of art (painters, sculptures, pottery, etc.), new song lyrics and actual music (don't know how to describe that technically), color photos of other non-text art. Why can't Irreantum explore more genres, reach out, skim the best of the best in other artisitic endeavor for a versatile mag, which the other mags do not approach. Perhaps we should move to a bigger size of page, to allow for more. >>> I don't want to touch music with a ten-foot pole, unless it's the occasional lyric-focused thing (which is essentially poetry). I'm vehemently opposed to becoming a general arts magazine; however, I would love to get an art director on board who could bring in some visual elements to support the magazine (and I wouldn't want to just highlight random artists like Dialogue does; it would need to be directly tied to our content, like Sunstone does a pretty good job with). I would love to run literary translations, but is there any Mormon literature being written in other languages? ------_=_NextPart_001_01C2D168.EA016880 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable RE: [irr-ed] Focus of AML & Irreantum

Thanks for this feedback, Travis. Here's some = responses:

<<<
So, you are thinking of renaming the sub-title of = Irreantum for focus.  Fine with me.  Though I still don't = know how that focus will create a better niche for us, with regard to, = say, Dialogue, which publishes poetry, fiction, personal = essays/memoir.  For that matter, BYU Studies also has personal = essays and poetry, as does Sunstone.

>>>

Today I'm thinking I'll leave the subhead alone. I do = want Irreantum to become the preeminent fiction outlet, and I'd like to = get all the best stuff on the memoir side of the personal essay = spectrum. I'd like to see us become so preeminent in fiction that = Dialogue and Sunstone let go of that rope and start directing fiction = writers our way. (Wishful thinking, I know.)

<<<
I see several threads in your rant and I can't tell = which is the main/important thread.  This email seems like more of = a journal entry, working out frustrations, than containing any sort of = definitive suggestion.  Are you just trying to "pick a = fight" on several fronts because you had a bad day at work?  = I'm halfway joking, but halfway not.

>>>

It was an exploratory post, not a decision-making = post. And yes, I'm surrounded by lack of focus in my life right now, = not only at the company where I work but also in the freshman papers I = was working with last week. Irreantum is the venue where I have the = most potential control over matter unorganized, so maybe I'm channeling = all my peevishness there. Sorry! I come across much less peevish in = person even when passionate, so forgive me my e-mail = excesses.

<<<
If the real issue here is How do we make Irreantum = substantively better? then perhaps we ought to have some professionals, = outside our closed group (or some in, some out) critique our mag within = the context of other Mormon literary mags.  Let's make Irreantum = stand apart, I agree.  I, myself, just started reading Sunstone, = Dialogue, and BYU Studies a couple months ago so am not intimately = familiar with their content.  Yes, there seem to be many = similarities:  poetry, personal essays, book and movie reviews, = some fiction.  How different do we want to be?  How = similar?

>>>

I would love to get some critiques of Irreantum; = there's been precious little so far, which sometimes makes me wonder if = anyone is reading the mag. I don't see any of the other LDS mags as = strictly "literary mags," and that's the niche I want = Irreantum to fill. When people think of Mormon fiction and other = literary arts, I want them to look to Irreantum first.

<<<
Instead of nixing all creative nonfiction, I'd like = to see Irreantum do more!  What about more:  nature writing, = travel writing, oral history, diaries/journals, radio commentary, = literary biography, cross-cultural writing, political writing, = historical and science writing.

>>>

I don't want to nix all creative nonfiction, but I = want us to focus on that which most resembles fiction in style and = technique, mostly in the memoir area. I'm most definitely NOT = interested in most of the categories you list; other pubs are already = handling those. I'm not interested in another general-interest Mormon = intellectual publication.

<<<
Why can't Irreantum do things the other literary = mags aren't.  For example:  CD-ROM movie and music reviews, = translations of all genre of literary letters, transcripts from = interesting interviews with artists in all genre of art (painters, = sculptures, pottery, etc.), new song lyrics and actual music (don't = know how to describe that technically), color photos of other non-text = art.  Why can't Irreantum explore more genres, reach out, skim the = best of the best in other artisitic endeavor for a versatile mag, which = the other mags do not approach.  Perhaps we should move to a = bigger size of page, to allow for more.

>>>

I don't want to touch music with a ten-foot pole, = unless it's the occasional lyric-focused thing (which is essentially = poetry). I'm vehemently opposed to becoming a general arts magazine; = however, I would love to get an art director on board who could bring = in some visual elements to support the magazine (and I wouldn't want to = just highlight random artists like Dialogue does; it would need to be = directly tied to our content, like Sunstone does a pretty good job = with). I would love to run literary translations, but is there any = Mormon literature being written in other languages?

------_=_NextPart_001_01C2D168.EA016880-- -- Irreantum Editor's Discussion List ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Christopher Bigelow Subject: RE: [irr-ed] Focus of AML & Irreantum Date: 10 Feb 2003 18:59:58 -0700 This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C2D171.47985370 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" I think the idea of a survey would be great, but I bet there's only a small percentage of our readers who are on AML-List, so we'd probably need to do it by mail. Does anybody want to take a first crack at drawing up a survey for our subscribers? -----Original Message----- Sent: Saturday, February 08, 2003 5:21 PM Chris, I'm not on Irreantum's board at present, so I doubt that I should even be allowed a "vote." But for what it's worth, I think I agree with you pretty much to a T when it comes to what Irreantum's focus ought to be (and the AML awards, for that matter). AML-List is the most freewheeling of all the AML venues, but I don't think that its broad focus should be taken as defining the scope of the venues where money and the "AML brand name" are involved: i.e., Irreantum and the awards. I wouldn't change the "Mormon Literature" subhead for Irreantum: I think that shorter is better, and honestly, I think the "Mormon literature" communicates the narrower focus better and more clearly than spelling out the genres would do. I also think that it's only a small (but vocal) group who keep wanting AML to devote more attention to devotional/doctrinal/historical/etc. works. A bee in a few people's bonnets. It would be interesting to do a reader-use survey to find out what sections of Irreantum attract the most attention. If growing page count is an issue, I would start thinking very seriously about getting rid of AML-List highlights, unless feedback shows that this is a favorite with people. We've seen recently, I think, how pieces run on AML-List can be picked up and used as "core" items by those in different departments, or as relevant to specific themes. That function could certainly continue (with possible mini-highlights sections on specific discussions--call it an electronic panel discussion or something) as desired. I think some kind of survey of our core audience (conducted, perhaps, via AML-List?) might be very worthwhile. Anyway, I agree with you completely about Irreantum's focus on bellelettristic literature (for lack of a better term), though I would make sure to keep a focus also on the general LDS publishing world. To the degree there's overlap with Dialogue and Sunstone and BYU Studies, I would say that this would be because they're overlapping with us, rather than vice versa (being, in all three cases, really rather broader in their focus, though not necessarily audience, than we want to be). Jonathan jlangfor@pressenter.com -- Irreantum Editor's Discussion List ------_=_NextPart_001_01C2D171.47985370 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable RE: [irr-ed] Focus of AML & Irreantum

I think the idea of a survey would be great, but I = bet there's only a small percentage of our readers who are on AML-List, = so we'd probably need to do it by mail.

Does anybody want to take a first crack at drawing up = a survey for our subscribers?

-----Original Message-----
From: Jonathan Langford [mailto:jlangfor@pressenter.com]
Sent: Saturday, February 08, 2003 5:21 PM
To: irreantum-ed@lists.xmission.com
Subject: Re: [irr-ed] Focus of AML & = Irreantum


Chris,

I'm not on Irreantum's board at present, so I doubt = that I should even be
allowed a "vote."  But for what it's = worth, I think I agree with you pretty
much to a T when it comes to what Irreantum's focus = ought to be (and the
AML awards, for that matter).  AML-List is the = most freewheeling of all the
AML venues, but I don't think that its broad focus = should be taken as
defining the scope of the venues where money and the = "AML brand name" are
involved: i.e., Irreantum and the awards.

I wouldn't change the "Mormon Literature" = subhead for Irreantum: I think
that shorter is better, and honestly, I think the = "Mormon literature"
communicates the narrower focus better and more = clearly than spelling out
the genres would do.

I also think that it's only a small (but vocal) group = who keep wanting AML
to devote more attention to = devotional/doctrinal/historical/etc. works.  A
bee in a few people's bonnets.

It would be interesting to do a reader-use survey to = find out what sections
of Irreantum attract the most attention.  If = growing page count is an
issue, I would start thinking very seriously about = getting rid of AML-List
highlights, unless feedback shows that this is a = favorite with people.
We've seen recently, I think, how pieces run on = AML-List can be picked up
and used as "core" items by those in = different departments, or as relevant
to specific themes.  That function could = certainly continue (with possible
mini-highlights sections on specific = discussions--call it an electronic
panel discussion or something) as desired.

I think some kind of survey of our core audience = (conducted, perhaps, via
AML-List?) might be very worthwhile.

Anyway, I agree with you completely about Irreantum's = focus on
bellelettristic literature (for lack of a better = term), though I would make
sure to keep a focus also on the general LDS = publishing world.  To the
degree there's overlap with Dialogue and Sunstone = and BYU Studies, I would
say that this would be because they're overlapping = with us, rather than
vice versa (being, in all three cases, really rather = broader in their
focus, though not necessarily audience, than we want = to be).

Jonathan

jlangfor@pressenter.com



--
Irreantum Editor's Discussion List = <irreantum-ed@lists.xmission.com>

------_=_NextPart_001_01C2D171.47985370-- -- Irreantum Editor's Discussion List ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Christopher Bigelow Subject: [irr-ed] FW: (aml-board) Singles Ward and Irreantum Date: 14 Feb 2003 15:48:30 -0700 This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C2D47B.321AFA90 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" -----Original Message----- Sent: Thursday, February 13, 2003 12:43 PM Scott Parkin's recent addition to AML-List's discussion on "Singles Ward" finally inspired me to want to do an article for Irreantum on this debate with varying opinions presented. The AML-List discussion is a great base to build from. I'd like to invite those that participated to modify their e-mail messages into article form and submit them or to have me do it for them and let them approve the results. The only problem is I haven't been keeping track of the messages. That, after all, is Marny's job as AML-List Highlights editor, and I'm happy to avoid doing other people's work. So, Marny, would it be too difficult for you to forward to me all the entries in the AML-List "Singles Ward" discussion so I can get to work on this? And that would be one less topic you have to worry about for AML-List Highlights. -- D. Michael Martindale dmichael@wwno.com ================================== Check out Worldsmiths, the new online LDS writers group, at http://www.wwno.com/worldsmiths Sponsored by Worlds Without Number http://www.wwno.com ================================== -- AML-Board discussion list AML Board Admin Site: http://www.aml-online.org/admin/index.html ------_=_NextPart_001_01C2D47B.321AFA90 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable FW: (aml-board) Singles Ward and Irreantum

-----Original Message-----
From: D. Michael Martindale [mailto:dmichael@wwno.com]
Sent: Thursday, February 13, 2003 12:43 PM
To: aml-board@lists.xmission.com
Subject: (aml-board) Singles Ward and = Irreantum


Scott Parkin's recent addition to AML-List's = discussion on "Singles
Ward" finally inspired me to want to do an = article for Irreantum on this
debate with varying opinions presented. The AML-List = discussion is a
great base to build from. I'd like to invite those = that participated to
modify their e-mail messages into article form and = submit them or to
have me do it for them and let them approve the = results.

The only problem is I haven't been keeping track of = the messages. That,
after all, is Marny's job as AML-List Highlights = editor, and I'm happy
to avoid doing other people's work.

So, Marny, would it be too difficult for you to = forward to me all the
entries in the AML-List "Singles Ward" = discussion so I can get to work
on this? And that would be one less topic you have = to worry about for
AML-List Highlights.

--
D. Michael Martindale
dmichael@wwno.com

=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
Check out Worldsmiths, the new online LDS writers = group, at
http://www.wwno.com/worldsmiths

Sponsored by Worlds Without Number
http://www.wwno.com
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D


--
AML-Board discussion list
  AML Board Admin Site: http://www.aml-online.org/admin/index.html

------_=_NextPart_001_01C2D47B.321AFA90-- -- Irreantum Editor's Discussion List ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Travis K. Manning" Subject: [irr-ed] Fw: [AML-Mag] Re: [AML] Singles Ward Date: 14 Feb 2003 23:34:12 -0800 Michael, Here's a comment by Dutcher. Travis ************** ----- Original Message ----- Sent: Friday, January 17, 2003 5:55 PM > In a message dated 1/17/03 4:15:02 PM Mountain Standard Time, > ersamuel@byugate.byu.edu writes: > > << At that point, I decided that I didn't want to be a Mormon anymore, and I > was sad about it, because I generally like being a Mormon, and I love my job, > which I was now going to have to quit. >> > > I've decided to finally join in the "Singles Ward" discussion. I've > restrained myself for several months simply because I thought that any of my > highly critical comments could easily be interpreted as sour grapes from a > fellow Mormon director. After all, you don't read critiques of Spielberg > films from Martin Scorcese (although, frankly, such critiques would be far > more valuable and insightful than reviews from journalists who have never had > the filmmaking experience). > > Unlike Eric, after seeing "Singles Ward" I did not want to give up Mormonism. > I did, however, want to hang myself. Remember: I was in the so-called "film" > for twenty seconds or so. And, it's true, if I hadn't made "God's Army," this > crime against our culture would never have existed. > > I thought the movie started well with a cute title sequence. The first few > minutes were engaging, and then it all went to hell. I did not recognize > these caricatures as any Mormons that I have ever known. And, yes, I was in a > singles ward for three years. Some of the movie "Mormons" may have dressed > the same, but aside than that, they were aliens to me. They didn't speak, > walk, or interact like real human beings. > > Before I continue, let me state that I love movie comedies as a genre. To > give examples: I loved "Arthur," "Dirty Rotten Scoundrels," "Young > Frankenstein," "Liar, Liar." I even enjoy stupid, brainless comedy like "The > Man With Two Brains," "Dumb and Dumber," "Airplane," and "Monty Python and > the Holy Grail." > > I love comedy. I love to laugh. And this is where "Singles Ward" fails most > miserably. It simply isn't funny. Okay, sure. There are a couple of gags that > made me smile: the kid being called to Boise on his mission and actually > being excited about it and...there must be another one. Maybe not. > > In my opinion, a good LDS comedy would make all sorts of people laugh (not > just BYU students) and would leave the audience feeling an affection for at > least one or two of the characters in the movie. And (dare I say it?) it > might even attempt to shed some light on our human experience. > > I'm devoting too much time to this movie. It has already wasted three hours > of my life. (I had to watch it twice!). Let's speed things up: > > Performances: the otherwise flat female lead found some real emotion in the > parking lot of the comedy club, and the Idaho missionary had a couple of cute > moments. The male lead was handsome and, initially, likable. I suspect he's a > good actor and, in another film, could give a strong performance. Oddly, on > my second viewing, I found his performance somewhat irritating. The cameos > were pointless and clumsy. > > Camera Work: serviceable. > > Sound: fine. > > Wardrobe: whatever. > > Music: oh my gosh. Sometimes I thought I was watching a "Tom and Jerry" > cartoon. > > Screenplay: a string of gags, most of which fell flat to me. No real > character development. And I thought the male lead's "epiphany" at the end > was a disservice to the character. He didn't return to active Mormonism > because of any new spiritual understanding, he returned to Mormonism > because...well, that's just who he was. He passed the sacrament, he went on a > mission, he knows a bunch of Mormons...it's time to get back in line. Pretty > weak reasons. > > Also, the movie clearly meant to be a romantic comedy. I've already addressed > the problem of the nonexistent comedy. Where was the romance? Where was the > chemistry? Where, oh where, was the climactic embrace when the characters > finally overcame the obstacles and became "one?" Oh yeah, it happened > off-screen. If only the rest of the movie had happened off-screen. > > I did not, even for a moment, identify with the characters or care at all > what happened to them. I thought the gags with the cops (the tasting of the > laundry detergent and the stakeout behind the shrubbery) were painfully > unsuccessful. In truth, I thought 90% of the gags were painfully > unsuccessful. > > In summary, I was embarrassed for everyone associated with the film > (especially me) and I was embarrassed that non-Mormons might somehow > accidentally see this movie. It made us look shallow, self-righteous, and > untalented. It had nothing excellent about it. > > You know, I've heard it said that if "Fiddler on the Roof" had been made and > distributed worldwide in the 1930's, maybe the world would not have allowed > the attempted extermination of the Jews in the 1940's. > > I fear that, if the world believes that Mormons are like those in "The > Singles Ward," they might decide genocide is not such a bad idea after all. > > Richard Dutcher > > > > > - > AML-List Magazine, a daily selection of posts from AML-List. > See AML-List archives at http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm > -- Irreantum Editor's Discussion List ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Travis K. Manning" Subject: [irr-ed] Fw: [AML-Mag] Re: [AML] Singles Ward Date: 14 Feb 2003 23:35:51 -0800 Michael, Here's article 2 from Dutcher. Travis ************** ----- Original Message ----- Sent: Wednesday, January 22, 2003 12:59 PM > In a message dated 1/21/03 4:26:24 PM Mountain Standard Time, > RichardDutcher@aol.com writes: > > << I've decided to finally join in the "Singles Ward" discussion. >> > > I've been tattled on. Apparently, some of my fellow AML brethren and sisters > couldn't wait to deliver my critique to the folks over at Halestorm. > > So here's the story (I hope the format transfers correctly): > > INT. ZION FILMS - DAY > > The telephone rings. A man is slouching at the computer. He is in his late > 30's. He wears small, silver eyeglasses. He needs a haircut. This is RICHARD > DUTCHER. > > Richard picks up the phone. > > RICHARD > Zion Films. > > The voice on the other end of the phone is a little louder than normal, full > of nervous energy. This is the voice of DAVE, an LDS movie producer. > > DAVE (V.O.) > Is this Richard? > > RICHARD > Yes, it is. > > DAVE (V.O) > Richard, this is Dave Hunter. > > RICHARD > Hey, Dave. > > DAVE (V.O.) > Richard, I gotta tell you. A few different people > have given me a review of "Singles Ward" that > went out over the AML list with your name on it. > > RICHARD > Uh huh. > > DAVE (V.O.) > Richard, did you write this? > > RICHARD > (matter of fact) > Yeah. > > Awkward silence. Dave makes a frustrated noise. > > RICHARD > What's the problem? I didn't say anything > in there that I haven't said to you. > > DAVE (V.O.) > Yeah, well, Richard... > > Another awkward silence. > > DAVE (V.O.) > Onward and upward. > > RICHARD > Okay. > > DAVE (V.O.) > Bye. > > RICHARD > Bye. > > Richard hangs up the phone. He smiles a private, guilty smile, then sighs, > shakes his head, and goes back to work. > > THE END > > So Dave's angry with me now. And probably so are Kurt, John, and the rest of > the "Singles Ward" gang. They're probably not going to invite me to "The > R.M." premiere. Darn it. > > My experiences over the past three years have led me to believe that perhaps > our artistic community has not matured enough to accept criticism. > > I have noticed that when someone (me) criticizes a Jack Weyland novel, many > interpret the criticism as a personal attack on the author. When someone (me > again) criticizes a Halestorm movie, it is taken as a critique of the > filmmakers as human beings. That's messed up. > > By the way, I've met Jack Weyland and he seems to be one of the most sincere, > humble, gentle men I've ever known. In the afterlife, I'll probably be > assigned the task of ironing his celestial robes. (Actually, I wouldn't mind > ironing next to Dave Hunter. He's a very likeable guy.) > > Let me share a lesson I learned 16 years ago in a BYU acting class taught by > the late Tad Danielewski. It is surely the most valuable lesson I learned > from him: > > We were required, of course, to regularly perform scenes and monologues for > the class. Immediately following each of our performances, we were required > to sit in a chair facing the rest of the class. The class would critique the > performance. Often the critiques were merciless. > > We were not allowed to say a word, even when some member of the class said > something completely asinine. We were not allowed to explain our choices. We > were not allowed to defend ourselves. We had to listen. To everyone. Even > after all the critics had finished, we were not allowed to say anything other > than "Thank you." And then we took our seats and watched the next performance. > > As frustrating and difficult as this was, it taught me a great lesson. You > answer your critics not by arguing with them, not by writing them letters or > by calling them on the telephone. You answer them with your next performance. > You defend yourself with your work, not with your mouth. > > You make use of the insightful criticism, you forget the worthless criticism, > and you keep working. > > Let others defend you. And they will, publicly, if you have produced > something of quality. If no one stands up with an intelligent defense of your > work, then maybe it's time to pay attention to the criticism. > > I have yet to see an intelligent response to the criticisms of "The Singles > Ward." > > The best and most appropriate response would be a better movie from the > filmmakers. Let's hope we see it in "The R.M." > > Richard Dutcher > > > > > > > > - > AML-List Magazine, a daily selection of posts from AML-List. > See AML-List archives at http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm > -- Irreantum Editor's Discussion List ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Travis K. Manning" Subject: [irr-ed] Fw: [AML-Mag] Re: [AML] Singles Ward Date: 14 Feb 2003 23:36:45 -0800 Michael, I believe this is article 3 from Dutcher. Travis ***************** ----- Original Message ----- Sent: Monday, January 27, 2003 10:07 PM > In a message dated 1/23/2003 8:41:12 PM Eastern Standard Time,= > innes_fairbain@hotmail.com writes: > > > I think the appearance of Richard Dutcher in particular validated it in= > some=20 > > people's eyes. I was wondering after I saw it why he did=20 > > it. My question=20 > > to Richard Dutcher: didn't you read the script? > > There=B4s an interesting story here. I did read the script. The director= > asked me to read it several weeks before filming began. He said he wanted= > my constructive criticism, which I was glad to give (free of charge). > > Interestingly, when he called me to get a report, and when I started to very= > gently reveal some serious problems with the screenplay, it seemed that he= > couldn=B4t get off the phone quickly enough. > > I was confused at the time. Believe me, the criticism was very constructive= > and very gently delivered, but it was clear that he didn=B4t want to hear= > it. I wondered if he merely wanted a pat on the back and a "Way to go, my= > man! Good job!" > > I agreed to do the cameo, hoping that some of my suggestions had been= > incorporated into the screenplay. Also, I was passing through a very= > supportive period. I wanted to help any LDS filmmaker make a movie. I= > wanted everyone to do well. (I still do. Honestly.) And I genuinely liked= > the director and the producer. > > Later, the director asked me to view an edit of the film. Again, I agreed. I= > was surprised to see that none of my previous criticism had made any= > difference in the movie. Some of my suggestions, granted, were expressions= > of my personal preferences. So those were understandably disposable. My= > other suggestions had more to do with universally accepted principles of= > simple story structure and character development. > > So I once again delivered very constructive and friendly criticism of the= > work (including a repeat of my previous suggestions). I offered to sit in,= > free of charge, and make some editing changes that I thought would= > dramatically improve the film. I suggested a few days of re-shoots. > > I was also present a few days later after a screening with several other LDS= > movie folk. I spoke very little, but listened to their suggestions. Some= > were very different than mine, and some were very good suggestions. All the= > criticism was given in the kindest and most supportive tone. And all the= > criticism seemed to focus on the same very serious problems. > > I watched as the director nodded in agreement, acknowledged the movie=B4s= > shortcomings, and even took notes on a pad of paper. > > I did not get to see the movie again until it opened. I was absolutely= > dumbfounded to see that, as far as I could tell, the filmmakers had= > incorporated none of the suggestions. None of them. From anyone. > > They knew they had a seriously flawed film and, rather than fix it, they= > released it unimproved. They put forth no apparent effort to address the= > problems. > > This I don=B4t understand at all. In fact, in my eyes, it is an unforgivable= > artistic sin. > > And maybe this explains some of my rancor. Although, after seeing the final= > product, I expressed my opinion of the movie quite freely with the= > filmmakers, but I bridled my passion and tried not to publicly denounce the= > movie until after it had run its course. I didn't want the producers= > accusing me of hurting their box office. > > But, as all of you know, the dam burst recently and out came that AML= > review. I partially agree with some on the list who feel I should have= > softened the punch (but I already tried that!) Abd once I got started on= > that review, I just couldn't stop. It was so liberating (and a heck of a= > lot of fun)to finally express my opinions regarding this movie. > > I have asked myself several times over the past week or so whether I should= > have written it, and whether I need to repent of this impulsive act. I'm= > still not sure. > > However, I am sure of one thing: the guys who made "Singles Ward" do not= > listen to gentle, constructive criticism. They graciously receive the= > praise of their following, but they lash out at any criticism. > > I hoped that maybe my sharp words would make a difference. That they would= > finally pay attention. > > But they didn't. They treated my criticism the same as they treated Kieth= > Merrill=B4s, Sean Means=B4, and Eric Snider=B4s. They wrote emails and made= > phone calls, trying to convince me how mean and wrong I am. > > Whatever. It gives me no hope that their work will improve. And, unlike Eric= > Samuelsen, I will not write any critique or review of "The R.M."=20 > > What would be the point? The filmmakers aren't listening. > > Richard Dutcher > > > > > > > - > AML-List Magazine, a daily selection of posts from AML-List. > See AML-List archives at http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm > -- Irreantum Editor's Discussion List ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Travis K. Manning" Subject: Fw: [irr-ed] Singles Ward Date: 14 Feb 2003 23:37:55 -0800 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0041_01C2D482.193D9B20 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable RE: [irr-ed] Theme issuesMichael, FYI, SW article. Travis ************ ----- Original Message -----=20 Cc: 'dmichael@wwno.com'=20 Sent: Tuesday, January 28, 2003 8:34 AM Sounds like a job for film editor D. Michael Martindale, if you're = interested, D. Mike.=20 Perhaps also Marny Parkin might want to compile some AML-List comments = for her highlights.=20 Come to think of it, I don't know if Michael got onto this list. You = here, Michael?=20 -----Original Message-----=20 Sent: Tuesday, January 28, 2003 9:30 AM=20 There have been some other interesting responses related to _Singles = Ward_=20 as well by people like Eric Samuelsen. I think it might be interesting = to=20 collect a collage of the more interesting statements for publication. = See=20 if you can also get someone to defend SW, preferably in spirited but=20 intelligent terms...=20 Jonathan=20 jlangfor@pressenter.com=20 --=20 Irreantum Editor's Discussion List =20 ------=_NextPart_000_0041_01C2D482.193D9B20 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable RE: [irr-ed] Theme issues
Michael,
 
FYI, SW article.
 
Travis
 
************
----- Original Message -----
From: Christopher Bigelow =
Sent: Tuesday, January 28, 2003 8:34 AM
Subject: RE: [irr-ed] Theme issues

Sounds like a job for film editor D. Michael = Martindale, if=20 you're interested, D. Mike.

Perhaps also Marny Parkin might want to compile some = AML-List=20 comments for her highlights.

Come to think of it, I don't know if Michael got onto = this list.=20 You here, Michael?

-----Original Message-----
From:=20 Jonathan Langford [mailto:jlangfor@pressenter.com]=20
Sent: Tuesday, January 28, 2003 9:30 AM =
To: irreantum-ed@lists.xmissi= on.com=20
Subject: Re: [irr-ed] Theme issues


There have been some other interesting responses = related to=20 _Singles Ward_
as well by people like Eric=20 Samuelsen.  I think it might be interesting to
collect a collage of the more interesting statements for=20 publication.  See
if you can also get = someone to=20 defend SW, preferably in spirited but
intelligent=20 terms...

Jonathan

jlangfor@pressenter.com



--
Irreantum Editor's = Discussion List=20 <irreantum-ed@lists.xmission.com>

------=_NextPart_000_0041_01C2D482.193D9B20-- -- Irreantum Editor's Discussion List ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Travis K. Manning" Subject: Fw: [irr-ed] Singles Ward Date: 14 Feb 2003 23:39:15 -0800 Michael, Here's another from Harlow. Travis ****************8 ----- Original Message ----- Sent: Tuesday, January 28, 2003 11:39 PM > I'm working on a review of SW right now. I don't think it's a really fine > movie, but my review is considerably less despairing than Richard or > Eric's. Part of the problem for that horrible death wish scene is that > Kurt Hale was trying to solve a narrative problem that he didn't > understand well enough to solve, i.e., how do you know that if you > present as narrator an unsympathetic character, or a character who's not > sympathetic to your target audience's beliefs, that your audience will > stay with the picture. Jack Weyland ran into the same problem with his > first story, "Punch and Cookies Forever," and it took him till his fourth > or fifth novel, _The Reunion_, to figure out how to present the main > conflict in that story, which is the toll a calling like bishop or SP > takes on the bp or SP's family. > > I suspect when Hale figures out what Weyland figured out his storytelling > will be better. > > Harlow Clark > > On Tue, 28 Jan 2003 10:30:24 -0600 Jonathan Langford > writes: > > There have been some other interesting responses related to _Singles > > Ward_ as well by people like Eric Samuelsen. I think it might be > > interesting to collect a collage of the more interesting statements for > > > publication. See if you can also get someone to defend SW, > > preferably in spirited but intelligent terms... > > > > Jonathan > > > > jlangfor@pressenter.com > > ________________________________________________________________ > Sign Up for Juno Platinum Internet Access Today > Only $9.95 per month! > Visit www.juno.com > > -- > Irreantum Editor's Discussion List > -- Irreantum Editor's Discussion List ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Travis K. Manning" Subject: [irr-ed] Fw: [Singles Ward] aml-list-digest V1 #958 Date: 14 Feb 2003 23:41:30 -0800 More singles ward Travis ----- Original Message ----- Sent: Wednesday, January 29, 2003 2:57 PM > > aml-list-digest Wednesday, January 29 2003 Volume 01 : Number 958 > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 12:59:16 -0700 > From: margaret young > Subject: [AML] Black History Fireside > > Last night (I'm writing this Monday morning), I did a fireside with the > brilliant Fiona Smith. I spoke a little about Green Flake, who was a > slave of James and Agnes Flake. After the fireside, amidst the group of > people wanting to talk, was a middle-aged man (white) who refused to > shake my hand. He announced that he was a descendant of James and Agnes > and that Green was not a slave, but had been given his freedom. Then he > added, "And the rest of those niggers went back to Mississippi." He > punched the most offensive word in that sentence so I wouldn't mishear. > Interestingly, in the days before this fireside, I had been dealing > head-on with racist epithets. I had helped a black friend of mine move > from her workplace after she quit her job because of some racist > comments. I had worked with my foster son's therapist on anger > management in the face of the "N" word. (How do you respond > appropriately, dear young man, to a person who calls you or your > nine-year-old sister "a stupid nigger"?) After the fireside, I told > Fiona and my husband about the incident and said I felt bad about my > diplomacy. I did not call this man on his racism. We were in a chapel > and he spoke the word that ignites my fuse. I chose not to make a > scene, and hid my inner response pretty well, but was fuming long after > the fireside. My husband urged me to let it go. Good advice, but hard > to follow. I found myself waking up from a dream last night. It > involved that racist man, but I don't remember any details. By the way, > he cornered me for quite awhile, while others were waiting, and tried to > tell me the true version of the Green Flake story--in which James and > Agnes are heroic pioneers who freed all their slaves except those who > insisted on staying with them. He told me that if Green was a slave, it > was because he wanted to be. (Right.) I didn't tell him that I knew > very well where he had gotten that version, and knew why it wasn't quite > true. And then I felt so guilty that I hadn't been bold. Actually, the > Flakes were indeed great pioneers--and they were also slave owners who > were sometimes abusive to their slaves. They would not have seen > themselves as abusive, because their behavior was an accepted norm of > the day. And much of the information I have on Green and others of the > Flake slaves is from members of the white Flake family--who have been > enormously supportive and helpful. As I was trying to go to sleep last > night, I tried to imagine how a better person would have handled the > situation. Do we just let such things go so we don't create a scene? > Do we calmly say, "I'm sorry, but that word offends me in ways you > probably don't understand, so I really cannot continue this > conversation." I honestly asked myself what the Savior would do and I > honestly didn't know. I still don't. It angers me that my whiteness > seemed to empower that guy to say that word. I doubt he would have said > it to Darius Gray. And I wonder what Darius would've done if he had. > (I'm copying this to him, so Darius, feel free to respond.) Darius can > be a great diplomat, but he stands up for what he believes. I've seen > him bear his testimony strongly to a group of disaffected Mormons, and I > know he has spoken strongly to believing Mormons about the hard issues > of racism. I would love feedback on this. I've received racist mail, > and I've been confronted by ex-Mormons who fear _Standing on the > Promises_ is mollifying Mormons. (Of course, they haven't read the > books, but they're just real concerned anyway.) I am able to look > friendly and accommodating when I'd really like to punch someone. I > don't believe in punching, but I don't believe in accommodating either. > I love Spenser's words:" Be bold, be bold, be not too bold." I fear I > was not bold enough last night. > > [Margaret Young] > > > > - -- > AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature > > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 17:11:16 -0700 > From: "Eric D. Snider" > Subject: Re: [AML] Singles Ward > > Richard Dutcher: > > > > ><< 7. Did Dutcher, after seeing SW, really want to hang himself? >> > > > >I guess only I can answer this one. > > > >It's true. I have witnesses: my able former assistant, Emily, and my talented > >storyboard artist, Brian. They experienced the movie with me. > > > >These kind souls were with me in my hour of distress. They restrained me, and > >prevented me from doing harm to myself. > > > >I will be eternally grateful. God bless their beautiful souls. > > > > What *I* heard was that Richard was so embarrassed by the film that > he asked that his part be removed from the video/DVD release. Is this > true? And did they do it? (I haven't watched it on DVD, of course, so > I don't know.) > > > Eric D. Snider > > > > > > > - -- > AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature > > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 17:52:35 -0700 > From: "Mary Jane Jones" > Subject: Re: [AML] Singles Ward > > >>A few questions for the List: > > I can only respond to one... > > >>1. Isn't Singles Ward (SW) the most watched LDS movie to date? > > Singles Ward has grossed just under $1.3 million, I believe. God's Army = > grossed nearly $2.7 million. Brigham City grossed around $1 million. The = > Other Side of Heaven grossed over $4.7 million. Both the God's Army and = > Brigham City videos have sold briskly, I understand. I don't know how the = > Singles Ward video has sold, but I imagine it has done comparably well. = > =20 > > That puts Singles Ward clearly behind God's Army and The Other Side of = > Heaven, and slightly ahead of Brigham City in terms of box office (which = > translates into eyeballs watching screens at movie theaters).=20 > > So, no, I don't think Singles Ward is the most watched LDS movie to date. > > Mary Jane (Jones) Ungrangsee > > > > > - -- > AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature > > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 23:56:33 -0500 > From: Justin Halverson > Subject: RE: [AML] Why Not PG? > > Matthew Lee wrote: > >I've been exposed to enough darkness in the world, > >enough uncomfortable-ness that I don't feel a need to > >supplement my media diet with more. It's unavoidable > >that I will see more in my life without having to seek > >it out. > > But there is a difference, I would argue, between what Elder Christensen > and Presidents Hinckley and Benson (from the quotes in your most recent > post) call "mud," "sleazy stuff," "degrading," "filth," etc, and that > which, though it makes me uncomfortable, has--to use your words--"moral and > artistic merit." I can't say exactly where the line lays, because I suspect > that it is different for each person. And I suspect that it is very > possible that the very same film (or book, or sculpture, or whatever) may > be worthless "mud" to one and a powerful spiritual experience for another. > (And even if you can't make the case for artistic merit, certainly if > something has moral merit, it's worth watching, right? President Benson, > for example, cautions against "immoral" art). > > There is an important difference, too, I believe, between the darkness we > experience as human beings and the darkness that is part of *all* good art. > That's one reason we had to come live on earth, why Heavenly Father > couldn't just show us a film or have us read a book--and he'd certainly be > the one to direct or write it. Vicarious experience gained through good art > can help us understand one another, can challenge the different prejudices > and weaknesses we all hold. It can help prepare us for the real > darkness--because it contains *vicarious* darkness. But just as viewing > good art cannot save us in and of itself, it cannot damn us in and of > itself, either. The way we act when we leave the movie theater or turn off > the TV or close a book--the way we respond to real darkness, which you are > correct in stating is unavoidable--determines that. I wonder if Jesus might > have been talking about this in some sense when he reminded listeners that > "Not that which goeth into the mouth defileth a man; but that which cometh > out of the mouth, this defileth a man" (Matthew 15:11(11-20)). We can't > blame R-rated films--or anything or anyone else--for our sins, just as we > can't say we're good people for just seeing "Legacy" or simply reading the > Book of Mormon (though these are not, of course, analogous actions). > > Of course, I'm not suggesting that we take *everything* into our mental and > spiritual mouths. We're still under the injunction of the 13th article of > faith to seek out good things, and given the guideline from prophets living > and dead--as you pointed out with the quotes you included at the end of > your last post--to be very careful, and to evaluate/judge everything we see > in terms of whether it entices us to do good or evil. > > Also, I think that we're blessed with different strengths and weaknesses, > different gifts of the spirit. I wonder if, for some, the ability (and > desire) to maintain the critical distance needed to productively view a > difficult film is such a gift. And just as Paul says, this gift *in and of > itself* doesn't mean its bearer is smarter or better or more spiritual or > worthy than the bearer of another gift. It just means we're different, that > we like different things and are moved by different things, that we learn > in different ways and speak different languages (literally and > metaphorically). Just because I feel a deep need--a call?--to see as many > good stories as I can doesn't mean anyone will or should. And just because > someone else doesn't feel that need, doesn't mean that mine is felt any > less, or is any less valid. > > Bottom line, I know when something uplifts *me* and when something doesn't. > I'm sure that you know the same things about yourself, too. I try to stay > away from the latter and get as much as I can of the former, as I'm sure > you do, too. > > Justin Halverson > > > > > > - -- > AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature > > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 00:16:58 -0500 > From: RichardDutcher@aol.com > Subject: Re: [AML] Singles Ward > > In a message dated 1/24/2003 5:56:50 PM Eastern Standard Time, ersamuel@byugate.byu.edu writes: > > > 10. Was it proper for Dutcher to label the girl as "the otherwise flat > > >female lead?" (Of course, I noticed that right off but it is polite not to > > >mention such things.) > > > > Actually, I thought she was quite an attractive young > > woman. Just couldn't act. > > Although I did not enjoy her performance in "Singles Ward," I must stand up for this actress. I called her in for an audition recently. She gave a very fine reading. She has talent, and I honestly have no doubt that she can and will give solid performances in the future (if she gets the chance). > > This begs the question: So why did she deliver a poor performance in the movie? Maybe for the same reason that most of the rest of the cast delivered poor performances. They were either poorly directed or poorly cast. Or both. > > I've seen many of the "Singles Ward" actors in auditions and in plays. I can vouch for their talent. None of the blame should fall on them, although it inevitably does because they are visible and the director isn't. > > Richard Dutcher > > > > > - -- > AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature > > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 22:39:18 -0700 > From: "Eric D. Snider" > Subject: Re: [AML] Singles Ward > > Note: Question #9 refers to the actual quality of the actual film > "The R.M.," which some of us have seen. Otherwise, this e-mail is > just me rambling some more. > > > >Alan Mitchell asked: > > > > >1. Isn't Singles Ward (SW) the most watched LDS movie to date? > > Not in terms of box office dollars. It is third, with $1.2 million, > behind "The Other Side of Heaven" ($4.7 million) and "God's Army" > ($2.2 million). "Brigham City" ($900,000) comes after it, but I > suspect more DIFFERENT people saw that movie than "Singles Ward." > "Singles Ward" had a lot of the same people seeing it again and again > and again, whereas "Brigham City" is not the type of film (i.e., > comedy or action flick) to inspire that sort of repeat business. > > > > > >2. Did SW succeed because of the characters, story line, warm > >fuzzy >feeling, > > >or technical merit? > > It succeeded because a lot of young Mormons don't get out enough to > know what real comedy is, to know that a reference is not the same > thing as a joke, to know that just because they recognize something > doesn't mean they're being entertained by it. Technically, the film > had a lot of problems. > > > > > >3. Did it sell so many tickets because Mormon singles in Happy Valley love > > >to laugh at themselves? > > > > Eh, maybe. I think it's true Mormons have a good sense of humor in > the sense that they can take a joke aimed at them, if it's done in > good fun and doesn't come from an outsider. > > > > >4. Was it "officially approved" by all the cameos and therefore liked ? > > > > No. > > > > >5. If Eric Samuelson, Richard Dutcher, and Eric Snider actually liked SW, > > >what would that say about the state of Mormon arts? > > > > If we all liked "Singles Ward," it would mean "Singles Ward" was a > good movie. :-) > > As it is, it's strange enough that the three of us actually agreed on > something. It surely will not happen again. > > > > > >>6. Is it true that cattle will eat anything that is put in their stalls? > > No, but people at Chuck-A-Rama will. > > > > >7. Did Dutcher, after seeing SW, really want to hang himself? > > > > If not, I'm sure he did after seeing the box office receipts for > "Singles Ward." > > > > > > >8. Why can't we all just get along? > > > > Because too many people are idiots. > > But I kid. The thing a lot of us have a hard time with is separating > professional criticism from personal criticism. It's natural, I > guess, to take criticism against our work -- which we invest so much > time, energy and passion in -- as criticism against us. I suppose > it's also natural to take disagreements with our opinions personally. > But we need to put off the natural man. > > > > >9. Can't we hardly we wait until the sequel "The RM" comes out so we >can > > >hate it too? > > > > I saw this movie today. It's not a sequel, actually. It has a lot of > the same actors, and one of them who played a guy going on his > mission in "Singles Ward" plays a guy coming home from his mission in > "R.M." But it's a different guy. > > Anyway, the film is surprisingly not bad. The humor focuses more on > characters and situations and less on observations like "Mormons eat > Jell-O." It is not a great movie, but an OK one, and I laughed quite > a few times during it. > > > > > >10. Was it proper for Dutcher to label the girl as "the otherwise flat > >>female lead?" (Of course, I noticed that right off but it is polite not to > > >mention such things.) > > Anything Dutcher does is OK by me. Seeing movies like "The Singles > Ward" and "Handcart" has only made his films seem that much better by > comparison. > > > > >12. Wasn't the moral of the play to commit genocide against all >comedians? > > > > That was the one thing I agreed with the movie about. > > > Eric D. Snider > > > > > > > - -- > AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature > > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 23:44:39 -0600 > From: lajackson@juno.com > Subject: [AML] Disappointing People (was: Singles Ward) > > Thom Duncan: > > ... I've learned something early on that has helped > me over the years. You can't please everybody. > Pure and simple. > > _______________ > > This is an important lesson to learn. It believe it > applies not only to producers, but to actors, writers, > co-workers, politicians, prophets, parents, teachers, > bishops, Relief Society presidents, ... [smile] > > Larry Jackson > lajackson@juno.com > > > > ________________________________________________________________ > Sign Up for Juno Platinum Internet Access Today > Only $9.95 per month! > Visit www.juno.com > > > > > - -- > AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature > > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 07:54:29 -0700 > From: "Elizabeth Walters" > Subject: RE: [AML] Singles Ward > > "I wonder what Scorcese would say about Spieberg's 1942." > > Probably something similar to what Spielberg would say about > Scorcese's "Cape Fear" or "Last Temptation of Christ." > > > > - -- > AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature > > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 09:37:17 -0700 > From: workshop@burgoyne.com > Subject: [AML] Re: Writing Contest at LTU&E > > Quoting Marny Parkin : > > > I'm forwarding the rules to the DragonComet Writing contest, in > > conjunction with the science fiction sympoisum at BYU (Feb. 13-15) > > for those who are interested. > > [snip] > > > Three questions: > > Is the contest open to everyone, or only to those who have not been published? > > Who is going to be doing the judging? (Professional author(s), BYU English > professor(s), professional editor(s), LEADING EDGE staff, anyone who wants to, > or who?) > > Are there prizes for the winners, and if so, what are they? > > Thanks, > > Kathleen Dalton-Woodbury > workshop@burgoyne.com > > > > - --------------------------------------------------------------------- > This mail sent through Burgoyne Webmail - http://popmail.burgoyne.com > > > > > > - -- > AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature > > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 09:57:05 -0700 > From: Christopher Bigelow > Subject: [AML] Center Street Theatre Promotion? > > Center Street Theatre dudes, I would love to see you start doing more promo, > such as having a website and using e-mail and snail mail to drive people > there, maybe start selling season and/or individual tickets online. I'm a > prime candidate for attending your theater, but I don't feel I've been > romanced or informed enough (I'm not saying that's stopping me from > attending, just making an observation). > > I do not have a CST schedule on my fridge. I don't think I've ever been > enticed with a promo, such as two-for-one tickets or other benefits. The > only publicity I'm aware of for your theatre is some newspaper reviews and > features, which are good as far as they go but probably not enough. Have I > missed or forgotten some efforts, or are you guys still getting ramped up on > those? E-mail in particular could be a fairly cheap, effective way to get > more momentum going. It's possible to start building a mailing list quite > small by asking for referrals, and eventually it gets bigger and more > effective. All I know is that people need to get regular information and > reminders and offers from you, not necessarily four-color slick stuff but at > least the occasional flyer and e-mail. > > I could possibly offer some assistance with some occasional targeted > mailings (snail and e-mail), if you want and you have a little budget to > cover expenses. And you need a webmaster, if you don't already have one. > Maybe other AML-Listers have expertise they would volunteer. > > You need to capture people's e-mails who visit your site and then keep in > regular touch with them. You need to not be afraid to even do a little > targeted spamming, which unfortunately does get some results, so it's worth > doing. > > Or maybe you already have all these things in play and I just haven't > personally seen the results yet. > > Chris Bigelow > > > - -- > AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature > > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 09:15:51 -0800 > From: Kathy and Jerry Tyner > Subject: Re: [AML] Singles Ward > > You know, I've not proffered an opinion on all of this since I haven't > seen the movie. So, for obvious reasons I have only to note that my > fourteen year daughter loves it and so do her friends and maybe that's > the level of audience this film was shooting for. > > But I must say that anyone, I mean anyone who would not accept > and use Richard's most generous offer of help and also other's > suggestions suffers in my opinion from a staggering case of hubris. > > I can think of a few other choice descriptions, but I'll keep those > to myself. Why would anyone pass on a offer to make a better > movie? I'm just stunned by this revelation. They deserve the > harsh criticism they've received. And I even felt a little sorry for > them before hearing this. It would be like passing up using the > Urim and Thummim to translate something. > > I would take an offer of help from Richard Dutcher any day, > even if was only how to do a better home video of my mom's > birthday party. What do I know that they didn't grasp? > > Kathy Tyner > Orange County, CA > > > > - -- > AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature > > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 10:18:55 -0700 > From: "Kim Madsen" > Subject: RE: [AML] Singles Ward > > Richard Dutcher wrote: > "But, as all of you know, the dam burst recently and out came that AML > review....I have asked myself several times over the past week or so whether > I should have written it, and whether I need to repent of this impulsive > act. I'm still not sure." > > Richard, I for one am glad that there are people who are willing to honestly > express their opinions. Your experience, education and talent make your > opinion worth considering. It educates me. I also get a good laugh or at > least a smirk or two out of your clear-voiced and fresh turns of phrase. So > please don't repent, because repenting means not ever doing it again, and I > need the input. > > As one of the "uneducated" movie consuming masses, I have to admit I own > copies of both your movies and SINGLES WARD. I've watched your movies > several times each. I've watched SINGLES WARD once since I got it. Every > time I think about seeing it again I think, "nah, don't feel like seeing a > roadshow tonight". But I've loaned it out a lot. The 14 - 17 years olds I > know really love SINGLES WARD. I think for them it's like belonging to a > club. They get the in-humor and it's definitely on their level. So I may > have to sit through it again this Wednesday when the Beehives and MIA Maids > come to my house to work on leper bandages and watch a movie for a YW > activity. > > I buy these LDS movies because I feel like I'm preserving a little bit of > history for the future--in 20 years we'll pull them out and laugh and gack > at some of them, I'm sure. Those of you who are more visionary have the > "gack" response now. Ahead of your time. > > Anyone ever seen LEFT BEHIND and some of those "born again" type Christian > movies? I think history will lump LEFT BEHIND, CHARLY, OUT OF STEP, THE > SINGLES WARD, JOSHUA (a born again one) and others of that ilk together in a > "home literature"-ish category. It'll bring a whole new meaning to the > phrase "home movies". > > Then there are films that tell the story of a culture in a way that's > universal in theme--those kinds of stories that say "hey, they're not so > different from us, and look what they had to go through" (FIDDLER ON THE > ROOF, SCHINDLER'S LIST, BRIGHAM CITY--will Dutcher's film about THE PROPHET > fall here?). Those are stories that give insight into a culture or people as > opposed to exploiting it's idiosyncrasies for low humor (SINGLES WARD, > ANIMAL HOUSE, ENCINO MAN, WAYNE'S WORLD, etc. etc. etc.) Hey, epiphany! > That's what bugs me about SINGLES WARD--it's a cleaned up version of teen > humor. No sex jokes, no potty jokes, no crass bodily functions...but a > gentler form of that with Jell-O molds, slapschtick cops, weird camera > angles to tell us THESE PEOPLE ARE GEEKS just isn't funny enough to sustain > a full length movie. Maybe they could refine some of those bits into 60 > second commercials for gelatin, the Welcome Wagon, airlines, bungee-jumping > theme parks--the humor would sustain a 60 second commercial. > > Kim Madsen > AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature > > > > > > > - -- > AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature > > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2003 18:29:37 EST > From: Kimheuston@aol.com > Subject: [AML] S. Michael WILCOX, _The Way, the Truth, and the Life_ (Review) > > Title: The Way, the Truth, and the Life: Images of the New Testament > Author: S. Michael Wilcox. Photos by Floyd Holdman and Don O. Thorpe > Publisher: Covenant > Year Published: 2002 > Number of Pages: 102 > Binding: Hardback=20 > ISBN: 1-59156-109-4 > Price: $29.95 > > Reviewed by Kimberley Heuston > > _The Way, the Truth, and the Life_ is the second coffee-table book about the= > =20 > Holy Land by S. Michael Wilcox, a popular instructor at the University of=20 > Utah Institute and prolific LDS writer. The first, _On Holy Ground: Images= > =20 > of Old Testament Lands_, published by Covenant in 2001, is in some ways the= > =20 > superior book. Not only did it include John Telford's beautiful photographs= > =20 > (apparently recycled from Susan Easton Black's 1999 contribution to the same= > =20 > genre, _In the Footsteps of Jesus: Images of the Holy Land_, also published= > =20 > by Covenant), but as the first in the series, it was more careful to define= > =20 > its authorial voice, which is important given that this is a book that=20 > positions itself outside familiar genres. It's not really a coffee-table=20 > book; although Holdman and Thorpe are apparently widely-published=20 > photographers, the photos chosen for this particular project are of mixed=20 > quality and alternate with nineteenth-century maps and illustrations more=20 > probably chosen for the virtue of their lapsed copyrights than for their=20 > dubious esthetic qualities. Neither is it a commentary on the historical or= > =20 > archaeological context for the pictured sites, like Jefferson White's=20 > _Evidence of Paul's Journeys_ or John Crossan and Jonathan Reed's= > _Excavating=20 > Jesus: Beneath the Stones, Behind the Texts_. =20 > > In fact, a first reading left me scratching my head. The "author's preface"= > =20 > is simply the JST of John 1: 1-5. Chapter 1, "Even Unto Bethlehem," began= > =20 > starkly and a little clumsily:=20 > > "Bethlehem has always been one of my favorite sites. I look forward to it= > =20 > with the same anticipatory emotion that I looked forward to Christmas= > morning=20 > as a child. There is a joy and a delight that still rings in Bethlehem. We= > =20 > start in the shepherd's fields by reading the simple, beautiful words of= > Luke=20 > annually repeated in homes all over the world at the Christmas season." > > Who are you? I wonder (a little disingenuously, since we lived in the same= > =20 > ward for a few months.) And who are "we"? Do you mean every Christian? =20 > Every reader of this book? Several paragraphs later "the sisters of our=20 > group" sing, and I wonder if he is describing a trip he took with his=20 > extended family. It is only as the book wears on that the reader gathers=20 > that this book is essentially a well-illustrated collection of lecture notes= > =20 > from the LDS student trips Wilcox regularly leads to Palestine. =20 > > Despite its bumpy beginning, the narrative taken on its own terms is=20 > compelling. It is clear that Wilcox is writing about experiences and= > musings=20 > that matter deeply to him, and if they are not as fully explained or=20 > historically situated as I would like, they are as nourishing and homey as a= > =20 > slice of hot wheat bread spread with butter and honey and washed down with a= > =20 > glass of cold milk. Each chapter provides that mixture of information and= > =20 > applied gospel "life lesson" familiar to all who have been lucky enough to= > =20 > witness an earnest parent giving a Family Home Evening lesson to cherished= > =20 > children. As that pillar of American cultural studies, TV Guide, warns in= > =20 > its blurb about the 1950s movie _Tammy_, this book will be most meaningful= > =20 > "For the pure in heart." > > Bottom line: a more polished and sophisticated version of the journal every= > =20 > traveler to the Holy Land wishes they had kept, but offers little new=20 > insight. > > > - -- > AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature > > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 10:20:00 -0700 > From: "Thomas C. Baggaley" > Subject: RE: [AML] Singles Ward > > 1. Isn't Singles Ward (SW) the most watched LDS movie to date? > > No. Among the 6 films that have been released to date, the most watched > (at least as reflected in box office gross) would be "The Other Side of > Heaven" which grossed $4,720,112 at the box office. Next would come > "God's Army", which grossed $2,628,829. "The Singles Ward" would be > third at $1,250,798. Of course, these numbers do not reflect video or > DVD sales and rentals. Since "The Other Side of Heaven" will not be > released on video and DVD until April, it loses some ground there. > (Numbers from LDSfilm.com) > > Thomas > > - ---------------------------- > "Of course, there should be a structure, an architecture to any score. > It's not a piece here and a piece there. It has to be thought out. You > can't approach each cue as a separate piece of music." - Jerry > Goldsmith, composer > > Contact info: > Thomas C. Baggaley > Composer > 9446 Fox Hunt Drive > Sandy, Utah 84092 > Tel: (801) 942-3580 > E-mail: thomas@baggaleymusic.com > Web page: http://www.baggaleymusic.com > > > > > > > > - -- > AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature > > > ------------------------------ > > End of aml-list-digest V1 #958 > ****************************** > > -- Irreantum Editor's Discussion List ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Christopher Bigelow Subject: [irr-ed] Winter cuts/spring deadline Date: 24 Feb 2003 16:48:55 -0700 This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C2DC5F.4AFD3FF0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Hey, just a heads up that my word count on the winter issue somehow got up to 96,693 and we usually print about 70,000 or less, so I propose cutting the following: Essay Elegant Angst: Mining the Treasures of Mormon Personal Essays, 1982-2001 By Cherry B. Silver Story Invisible Life By Katherine Woodbury Humor, Emotion, and Suspense A review of Kerry Blair's Closing In (Covenant, 2002) Reviewed by Katie Parker For the Defense: The Life of Hugh Winder Nibley A review of Boyd Petersen's Hugh Nibley: A Consecrated Life (Greg Kofford Books, 2003) Reviewed by Greg Taggart Heartwarming Lessons from a Lifetime of Sharing A review of George Durrant's Scones for the Heart (Bonneville Books, 2002) Reviewed by Arlene Miera The deadline for spring text is March 15, as you probably all know already. The cover will be Jana Reiss of Publishers Weekly and Sheri Dew, if she gets her interview done in time. So far, here's what I have in hand for spring: Jana Reiss interview John Alba Cutler, Los escogidos y los despreciados: Latino Influences in LDS Literature Linda Paulson Adams interview and novel excerpt Year in Review: 2002, by Andrew Hall If I add all the winter cuts listed above into the spring file, I already have 30,000 total words, more than half full. Let me know if anyone wants to make any arguments for restoring any of the cuts back into the winter file, but it would have to be a pretty good argument. Also, let me know if you DON'T want any of the winter cuts to appear in spring because you have something better or for any other reason. If we keep all these winter cuts in spring, we'll need about another 40,000 or so total words for spring. Thanks! ------_=_NextPart_001_01C2DC5F.4AFD3FF0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Winter cuts/spring deadline

Hey, just a heads up that my word = count on the winter issue somehow got up to 96,693 and we usually print = about 70,000 or less, so I propose cutting the following:

Essay
Elegant Angst: Mining the Treasures = of Mormon Personal Essays, 1982-2001
By Cherry B. Silver

Story
Invisible Life
By Katherine Woodbury

Humor, Emotion, and = Suspense
A review of Kerry Blair's Closing = In (Covenant, 2002)
Reviewed by Katie Parker

For the Defense: The Life of Hugh = Winder Nibley
A review of Boyd = Petersen's Hugh Nibley: A = Consecrated Life (Greg = Kofford Books, 2003)
Reviewed by Greg Taggart

Heartwarming Lessons from a = Lifetime of Sharing
A review of George = Durrant's Scones for the = Heart (Bonneville Books, = 2002)
Reviewed by Arlene Miera

The deadline for spring text is March = 15, as you probably all know already. The cover will be Jana Reiss of = Publishers Weekly and Sheri Dew, if she gets her interview done in = time.

So far, here's what I have in hand for = spring:
Jana Reiss interview
John Alba Cutler, Los escogidos y los despreciados: Latino = Influences in LDS Literature
Linda Paulson Adams interview and = novel excerpt
Year in Review: 2002, by Andrew = Hall

If I add all the winter cuts listed = above into the spring file, I already have 30,000 total words, more = than half full. Let me know if anyone wants to make any arguments for = restoring any of the cuts back into the winter file, but it would have = to be a pretty good argument. Also, let me know if you DON'T want any = of the winter cuts to appear in spring because you have something = better or for any other reason. If we keep all these winter cuts in = spring, we'll need about another 40,000 or so total words for spring. =

Thanks!

------_=_NextPart_001_01C2DC5F.4AFD3FF0-- -- Irreantum Editor's Discussion List ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Anderson, Tory" Subject: RE: [irr-ed] Winter cuts/spring deadline Date: 24 Feb 2003 16:50:39 -0700 This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C2DC5F.88E6DBF0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Chris, This is fine with me. Tory -----Original Message----- Sent: Monday, February 24, 2003 4:49 PM Hey, just a heads up that my word count on the winter issue somehow got up to 96,693 and we usually print about 70,000 or less, so I propose cutting the following: Essay Elegant Angst: Mining the Treasures of Mormon Personal Essays, 1982-2001 By Cherry B. Silver Story Invisible Life By Katherine Woodbury Humor, Emotion, and Suspense A review of Kerry Blair's Closing In (Covenant, 2002) Reviewed by Katie Parker For the Defense: The Life of Hugh Winder Nibley A review of Boyd Petersen's Hugh Nibley: A Consecrated Life (Greg Kofford Books, 2003) Reviewed by Greg Taggart Heartwarming Lessons from a Lifetime of Sharing A review of George Durrant's Scones for the Heart (Bonneville Books, 2002) Reviewed by Arlene Miera The deadline for spring text is March 15, as you probably all know already. The cover will be Jana Reiss of Publishers Weekly and Sheri Dew, if she gets her interview done in time. So far, here's what I have in hand for spring: Jana Reiss interview John Alba Cutler, Los escogidos y los despreciados: Latino Influences in LDS Literature Linda Paulson Adams interview and novel excerpt Year in Review: 2002, by Andrew Hall If I add all the winter cuts listed above into the spring file, I already have 30,000 total words, more than half full. Let me know if anyone wants to make any arguments for restoring any of the cuts back into the winter file, but it would have to be a pretty good argument. Also, let me know if you DON'T want any of the winter cuts to appear in spring because you have something better or for any other reason. If we keep all these winter cuts in spring, we'll need about another 40,000 or so total words for spring. Thanks! ------_=_NextPart_001_01C2DC5F.88E6DBF0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Winter cuts/spring deadline
Chris,
 
This is fine with me.
 
Tory
-----Original Message-----
From: Christopher Bigelow [mailto:Chris.Bigelow@UnicityNetwork.com]
Sent: Monday, February 24, 2003 4:49 PM
To: 'irreantum-ed@lists.xmission.com'
Subject: [irr-ed] Winter cuts/spring deadline

Hey, just a heads up that my word count on the winter issue somehow got up to 96,693 and we usually print about 70,000 or less, so I propose cutting the following:

Essay
Elegant Angst: Mining the Treasures of Mormon Personal Essays, 1982-2001
By Cherry B. Silver

Story
Invisible Life
By Katherine Woodbury

Humor, Emotion, and Suspense
A review of Kerry Blair's Closing In (Covenant, 2002)
Reviewed by Katie Parker

For the Defense: The Life of Hugh Winder Nibley
A review of Boyd Petersen's Hugh Nibley: A Consecrated Life (Greg Kofford Books, 2003)
Reviewed by Greg Taggart

Heartwarming Lessons from a Lifetime of Sharing
A review of George Durrant's Scones for the Heart (Bonneville Books, 2002)
Reviewed by Arlene Miera

The deadline for spring text is March 15, as you probably all know already. The cover will be Jana Reiss of Publishers Weekly and Sheri Dew, if she gets her interview done in time.

So far, here's what I have in hand for spring:
Jana Reiss interview
John Alba Cutler, Los escogidos y los despreciados: Latino Influences in LDS Literature
Linda Paulson Adams interview and novel excerpt
Year in Review: 2002, by Andrew Hall

If I add all the winter cuts listed above into the spring file, I already have 30,000 total words, more than half full. Let me know if anyone wants to make any arguments for restoring any of the cuts back into the winter file, but it would have to be a pretty good argument. Also, let me know if you DON'T want any of the winter cuts to appear in spring because you have something better or for any other reason. If we keep all these winter cuts in spring, we'll need about another 40,000 or so total words for spring.

Thanks!

------_=_NextPart_001_01C2DC5F.88E6DBF0-- -- Irreantum Editor's Discussion List ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Anderson, Tory" Subject: RE: [irr-ed] Winter cuts/spring deadline Date: 24 Feb 2003 16:52:51 -0700 This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C2DC5F.D7482AB0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Just meant to send this to you, Chris, instead of everybody. Dang, did it again. -----Original Message----- Sent: Monday, February 24, 2003 4:51 PM Chris, This is fine with me. Tory -----Original Message----- Sent: Monday, February 24, 2003 4:49 PM Hey, just a heads up that my word count on the winter issue somehow got up to 96,693 and we usually print about 70,000 or less, so I propose cutting the following: Essay Elegant Angst: Mining the Treasures of Mormon Personal Essays, 1982-2001 By Cherry B. Silver Story Invisible Life By Katherine Woodbury Humor, Emotion, and Suspense A review of Kerry Blair's Closing In (Covenant, 2002) Reviewed by Katie Parker For the Defense: The Life of Hugh Winder Nibley A review of Boyd Petersen's Hugh Nibley: A Consecrated Life (Greg Kofford Books, 2003) Reviewed by Greg Taggart Heartwarming Lessons from a Lifetime of Sharing A review of George Durrant's Scones for the Heart (Bonneville Books, 2002) Reviewed by Arlene Miera The deadline for spring text is March 15, as you probably all know already. The cover will be Jana Reiss of Publishers Weekly and Sheri Dew, if she gets her interview done in time. So far, here's what I have in hand for spring: Jana Reiss interview John Alba Cutler, Los escogidos y los despreciados: Latino Influences in LDS Literature Linda Paulson Adams interview and novel excerpt Year in Review: 2002, by Andrew Hall If I add all the winter cuts listed above into the spring file, I already have 30,000 total words, more than half full. Let me know if anyone wants to make any arguments for restoring any of the cuts back into the winter file, but it would have to be a pretty good argument. Also, let me know if you DON'T want any of the winter cuts to appear in spring because you have something better or for any other reason. If we keep all these winter cuts in spring, we'll need about another 40,000 or so total words for spring. Thanks! ------_=_NextPart_001_01C2DC5F.D7482AB0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Winter cuts/spring deadline
Just meant to send this to you, Chris, instead of everybody.
 
Dang, did it again.
-----Original Message-----
From: Anderson, Tory [mailto:TAnderson@nact.com]
Sent: Monday, February 24, 2003 4:51 PM
To: 'irreantum-ed@lists.xmission.com'
Subject: RE: [irr-ed] Winter cuts/spring deadline

Chris,
 
This is fine with me.
 
Tory
-----Original Message-----
From: Christopher Bigelow [mailto:Chris.Bigelow@UnicityNetwork.com]
Sent: Monday, February 24, 2003 4:49 PM
To: 'irreantum-ed@lists.xmission.com'
Subject: [irr-ed] Winter cuts/spring deadline

Hey, just a heads up that my word count on the winter issue somehow got up to 96,693 and we usually print about 70,000 or less, so I propose cutting the following:

Essay
Elegant Angst: Mining the Treasures of Mormon Personal Essays, 1982-2001
By Cherry B. Silver

Story
Invisible Life
By Katherine Woodbury

Humor, Emotion, and Suspense
A review of Kerry Blair's Closing In (Covenant, 2002)
Reviewed by Katie Parker

For the Defense: The Life of Hugh Winder Nibley
A review of Boyd Petersen's Hugh Nibley: A Consecrated Life (Greg Kofford Books, 2003)
Reviewed by Greg Taggart

Heartwarming Lessons from a Lifetime of Sharing
A review of George Durrant's Scones for the Heart (Bonneville Books, 2002)
Reviewed by Arlene Miera

The deadline for spring text is March 15, as you probably all know already. The cover will be Jana Reiss of Publishers Weekly and Sheri Dew, if she gets her interview done in time.

So far, here's what I have in hand for spring:
Jana Reiss interview
John Alba Cutler, Los escogidos y los despreciados: Latino Influences in LDS Literature
Linda Paulson Adams interview and novel excerpt
Year in Review: 2002, by Andrew Hall

If I add all the winter cuts listed above into the spring file, I already have 30,000 total words, more than half full. Let me know if anyone wants to make any arguments for restoring any of the cuts back into the winter file, but it would have to be a pretty good argument. Also, let me know if you DON'T want any of the winter cuts to appear in spring because you have something better or for any other reason. If we keep all these winter cuts in spring, we'll need about another 40,000 or so total words for spring.

Thanks!

------_=_NextPart_001_01C2DC5F.D7482AB0-- -- Irreantum Editor's Discussion List ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Christopher Bigelow Subject: RE: [irr-ed] Winter cuts/spring deadline Date: 24 Feb 2003 16:53:20 -0700 This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C2DC5F.E8DBD4C0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Good. Tory, you think you'll have 2-3 total fiction pieces by March 15? (Counting the Woodbury piece, I assume.) -----Original Message----- Sent: Monday, February 24, 2003 4:51 PM Chris, This is fine with me. Tory -----Original Message----- Sent: Monday, February 24, 2003 4:49 PM Hey, just a heads up that my word count on the winter issue somehow got up to 96,693 and we usually print about 70,000 or less, so I propose cutting the following: Essay Elegant Angst: Mining the Treasures of Mormon Personal Essays, 1982-2001 By Cherry B. Silver Story Invisible Life By Katherine Woodbury Humor, Emotion, and Suspense A review of Kerry Blair's Closing In (Covenant, 2002) Reviewed by Katie Parker For the Defense: The Life of Hugh Winder Nibley A review of Boyd Petersen's Hugh Nibley: A Consecrated Life (Greg Kofford Books, 2003) Reviewed by Greg Taggart Heartwarming Lessons from a Lifetime of Sharing A review of George Durrant's Scones for the Heart (Bonneville Books, 2002) Reviewed by Arlene Miera The deadline for spring text is March 15, as you probably all know already. The cover will be Jana Reiss of Publishers Weekly and Sheri Dew, if she gets her interview done in time. So far, here's what I have in hand for spring: Jana Reiss interview John Alba Cutler, Los escogidos y los despreciados: Latino Influences in LDS Literature Linda Paulson Adams interview and novel excerpt Year in Review: 2002, by Andrew Hall If I add all the winter cuts listed above into the spring file, I already have 30,000 total words, more than half full. Let me know if anyone wants to make any arguments for restoring any of the cuts back into the winter file, but it would have to be a pretty good argument. Also, let me know if you DON'T want any of the winter cuts to appear in spring because you have something better or for any other reason. If we keep all these winter cuts in spring, we'll need about another 40,000 or so total words for spring. Thanks! ------_=_NextPart_001_01C2DC5F.E8DBD4C0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Winter cuts/spring deadline
Good. Tory, you think you'll have 2-3 total fiction pieces by March 15? (Counting the Woodbury piece, I assume.)
-----Original Message-----
From: Anderson, Tory [mailto:TAnderson@nact.com]
Sent: Monday, February 24, 2003 4:51 PM
To: 'irreantum-ed@lists.xmission.com'
Subject: RE: [irr-ed] Winter cuts/spring deadline

Chris,
 
This is fine with me.
 
Tory
-----Original Message-----
From: Christopher Bigelow [mailto:Chris.Bigelow@UnicityNetwork.com]
Sent: Monday, February 24, 2003 4:49 PM
To: 'irreantum-ed@lists.xmission.com'
Subject: [irr-ed] Winter cuts/spring deadline

Hey, just a heads up that my word count on the winter issue somehow got up to 96,693 and we usually print about 70,000 or less, so I propose cutting the following:

Essay
Elegant Angst: Mining the Treasures of Mormon Personal Essays, 1982-2001
By Cherry B. Silver

Story
Invisible Life
By Katherine Woodbury

Humor, Emotion, and Suspense
A review of Kerry Blair's Closing In (Covenant, 2002)
Reviewed by Katie Parker

For the Defense: The Life of Hugh Winder Nibley
A review of Boyd Petersen's Hugh Nibley: A Consecrated Life (Greg Kofford Books, 2003)
Reviewed by Greg Taggart

Heartwarming Lessons from a Lifetime of Sharing
A review of George Durrant's Scones for the Heart (Bonneville Books, 2002)
Reviewed by Arlene Miera

The deadline for spring text is March 15, as you probably all know already. The cover will be Jana Reiss of Publishers Weekly and Sheri Dew, if she gets her interview done in time.

So far, here's what I have in hand for spring:
Jana Reiss interview
John Alba Cutler, Los escogidos y los despreciados: Latino Influences in LDS Literature
Linda Paulson Adams interview and novel excerpt
Year in Review: 2002, by Andrew Hall

If I add all the winter cuts listed above into the spring file, I already have 30,000 total words, more than half full. Let me know if anyone wants to make any arguments for restoring any of the cuts back into the winter file, but it would have to be a pretty good argument. Also, let me know if you DON'T want any of the winter cuts to appear in spring because you have something better or for any other reason. If we keep all these winter cuts in spring, we'll need about another 40,000 or so total words for spring.

Thanks!

------_=_NextPart_001_01C2DC5F.E8DBD4C0-- -- Irreantum Editor's Discussion List ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Travis K. Manning" Subject: Re: [irr-ed] Winter cuts/spring deadline Date: 24 Feb 2003 17:13:18 -0800 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_000B_01C2DC28.064E6A00 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Winter cuts/spring deadlineChris, Yes, cut Cherry's piece permanently. I have a really great essay on LDS = women's book clubs for the Spring issue. We're working through the = second substantive edit on it now--it should be good (3 to 4,000 words). = I may also have a short nature essay ('round 1,000 words) on = Escalante.ready by March 15.=20 Thanks for the early suggestions on setting up an editor's review = process. I really think we ought to move toward setting up something = more formal. Not right now, but the near future. Travis Manning ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Christopher Bigelow=20 To: 'irreantum-ed@lists.xmission.com'=20 Sent: Monday, February 24, 2003 3:48 PM Subject: [irr-ed] Winter cuts/spring deadline Hey, just a heads up that my word count on the winter issue somehow = got up to 96,693 and we usually print about 70,000 or less, so I propose = cutting the following: Essay=20 Elegant Angst: Mining the Treasures of Mormon Personal Essays, = 1982-2001=20 By Cherry B. Silver=20 Story=20 Invisible Life=20 By Katherine Woodbury=20 Humor, Emotion, and Suspense=20 A review of Kerry Blair's Closing In (Covenant, 2002)=20 Reviewed by Katie Parker=20 For the Defense: The Life of Hugh Winder Nibley=20 A review of Boyd Petersen's Hugh Nibley: A Consecrated Life (Greg = Kofford Books, 2003)=20 Reviewed by Greg Taggart=20 Heartwarming Lessons from a Lifetime of Sharing=20 A review of George Durrant's Scones for the Heart (Bonneville Books, = 2002)=20 Reviewed by Arlene Miera=20 The deadline for spring text is March 15, as you probably all know = already. The cover will be Jana Reiss of Publishers Weekly and Sheri = Dew, if she gets her interview done in time. So far, here's what I have in hand for spring:=20 Jana Reiss interview=20 John Alba Cutler, Los escogidos y los despreciados: Latino Influences = in LDS Literature=20 Linda Paulson Adams interview and novel excerpt=20 Year in Review: 2002, by Andrew Hall=20 If I add all the winter cuts listed above into the spring file, I = already have 30,000 total words, more than half full. Let me know if = anyone wants to make any arguments for restoring any of the cuts back = into the winter file, but it would have to be a pretty good argument. = Also, let me know if you DON'T want any of the winter cuts to appear in = spring because you have something better or for any other reason. If we = keep all these winter cuts in spring, we'll need about another 40,000 or = so total words for spring.=20 Thanks!=20 ------=_NextPart_000_000B_01C2DC28.064E6A00 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Winter cuts/spring deadline
Chris,
 
Yes, cut Cherry's piece permanently.  I have a = really=20 great essay on LDS women's book clubs for the Spring issue.  We're = working=20 through the second substantive edit on it now--it should be good (3 = to=20 4,000 words).  I may also have a short nature essay ('round 1,000 = words) on=20 Escalante.ready by March 15.
 
Thanks for the early suggestions on setting up an = editor's=20 review process.  I really think we ought to move toward setting up=20 something more formal.  Not right now, but the near = future.
 
Travis Manning
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Christopher = Bigelow
To: 'irreantum-ed@lists.xmi= ssion.com'=20
Sent: Monday, February 24, 2003 = 3:48=20 PM
Subject: [irr-ed] Winter = cuts/spring=20 deadline

Hey, just a heads up that my word count = on the=20 winter issue somehow got up to 96,693 and we usually print about = 70,000 or=20 less, so I propose cutting the following:

Essay
Elegant Angst: Mining the Treasures of Mormon = Personal=20 Essays, 1982-2001
By Cherry = B.=20 Silver

Story
Invisible Life
By Katherine Woodbury

Humor, Emotion, and = Suspense=20
A review of Kerry Blair's = Closing In=20 (Covenant, 2002)
Reviewed by=20 Katie Parker

For the Defense: The Life of Hugh = Winder=20 Nibley
A review of Boyd=20 Petersen's Hugh Nibley: A = Consecrated=20 Life (Greg Kofford Books, = 2003)=20
Reviewed by Greg = Taggart

Heartwarming Lessons from a = Lifetime of=20 Sharing
A review of = George=20 Durrant's Scones for the=20 Heart (Bonneville Books, = 2002)=20
Reviewed by Arlene Miera =

The deadline for spring text is March = 15, as you=20 probably all know already. The cover will be Jana Reiss of Publishers = Weekly=20 and Sheri Dew, if she gets her interview done in time.

So far, here's what I have in hand for=20 spring:
Jana Reiss = interview=20
John Alba Cutler, Los escogidos y los despreciados: Latino = Influences in=20 LDS Literature
Linda = Paulson Adams=20 interview and novel excerpt
Year in=20 Review: 2002, by Andrew Hall

If I add all the winter cuts listed = above into the=20 spring file, I already have 30,000 total words, more than half full. = Let me=20 know if anyone wants to make any arguments for restoring any of the = cuts back=20 into the winter file, but it would have to be a pretty good argument. = Also,=20 let me know if you DON'T want any of the winter cuts to appear in = spring=20 because you have something better or for any other reason. If we keep = all=20 these winter cuts in spring, we'll need about another 40,000 or so = total words=20 for spring.

Thanks! =

------=_NextPart_000_000B_01C2DC28.064E6A00-- -- Irreantum Editor's Discussion List ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Gideon Burton Subject: RE: [irr-ed] Winter cuts/spring deadline Date: 25 Feb 2003 10:04:24 -0700 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_001E_01C2DCB5.4A6CC9B0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable What's the reasoning on permanently cutting Cherry's piece? I had = thought there was a lot of interest in this, and the proceedings won't be out = for awhile. =20 Gideon=20 -----Original Message----- [mailto:owner-irreantum-ed@lists.xmission.com] On Behalf Of Travis K. Manning Sent: Monday, February 24, 2003 6:13 PM =20 Chris, =20 Yes, cut Cherry's piece permanently. I have a really great essay on LDS women's book clubs for the Spring issue. We're working through the = second substantive edit on it now--it should be good (3 to 4,000 words). I may also have a short nature essay ('round 1,000 words) on Escalante.ready = by March 15.=20 =20 Thanks for the early suggestions on setting up an editor's review = process. I really think we ought to move toward setting up something more formal. Not right now, but the near future. =20 Travis Manning ----- Original Message -----=20 Sent: Monday, February 24, 2003 3:48 PM =20 Hey, just a heads up that my word count on the winter issue somehow got = up to 96,693 and we usually print about 70,000 or less, so I propose = cutting the following: Essay=20 Elegant Angst: Mining the Treasures of Mormon Personal Essays, 1982-2001 = By Cherry B. Silver=20 Story=20 Invisible Life=20 By Katherine Woodbury=20 Humor, Emotion, and Suspense=20 A review of Kerry Blair's Closing In (Covenant, 2002)=20 Reviewed by Katie Parker=20 For the Defense: The Life of Hugh Winder Nibley=20 A review of Boyd Petersen's Hugh Nibley: A Consecrated Life (Greg = Kofford Books, 2003)=20 Reviewed by Greg Taggart=20 Heartwarming Lessons from a Lifetime of Sharing=20 A review of George Durrant's Scones for the Heart (Bonneville Books, = 2002)=20 Reviewed by Arlene Miera=20 The deadline for spring text is March 15, as you probably all know = already. The cover will be Jana Reiss of Publishers Weekly and Sheri Dew, if she = gets her interview done in time. So far, here's what I have in hand for spring:=20 Jana Reiss interview=20 John Alba Cutler, Los escogidos y los despreciados: Latino Influences in = LDS Literature=20 Linda Paulson Adams interview and novel excerpt=20 Year in Review: 2002, by Andrew Hall=20 If I add all the winter cuts listed above into the spring file, I = already have 30,000 total words, more than half full. Let me know if anyone = wants to make any arguments for restoring any of the cuts back into the winter = file, but it would have to be a pretty good argument. Also, let me know if you DON'T want any of the winter cuts to appear in spring because you have something better or for any other reason. If we keep all these winter = cuts in spring, we'll need about another 40,000 or so total words for spring. = Thanks!=20 ------=_NextPart_000_001E_01C2DCB5.4A6CC9B0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Winter cuts/spring deadline

What’s the reasoning on = permanently cutting Cherry’s piece? I had thought there was a lot of interest = in this, and the proceedings won’t be out for = awhile.

 

Gideon

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-irreantum-ed@lists.xmission.com [mailto:owner-irreantum-ed@lists.xmission.com] On Behalf Of Travis K. = Manning
Sent: Monday, February = 24, 2003 6:13 PM
To: irreantum-ed@lists.xmission.com
Subject: Re: [irr-ed] = Winter cuts/spring deadline

 

Chris,

 

Yes, cut Cherry's piece permanently.  I have a really great = essay on LDS women's book clubs for the Spring issue.  We're working = through the second substantive edit on it now--it should be good (3 to 4,000 words).  I may also have a short nature essay ('round 1,000 words) = on Escalante.ready by March 15.

 

Thanks for the early suggestions on setting up an editor's = review process.  I really think we ought to move toward setting up = something more formal.  Not right now, but the near future.

 

Travis Manning

----- Original Message -----

Sent: Monday, = February 24, 2003 3:48 PM

Subject: = [irr-ed] Winter cuts/spring deadline

 

Hey, just a heads up that my word count on the winter issue somehow got up to = 96,693 and we usually print about 70,000 or less, so I propose cutting the = following:

Essay
Elegant Angst: Mining the Treasures of Mormon Personal Essays, 1982-2001 =
By Cherry B. Silver

Story
Invisible Life
By Katherine Woodbury

Humor, Emotion, and Suspense
A review of Kerry Blair's Closing = In (Covenant, 2002)
Reviewed by Katie Parker

For the Defense: The Life of Hugh Winder = Nibley
A review of Boyd Petersen's Hugh = Nibley: A Consecrated Life (Greg Kofford Books, 2003)
Reviewed by Greg Taggart

Heartwarming Lessons from a Lifetime of = Sharing
A review of George Durrant's Scones = for the Heart (Bonneville Books, 2002)
Reviewed by Arlene Miera

The deadline for spring text is March 15, as you probably all know already. = The cover will be Jana Reiss of Publishers Weekly and Sheri Dew, if she gets = her interview done in time.

So far, here's what I have in hand for spring:
Jana Reiss interview
John Alba Cutler, Los escogidos y = los despreciados: Latino Influences in LDS Literature
Linda Paulson Adams interview and novel excerpt
Year in Review: 2002, by Andrew Hall

If I add all the winter cuts listed above into the spring file, I already = have 30,000 total words, more than half full. Let me know if anyone wants to = make any arguments for restoring any of the cuts back into the winter file, = but it would have to be a pretty good argument. Also, let me know if you DON'T = want any of the winter cuts to appear in spring because you have something = better or for any other reason. If we keep all these winter cuts in spring, we'll = need about another 40,000 or so total words for spring.

Thanks!

------=_NextPart_000_001E_01C2DCB5.4A6CC9B0-- -- Irreantum Editor's Discussion List ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Christopher Bigelow Subject: RE: [irr-ed] Winter cuts/spring deadline Date: 25 Feb 2003 10:11:22 -0700 This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C2DCF0.EBCCE250 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" I would be fine to run Cherry's piece in spring if it doesn't replace something that won't otherwise find publication. -----Original Message----- Sent: Tuesday, February 25, 2003 10:04 AM What's the reasoning on permanently cutting Cherry's piece? I had thought there was a lot of interest in this, and the proceedings won't be out for awhile. Gideon -----Original Message----- [mailto:owner-irreantum-ed@lists.xmission.com] On Behalf Of Travis K. Manning Sent: Monday, February 24, 2003 6:13 PM Chris, Yes, cut Cherry's piece permanently. I have a really great essay on LDS women's book clubs for the Spring issue. We're working through the second substantive edit on it now--it should be good (3 to 4,000 words). I may also have a short nature essay ('round 1,000 words) on Escalante.ready by March 15. Thanks for the early suggestions on setting up an editor's review process. I really think we ought to move toward setting up something more formal. Not right now, but the near future. Travis Manning ----- Original Message ----- Sent: Monday, February 24, 2003 3:48 PM Hey, just a heads up that my word count on the winter issue somehow got up to 96,693 and we usually print about 70,000 or less, so I propose cutting the following: Essay Elegant Angst: Mining the Treasures of Mormon Personal Essays, 1982-2001 By Cherry B. Silver Story Invisible Life By Katherine Woodbury Humor, Emotion, and Suspense A review of Kerry Blair's Closing In (Covenant, 2002) Reviewed by Katie Parker For the Defense: The Life of Hugh Winder Nibley A review of Boyd Petersen's Hugh Nibley: A Consecrated Life (Greg Kofford Books, 2003) Reviewed by Greg Taggart Heartwarming Lessons from a Lifetime of Sharing A review of George Durrant's Scones for the Heart (Bonneville Books, 2002) Reviewed by Arlene Miera The deadline for spring text is March 15, as you probably all know already. The cover will be Jana Reiss of Publishers Weekly and Sheri Dew, if she gets her interview done in time. So far, here's what I have in hand for spring: Jana Reiss interview John Alba Cutler, Los escogidos y los despreciados: Latino Influences in LDS Literature Linda Paulson Adams interview and novel excerpt Year in Review: 2002, by Andrew Hall If I add all the winter cuts listed above into the spring file, I already have 30,000 total words, more than half full. Let me know if anyone wants to make any arguments for restoring any of the cuts back into the winter file, but it would have to be a pretty good argument. Also, let me know if you DON'T want any of the winter cuts to appear in spring because you have something better or for any other reason. If we keep all these winter cuts in spring, we'll need about another 40,000 or so total words for spring. Thanks! ------_=_NextPart_001_01C2DCF0.EBCCE250 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Winter cuts/spring deadline
I=20 would be fine to run Cherry's piece in spring if it doesn't replace = something=20 that won't otherwise find publication.
-----Original Message-----
From: Gideon Burton=20 [mailto:Gideon_Burton@byu.edu]
Sent: Tuesday, February 25, = 2003=20 10:04 AM
To: = irreantum-ed@lists.xmission.com
Subject: RE:=20 [irr-ed] Winter cuts/spring deadline

What’s the reasoning on = permanently=20 cutting Cherry’s piece? I had thought there was a lot of = interest in this, and=20 the proceedings won’t be out for awhile.

 

Gideon

-----Original=20 Message-----
From: = owner-irreantum-ed@lists.xmission.com=20 [mailto:owner-irreantum-ed@lists.xmission.com] On Behalf Of = Travis=20 K. Manning
Sent: Monday, February 24, = 2003 6:13=20 PM
To:=20 irreantum-ed@lists.xmission.com
Subject: Re: [irr-ed] Winter = cuts/spring=20 deadline

 

Chris,

 

Yes, cut Cherry's piece permanently.  = I have a=20 really great essay on LDS women's book clubs for the Spring = issue.  We're=20 working through the second substantive edit on it now--it should be=20 good (3 to 4,000 words).  I may also have a short nature = essay=20 ('round 1,000 words) on Escalante.ready by March 15. =

 

Thanks for the early suggestions on setting = up an=20 editor's review process.  I really think we ought to move toward = setting=20 up something more formal.  Not right now, but the near=20 future.

 

Travis Manning

----- Original = Message -----=20

From: Christopher = Bigelow=20

To: 'irreantum-ed@lists.xm= ission.com'=20

Sent: Monday,=20 February 24, 2003 3:48 PM

Subject:=20 [irr-ed] Winter cuts/spring deadline

 

Hey, just a heads up = that my=20 word count on the winter issue somehow got up to 96,693 and we = usually print=20 about 70,000 or less, so I propose cutting the = following:

Essay=20
Elegant Angst: Mining the Treasures of Mormon Personal Essays, = 1982-2001=20
By Cherry B. Silver

Story=20
Invisible Life
By Katherine Woodbury

Humor, Emotion, and=20 Suspense
A review of Kerry Blair's Closing In (Covenant, = 2002)=20
Reviewed by Katie Parker

For the Defense: The = Life of Hugh=20 Winder Nibley
A review of Boyd = Petersen's Hugh Nibley: A Consecrated = Life (Greg=20 Kofford Books, 2003)
Reviewed by Greg Taggart

Heartwarming Lessons = from a=20 Lifetime of Sharing
A review of George=20 Durrant's Scones for the=20 Heart (Bonneville Books, 2002)
Reviewed by Arlene = Miera

The deadline for = spring text is=20 March 15, as you probably all know already. The cover will be Jana = Reiss of=20 Publishers Weekly and Sheri Dew, if she gets her interview done in=20 time.

So far, here's what I = have in=20 hand for spring:
Jana Reiss=20 interview
John Alba Cutler, Los escogidos y los despreciados: = Latino=20 Influences in LDS Literature
Linda Paulson Adams = interview=20 and novel excerpt
Year in Review: 2002, by Andrew = Hall=20

If I add all the = winter cuts=20 listed above into the spring file, I already have 30,000 total = words, more=20 than half full. Let me know if anyone wants to make any arguments = for=20 restoring any of the cuts back into the winter file, but it would = have to be=20 a pretty good argument. Also, let me know if you DON'T want any of = the=20 winter cuts to appear in spring because you have something better = or for any=20 other reason. If we keep all these winter cuts in spring, we'll = need about=20 another 40,000 or so total words for spring.

Thanks!=20 =

------_=_NextPart_001_01C2DCF0.EBCCE250-- -- Irreantum Editor's Discussion List ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Andrew Hall" Subject: [irr-ed] Sign me up Date: 26 Feb 2003 03:42:55 +0000 Jana says I should add myself to this list. Is this how I do it? Andrew Hall _________________________________________________________________ Help STOP SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail -- Irreantum Editor's Discussion List ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "jana" Subject: [irr-ed] New Board Member Date: 25 Feb 2003 19:57:41 -0800 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_00DC_01C2DD08.27AD4960 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Winter cuts/spring deadline Hi all! Just a quick note to let you know that I've recruited Andrew Hall to = be the Assistant Review Editor (or should that be Assistant Book Review = Editor?--it's more precise but kinda wordy). He'll be compiling/editing = the "Selected Recent Releases"column. Jana ------=_NextPart_000_00DC_01C2DD08.27AD4960 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Winter cuts/spring deadline
 
Hi all!
 
Just a quick note to let you know = that I've=20 recruited Andrew Hall to be the Assistant Review Editor (or should = that be=20 Assistant Book Review Editor?--it's more precise but kinda = wordy).  He'll=20 be compiling/editing the "Selected Recent = Releases"column.
 
Jana
------=_NextPart_000_00DC_01C2DD08.27AD4960-- -- Irreantum Editor's Discussion List ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Marny Parkin Subject: Re: [irr-ed] Winter cuts/spring deadline Date: 26 Feb 2003 09:46:36 -0700 >Story >Invisible Life >By Katherine Woodbury I have accepted a story by Katherine titled "Thin, Scarlet Line" for the next issue (about the fall of Jericho). Is that the one you mean? She had sent both of these stories to me, but I had rejected "Invisible Life." I'm confused; please help! Marny (The winter issue is the one with the YA/children's stuff, right?) -- Irreantum Editor's Discussion List ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Anderson, Tory" Subject: RE: [irr-ed] Winter cuts/spring deadline Date: 26 Feb 2003 09:45:47 -0700 Katherine Woodbury had sent "Invisible Lives" to me (also, I guess). I accepted it. She did write and wonder about "Thin, Scarlet Line." I knew nothing about that. Perhaps rather than publish two of her stories in a row I will speak to her about postponing publication of "Lives" or withdraw it altogether. Tory -----Original Message----- Sent: Wednesday, February 26, 2003 9:47 AM >Story >Invisible Life >By Katherine Woodbury I have accepted a story by Katherine titled "Thin, Scarlet Line" for the next issue (about the fall of Jericho). Is that the one you mean? She had sent both of these stories to me, but I had rejected "Invisible Life." I'm confused; please help! Marny (The winter issue is the one with the YA/children's stuff, right?) -- Irreantum Editor's Discussion List -- Irreantum Editor's Discussion List ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Christopher Bigelow Subject: RE: [irr-ed] Sign me up Date: 26 Feb 2003 10:12:53 -0700 This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C2DDBA.4C9B58E0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Anyone can post messages to irreantum-ed without registering, but to receive messages you have to send a message to majordomo@lists.xmission.com that says "subscribe irreantum-ed," and you may also have to be confirmed--I can't remember. So, Andrew, if you're properly signed on, you should receive this message twice, once through irreantum-ed and once from the CC direct to you. -----Original Message----- Sent: Tuesday, February 25, 2003 8:43 PM Jana says I should add myself to this list. Is this how I do it? Andrew Hall _________________________________________________________________ Help STOP SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail -- Irreantum Editor's Discussion List ------_=_NextPart_001_01C2DDBA.4C9B58E0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable RE: [irr-ed] Sign me up

Anyone can post messages to irreantum-ed without = registering, but to receive messages you have to send a message to = majordomo@lists.xmission.com that says "subscribe = irreantum-ed," and you may also have to be confirmed--I can't = remember.

So, Andrew, if you're properly signed on, you should = receive this message twice, once through irreantum-ed and once from the = CC direct to you.

-----Original Message-----
From: Andrew Hall [mailto:andrewrhall@hotmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, February 25, 2003 8:43 PM
To: irreantum-ed@lists.xmission.com
Subject: [irr-ed] Sign me up


Jana says I should add myself to this list. Is this = how I do it?

Andrew Hall





_______________________________________________________________= __
Help STOP SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months = FREE* 
http://join.msn.com/?page=3Dfeatures/junkmail


--
Irreantum Editor's Discussion List = <irreantum-ed@lists.xmission.com>

------_=_NextPart_001_01C2DDBA.4C9B58E0-- -- Irreantum Editor's Discussion List ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Travis K. Manning" Subject: Re: [irr-ed] Winter cuts/spring deadline Date: 26 Feb 2003 19:13:56 -0800 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0041_01C2DDCB.357736A0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Winter cuts/spring deadlineAs far as Cherry's piece, isn't the new = annual supposed to be out ASAP for the 2002 Presidential Address? If = that's the case, and we're going to be putting it online, then we would = have ready access to it ASAP, right. Then why publish it right around = the same time in two different formats. Perhaps I'm not understanding = when I say I expect the 2002 AM papers--including Cherry's paper--will = be published early in 2003, or ASAP. =20 Someone correct me if I have assumed incorrectly. That was my reasoning. Gideon, if you want to go to bat, maybe we could = still do it; then again, Chris is the "space" man and would have a = little better feel with the submissions as a whole. Travis ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Gideon Burton=20 To: irreantum-ed@lists.xmission.com=20 Sent: Tuesday, February 25, 2003 9:04 AM Subject: RE: [irr-ed] Winter cuts/spring deadline What's the reasoning on permanently cutting Cherry's piece? I had = thought there was a lot of interest in this, and the proceedings won't = be out for awhile. Gideon=20 -----Original Message----- From: owner-irreantum-ed@lists.xmission.com = [mailto:owner-irreantum-ed@lists.xmission.com] On Behalf Of Travis K. = Manning Sent: Monday, February 24, 2003 6:13 PM To: irreantum-ed@lists.xmission.com Subject: Re: [irr-ed] Winter cuts/spring deadline Chris, Yes, cut Cherry's piece permanently. I have a really great essay on = LDS women's book clubs for the Spring issue. We're working through the = second substantive edit on it now--it should be good (3 to 4,000 words). = I may also have a short nature essay ('round 1,000 words) on = Escalante.ready by March 15.=20 Thanks for the early suggestions on setting up an editor's review = process. I really think we ought to move toward setting up something = more formal. Not right now, but the near future. Travis Manning ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Christopher Bigelow=20 To: 'irreantum-ed@lists.xmission.com'=20 Sent: Monday, February 24, 2003 3:48 PM Subject: [irr-ed] Winter cuts/spring deadline Hey, just a heads up that my word count on the winter issue somehow = got up to 96,693 and we usually print about 70,000 or less, so I propose = cutting the following: Essay=20 Elegant Angst: Mining the Treasures of Mormon Personal Essays, = 1982-2001=20 By Cherry B. Silver=20 Story=20 Invisible Life=20 By Katherine Woodbury=20 Humor, Emotion, and Suspense=20 A review of Kerry Blair's Closing In (Covenant, 2002)=20 Reviewed by Katie Parker=20 For the Defense: The Life of Hugh Winder Nibley=20 A review of Boyd Petersen's Hugh Nibley: A Consecrated Life (Greg = Kofford Books, 2003)=20 Reviewed by Greg Taggart=20 Heartwarming Lessons from a Lifetime of Sharing=20 A review of George Durrant's Scones for the Heart (Bonneville Books, = 2002)=20 Reviewed by Arlene Miera=20 The deadline for spring text is March 15, as you probably all know = already. The cover will be Jana Reiss of Publishers Weekly and Sheri = Dew, if she gets her interview done in time. So far, here's what I have in hand for spring:=20 Jana Reiss interview=20 John Alba Cutler, Los escogidos y los despreciados: Latino = Influences in LDS Literature=20 Linda Paulson Adams interview and novel excerpt=20 Year in Review: 2002, by Andrew Hall=20 If I add all the winter cuts listed above into the spring file, I = already have 30,000 total words, more than half full. Let me know if = anyone wants to make any arguments for restoring any of the cuts back = into the winter file, but it would have to be a pretty good argument. = Also, let me know if you DON'T want any of the winter cuts to appear in = spring because you have something better or for any other reason. If we = keep all these winter cuts in spring, we'll need about another 40,000 or = so total words for spring.=20 Thanks!=20 ------=_NextPart_000_0041_01C2DDCB.357736A0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Winter cuts/spring deadline
As far as Cherry's piece, isn't the new annual = supposed to be=20 out ASAP for the 2002 Presidential Address?  If that's the case, = and we're=20 going to be putting it online, then we would have ready access to it = ASAP,=20 right.  Then why publish it right around the same time in two = different=20 formats.  Perhaps I'm not understanding when I say I expect the = 2002 AM=20 papers--including Cherry's paper--will be published early in 2003, or=20 ASAP. 
 
Someone correct me if I have assumed = incorrectly.
That was my reasoning.  Gideon, if you want to = go to bat,=20 maybe we could still do it; then again, Chris is the "space" man and = would have=20 a little better feel with the submissions as a whole.
Travis
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Gideon=20 Burton
To: irreantum-ed@lists.xmissi= on.com=20
Sent: Tuesday, February 25, = 2003 9:04=20 AM
Subject: RE: [irr-ed] Winter = cuts/spring=20 deadline

What=92s the reasoning on = permanently=20 cutting Cherry=92s piece? I had thought there was a lot of interest in = this, and=20 the proceedings won=92t be out for awhile.

 

Gideon

-----Original=20 Message-----
From: = owner-irreantum-ed@= lists.xmission.com=20 [mailto:owner-irreantum-ed@lists.xmission.com] On Behalf Of = Travis=20 K. Manning
Sent: Monday, February 24, 2003 = 6:13=20 PM
To:=20 irreantum-ed@lists.xmission.com
Subject: Re: [irr-ed] Winter = cuts/spring=20 deadline

 

Chris,

 

Yes, cut Cherry's piece permanently.  I = have a=20 really great essay on LDS women's book clubs for the Spring = issue.  We're=20 working through the second substantive edit on it now--it should be=20 good (3 to 4,000 words).  I may also have a short nature = essay=20 ('round 1,000 words) on Escalante.ready by March 15. =

 

Thanks for the early suggestions on setting = up an=20 editor's review process.  I really think we ought to move toward = setting=20 up something more formal.  Not right now, but the near=20 future.

 

Travis Manning

----- Original Message = -----=20

From: Christopher = Bigelow=20

To: 'irreantum-ed@lists.xmi= ssion.com'=20

Sent: Monday,=20 February 24, 2003 3:48 PM

Subject:=20 [irr-ed] Winter cuts/spring deadline

 

Hey, just a heads up = that my=20 word count on the winter issue somehow got up to 96,693 and we = usually print=20 about 70,000 or less, so I propose cutting the = following:

Essay=20
Elegant Angst: Mining the Treasures of Mormon Personal Essays, = 1982-2001=20
By Cherry B. Silver

Story=20
Invisible Life
By Katherine Woodbury

Humor, Emotion, and=20 Suspense
A review of Kerry Blair's Closing In (Covenant, 2002) =
Reviewed by Katie Parker

For the Defense: The = Life of Hugh=20 Winder Nibley
A review of Boyd = Petersen's Hugh Nibley: A Consecrated = Life (Greg=20 Kofford Books, 2003)
Reviewed by Greg Taggart

Heartwarming Lessons = from a=20 Lifetime of Sharing
A review of George=20 Durrant's Scones for the=20 Heart (Bonneville Books, 2002)
Reviewed by Arlene = Miera

The deadline for = spring text is=20 March 15, as you probably all know already. The cover will be Jana = Reiss of=20 Publishers Weekly and Sheri Dew, if she gets her interview done in=20 time.

So far, here's what I = have in=20 hand for spring:
Jana Reiss=20 interview
John Alba Cutler, Los escogidos y los despreciados: = Latino=20 Influences in LDS Literature
Linda Paulson Adams = interview=20 and novel excerpt
Year in Review: 2002, by Andrew = Hall=20

If I add all the = winter cuts=20 listed above into the spring file, I already have 30,000 total = words, more=20 than half full. Let me know if anyone wants to make any arguments = for=20 restoring any of the cuts back into the winter file, but it would = have to be=20 a pretty good argument. Also, let me know if you DON'T want any of = the=20 winter cuts to appear in spring because you have something better or = for any=20 other reason. If we keep all these winter cuts in spring, we'll need = about=20 another 40,000 or so total words for spring.

Thanks!=20

------=_NextPart_000_0041_01C2DDCB.357736A0-- -- Irreantum Editor's Discussion List ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Christopher Bigelow Subject: RE: [irr-ed] Winter cuts/spring deadline Date: 27 Feb 2003 09:39:31 -0700 This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C2DE7E.CD7B4A50 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" The new annual should have been out this month, but we have a new editor (Linda Adams at BYU) who just took over and I don't know how long it will take her. I don't know of any plans to put anything from the annual online. Putting anything in both the annual and Irreantum would mean an overlap of about 300 readers. Irreantum would provide an additional 200 readers beyond the annual. I think it's pretty rare we should publish a piece in both places. The only time I've done it in recent memory was printing John-Charles's essay about Brigham City because I thought it was unusually interesting and we had a rebuttal from Scott Parkin to include with it. As of right now, Cherry's piece is in the spring file. But I can cut it first if we run out of space, or I can take it out if we decide to adopt a firmer policy of not double publishing in Irreantum and the AML Annual. -----Original Message----- Sent: Wednesday, February 26, 2003 8:14 PM As far as Cherry's piece, isn't the new annual supposed to be out ASAP for the 2002 Presidential Address? If that's the case, and we're going to be putting it online, then we would have ready access to it ASAP, right. Then why publish it right around the same time in two different formats. Perhaps I'm not understanding when I say I expect the 2002 AM papers--including Cherry's paper--will be published early in 2003, or ASAP. Someone correct me if I have assumed incorrectly. That was my reasoning. Gideon, if you want to go to bat, maybe we could still do it; then again, Chris is the "space" man and would have a little better feel with the submissions as a whole. Travis ----- Original Message ----- Sent: Tuesday, February 25, 2003 9:04 AM What's the reasoning on permanently cutting Cherry's piece? I had thought there was a lot of interest in this, and the proceedings won't be out for awhile. Gideon -----Original Message----- [mailto:owner-irreantum-ed@lists.xmission.com] On Behalf Of Travis K. Manning Sent: Monday, February 24, 2003 6:13 PM Chris, Yes, cut Cherry's piece permanently. I have a really great essay on LDS women's book clubs for the Spring issue. We're working through the second substantive edit on it now--it should be good (3 to 4,000 words). I may also have a short nature essay ('round 1,000 words) on Escalante.ready by March 15. Thanks for the early suggestions on setting up an editor's review process. I really think we ought to move toward setting up something more formal. Not right now, but the near future. Travis Manning ----- Original Message ----- Sent: Monday, February 24, 2003 3:48 PM Hey, just a heads up that my word count on the winter issue somehow got up to 96,693 and we usually print about 70,000 or less, so I propose cutting the following: Essay Elegant Angst: Mining the Treasures of Mormon Personal Essays, 1982-2001 By Cherry B. Silver Story Invisible Life By Katherine Woodbury Humor, Emotion, and Suspense A review of Kerry Blair's Closing In (Covenant, 2002) Reviewed by Katie Parker For the Defense: The Life of Hugh Winder Nibley A review of Boyd Petersen's Hugh Nibley: A Consecrated Life (Greg Kofford Books, 2003) Reviewed by Greg Taggart Heartwarming Lessons from a Lifetime of Sharing A review of George Durrant's Scones for the Heart (Bonneville Books, 2002) Reviewed by Arlene Miera The deadline for spring text is March 15, as you probably all know already. The cover will be Jana Reiss of Publishers Weekly and Sheri Dew, if she gets her interview done in time. So far, here's what I have in hand for spring: Jana Reiss interview John Alba Cutler, Los escogidos y los despreciados: Latino Influences in LDS Literature Linda Paulson Adams interview and novel excerpt Year in Review: 2002, by Andrew Hall If I add all the winter cuts listed above into the spring file, I already have 30,000 total words, more than half full. Let me know if anyone wants to make any arguments for restoring any of the cuts back into the winter file, but it would have to be a pretty good argument. Also, let me know if you DON'T want any of the winter cuts to appear in spring because you have something better or for any other reason. If we keep all these winter cuts in spring, we'll need about another 40,000 or so total words for spring. Thanks! ------_=_NextPart_001_01C2DE7E.CD7B4A50 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Winter cuts/spring deadline
The new annual should have been out this month, but we have a new editor (Linda Adams at BYU) who just took over and I don't know how long it will take her.
 
I don't know of any plans to put anything from the annual online.
 
Putting anything in both the annual and Irreantum would mean an overlap of about 300 readers. Irreantum would provide an additional 200 readers beyond the annual. I think it's pretty rare we should publish a piece in both places. The only time I've done it in recent memory was printing John-Charles's essay about Brigham City because I thought it was unusually interesting and we had a rebuttal from Scott Parkin to include with it.
 
As of right now, Cherry's piece is in the spring file. But I can cut it first if we run out of space, or I can take it out if we decide to adopt a firmer policy of not double publishing in Irreantum and the AML Annual.
-----Original Message-----
From: Travis K. Manning [mailto:tmanning.eagle@sisna.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February 26, 2003 8:14 PM
To: irreantum-ed@lists.xmission.com
Subject: Re: [irr-ed] Winter cuts/spring deadline

As far as Cherry's piece, isn't the new annual supposed to be out ASAP for the 2002 Presidential Address?  If that's the case, and we're going to be putting it online, then we would have ready access to it ASAP, right.  Then why publish it right around the same time in two different formats.  Perhaps I'm not understanding when I say I expect the 2002 AM papers--including Cherry's paper--will be published early in 2003, or ASAP. 
 
Someone correct me if I have assumed incorrectly.
That was my reasoning.  Gideon, if you want to go to bat, maybe we could still do it; then again, Chris is the "space" man and would have a little better feel with the submissions as a whole.
Travis
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, February 25, 2003 9:04 AM
Subject: RE: [irr-ed] Winter cuts/spring deadline

What's the reasoning on permanently cutting Cherry's piece? I had thought there was a lot of interest in this, and the proceedings won't be out for awhile.

 

Gideon

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-irreantum-ed@lists.xmission.com [mailto:owner-irreantum-ed@lists.xmission.com] On Behalf Of Travis K. Manning
Sent: Monday, February 24, 2003 6:13 PM
To: irreantum-ed@lists.xmission.com
Subject: Re: [irr-ed] Winter cuts/spring deadline

 

Chris,

 

Yes, cut Cherry's piece permanently.  I have a really great essay on LDS women's book clubs for the Spring issue.  We're working through the second substantive edit on it now--it should be good (3 to 4,000 words).  I may also have a short nature essay ('round 1,000 words) on Escalante.ready by March 15.

 

Thanks for the early suggestions on setting up an editor's review process.  I really think we ought to move toward setting up something more formal.  Not right now, but the near future.

 

Travis Manning

----- Original Message -----

Sent: Monday, February 24, 2003 3:48 PM

Subject: [irr-ed] Winter cuts/spring deadline

 

Hey, just a heads up that my word count on the winter issue somehow got up to 96,693 and we usually print about 70,000 or less, so I propose cutting the following:

Essay
Elegant Angst: Mining the Treasures of Mormon Personal Essays, 1982-2001
By Cherry B. Silver

Story
Invisible Life
By Katherine Woodbury

Humor, Emotion, and Suspense
A review of Kerry Blair's Closing In (Covenant, 2002)
Reviewed by Katie Parker

For the Defense: The Life of Hugh Winder Nibley
A review of Boyd Petersen's Hugh Nibley: A Consecrated Life (Greg Kofford Books, 2003)
Reviewed by Greg Taggart

Heartwarming Lessons from a Lifetime of Sharing
A review of George Durrant's Scones for the Heart (Bonneville Books, 2002)
Reviewed by Arlene Miera

The deadline for spring text is March 15, as you probably all know already. The cover will be Jana Reiss of Publishers Weekly and Sheri Dew, if she gets her interview done in time.

So far, here's what I have in hand for spring:
Jana Reiss interview
John Alba Cutler, Los escogidos y los despreciados: Latino Influences in LDS Literature
Linda Paulson Adams interview and novel excerpt
Year in Review: 2002, by Andrew Hall

If I add all the winter cuts listed above into the spring file, I already have 30,000 total words, more than half full. Let me know if anyone wants to make any arguments for restoring any of the cuts back into the winter file, but it would have to be a pretty good argument. Also, let me know if you DON'T want any of the winter cuts to appear in spring because you have something better or for any other reason. If we keep all these winter cuts in spring, we'll need about another 40,000 or so total words for spring.

Thanks!

------_=_NextPart_001_01C2DE7E.CD7B4A50-- -- Irreantum Editor's Discussion List ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Gideon Burton Subject: RE: [irr-ed] Winter cuts/spring deadline Date: 27 Feb 2003 09:46:41 -0700 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_003A_01C2DE45.2507E7E0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I don't expect last year's annual, which will include Cherry's address, = to come out for 2-3 months. Linda is new at her job and she is = mid-semester. Also, let's not assume that online and print publication is duplication. = In general, these reach different audiences (and we have made no firm = provision yet, anyway, for online publication). Chris should have his say = regarding space, of course. I think the real issue is whether Cherry's piece on personal essays has merit to be published in Irreantum. I think it does, since we have been talking about giving more prominence to personal = essays and memoirs. I'm a little surprised at your reluctance, Travis, = regarding her piece, given your interests, but maybe I don't know all the = variables. =20 Gideon=20 -----Original Message----- [mailto:owner-irreantum-ed@lists.xmission.com] On Behalf Of Travis K. Manning Sent: Wednesday, February 26, 2003 8:14 PM =20 As far as Cherry's piece, isn't the new annual supposed to be out ASAP = for the 2002 Presidential Address? If that's the case, and we're going to = be putting it online, then we would have ready access to it ASAP, right. = Then why publish it right around the same time in two different formats. = Perhaps I'm not understanding when I say I expect the 2002 AM papers--including Cherry's paper--will be published early in 2003, or ASAP. =20 =20 Someone correct me if I have assumed incorrectly. That was my reasoning. Gideon, if you want to go to bat, maybe we could still do it; then again, Chris is the "space" man and would have a = little better feel with the submissions as a whole. Travis ----- Original Message -----=20 Sent: Tuesday, February 25, 2003 9:04 AM =20 What's the reasoning on permanently cutting Cherry's piece? I had = thought there was a lot of interest in this, and the proceedings won't be out = for awhile. =20 Gideon=20 -----Original Message----- [mailto:owner-irreantum-ed@lists.xmission.com] On Behalf Of Travis K. Manning Sent: Monday, February 24, 2003 6:13 PM =20 Chris, =20 Yes, cut Cherry's piece permanently. I have a really great essay on LDS women's book clubs for the Spring issue. We're working through the = second substantive edit on it now--it should be good (3 to 4,000 words). I may also have a short nature essay ('round 1,000 words) on Escalante.ready = by March 15.=20 =20 Thanks for the early suggestions on setting up an editor's review = process. I really think we ought to move toward setting up something more formal. Not right now, but the near future. =20 Travis Manning ----- Original Message -----=20 Sent: Monday, February 24, 2003 3:48 PM =20 Hey, just a heads up that my word count on the winter issue somehow got = up to 96,693 and we usually print about 70,000 or less, so I propose = cutting the following: Essay=20 Elegant Angst: Mining the Treasures of Mormon Personal Essays, 1982-2001 = By Cherry B. Silver=20 Story=20 Invisible Life=20 By Katherine Woodbury=20 Humor, Emotion, and Suspense=20 A review of Kerry Blair's Closing In (Covenant, 2002)=20 Reviewed by Katie Parker=20 For the Defense: The Life of Hugh Winder Nibley=20 A review of Boyd Petersen's Hugh Nibley: A Consecrated Life (Greg = Kofford Books, 2003)=20 Reviewed by Greg Taggart=20 Heartwarming Lessons from a Lifetime of Sharing=20 A review of George Durrant's Scones for the Heart (Bonneville Books, = 2002)=20 Reviewed by Arlene Miera=20 The deadline for spring text is March 15, as you probably all know = already. The cover will be Jana Reiss of Publishers Weekly and Sheri Dew, if she = gets her interview done in time. So far, here's what I have in hand for spring:=20 Jana Reiss interview=20 John Alba Cutler, Los escogidos y los despreciados: Latino Influences in = LDS Literature=20 Linda Paulson Adams interview and novel excerpt=20 Year in Review: 2002, by Andrew Hall=20 If I add all the winter cuts listed above into the spring file, I = already have 30,000 total words, more than half full. Let me know if anyone = wants to make any arguments for restoring any of the cuts back into the winter = file, but it would have to be a pretty good argument. Also, let me know if you DON'T want any of the winter cuts to appear in spring because you have something better or for any other reason. If we keep all these winter = cuts in spring, we'll need about another 40,000 or so total words for spring. = Thanks!=20 ------=_NextPart_000_003A_01C2DE45.2507E7E0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Winter cuts/spring deadline

I don’t expect last = year’s annual, which will include Cherry’s address, to come out for 2-3 = months. Linda is new at her job and she is mid-semester. Also, let’s not = assume that online and print publication is duplication. In general, these = reach different audiences (and we have made no firm provision yet, anyway, for = online publication). Chris should have his say regarding space, of course. I = think the real issue is whether Cherry’s piece on personal essays has merit = to be published in Irreantum. I think it does, since we have been talking = about giving more prominence to personal essays and memoirs. I’m a = little surprised at your reluctance, Travis, regarding her piece, given your interests, but maybe I don’t know all the = variables.

 

Gideon

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-irreantum-ed@lists.xmission.com [mailto:owner-irreantum-ed@lists.xmission.com] On Behalf Of Travis K. = Manning
Sent: Wednesday, February = 26, 2003 8:14 PM
To: irreantum-ed@lists.xmission.com
Subject: Re: [irr-ed] = Winter cuts/spring deadline

 

As far as Cherry's piece, isn't the new annual supposed to be = out ASAP for the 2002 Presidential Address?  If that's the case, and we're = going to be putting it online, then we would have ready access to it ASAP, = right.  Then why publish it right around the same time in two different = formats.  Perhaps I'm not understanding when I say I expect the 2002 AM = papers--including Cherry's paper--will be published early in 2003, or ASAP.  =

 

Someone correct me if I have assumed = incorrectly.

That was my reasoning.  Gideon, if you want to go to bat, = maybe we could still do it; then again, Chris is the "space" man and = would have a little better feel with the submissions as a = whole.

Travis

----- Original Message -----

Sent: = Tuesday, February 25, 2003 9:04 AM

Subject: RE: = [irr-ed] Winter cuts/spring deadline

 

What’s the reasoning on = permanently cutting Cherry’s piece? I had thought there was a lot of interest = in this, and the proceedings won’t be out for = awhile.

 

Gideon

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-irreantum-ed@= lists.xmission.com [mailto:owner-irreantum-ed@lists.xmission.com] On Behalf Of Travis K. Manning
Sent: Monday, February = 24, 2003 6:13 PM
To: irreantum-ed@lists.xmission.com
Subject: Re: [irr-ed] = Winter cuts/spring deadline

 

Chris,

 

Yes, cut Cherry's piece permanently.  I have a really great = essay on LDS women's book clubs for the Spring issue.  We're working = through the second substantive edit on it now--it should be good (3 to 4,000 words).  I may also have a short nature essay ('round 1,000 words) = on Escalante.ready by March 15.

 

Thanks for the early suggestions on setting up an editor's = review process.  I really think we ought to move toward setting up = something more formal.  Not right now, but the near future.

 

Travis Manning

----- Original Message -----

Sent: Monday, = February 24, 2003 3:48 PM

Subject: = [irr-ed] Winter cuts/spring deadline

 

Hey, just a heads up that my word count on the winter issue somehow got up to = 96,693 and we usually print about 70,000 or less, so I propose cutting the = following:

Essay
Elegant Angst: Mining the Treasures of Mormon Personal Essays, 1982-2001 =
By Cherry B. Silver

Story
Invisible Life
By Katherine Woodbury

Humor, Emotion, and Suspense
A review of Kerry Blair's Closing = In (Covenant, 2002)
Reviewed by Katie Parker

For the Defense: The Life of Hugh Winder = Nibley
A review of Boyd Petersen's Hugh = Nibley: A Consecrated Life (Greg Kofford Books, 2003)
Reviewed by Greg Taggart

Heartwarming Lessons from a Lifetime of = Sharing
A review of George Durrant's Scones = for the Heart (Bonneville Books, 2002)
Reviewed by Arlene Miera

The deadline for spring text is March 15, as you probably all know already. = The cover will be Jana Reiss of Publishers Weekly and Sheri Dew, if she gets = her interview done in time.

So far, here's what I have in hand for spring:
Jana Reiss interview
John Alba Cutler, Los escogidos y = los despreciados: Latino Influences in LDS Literature
Linda Paulson Adams interview and novel excerpt
Year in Review: 2002, by Andrew Hall

If I add all the winter cuts listed above into the spring file, I already = have 30,000 total words, more than half full. Let me know if anyone wants to = make any arguments for restoring any of the cuts back into the winter file, = but it would have to be a pretty good argument. Also, let me know if you DON'T = want any of the winter cuts to appear in spring because you have something = better or for any other reason. If we keep all these winter cuts in spring, we'll = need about another 40,000 or so total words for spring.

Thanks!

------=_NextPart_000_003A_01C2DE45.2507E7E0-- -- Irreantum Editor's Discussion List ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Christopher Bigelow Subject: [irr-ed] Irreantum survey Date: 27 Feb 2003 10:30:18 -0700 This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C2DE85.E5F43A40 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Marny got us started on an Irreantum survey. Does anyone have any additions or suggestions for the following: Do you generally read Irreantum cover to cover? If not, what parts do you read most? What parts do you think are most important? (or rank these parts by importance) Are there any parts you never read? Would you like to see more pages in the mag? If so, which parts would you like to see expanded? If we had to cut pages, which parts would you not mind losing? Are you a member of the AML? If so, do you feel Irreantum contributes to AML's mission? Do you feel Irreantum covers AML news/events sufficiently? Do you subscribe to other LDS-oriented magazines? Which? If so, what do you see as Irreantum's place/niche? (are we different enough?) How many people usually read this copy? (do you lend it?) You should also have sections for both comments and referrals. You may also want to ask about reading habits--novels (LDS vs. regular mainstream vs. genre), memoirs/personal essays, short stories, poetry, nonfiction You could also ask about demographics--age range, education, profession If you do ask about these last two, you may want to consider an annual or biennial survey to track how these things change. You could also ask about the web site--do they use it, what they like/dislike, what they'd like to see You may also want to ask if they'd be willing to help with AML functions or Irreantum proofreading ------_=_NextPart_001_01C2DE85.E5F43A40 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Irreantum survey

Marny got us started on an Irreantum survey. Does anyone have any additions or suggestions for the following:

Do you generally read Irreantum cover to cover?
If not, what parts do you read most?
What parts do you think are most important? (or rank these parts by importance)
Are there any parts you never read?
Would you like to see more pages in the mag?
If so, which parts would you like to see expanded?
If we had to cut pages, which parts would you not mind losing?
Are you a member of the AML?
If so, do you feel Irreantum contributes to AML's mission?
Do you feel Irreantum covers AML news/events sufficiently?
Do you subscribe to other LDS-oriented magazines? Which?
If so, what do you see as Irreantum's place/niche? (are we different enough?)
How many people usually read this copy? (do you lend it?)

You should also have sections for both comments and referrals.
You may also want to ask about reading habits--novels (LDS vs.
regular mainstream vs. genre), memoirs/personal essays, short
stories, poetry, nonfiction
You could also ask about demographics--age range, education, profession

If you do ask about these last two, you may want to consider an
annual or biennial survey to track how these things change.

You could also ask about the web site--do they use it, what they
like/dislike, what they'd like to see
You may also want to ask if they'd be willing to help with AML
functions or Irreantum proofreading

------_=_NextPart_001_01C2DE85.E5F43A40-- -- Irreantum Editor's Discussion List ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Travis K. Manning" Subject: Re: [irr-ed] Winter cuts/spring deadline Date: 28 Feb 2003 19:58:36 -0800 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0013_01C2DF63.C77CDAC0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Winter cuts/spring deadlineConcerning Cherry's piece on essays, I guess = my thoughts are there are others out there waiting to break into print. = If we were hankering to fill space, yes, let's use Cherry's piece. To = answer Gideon's comment about Cherry's piece, I know essays are a fav of = mine, but I just want to make sure we're providing the opportunity for = many to publish. I like the idea of establishing Mormon essays as an = important genre of world literature, and I think we can do that by = publishing these essays wide and far. I don't know. I mean, Cherry's = piece is a critical piece about essays, versus others I have in the can = that are in themselves personal essays. And, if Cherry's piece is also = going to be published in the AML Annual, and online--whereas other = essayists I have in the can are not, they can only potentially publish = once in Irreantum--I am reluctant to publish it a third time, again, = while an Irreantum "first-timer" becomes a zero timer because we've = over-published a piece. Those are my thoughts any way. Breadth and = depth. Meaning, publish widely, as many good essays as we can, and = publish the in-depth analyses, like Cherry's--but utilizing our three = publishing sources: AML Annual, AML Annual online, and Irreantum. Glad = we're talking about this as I'm sure this will be a recurring issue. Travis ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Gideon Burton=20 To: irreantum-ed@lists.xmission.com=20 Sent: Thursday, February 27, 2003 8:46 AM Subject: RE: [irr-ed] Winter cuts/spring deadline I don't expect last year's annual, which will include Cherry's = address, to come out for 2-3 months. Linda is new at her job and she is = mid-semester. Also, let's not assume that online and print publication = is duplication. In general, these reach different audiences (and we have = made no firm provision yet, anyway, for online publication). Chris = should have his say regarding space, of course. I think the real issue = is whether Cherry's piece on personal essays has merit to be published = in Irreantum. I think it does, since we have been talking about giving = more prominence to personal essays and memoirs. I'm a little surprised = at your reluctance, Travis, regarding her piece, given your interests, = but maybe I don't know all the variables. Gideon=20 -----Original Message----- From: owner-irreantum-ed@lists.xmission.com = [mailto:owner-irreantum-ed@lists.xmission.com] On Behalf Of Travis K. = Manning Sent: Wednesday, February 26, 2003 8:14 PM To: irreantum-ed@lists.xmission.com Subject: Re: [irr-ed] Winter cuts/spring deadline As far as Cherry's piece, isn't the new annual supposed to be out ASAP = for the 2002 Presidential Address? If that's the case, and we're going = to be putting it online, then we would have ready access to it ASAP, = right. Then why publish it right around the same time in two different = formats. Perhaps I'm not understanding when I say I expect the 2002 AM = papers--including Cherry's paper--will be published early in 2003, or = ASAP. =20 Someone correct me if I have assumed incorrectly. That was my reasoning. Gideon, if you want to go to bat, maybe we = could still do it; then again, Chris is the "space" man and would have a = little better feel with the submissions as a whole. Travis ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Gideon Burton=20 To: irreantum-ed@lists.xmission.com=20 Sent: Tuesday, February 25, 2003 9:04 AM Subject: RE: [irr-ed] Winter cuts/spring deadline What's the reasoning on permanently cutting Cherry's piece? I had = thought there was a lot of interest in this, and the proceedings won't = be out for awhile. Gideon=20 -----Original Message----- From: owner-irreantum-ed@lists.xmission.com = [mailto:owner-irreantum-ed@lists.xmission.com] On Behalf Of Travis K. = Manning Sent: Monday, February 24, 2003 6:13 PM To: irreantum-ed@lists.xmission.com Subject: Re: [irr-ed] Winter cuts/spring deadline Chris, Yes, cut Cherry's piece permanently. I have a really great essay on = LDS women's book clubs for the Spring issue. We're working through the = second substantive edit on it now--it should be good (3 to 4,000 words). = I may also have a short nature essay ('round 1,000 words) on = Escalante.ready by March 15.=20 Thanks for the early suggestions on setting up an editor's review = process. I really think we ought to move toward setting up something = more formal. Not right now, but the near future. Travis Manning ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Christopher Bigelow=20 To: 'irreantum-ed@lists.xmission.com'=20 Sent: Monday, February 24, 2003 3:48 PM Subject: [irr-ed] Winter cuts/spring deadline Hey, just a heads up that my word count on the winter issue = somehow got up to 96,693 and we usually print about 70,000 or less, so I = propose cutting the following: Essay=20 Elegant Angst: Mining the Treasures of Mormon Personal Essays, = 1982-2001=20 By Cherry B. Silver=20 Story=20 Invisible Life=20 By Katherine Woodbury=20 Humor, Emotion, and Suspense=20 A review of Kerry Blair's Closing In (Covenant, 2002)=20 Reviewed by Katie Parker=20 For the Defense: The Life of Hugh Winder Nibley=20 A review of Boyd Petersen's Hugh Nibley: A Consecrated Life (Greg = Kofford Books, 2003)=20 Reviewed by Greg Taggart=20 Heartwarming Lessons from a Lifetime of Sharing=20 A review of George Durrant's Scones for the Heart (Bonneville = Books, 2002)=20 Reviewed by Arlene Miera=20 The deadline for spring text is March 15, as you probably all know = already. The cover will be Jana Reiss of Publishers Weekly and Sheri = Dew, if she gets her interview done in time. So far, here's what I have in hand for spring:=20 Jana Reiss interview=20 John Alba Cutler, Los escogidos y los despreciados: Latino = Influences in LDS Literature=20 Linda Paulson Adams interview and novel excerpt=20 Year in Review: 2002, by Andrew Hall=20 If I add all the winter cuts listed above into the spring file, I = already have 30,000 total words, more than half full. Let me know if = anyone wants to make any arguments for restoring any of the cuts back = into the winter file, but it would have to be a pretty good argument. = Also, let me know if you DON'T want any of the winter cuts to appear in = spring because you have something better or for any other reason. If we = keep all these winter cuts in spring, we'll need about another 40,000 or = so total words for spring.=20 Thanks!=20 ------=_NextPart_000_0013_01C2DF63.C77CDAC0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Winter cuts/spring deadline
Concerning Cherry's piece on essays, I guess my = thoughts are=20 there are others out there waiting to break into print.  If we were = hankering to fill space, yes, let's use Cherry's piece.  To answer = Gideon's=20 comment about Cherry's piece, I know essays are a fav of mine, but I = just want=20 to make sure we're providing the opportunity for many to publish.  = I like=20 the idea of establishing Mormon essays as an important genre of world=20 literature, and I think we can do that by publishing these essays wide = and=20 far.  I don't know.  I mean, Cherry's piece is a critical = piece about=20 essays, versus others I have in the can that are in themselves personal=20 essays.  And, if Cherry's piece is also going to be published in = the AML=20 Annual, and online--whereas other essayists I have in the can are not, = they can=20 only potentially publish once in Irreantum--I am reluctant to publish it = a third=20 time, again, while an Irreantum "first-timer" becomes a zero timer = because we've=20 over-published a piece.  Those are my thoughts any way.  = Breadth and=20 depth.  Meaning, publish widely, as many good essays as we can, and = publish=20 the in-depth analyses, like Cherry's--but utilizing our three publishing = sources:  AML Annual, AML Annual online, and Irreantum.  Glad = we're=20 talking about this as I'm sure this will be a recurring = issue.
 
Travis
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Gideon=20 Burton
To: irreantum-ed@lists.xmissi= on.com=20
Sent: Thursday, February 27, = 2003 8:46=20 AM
Subject: RE: [irr-ed] Winter = cuts/spring=20 deadline

I don=92t expect last year=92s = annual, which=20 will include Cherry=92s address, to come out for 2-3 months. Linda is = new at her=20 job and she is mid-semester. Also, let=92s not assume that online and = print=20 publication is duplication. In general, these reach different = audiences (and=20 we have made no firm provision yet, anyway, for online publication). = Chris=20 should have his say regarding space, of course. I think the real issue = is=20 whether Cherry=92s piece on personal essays has merit to be published = in=20 Irreantum. I think it does, since we have been talking about giving = more=20 prominence to personal essays and memoirs. I=92m a little surprised at = your=20 reluctance, Travis, regarding her piece, given your interests, but = maybe I=20 don=92t know all the variables.

 

Gideon

-----Original=20 Message-----
From:=20 owner-irreantum-ed@lists.xmission.com=20 [mailto:owner-irreantum-ed@lists.xmission.com] On Behalf Of = Travis=20 K. Manning
Sent: Wednesday, February 26, = 2003 8:14=20 PM
To:=20 irreantum-ed@lists.xmission.com
Subject: Re: [irr-ed] Winter = cuts/spring=20 deadline

 

As far as Cherry's piece, isn't the new = annual=20 supposed to be out ASAP for the 2002 Presidential Address?  If = that's the=20 case, and we're going to be putting it online, then we would have = ready access=20 to it ASAP, right.  Then why publish it right around the same = time in two=20 different formats.  Perhaps I'm not understanding when I say I = expect the=20 2002 AM papers--including Cherry's paper--will be published early in = 2003, or=20 ASAP. 

 

Someone correct me if I have assumed=20 incorrectly.

That was my reasoning.  Gideon, if you = want to go=20 to bat, maybe we could still do it; then again, Chris is the "space" = man and=20 would have a little better feel with the submissions as a=20 whole.

Travis

----- Original Message = -----=20

From: Gideon=20 Burton

To: irreantum-ed@lists.xmissi= on.com=20

Sent:=20 Tuesday, February 25, 2003 9:04 AM

Subject: RE:=20 [irr-ed] Winter cuts/spring deadline

 

What=92s the reasoning on = permanently=20 cutting Cherry=92s piece? I had thought there was a lot of interest = in this,=20 and the proceedings won=92t be out for awhile.

 

Gideon

-----Original=20 Message-----
From: owner-irreantum-ed@= lists.xmission.com=20 [mailto:owner-irreantum-ed@lists.xmission.com] On Behalf Of Travis K.=20 Manning
Sent: = Monday,=20 February 24, 2003 6:13 PM
To:=20 irreantum-ed@lists.xmission.com
Subject: Re: [irr-ed] Winter=20 cuts/spring deadline

 

Chris,

 

Yes, cut Cherry's piece permanently.  = I have a=20 really great essay on LDS women's book clubs for the Spring = issue. =20 We're working through the second substantive edit on it now--it = should be=20 good (3 to 4,000 words).  I may also have a short nature = essay=20 ('round 1,000 words) on Escalante.ready by March 15.=20

 

Thanks for the early suggestions on = setting up an=20 editor's review process.  I really think we ought to move = toward=20 setting up something more formal.  Not right now, but the near=20 future.

 

Travis Manning

----- Original = Message -----=20

From: Christopher = Bigelow=20

To: 'irreantum-ed@lists.xmi= ssion.com'=20

Sent:=20 Monday, February 24, 2003 3:48 PM

Subject:=20 [irr-ed] Winter cuts/spring deadline

 

Hey, just a heads up = that my=20 word count on the winter issue somehow got up to 96,693 and we = usually=20 print about 70,000 or less, so I propose cutting the=20 following:

Essay=20
Elegant Angst: Mining the Treasures of Mormon Personal Essays, = 1982-2001
By Cherry B. Silver

Story=20
Invisible Life
By Katherine Woodbury

Humor, Emotion, and=20 Suspense
A review of Kerry Blair's Closing In (Covenant, = 2002)=20
Reviewed by Katie Parker

For the Defense: The = Life of=20 Hugh Winder Nibley
A review of Boyd=20 Petersen's Hugh Nibley: A = Consecrated=20 Life (Greg Kofford Books, 2003)
Reviewed by Greg = Taggart=20

Heartwarming Lessons = from a=20 Lifetime of Sharing
A review of George=20 Durrant's Scones for the=20 Heart (Bonneville Books, 2002)
Reviewed by Arlene = Miera=20

The deadline for = spring text=20 is March 15, as you probably all know already. The cover will be = Jana=20 Reiss of Publishers Weekly and Sheri Dew, if she gets her = interview done=20 in time.

So far, here's what = I have in=20 hand for spring:
Jana Reiss=20 interview
John Alba Cutler, Los escogidos y los despreciados: = Latino=20 Influences in LDS Literature
Linda Paulson Adams = interview=20 and novel excerpt
Year in Review: 2002, by = Andrew Hall=20

If I add all the = winter cuts=20 listed above into the spring file, I already have 30,000 total = words, more=20 than half full. Let me know if anyone wants to make any arguments = for=20 restoring any of the cuts back into the winter file, but it would = have to=20 be a pretty good argument. Also, let me know if you DON'T want any = of the=20 winter cuts to appear in spring because you have something better = or for=20 any other reason. If we keep all these winter cuts in spring, = we'll need=20 about another 40,000 or so total words for spring. =

Thanks!=20 =

------=_NextPart_000_0013_01C2DF63.C77CDAC0-- -- Irreantum Editor's Discussion List