.
This blog was down for several days this month because someone forgot to pay for the domain name or hosting or something rudimentary like that.
The accompanying website has been down for a long time for reasons unclarified.
I suspect that with the demise of Irreantum, membership in the Association for Mormon Letters is at a low, low ebb. If so, the number of people who have standing to demand that the AML organization respond to them are dwindling few.
Me, I paid up for a lifetime membership, so I definitely have standing, but who can I talk to about any of these things?
The president’s far away in Hawaii and Jonathan manages this blog, but other than that, I know nothing other than that Jonathan had to contact some mysterious other person to get things running again.
About a year before Irreantum died, there was some asking from the then-current editors for help, but since then I can’t recall hearing anything from anyone about what’s needed. Maybe it’s because I can’t get to the annual meeting. I don’t know. What I do know is that this blog seems to be the only way I get news, but it’s written by members and friends of the AML—not leaders thereof.
Who’s accountable? If I want to help or I want to complain or I want to be part of the solution or I just want any sense of anything, where do I go?
I’m not looking for someone to crucify; I just have no idea what’s going on.
What is the AML anyway, and who runs it?
Good questions, Eric.
Here’s another: my membership lapsed with Irreantum’s passing. Who do I contact about renewing?
Also, you say
and
Having attended the AML conference for the past many years, I can’t say that I have any better an idea of what’s going on with the organization. True to Margaret Blair Young’s expressed desire to make the org more “global,” our president-elect is in Hawaii and next year’s meeting will be there. But where does that leave those of us who can’t afford to make it outside the continental US, especially when not everyone can make it to Utah Valley? I would hope the move away from hosting things in the Intermountain West would inspire the organization to extend its virtual reach, but instead that reach seems to be contracting.
On another note: a question for any of the leaders who may tune in: Would it be feasible to plan an analogous AML meeting closer to home (i.e., somewhere less financially restrictive than Hawaii) to take place at the same time as the Hawaii meeting? With sufficient time to respond to a call for papers (more than a month), more people might be able to attend one meeting or the other. FWIW: I’m willing and able to contribute to conference prep if that’s in the cards.
I consider the AML essentially defunct, but if there is somehow a conference in Hawaii and my bank account allows, I may very well take a business trip over there using pre-tax and pre-tithing dollars. That’s a nice discount!
However, I can’t imagine such a thing actually coming together, given current circumstances. I blame BYU-Provo for the demise of AML, by the way. There used to be numerous deeply involved BYU scholars in AML, but now they’re nearly all retired or deceased, and the rising generation has been scared off because anything involving Mormon lit hurts your tenure chances at BYU. Sad but true, unless someone knows otherwise.
.
The L Tom Perry Special Collections at BYU-Provo is now making huge efforts to collect Mormon writers and artists. I don’t know if that’s related to cultural shifts to the campus at large, but it is a hopeful sign.
Yeah, that’s good (they have a standing order for two copies of every Zarahemla release). And it’s good that the Mo lit class continues to get taught. BYU English Dept. should be leading out on Mo lit, though, not penalizing scholars who spend time on it, though.
.
The field is white, all ready to harvest.
“I don’t know if that’s related to cultural shifts to the campus at large, but it is a hopeful sign.”
Unfortunately, my perception is that English department and the university as a whole is still moving away from Mormon studies, even as the library is collecting more broadly in that area than ever.
I find it a little ironic for BYU to be discouraging academic research in Mormonism, even as other universities are beginning to develop programs or endow chairs in Mormonism. However, maybe that’s an opportunity in disguise. Perhaps the AML could reach out to other universities that are establishing programs in Mormonism to see if we can provide materials to support their coursework or help in other ways.
.
That’s a good point. We do have a decades-long history and that ain’t nothing. Framed properly, why wouldn’t one of those programs be interested in cooperation?)
(Answer: because they don’t care about literature, only history and sociology.)
I’m not sure if anyone knows the answer to this question, but your parenthetical called it to mind:
What don’t Mormon scholars care about Mormon literature? In much of what I’ve read from Eugene England, he encourages his colleagues to take Mormonism’s literary heritage seriously. I wonder why the “new guard” has chosen to steer clear…
My guess is that it’s a misunderstanding of, disdain for, or unacquaintance with the texts within the field.
Unfamiliarity may certainly be one factor, but I think there are other pressures at play.
BYU is encouraging their faculty to focus on research that will be highly respected by their academic colleagues outside of BYU. Mormons studying Mormon literature at a Mormon university run the risk of looking provincial, even if they’re doing good work.
At the same time, faculty positions at BYU have become very competitive, both because there are more Mormons earning PhDs than ever and because the academic job market is generally crappy. This means that Mormon PhDs who do show an interest in MoLit are going to be up against stiff competition for open positions at BYU, and a MoLit focus may actually work against them (for the reasons mentioned in the previous paragraph).
My impression is that a large number of AML founding members were BYU professors with tenure, who were therefore past their most stressful years of “publish or perish.” I suppose some members of the current pre-tenured crowd might show an interest in MoLit after they get tenure, but it seems unwise to assume that someone who has spent 12 years (6 years for a PhD + 6 years pre-tenure) studying post-colonial West African drama (or whatever), will suddenly decide to pivot their interest to Mormon literature. Hence the current situation where we see MoLit promotion largely in the hands of amateurs (in the sense both of non-professionals and in the sense of those who are motivated by the love of something).
I can honestly only think of 2 or 3 pre-tenured BYU faculty members (myself included) whose departments would be happy to see them publish on the topic of Mormon literature, and none outside of the library.
Hence the importance of promoting Mormon scholarship arising out of other, non-Mormon institutions. And the potential value of keeping the AML conference (and proceedings, if we ever get back to publishing them) as an avenue for publication that will count professionally.
BYU, for the reasons Katya mentions, will likely never lead in Mormon studies unless/until it has been proven as respectable by outside scholars and institutions. Sad but true. (And, in my view, itself provincial, but no one’s asking me…)
.
Do you think then that holding an AML conference at, say, Madison, NJ or Claremont, though difficult, would ultimately be of more use than being in Utah. For instance, if it’s in LA, those Claremont postgrads might want to submit papers since it’s in their backyard, which would get some new thinkers, etc etc etc.
When I applied to BYU (having graduated from their MA program, and earned a PhD elsewhere), they were reluctant because I was doing religion and lit. Not Mormonism and lit. But it still made the new guard uncomfortable. Now, there were likely other reasons they didn’t hire me, some of them rational, but there was and still seems to be a distinct discomfort with anything that whiffs of religious interest.
I think the issue, Th., is that it’s little guys all the way down. In other words, what few personnel AML has left are, for a variety of reasons, all limited in in what they can do, and the organization itself as a whole does not have the resources to change that.
.
I suspect that’s true. But that’s an argument for radical transparency. Even if it’s just a website that lists who’s kinda sorta doing what.
I appreciate Theric giving me a heads up on Twitter this morning. I quote:
@joebongo Please know the post about to go live is not an attack. I suspect it will be read that way by some, but me? I like hitting hornets
And my response:
@thmazing Well, not much to argue with there. This is exactly the kind of conversation that needs to be happening. No offense taken.
I wish I was a better, more qualified AML president/leader/cheerleader. But at this point, I am really glad Theric had the energy and gumption to kick the proverbial hornets nest. Let’s see who flies out to have their say.
Since last April when the “reigns” of AML landed in my lap, the one real thing I’ve thought that I can offer is a willingness to facilitate a discussion on rethinking AML’s mission and goals. In concrete terms, that would be some kind of a poll or survey, or series of interviews, where people with a stake in AML, people who have a history with AML and who want a future in AML, have a chance to offer their vision for the organization.
That I never sent out such a survey or started such a discussion is my failure. I apologize. But thank you Theric for getting it going.
To anyone reading this blog, I would ask: is there value in some kind of formal survey to all AML members and hangers-on, and what kind of questions or prompts would you like to see on such a document?
CONFERENCE
And then there’s this: I was invited to be a part of all this because I hopefully have the institutional backing to provide a venue and framework for an AML conference/symposium/gathering with a more “global” reach. Tyler, I’m glad you’re already thinking about alternative gatherings closer to home because I don’t think we are going to be able to pull anything off until 2016. There are a lot of hoops to jump through here, including a hotel (the linchpin of the whole thing) that won’t be finished until 2015, and weird scheduling changes at BYUH (we’re all about academic calendar gymnastics). So, I would say, yes, let’s start looking into alternatives for 2015 and see what happens.
Which leads to my other big question: Who of you reading this blog would have the 1) interest, and 2) ability (financial or otherwise), to make it to Hawaii in the winter/spring of 2016 for a AML conference/LDS writers workshop?
One of the first things I was asked to do when I got to BYUH was to organize some kind of LDS writers workshop like what was done here in the early 90s with Chris Crowe (now on the faculty at BYU-Provo). Back then, they had Card, Jack Weyland, Janice Kapp Perry, and other Mormon writers and artists come to Laie and lead a 3-4 day workshop for small groups of 8-15 participants. They also had the editors/publishers of Dialogue and Sunstone here, along with representatives of Deseret Book, LDS literary agents, etc. It was exciting. It was the 90s. I was still in high school.
So, at this point, we are looking into a way of possibly combining this kind of event with an AML-affiliated gathering. Maybe merging them, maybe running them simultaneously. I imagined that there would be lots of opportunities for crossover between the two groups. People attending workshops in the morning and then popping over to hear a panel on LDS memoir in the afternoon. Some key note speakers in the evening, a reading or two. I don’t know. Maybe it’s too much. Maybe it’s impractical. I would love to hear people’s perspectives on such an idea.
PARTICIPATION
Theric’s plaintive end note, “What is the AML, and who runs it?” is a perfect mantra.
As for the first part, what is AML, the next few months of questions and discussions should help (begin?) answer that question. As far as I’m concerned, everything is on the table. Should AML fold and merge with something else? Should it be an exclusively, or mostly, online community (Tyler had an interesting FB comment along these lines)? Should it roar back and be what it was in the beginning? Should it have a new president? Should it broaden its scope? Should it narrow it? Should it become an educational tool (offering online courses!)? Should it be a resource for Mormon authors and editors?
The second part of the question, who runs AML, is easier to answer. Essentially: whoever wants to. At this point, anyone who is willing to give their time and talents to the organization is part of the “leadership team.” I believe there is a board, but it would appear that it is not a board that meets. How do we go about appointing officers and filling roles? What roles to we need to fill? Who wants a job (unpaid, of course)? I don’t want to diminish the legacy or reputation of the AML, but it’s a choose-your-own-responsibility situation. (But we can only have one ice cream taster. And that job is taken.) I imagine most of us are looking to be in charge of less things, not the other way around. But I have heard from a couple of people who have expressed interest in being more involved. I need to follow up with them. There’s a new generation of scholars/writers out there to recruit. How are we going to pitch AML to them? Who’s going to make that pitch?
I found Christopher Bigelow’s comment quite insightful. I don’t know what the inner workings of tenure are in the English Department in Provo. But I can imagine a scenario where he’s right. It would appear (in my very limited experience) that the most active members are currently not affiliated with a University, or work/teach in areas besides literature and whose forays into Mormon letters are not part of their official career trajectory. What does this mean for AML?
I realize that I have brought virtually nothing to this organization so far. People like Jonathan Langford are all that’s keeping it afloat. I am happy to cede my title to anyone who feels like they have the vision and muscle to move forward. (I myself am only a man of moderate musculature. Tyler Chadwick for president?) Theric’s last suggestion about radical transparency is spot on. Let’s break everything down and get it out in the open. I have only a vague idea of how things work, and to be perfectly fair to all, I haven’t really asked. For instance, if Jonathan had contacted me about the website, I would have had no idea what to tell him. I don’t know who has the purse strings, the domain name, etc. My homework is to start figuring this stuff out.
IRREANTUM
I would love to resurrect Irreantum or something like it. I think there’s even a possibility that, if it was an online publication, my employer would be willing to house it. Remote possibility of keeping it print. We could publish once a year and would need about 5 people willing to put in 10-20 hours a month, give or take. Any takers?
In conclusion, I apologize in advance for my ignorance. I am an outsider and have no AML-memory, so if what I say sounds naive or impractical or stale, it probably is. Wm, you are right, it’s all little guys around here. Those who have led this organization in the past, feel free to chime in and let us know what you see.
And sorry for the ridiculously long comment.
Joe
Sadly, I’m not savvy enough to unbold things, and my efforts to do so only seem to have made matters worse by italicizing the ending…
Looks perfect, Jonathan. Thanks.
Actually, William did it for me, after I messed it up. Thanks!
Also, I have now added an account for you here. (This is one of those things I was all set to do when the blog went down, and then it didn’t happen…) Let me know via email if you don’t get a confirming email with your password.
I would seriously consider a Hawaii conference in 2016, if I have the money. Adding a writers conference would be an additional draw.
.
With two years warning and if it coincides with me not teaching, I’ll start saving money now.
.
This is too important and valuable to be buried here. I propose when you get your shiny new log-in, this becomes a new post so it can be discussed thoroughly. I’m not sure what should be asked, but I agree that it’s important to work some of these things out.
With this much warning, I could start saving for the conference now. Will BYUH get us discounted hotel rates as well. Because that would be swell. I would love to participate in a writers workshop or the like as well.
Although these kind of questions terrify me, they need to be asked. I’m glad you’re thinking about them.
Well, I don’t know if I want to, but I’m willing to.
If I were associated with a university, I would try to get a Young AML going. And when I teach my occasional MoLit class at the Berkeley Institute, I would love to push them towards such a thing. But until we have a clear presence and purpose, I don’t see kids showing up.
As for me, I didn’t take the MoLit course at BYU and frankly, I have no idea how I came to join the AML-List after graduation. But it was something I was heavily interested in and have remained so ever since. Like the comment Motley Vision got today from a teenager shows, AML is providing something people need if only they knew where to find it. Which is where good branding and social media come in. (Which, as my book sales attest, I ain’t great at.)
This sounds like something a few mass emails ought to be able to uncover. And if we can’t uncover someone, they either aren’t doing anything or will show up when we trample their roses.
Yes. I’m willing to play a role here, but if we’re sticking with paper publication (and I hope that’s part of our model), then I can’t be in charge. I have no idea how all that was done.
And although it’s stupid to bring up money right now, the thing that will make Irreantum immediately reputable (and rising tides and rising ships etc etc) will be to pay for what’s published. But I know better than to attempt solving that problem today.
Ummm. Didn’t mean to bold that whole comment. Slashes! I forgot the slash! Guess my HTML skills are, well, not skills at all.
If anyone wants to go in and unbold, feel free. (I don’t have a login for the blog yet. Which is my fault, not Jonathan’s.)
Thank you, Joe Plicka!
Here’s what I put on FB.
Let me add before pasting it that I am thrilled to see you engaging these questions!
Okay. We no longer have our journal, but we do have our annual meetings. If it works out at BYU-Hawaii, we’re good! If not, we send it to SVU. If that fails, I’ll take it on again and do it in Africa.
I remain committed to the mission of AML and will be taking Doug Thayer’s new book with me to read and review as I travel on Friday.
AML: Serious LDS fiction/film/poetry/creative non-fiction. We sometimes honor fantasy/sci fi, but there is an entire conference (LTUE) for that genre. More popular fiction has Storymakers, though often the entries in that conference are also discussed at AML.
The future? I think there is one.
“AML: Serious LDS fiction/film/poetry/creative non-fiction. We sometimes honor fantasy/sci fi, but there is an entire conference (LTUE) for that genre. More popular fiction has Storymakers, though often the entries in that conference are also discussed at AML.”
I agree with these boundaries with the understanding that they aren’t immovable.
I may come back and tackle the larger issues Joe raises, but just to provide what little context I can:
To the best of my knowledge, the past few years, what has kept AML going is:
1. Kathleen Dalton Woodbury handling pretty much all administrative details.
2. Jacob Proffitt helping Kathleen with web expertise as needed/he could.
3. Jonathan Langford administering the content for the blog.
4. Margaret Young and others making sure an AML conference happened.
5. Jack Harrell (and his team) editing Irreantum (now defunct).
Forgive me if there are board members who were actively doing stuff. But if they were, it’s not something I know about.
Neither Kathleen nor Jacob has a primary interest in Mormon literature. Both have been gracious enough to help, but Mormon lit is not their main scene. And both have put in a lot of time to keep things going. And neither is in a position to take on main leadership roles. I don’t know that they’d even have the interest in that.
Jonathan has been doing a good job of bringing on bloggers, but (and he would be the first to admit that), he doesn’t have a lot of technical expertise with WordPress. Nor an interest in/much experience with social media. Which means that the content and audience for Dawning of a Brighter Day is almost solely centered around the blog posts.
The AML doesn’t happen without people volunteering their time. As has been alluded to above, it has been difficult for the AML to attract such volunteers because it’s organizational structure and activities have been stuck in a pre-internet model. And, as Chris notes, BYU-Provo has not only not been acting as the center of the organization and the conversation, but it also hasn’t been producing newer generations of members. Yes, the Mormon lit class is still being taught. But there hasn’t been an easy/effective way to bring those students post-class into the larger conversation.
I forgot to add: there have been people stepping up to administer the awards. I don’t know who they are, but I’m grateful for their work.
William basically has it right, so far as I know.
Kathleen Woodbury is the official site administrator. Unfortunately, her time has been taken up with the care of sick relative, so she has not been able to be as actively involved.
The glitch earlier this week was because someone changed the AML credit card without telling Kathleen, so the automatic deposit didn’t go through. It took a fair amount of internal back-and-forth to find this out.
The website has been hacked and spammed, and needs to be cleaned up and possibly put in a more user-friendly and/or up-to-date format. There has been some behind-the-scenes discussion between me, Kathleen, and Jacob Proffitt about ways to do this, including some (ironically) just before this latest glitch with the AML blog. We’d like to get some guidance from the AML leadership about the direction they want to take this — ideally, from the AML board. There used to be an email list for the board, but it’s been a long time since it was formally used for anything. I’m not even entirely sure who’s on the board anymore.
I very much second William’s comment about me lacking technical know-how and social media knowledge. I’m willing to continue with helping to arrange content for the blog, and even with working on content for (re-)generated AML website pages, but there’s a real need for volunteers to help out with the website, as well as other aspects of the organization.
The easiest short-term fix would be to recreate core static content (pages) here on the blog and add some AML branding to it. The reviews and awards databases are a more difficult issue that I don’t know enough about the technical details of to make any recommendations, although it wouldn’t be insanely laborious (although it would still take quite a bit of time) to create a separate WordPress site for the awards and then use tags and categories to make them searchable. There are some many reviews that that might require some programming.
Maybe what we need is a post on this blog asking people to list the skills they have that can be used to reinvent AML.
I’ve been involved at least slightly behind the scenes, setting up a plugin on my own server to forward notices about new blog entries to the email list.
I’m a long-time WordPress techie, and although I don’t have time to manage another site on my own, I can help out as needed — keeping the gears spinning and customizing things when necessary.
I haven’t posted on the blog before. That may seem odd for the guy who supposedly ran AML for 12 months. I just want to deal with a couple of issues raised here by Theric and others. Firstly, about the disruption to the blog. When I became President we had to move the mailing address and banking details for AML to Utah County as Kathleen wanted to resign and not take responsibility for these parts of AML any longer. She has been happy to continue with technical issues, however we were unaware at the time that certain renewals were linked to the old AML account and so it took a couple of days when things went south to realize that and I gave Jonathan and Kathleen the current banking details that allowed the site to come back up.
In the time I have been involved with AML, less than 2 years, I inherited Margaret and her expertise and Jonathan who has valiantly continued the blog but there has been no secretary, no treasurer, no one keeping the membership lists and, as of the last issue, no Irreantum. The decision to finish publishing was made by others before I came on board.
I saw my role as trying to bring together a conference for AML in 2014 and between us, Margaret and I pulled it off – small and imperfectly perhaps, but I am grateful to all those who took part and gave interesting and thought provoking presentations. It was also a two person team that ensured that the AML awards happened this year.
AML has a place but it cannot function without a committee of active, involved individuals who are willing to put in the time and effort, and accept the responsibility to ensure its survival.
My personal area of interest is Mormon and Jewish YA fiction. YA is not the most popular segment of the literary marketplace and I am not as erudite as many of you. I certainly enjoy reading your thoughts.
Thanks to all of you who want to keep AML viable, perhaps you can find an suitable way of restoring the energy to an organization that has run out of steam.
Glenn Gordon
Past President, AML
.
If we can successfully migrate leadership away from the geographic model, I’m happy to be involved. I would be most vested, probably, in the publication aspects, but I care most about AML surviving NOW.
Incidentally, Glenn, even without a treasurer, you make it sound like the books are up-to-date? Also, do we have a maintained list of lifetime members? Those might be good people to approach in this process.
As a more general comment:
I like AML. I think there’s a place for it. I particularly think there’s a place for talking about and promoting serious, high-quality Mormon fiction, and for sponsoring criticism (both amateur and professional) of fiction by, for, and about Mormons. Finally, I like the idea of AML as a kind of bazaar for finding out what’s happening in the world of Mormon letters as a whole — something that at present I think we have at least some rudiments of through the efforts of Andrew Hall, but I’d love to see more of that. Getting the website back up and running could be part of that, if (for example) we could get pages up with lists of Mormon publishers.
The annual conference, I think, is an important part of promoting critical discussion, although I haven’t attended for decades and am unsure if I ever will be able to attend (assuming it doesn’t wind up being held in Minnesota one of these years). I also like the idea of a writing workshop, especially if that will bring new vigor to the organization, but would not want to see it happen at the expense of other activities.
Irreantum started as a broad-spectrum literary magazine, intended not only as a venue for publication of fiction but also for criticism, reviews, and news of the Mormon publishing world. Over time, it became more focused on becoming a publishing outlet for “literary” fiction, while some of its other functions were assumed by the AML blog. My interest would probably be greater if it went back to more of a broad-spectrum format, with a higher proportion of criticism/interviews/etc., but I don’t know if there’s an audience for that kind of broad-spectrum publication.
At a bare minimum, I think AML needs an active website and an awards program. Sadly, even while the quality of posts has mostly continued at the AML blog (I haven’t been active in filling a few slots that have had to retire), the traffic is considerably lower than it used to be. Maybe the future is in social medium, but if so, I’m not the person who’s qualified to take it there.
There is so much that AML *could* be. And there’s a lot of it that I value. I value the annual conference, even though I can’t go — and would be glad to reprint talks from the conference here on the blog. I liked the fact that Irreantum was being published and kept subscribing to it, even after its focus shifted away from my particular interests. I’d be happy with writing workshops, if there was a sense that they are serving the community.
Mostly, I have an investment in the notion of AML as a community. I love to hear about what everyone is *doing.* I love to encourage it, even when it’s not my thing. But it all takes hands. I find it striking that almost none of the volunteers currently working on AML has any professional investment in the activities it promotes. Even professors are few on the AML ground these days (pace Joe and Margaret). The “them” who could help AML to all these things is *us.*
What’s “serious LDS fiction”?
Speaking only for myself: I would say that “serious Mormon fiction” is fiction that makes attempts to engage with questions related to what it means to be Mormon, at the same time that they tell a story. Any genre qualifies, and any literary style.
Note that this is not meant to exclude anyone or any given discussion. Rather, it’s meant to describe a kind of conversation that I mostly don’t think is taking place elsewhere. Along with discussions of the kinds of stories written by Margaret Young, Angela Hallstrom, and Jack Harrell, I think it also includes discussion of underlying Mormon themes in the science fiction and fantasy of Orson Scott Card and Dave Farland. It includes interviews with Mormon authors who write mostly for a “mainstream” market where they get a chance to talk about how their Mormonism impacts their writing. And a lot more.
On the whole, I would tend to give priority to literature that explicitly engages with Mormonism on a thematic, cultural, or historical level — simply because if AML isn’t going to discuss and celebrate those works, who will? And I like some complexity in how they are addressed. Personally, I tend to prefer texts that show Mormonism as a challenging but rewarding way of making meaning with life. But by the definitions I’ve given above, these are surely not the only things that AML would be about. And as a blog moderator (and AML-List moderator in past years), I can say that whenever given the option, I try to interpret questions of relevance broadly rather than narrowly.
.
Definitely read this.
It’s a step in the right direction, but not quite yet there.
The main reason I’ve assumed AML is effectively defunct is because the main web address has been dead for so long. Seems like that’s priority one!
.
I agree. This isn’t a thing I could really help with, but exporting the data and building something 2014ish on the address would be great.
Incidentally, does the AML still own aml-online.org?
AML still owns aml-online.org but mainly because there are still people out there who still insist on using it to get to mormonletters.org. If we were to cancel the aml-online.org domain, we’d lose those people, since I haven’t figured out a way to get them to switch over to mormonletters.org.
I think giving AML a more visible social media presence would also help. Who is in charge of the Twitter and Facebook feeds? I’d be happy to take those reins right now if no one objects.
It seems we might get some more traffic/interest in the site/blog if we could do more with social media to attract people to it.
Since Joe mentioned my FB comment, I’ll add it to this conversation.
Eric said people might be more at ease and willing to participate if the AML was more transparent and maintained a better online presence. I responded:
Mormon lit seminars could provide focus to an annual meeting and expand MoLit scholarship in a way that makes use of multiple-levels of peer review and archives the papers for new generations of MoLit scholars.
.
It also opens up one more avenue for people to find a way in in the first place.
“The org’s been stagnant for some time and (like I’ve said before) seems to be stuck in a pre-digital mode of interaction and community building.”
Agreed. Here’s my perspective as someone who hasn’t really been involved since 2006 when I moved away from Utah and found that there was essentially no meaningful way to connect with the organization in my new location. Basically, I think there’s a need to take the entire organization online. This might not have an immediate effect on the amount of membership dues coming in, but it can in the long-term as the breadth of outreach expands.
So from my outsider perspective and off the top of my head, here are some potential priorities and ways to update the image and reach of AML (and I can’t say “the AML” any more than I can say “the BYU”–that in itself sounds old fashioned to my ears).
1) Get the website back up, that’s been said. But check for new URLs because even “aml-online” seems old school (of course it’s online) and SEO probably isn’t great with just the initials. Maybe use something like “mormonletters.org” and other addresses like “aml-online” route through to it?
2) Migrate this blog onto that site. Have it be central, in fact, perhaps on the homepage (under a brief introductory sentence or paragraph) with additional pages for:
a) The awards. Someone already talked about the amount of work that will take to make clean and searchable, but giving the awards every year and having a clean record of them helps establish AML as an arbiter of quality in Mormon arts and letters. And that’s a key market position, to be frank, that no other organization is poised to usurp.
b) An “About” page with a description of AML, and a complete list of leadership and board members (with contact info)
c) A contact page, so that’s redundant but increases transparency.
d) Perhaps a “History” page, though that could be part of “About”; it strikes me the old website has or had something like this at one point–if so hopefully it could be updated.
e) An “Events” page for any in-person or online events coming up, with a way to sign up/register.
f) Any past publications or audio recordings that could be made available. In order to increase clout and interest I’d argue in favor of putting pdfs of all past issues of Irreantum (article by article or entire issues) online and transcripts or audio recordings of past conference presentations. This is a ton of work and may be phase 2 or something, but having a wealth of content online attracts people and keeps them involved in new content. So when I google “Mormon short story” or “missionary films” or “Eugene England” or whatever it is, I’m directed here and then I get curious and go to the homepage or About page or something.
g) a “Get Involved” page with specific information (“Right now we need this…”) and a tip jar, so people can leave a tax deductible donation or sign up for memberships. Some of that can be on the homepage (see MormonStories.org — it’s right there) or other places too–emphasizing the need for money is fine, and it might as well be crowdsourced right there on the site, not just on occasional runs on Kickstarter that will require original and valuable gifts at different donation levels (and hence run high fulfillment costs).
h) a podcast…
3) A podcast. I think part of AML’s problem, a little like Sunstone’s, is that it’s been passed up by the Bloggernacle and the Open Stories Foundation. When people think of good discussions of Mormon issues they think of Mormon Matters and Mormon Stories and all the blogs; for literature maybe it’s AMV and BCC and a few others. Having a podcast to complement the written blog helps bring AML up to date, and if there are audio recordings of old presentations maybe this is the place to put them (in some type of archive). And I’d expand the purview, like with AMV, to all things Mormon art and culture–not meaning that this is now a premiere place to talk about painting and music, but that those things or timely topics like Ordain Women can be discussed around a central core of Mormon letters. And that can include interviews, two people discussing a recent book or film or author–or quite old ones as well–along with all kinds of things like, I don’t know, pioneer poetry readings or jam sessions or poetry slams or anything else that AMLers sit around and talk about between sessions at the conference. But this, like the other things, is hard; I tried to launch a monthly Mormon Art podcast for John Dehlin a few years ago and, even planning just twelve episodes a year, it was hard getting interviewees onboard, figuring out the recording technology, all that kind of thing, and in the end I decided I didn’t have the time for it. Perhaps rotating hosts could help with that–doing one episode a year rather than 12 or 48 is significantly easier.
4) Eliminate in-person board meetings and expand the board to people beyond Utah. Just use email if setting up a six-way Skype call’s too difficult. Maybe this has already started under Margaret, but I know in 2006 when I was asked to be on the board I said I’m about to move to New York and they said, oh, never mind then, you have to be in Salt Lake, and I thought it odd then, eight years ago, that the board had to meet in person rather than online. So that could help find new blood.
5) Let Irreantum lie and focus all publishing attention on the website/blog. People are going to find AML’s material online, not in print, and it’s the discussion of Mormon lit that will count. But does removing the print journal remove most of the incentive for big purchases like lifetime memberships? Maybe get rid of memberships all together and just solicit donations?
6) Conferences. I’ve only attended one, in 2006 I think, and I can’t pay to fly anywhere for something like that, so as they are now these aren’t a selling point for me and I’d even consider axing the annual conference or mixing it up somehow with smaller conferences/writer’s retreats. I understand that they’re quite popular, of course, but I don’t know how large the crowd is, especially if, like the Mormon History Association, it’s going to be in different places every year (and Mormon lit professors, unlike many academic historians, don’t get tenure credit for presenting at Mormon lit conferences). Maybe the main audience is fiction authors, like was said, so a small workshop or class in Utah or California or Boston is in order, but I’d rather go small and cheap than maintain a large annual conference that sucks out everyone’s volunteer time/energy. I’m just speculating, I know, but what I do suspect more strongly is that getting some of this online would be great. Maybe an online class with a published author or editor, with video sessions running once a week for six weeks or something, available later as password protected VOD, with weekly writing assignments, etc., and the author gets 60% and AML 40% (or something like that). No one’s going to read an academic paper into their computer microphone, but maybe live streams or, perhaps more feasibly, after-the-fact podcasts of conference sessions online ($.99 per download) could increase involvement for those who can’t attend in person. Basically I’d just love to see a way to move these social interactions online, and that’s easier, hopefully, than editing the talks and publishing them in the AML Annual, which I don’t think has happened in years because it’s so time- and cost-intensive. And doing conferences online can help make it easier to involve people internationally, rather than finding a brick-and-mortar venue in a place like Accra or Sao Paolo and getting enough people to attend it.
7) And then there might be other out-of-the-box concepts, like using Amazon fulfillment to start an AML Press, or developing a MormonLit app, or producing a web series of video interviews with Mormon authors, or running a course in Mormon Literature like, I believe, Tyler’s talking about at AMV right now–or focus on one genre or topic like women authors and do that over a few weeks or months. And Tyler can correct me, but I think he’s said he’s planning on doing that all for free at AMV, but I don’t think it would horrible to charge up to $20 for a multi-week course like that–the price point might actually be much higher. Depends where the texts come from, etc.
Basically I think AML’s core offerings in the digital age are 1) the annual awards and fiction contests to show people what’s worth their time, and 2) the discussion that it can engender about Mormon art and letters. E.g. it’s an arbiter of quality and a place where creators and fans can connect–both of which should foster increased production of high quality work. Much of this is being served elsewhere (blogs, Sunstone, Dialogue, university courses) but AML could return to the forefront if it can find an online presence beyond this blog. And of course a strong social media presence goes without saying–it’s better to pick one platform like Facebook or Twitter and do it well rather than have an inactive presence on half a dozen platforms, and in any case 40-50% of the posts should lead back to the website (the other 50-60% just giving updates on Mormon art, lit, and news, like Sunstone’s Twitter feed, for instance).
Sorry this, um, got LONG. I’m busy off working on my own projects, so I salute everyone who’s stuck with AML over the years and kept it alive. I’ve got no skin in the game and honestly don’t know how I could jump in here now and contribute, so those of you who do have skin in the game and are contributing can feel quite free to laugh all these ridiculously difficult suggestions off.
.
It’s true that AML matters here. When Sarah Eden won the novel award last year, she was delighted and exited even though she’s quote-unquote part of the LDStorymakers crowd. I’ve been creeping along, trying to find more AML Awards history. I can’t guarantee it’s completeness, but the Wikipedia page is thus more complete than what was on this site.
This would be great. Make the past storied and people want part of that legacy. I don’t know nearly enough about this.
I completely agree. The best search-engine optimization is lots and lots of stuff people are interested in.
Like a TED model, sort of? Online and radio TED, not live-and-in-person TED/TEDx.
Randy Astle said:
1) Get the website back up, that’s been said. But check for new URLs because even “aml-online” seems old school (of course it’s online) and SEO probably isn’t great with just the initials. Maybe use something like “mormonletters.org” and other addresses like “aml-online” route through to it?
2) Migrate this blog onto that site.
Kathleen then proceeds to bang her forehead on her desk.
The AML blog is already on mormonletters.org
Please look at the URL on your browser as you read the AML blog.
I would love to cancel aml-online.org because it is not AML’s primary domain name. But how do I get people to stop insisting on using aml-online.org when they should change to mormonletters.org?
Kill the domain and let God sort it out.
I was also wondering about that, Kathleen. Because it’s been mormonletters.org for several years now.
What you could do is rather than auto-forward aml-online.org, put up a page for aml-online.org that basically says that this url is being sunset and that folks should update their bookmarks, etc. to mormonletters.org and then give them a link to click to get to this site. Auto-forwarding is good practice, but only as long as the old domain name is kept registered and pointed to the new one, and at some point, even if it’s only $12/year, it doesn’t make sense to continue to support the old domain.
I would love to be a part of a Mormon lit seminar. It could be co-run by a creative writer and a literary critic.
Here’s my vision for these seminars, Scott, which could include interested parties from diverse backgrounds who share an interest in MoLit:
1. Following the Mormon Theology Seminar (some of the wording is directly from their website), the organizers pick a text/small collection of texts and solicit participants. To keep things manageable, the number of participants would need to be limited.
2. Once the texts and the participants are lined up, the group decides on a reading schedule that’s amenable to everyone and that can pace their efforts.
3. With the reading schedule in place, the group spends a designated amount of time discussing the texts in an online forum, with seminar members taking turns (a week or two per turn) leading discussions that address the current reading assignment. The Mormon Theology Seminar collaborates in this way for a period of 3-4 months. We might decide on a different timeframe.
4. At the conclusion of the seminar, the participants co-author a concise report summarizing their discussion of the texts. In addition to the joint report, participants also compose individual papers prompted by their own work in the seminar.
5. Reports and individual papers are then presented and peer reviewed. I see the “presentation” and review happening in any number of ways (or even a combination thereof): via 1) a face-to-face conference, 2) CommentsPress style blog entries (allows commentary on individual paragraphs: http://futureofthebook.org/commentpress/), 3) online audio or video readings with comments by seminar members.
6. After presentation and review, the reports and papers are then revised (if necessary, per peer review feedback) and published or archived.
I see a seminar organized like this—one that takes MoLit seriously by generating readings of specific texts—contributing significant work to Mormon Literary Studies and, like Eric points out, helping people find a way into the conversation.
In place of next year’s AML meeting, we could experiment with something along these lines. Thoughts?
Also: We could also potentially facilitate writing seminars in a similar way, where groups of fiction writers/nonfiction writers/poets come together to create work centered on a certain theme, idea, text, etc., to workshop each other’s writing, to present the work in online readings, and to publish the resulting pieces. (I may actually organize something like this for poets on Fire in the Pasture.)
Separating things into a criticism-generating seminar and a creative work-generating seminar could help us serve both scholarly and writerly communities and build the MoLit community’s base of solid work.
.
This sounds good to me. The first year will be important in setting a standard of quality, a standard of narrowness/breadth, and a standard of inclusiveness to potential participants.
Thus, first though, the first set of texts should focus on Application of Humor in Presentation of Mormon Life or something like that (this all off the top of my head) and the texts could be Samuel Taylor, Curtis Taylor (are they related?), Jodi Hilton if we’re being expansive one direction, Howard Tayler (spelled different) if in another direction, poetry by Danny Nelson. (If I thought about it more I could come up with better examples, this is just me thinking along paths places before me without much filter.)
Don’t forget the Sugar Beet, as collected in The Mormon Tabernacle Enquirer.
http://www.amazon.com/Tabernacle-Enquirer-Christopher-Kimball-Bigelow/dp/1930074174
I like this idea a lot even though I’m not sure if I’d be able to participate.
Someone, I think, asked where all the up-and-coming Mormon literary scholars are. While I imagine that we already know most of those who are active in this field, I can’t help but wonder if there aren’t some scholars and students out there who don’t know about us because they aren’t at one of the high-LDS concentration institutions. An ongoing search of online databases (e.g., the MLA publications database) might yield a few new names — who could then be invited to participate in the AML conference, post their papers on the blog, etc.
This is something I’d be willing to help with.
A few scholars I’ve talked with also think of AML as an organizations just for creative writers.
Like everyone else, I have a lot to say on the subject. I’d like to see AML continue with a new vision and focus for the future. Essentially, I think it needs to reinvent itself for the twenty-first century and figure out what it wants to contribute to the current Mormon literary scene. I think it should also reconsider its audience. An organization like LDStorymakers seems to be doing well because it knows its audience, but I don’t think the same is true for AML.
I think the 2015 conference should be an experiment in remote conferencing. As an adjunct, I don’t have the backing to travel anywhere this year, but I’d still like to participate in the conference via Skype, Google+, or whatever else might be available to beam me and others in to a conference held at UVU or even BYU-Hawaii. This would also make it possible for others to participate, including William, Jonathan, Theric. Expensive travel costs shouldn’t stop something like the AML conference from happening. Besides, as Mormons, we are used to watching conferences on a screen. It’s in our DNA.
Video conferencing–as I think someone has already mentioned–would also make an AML board meeting possible from a variety of locations. I’d be happy and enthusiastic to serve on this board and contribute ideas to AML’s future. I imagine such meetings would be more effective in planning out a future than a forum like this.
Great post Th.!
If we’re all making suggestions, I would like to see all the book reviews that Jeff Needle manages to be posted on this blog, and not buried in some AML message board that is barely used. There is robust book criticism going on underneath the surface of AML, but no one would know about it if they visit this blog or the main website. By making reviews a regular feature of this blog, adds a constant flow of content to attract visitors.
In addition, there needs to be only one website. This blog and the main website needs to be one destination. I know, easier said than done, but baby steps in the right direction will eventually get there.
Guess now I’ve started, I’ll say this at least. Thank you to all those who have kept AML alive. Your hard work does not go unappreciated. AML may currently seem on life support barely hanging on, but with those passionate about keeping it alive, I dare say AML’s best days are yet to come.
.
This is a great point. And Jeff would probably have more luck getting reviewers if those reviews were made public.
Similarly, the clearinghouse that Andrew manages is a huge selling point that we could package a little better. For instance, when he uncovers new reviews, it would be great if they appeared also on a page dedicated to that book….
I mean—we’re talking serious webbing here, but that makes sticky content that keeps people coming back and, eventually, getting involved.
If we were to connect all of the reviews to a web page for each book, then we should use New LDS Fiction, where Karlene Browning (aka LDS Publisher) makes a web page for every new Mormon-authored fiction book. When I first started doing the reviews I was going to link all of the reviews to those pages, but I stopped pretty quickly because it was taking too much time. http://www.newldsfiction.com/
Jonathan said:
And Eric said:
Andrew’s efforts to curate MoLit-related content from around the web are top notch. They represent a tremendous expenditure of time and energy. As good a job as Andrew does with this clearinghouse, I wonder if it would be possible to distribute that time and energy across the MoLit community and make the MoLit rundowns a collaborative effort I mention this for three reasons:
1) We all hate to admit it, but Andrew won’t always be around. As such, it might be useful to implement an aggregation and curation system that could easily and efficiently pass to others in the community.
2) As wide as Andrew’s reach is, he can’t possibly keep his eyes peeled for everything that pops up on the web related to MoLit. Increasing the number of eyes looking would help eliminate possible deficiencies in each clearinghouse and expand the curation system’s reach.
3) If Andrew, for whatever reason, can’t attend to his curatorial efforts for a period of time, some content doesn’t make it into the clearinghouse. Incorporating a distributed aggregation model could make it easier to consistently offer the clearinghouse to the community.
A model to consider would be the one used by Digital Humanities Now, “an experimental, edited publication that highlights and distributes informally published digital humanities scholarship and resources from the open web.” The editorial staff at DHNow—a rotating editor-in-chief, who selects and prepares content for publication, and volunteer editors-at-large, who nominate content for publication—draws the most important/interesting material from what seems to be a crowdsourced compendium of digital humanities resources and from the staff’s personal learning networks. They then disseminate that material via DHNow.
I suspect this model could translate well into a collaborative MoLit clearinghouse, albeit on a smaller scale. Even if we decide it’s not feasible, it might be useful (to Andrew and to the community) to consider implementing a more collaborative, distributed approach to the project.
.
I would be interested in seeing how this works. When Katya was working on her MoLit wiki (which wasn’t about collating all reviews, but still a large potentially collaborative project), it had a hard time getting participants.
I think the way to make this really fly is a simple means of submitting, say, a link. Copy paste submit. Done. Make it easy for anyone to submit a review or a new book or whatever.
I’m not sure exactly (and I still need to follow Tyler’s link), but the smell of this is a sensible smell.
Eh, I’d say that my wiki never even got out of beta and I consequently didn’t spend much time or effort trying to recruit new contributors.
.
I suppose that’s accurate. Where is it now?
I’m liking a lot of these specific ideas. And perhaps this is a separate discussion, but I think that the place to start is by establishing the scope of the AML. One of the issues it has had in the past is that by serving a variety of audiences in a variety of ways and in larger or smaller ways depending on the main interests of the people running the projects, it has managed to not please anyone thoroughly.
And so those who write for the mainstream Mormon fiction market didn’t feel at home.
And those who write non-overtly-Mormon SF&F never got that engaged. And neither did YA authors. And not so much film or theater people either. And not visual artists at all. Or performing artists.
And when Irreantum started, it seemed like it was more aimed at the writers and publishers. And then later it was more aimed at essayists, poets and literary fiction writers.
And the literary critics have tended to be presidents and the annual meetings were mainly geared towards them, but were also sort of geared towards authors. And their work has languished in terms of lasting presentation (as in: there hasn’t been an AML annual produced in years and Irreantum tended to not focus on literary criticism).
And both for artists and critics, you have those who are working specifically on overtly Mormon topics/themes/characters and those who are not but who drawn on some Mormon materials to inform their work and those who don’t draw on Mormon materials in any specific, intentional way, but are Mormon and are more interested in what it means to be a Mormon who is an artist or an academic/critic.
And, of course, the problem with so many audiences is that you can’t please all of them and because most of what we do does not directly impact our academic or artistic careers, AML slips to the bottom of the list in terms of attention, volunteering, fundraising, etc. And it also is prone to shifting in the direction of the interests of whoever is most engaged with it at any one time. There’s nothing wrong with that. It’s what naturally happens. But it does lead to mixed messages to potential audiences.
I’d love to go big –be the nexus for Mormon art and artists–because I think that would have the potential to have the most impact on the mainstream Mormon audience. But that would take hefty resources to launch and is hard to sustain.
So that leaves narrow. And the question I have is this:
Is it possible to position AML as an organization that would be attractive to both critics and creators of narrative art? (recognizing that we’d still need to define which critics and writers — any Mormons or just Mormon who are interested in Mormonism as a subject or some hybrid?).
And remember with positioning you have to think about where your organization fits in the overall ecosystem. Let’s say the primary players in the ecosystem are:
LDStorymakers/Whitney Awards (mainly writers of overtly Mormon non-SF&F genre fiction)
LTUE/CONduit (as a shorthand for the community of LDS SF&F authors/fans; also draws in some YA)
Dialogue/Sunstone (fiction, poetry, personal essay, reviews, some cultural studies)
BYU Studies (same as Dialogue and Sunstone but w/more orthodox editorial voice)
Mormon Scholars in the Humanities (professional organization for Mormons not necessarily about Mormonism)
Meridian Magazine/LDS Living (some reviews)
Mormon Artist (focuses on Mormons who are artists and how their Mormonism interacts with their work)
LDS Publishers (I’m not going to list them all out, but these vary widely, of course)
The are others we could point at. But I think this provides a good list to start with when thinking about where the AML could position itself.
Don’t forget Segullah!
We did start as a published journal and are now publishing monthly journal content online, though our blog is probably more prominent now for most people. We have also had a lot of discussions within our group about what our mission is, what our core focus is, who our audience is, etc. Our main focus is fostering creative writing by Mormon women.
Good point. I’ve pointed to Segullah numerous times over the past few years as a good model for a creative arts focused Mormon org. My bad for omitting it from the list above.
Perhaps, if as Joe indicated, there is unlikely to be a conference for AML in Hawaii until 2016, we can use the time to refocus and position AML as a viable organization in the LDS and literary community. I would recommend that we take ownership of the awards for 2015 with a lot of input from our online community (thanks Tyler for pointing out some deficits) and consider ways of better marketing the awards both internally and externally. I am happy to be involved in whatever capacity might be useful. I don’t know if it has come to your attention, but LDS-themed literature, or even popular fiction, is almost totally absent from discussion in respected literary and children’s lit journals. In working on my PhD in YA literature, one of the constant criticisms from my (non-LDS) supervisors was the dearth of critical material NOT published by Mormons.
Agreed. There’s a slight chance that I could be eligible for an award so can’t commit now to helping, but should that turn out not to be the case, at the very least, I’m willing to help use the AMV platforms to help spread the word.
Let me add this: one reason the Whitney Awards can create more buzz (and it’s only one — there are others) is that because anyone can nominate and because there is a short list, it creates opportunities for buzz in advance of the actual awards presentation itself.
Oops. That’s not the right phrasing. What I mean is that I might be able to help with more than just with publicity, but publicity is a given. In the past, that hasn’t always been easy to do though, because there’s no day-of/next day way to find out who won awards unless those in person at the AML conference share that information.
.
Yeah, anticipation and announcement could be better.
I’ve served as in nominating comics to the awards committee in the past.
William—are you suggesting that we have certain static categories which would have shortlists? I assume we could still have other surprise categories as well (or years when insufficient quality exists in a given category). Having recurring categories though could help remind AML that it cares about, say, sculpture or orchestral music. And a public nomination routine always uncovers work that otherwise gets lost.
I’m not making any recommendations at this point — just musing about where some of the barriers are. There are upsides and downsides to short lists and part of the charm of the AML awards has been their flexibility to just go with whatever seems important to the judges in a particular year. But there could be a way to balance all that.
.
What’s the title of your dissertation?
One note that applies to all of the above:
I think that anyone who is willing to take on Awards, Seminar, Conference, etc. should also commit to documenting and sharing the processes and outcomes. Some of that can be public. Some of that might not need to be or should be, but should exist so that it can be shared with future organizers and also so best practices can be shared.
Whoa, there’s still an AML message board? Jeff Needle is still coordinating book reviews? I haven’t seen an AML book review in years, it seems. I used to get email notices of new reviews, but those died off. Like many probably have, I assumed these were additional areas of the AML that were now defunct. The gym floor is literally rolling with balls that have been dropped… Oh, the humanity.
Ya, the book reviews still are quite active, but seem disconnected to AML at large. In addition to the AML message board, Jeff posts the reviews to the Yahoo email list Mormon Library, which is where I typically read them. He might also post to a couple other email lists as well, but I’m not sure. I usually see anywhere from 2-5+ full length reviews on new books, encompassing quite a broad spectrum of new titles.
.
Awesome. What’s the link these days?
Here’s the link to the message board Reviews area:
http://forums.mormonletters.org/yaf_forum3_Reviews.aspx
Now to make matters more confusing, it appears Jeff has started posting the reviews to an unofficial blog. I suspect this is because of the downtime of the several websites recently. Mostly likely the message board was down as well., so Jeff must have created a placeholder blog until the message board is back up (which it appears that it is.)
http://associationformormonletters.blogspot.com
Anyone who wants to be included in the review pool of writers, just email Jeff. He super organized and is always sending out books to be reviewed. He has been a stalwart and a tremendous volunteer for these past years.
I suppose this is a selfish question to ask, and this might not be the best time considering some of the changes you all are suggesting, but I’m going to ask it anyway.
Is there room for theatre-makers to play at this party? Film has been mentioned, though only briefly. I feel very strongly that theatre is indeed a narrative art (though that is probably a semantic argument).
.
I have a hard time imagining an argument of any answer other than yes.
Ditto.
I thought the theatre-makers were already at the party…
“AML: Serious LDS fiction/film/poetry/creative non-fiction.”
This is pretty typical. There is an AML award for drama, yes, and there are occasional mention of happenings (thanks to Andrew) but it seems theatre is left out of the MoLit canon more often than not.
Theatre was a very well represented on the AML list back in the day. If it isn’t now — well, it’s because nothing is very well represented. I suppose you could point to the later issues of Irreantum. And I would agree with that criticism.
But hey, I’m willing to represent! Especially in Hawaii in 2016. Bam.
Nice.
Yes! Theatre comes before anything else!
Amen!
In its latest iteration it is called: “The role of popular religious fiction in promoting and sustaining the religio-cultural norms of the faith community”. I am looking at a selection of Mormon and Jewish Middle Grade and YA novels that have a didactic purpose in promoting faithfulness to children and young adults. Most Mormon themed books for these ages are by their nature didactic and moralistic, however very few Jewish novels have the same purpose. The most similar group of Jewish novels are those featuring the bat-mitzvah where the intent is generally that the protagonist, despite obstacles, decides to become bat-mitzvah and become an official part of the Jewish community. That’s kind of it in a nutshell. I also look at the bibliotherapeutic value of faith literature.
That sounds fascinating, Glenn.
.
Agreed.
I’m excited this discussion is happening. That we have so many comments shows me that an interest in the success of AML exists, even if its supporters are few right now. Also, there are some great ideas here.
I agree with Randy Astle and others who have said that we need to revamp/resurrect the parent website, make this blog a child page on that website, use social media and online meeting technologies more, and find a focus for AML and stick to it. All of Randy’s ideas were great, except that I would like to see Irreantum return in some format and I wouldn’t want the conferences to go away. But I am open to a smaller scale perhaps. Also, all things AML should be on the same website: blog, book reviews, awards, etc.
Mission of the AML: For me, the AML and Irreantum has always been about serious LDS fiction, film, poetry, and creative non-fiction with the qualifications to that as Margaret Blair Young outlined above. I see the adjective “serious” here meaning that the pieces included and talked about exemplify the best that is out there in each category, and the “best” execute in such a way that theme, plot (structure), character, point of view, language, and setting, as applicable, combine into a work of excellence. It’s this excellence that an organization like AML should be about. That excellence may be found in SF/Fantasy or mainstream works, to be sure, and if it’s found there, let’s honor it, but my personal tastes are literary and I have looked to AML and Irreantum, Dialogue, Sunstone, Signature Books, and Zarahemla Books to support and publish the works that I and a rather small subset of the LDS reading public would like to read. This may be perceived as a little selfish, but I agree with Margaret and Scott Hales that the other genres have their outlets already. We need one place at least that supports and honors serious/literary Mormon fiction, film, poetry, and creative non-fiction, no matter their popularity in the LDS community at large.
Irreantum: Perhaps Irreantum could be resurrected in the format that an editor of the literary magazine Crazyhorse did with Sixfold. Click on “How It Works,” in particular. It’s a writer-voted journal and they publish the resulting journal in electronic book formats and as a print pub, or you can read it online. Anyway, that’s an idea. With the participation response we got for the Mormon LitBlitz this year, it seems that it might be worth exploring.
Conferences: I am interested in conferences that explore Mormon works both from a critical perspective and as an opportunity to present new works or even parts of works-in-progress (writer willing, of course). I fall into the writer camp more than I do the scholar camp, but I enjoyed the presentations at this year’s AML conference. I made a lot of new friends and have been trying to “catch up” ever since. I think the online video technology is such that we can connect with people worldwide no matter where we hold the conference. Google hangouts seem to work well. I wouldn’t want online video to replace the physical location entirely, though. If you have the means to attend, then you can meet people face to face and the connection with each other is that much more meaningful.
How I Can Help: I know HTML/CSS. I have my own WordPress blog that I’m not very good about posting new content to, but I have become familiar with WordPress and what you can do with it. So I’m willing to help with what I can for the website. I can create pages and maintain them. My degree of participation would depend on who leads out. From what Wm said, it sounds as if the two people who currently hold the keys to the kingdom aren’t available to keep up with it, so those keys should go to someone else and all the financial ties/obligations associated with that as well (not that that person pays for it, but they have the ability to use AML’s funds to do so). I also wouldn’t mind writing a blog post occasionally. I agree that we need to have a stronger Twitter and Facebook presence. I second Scott Hales’s nomination to take care of those. I know Google+ is the stepchild of social media, but I like it and think it has some strong points. In particular, the hangouts.
There seems to be enough support for the idea of what we want AML to be here. We just need to commit to it and take care of action items. Even with a small group like this, I hope that through the social media and other tools we have we can grow and expand our influence on the broader LDS community.
Michael Ellis
Th. you just blew up this blog. Hornets indeed.
I will try to harness and organize some of what’s been suggested and make a new post with some action items and a call for volunteers. I also want to respond to much of what’s been expressed and suggested individually. Got to go to convocate with some nerdy professors, but I hope to get back to this post this evening, if not sooner.
Of course, most of you will be sleeping by then, or planning your next podcast/book review/conference paper for AML.
Thanks, Joe. I think that’s a good place to start. Can I suggest that you break action items into two categories? Triage (what needs to be done now) and Ambitions (what we can do once the victim is stable).
Yes. That seems like the way to go about it. Coming soon.
Full name to avoid confusion with Langford.
Tyler is making all kinds of sense here. I indicated on FB that I’m happy to be involved once my own position is secure. I’m working toward the kind of placement that is tolerant of broad interests and won’t turn its nose up at the Mo stuff. That said, if I stay here in Lethbridge, Alberta, Canada, I could look at hosting one year. We have Jenn Quist up the highway, Brent Cottle in Cardston, and several Storymaker types in the area that might very well be interested/supportive.
A couple of observations about the conference I attended a couple of years ago (Margaret’s last):
1) Interaction with other writers was the best part for me, and while my own performance in the FitP reading was substandard, that kind of exchange, and perhaps discussion forums that depend less on papers and more on dialogue would be welcome at future meetings.
2) Contributors were generally grad students, not itself an issue except that I did notice that very few of us were practicing, professional scholars. And there is a qualitative difference. Organizing sessions with at least one employed scholar as a participant and doing some pre-conference workshopping might improve the overall quality and gradually impact interest/attendance.
3) Sessions for armchair critics and writers–clearly demarcated as such–might also be helpful. AML is a lot of things, as I understand it, and Scott’s right about its base. Day 1: criticism and scholarship; Day 2: workshopping, readings, discussions. Just an idea.
4) I think MSH will be in Logan in the Spring. I plan to be there, and it would be great if AML could have a meeting there as well, either concurrently (not ideal) or just before. I’d come to both and present/participate gladly. Gets us around the HI issues that Joe mentioned, and would draw other MSHers as well.
5) The executive and executive functions very well can be multinational, or at least wider spread, in this day and age. I’d be happy to participate if that were the model.
6) I have limited experience, but I know some good people. Can we resurrect Irreantum as an online journal? I’d have to abandon Patricia over at WIZ, but I’d be willing to pitch in there, too. And Kristine Haglund will be stepping down from Dialogue, Jenny Webb might want to help with layout, etc. No doubt between us all we could put out a decent product and prepare PDF’s and other downloadable formats for a limited cost. Print-to-order is easily possible as well. I think a roving editorial post would work: I’d tackle an issue on discipleship and creativity: one or two short critical/theoretical essays and creative material that complemented it. Tyler could do one on Caldiero or sonosophy more generally, Patricia on green language. Does Irreantum have to be what it was, or can it evolve?
Tyler’s MoLit course could be serialized in it, for instance, and it could also feature or link to community-making efforts like Wm’s, Jonathan’s, Tyler’s, etc.
I’d want it to appeal broadly, though: serious thinking, serious reviews, but accessible to more than academics.
Anyway, spitballing.
.
Accessible to more than academics, yes, but accessible to academics as well. Part of the problem seems to be stuck in a limbo between amateur and professional, but AML can be good at bridging because—in the original sense of the word amateur—we all love this stuff.
That was what I was gesturing at, but I wanted to leave room for Scott’s observations about the base. AML does need to be big tent, but it also needs to make some decisions, too, about its preoccupations, standards, and the like. We get some interesting characters at MSH who have no earthly idea what we’re about and just think we’re Mormons who like reading. They embarrass themeles and take space from people who might have more meaningfully contributed. There was a little of that at AML when I went.
Dude, I’m trying, okay…
I could go to Hawaii in 2016. And I might be able to help here and there with stuff.
Plans are easy; engagement, funding, and execution is hard. If you can convert half of this spirited discussion into pragmatic organizational accomplishment, then good work will be done.
While not at all the same thing, I can tell you that LTUE requires an entire year worth of effort, a core organizing committee of close to a dozen people who meet at least bi-weekly all year to make assignments and manage preparations, an on-site staff of several dozen (as well as many dozens of supplemental and independent workers), and a full time commitment by all in the final month to pull it off.
Just for a single annual conference.
Worth every minute of the effort required, but it requires an enormous commitment of time, money, and energy in the execution *after* all the plans are made. Which is the part AML has had a harder time getting. Plenty of ideas; much less simple, grunt labor.
Not trying to be a wet blanket, just a pragmatic realist. This stuff is hard to do, which is why so many of yesteryear’s organizers burned out and went away.
Definitely. That’s part of why I asked Joe to break the list into Triage and Ambitions.
One difference, though, is that calls for volunteers in the past have been nebulous and highly dependent on residence in Utah.
If the AML conference is going on the road, there are lots of places that a conference could be held. Heck, the Twin Cities area might host it one day. I might even be able to access to facilities from UW River Falls, where my wife teaches (and I have taught as an adjunct at times), which is part of the Twin Cities metro area. We now have (to my certain knowledge) four solid AML members right here, and plenty of local connections. And I’d be willing to help. (Have to include those “golden words.”) And certainly there are other places, such as northern and southern California, that would be logical candidates for the conference. If we move to a more mobile global model, this could be a way of both sharing the workload and generating more interest beyond the existing crowd. I can’t help but think that having a conference in our own backyard might (with sufficient notice) provide a valuable impetus for scholars in this area (Mormon and non-Mormon both) to take a crack at papers with a Mormon literary focus, if we can get the word out to local colleges and universities. And it would make good outreach in other ways, too.
I’ve always thought of drama (both on stage and on film) as part of AML’s core, along with poetry and prose narrative (novels and short stories). I’ve tried to keep at least one monthly “slot” on the AML blog dedicated to drama, although due to other conflicts those who have filled those slots in the past have had to drop out. Mel, would you like to take a shot?
Sorry to be slow, Jonathan; didn’t see this until today. I would be happy to help if I can. The difficulty is that there is less going on with drama and film simply because there are fewer makers, and many of those makers (myself included) aren’t always writing with an LDS audience or characters in mind.
Do you mean reviews, or commentary? Perhaps we can take this discussion into email and thus further in depth. Bottom line: Yes, I would like to help.
Well, I am hesitant to put up a new post headed into the weekend (5:00 Hawaii time, 11:00 EST). I’ll try to have something for further review and comment by early next week.
This is a great outpouring of hopes and ideas. Of course, Scott Parkin is right, there will be heavy lifting, and things might get a little too real. (And when it comes to conferences, yes, it’s a logistical clustercuss, as I am finding out.) But aside from that rubik’s cube, I think there are plenty of small, steady steps we can take to bring in new parties, vastly increase our visibility, and deepen the engagement of an admittedly small but devoted community.
Clearly the awards, website, social platforms, and remote conferencing are key priorities. A handful of people have expressed interest in helping govern. Jonathan is cleaning up the board list as we speak. Margaret is ready to dive in and help make the conference happen. I’ve got a legal pad and a map of who suggested this and volunteered for that.
I emphasize to Melissa Leilani Larsen that even thought AML doesn’t have a T in it, theatre-makers are part of the circle of trust. Jeff Needle’s meticulously curated and consistently updated reviews are a goldmine (i mean really, wow), and they include plays and productions.
The nebulous and ever-present question that was also addressed here was scope/mission. The word “serious” was thrown around, and that works for me, because I can’t really think of a better one. (Serious doesn’t mean long-faced, but it does signal intent.) “Excellence” (as defined by Michael Andrew Ellis) is a good one, too, albeit prone to starting fights.
And then the second half of that: lit and film and theatre by, for and about Mormons? Or any combination of the 3? (By, for or about Mormons?) Wm’s excellent question: is it possible to serve both critics and creators? I think it is, since most critics are creators and vice versa.
I would gravitate towards a as-broad-as-possible definition of both AML’s audience and its critical reach. As in, Mormon authors whether they’re writing about Mormons/Mormonism or not, and non-Mormon authors who are writing about Mormons/Mormonism, and even authors who aren’t Mormon or even writing directly about Mormons/Mormonism but whose work has value and implications for Mormon audiences and Mormon thought. I would include the Catholic writer Brian Doyle in this category (who is a friend of BYU essayist Pat Madden and who actually does make reference to Mormons in his essays, on occasion, without ever spending too much time on it). Based on what I’ve seen reviewed recently, I’d say we’re pretty much already there, or headed in this direction.
In Wm’s “ecosystem,” I guess I see AML as falling somewhere between MSH (a professional organization, but where amateurs are welcome and respected, and really, like Th. says, we’re all amateurs) and Mormon Artist (but with a focus on narrative arts), skimming off the top of LDStorymakers and LTUE (that sounds elitist, I know, sorry), and drawing in interested segments of the audiences for Dialogue, Sunstone, BYU Studies, Segullah, Meridian/LDS Living, and Mormon blogs (and hopefully adding our own journal/site for publishing new work).
Speaking of Irreantum, it seems there is a fair amount of interest in starting something up to fill the vacuum it left behind. My initial thoughts are that the new Irreantum (or insert new name here) should be something that doesn’t try to do what Dialogue already does. I guess I was thinking something like Dialogue’s smart, playful, and sometimes strange and irreverent younger brother. Something that looks for the best fiction, poetry, essays, but also the best comics, journalism, interviews and miscellany (humor, found literature, food reviews and recipes, Mormon curiosities). And this doesn’t exclude Jonathon Penny’s suggestion of critical/theoretical essays. I especially like J Penny’s idea of having a roving editorship and themed issues.
Thoughts?
.
I’m glad. Because this is getting a bit much to hold in my head.
I think the by AND for AND about is what has traditionally set AML apart from similar organizations. So I’m all for staying brains-falling-out liberal on this point.
Roving editorship with a band of people who help execute is, I think, the best first step in Irreantum’s renaissance.
And, one more QUESTION:
In the far away land of 2016, does an AML Hawaii conference seem more appropriate/reachable in the winter (February), spring (May), or summer (July)?
Winter and spring would be mid-semester, which I’m inclined to favor because it harnesses the energy and participation of more students and faculty. Summer is vacation time for more people, maybe, and is probably an easier time to gain access to university resources. Airfare is cheapest in February.
Just trying to crowdsource this a little. What am I not seeing?
.
I honestly don’t know. For me, midJune to midAugust will easiest to travel for AML, but having students around to help makes a lot of sense. As does cheaper airfare. If it can be the week following Presidents Day, that would be perfect.
When it comes to future AML conference, may I suggest having sponsored AML presentations/panels at other conferences. I remember when AML sponsored regular sessions at Sunstone. And I believe I’ve seen them at MLA’s annual gathering once or twice. The advantage is AML’s name gets out there in the larger Mormon intellectual eco-sphere, exposing some people who would never bother going to an AML conference, while not having to organize an entire conference itself. I don’t suggest that this be a replacement for a regular AML conference, but something in addition to that might be easier to pull off with more regularity. In fact, I’m certain I only found out about AML originally was at a Sunstone session in the early 90s. Easier said than done, I know, but just throwing it out there to think about.
I’m pretty sure AML used to sponsor a session at the annual Rocky Mountain Modern Language Association conference.
I presented my first paper as a grad student at the RMMLA AML session. I think it was moderated by Alan Goff.
So: yes, the AML did used to sponsor sessions at larger academic conferences.
.
Now that Mary Ellen has left Sunstone, I’m not sure I’m still on, but I *was* going to be helping put together the Sunstone West Symposium, and there was going to be more arts-themed sections which I would happy to brand as AML.
Again, if I’m still helping. I haven’t heard.
I’m a bit late to the party, but here are a few of my thoughts. Some things are based on my experience at Segullah during the last few years, but I do not speak officially for them in any way (anyone else from Segullah is free to add their own thoughts):
I started reading Irreantum and the AML list back in the early 2000s. My impression at the time was that AML was primarily about criticism and scholarship of Mormon literature, wheras other organizations focused more on writing and writers. Obviously there is, and should be, some overlap, but I feel like there has been a bit of shift in the perceived audience and I hear a lot more discussion about trying to focus on ‘serious’ literature these days than I used to. Older issues of Irreantum that I own have interviews with writers like Anita Stansfield, Chris Heimerdinger, and Rick Walton, so we haven’t always been afraid of the more ‘popular’. I worry about a tendency to focus too much on what we are not and to negatively define AML and think we should be careful not to do that. Any organization will need to have continual discussion about its mission, audience, focus, and priorities. Self-reflection and re-defining ourselves is great, but lets not make the borders too tight. I like to think of different organizations associated with Mormon letters as existing on a spectrum or Venn diagram of sorts, and some overlap is good and healthy.
If you want to be relevant these days, you need a solid web presence and you need to use social media to reach your audience. I have mixed feelings about Facebook and I’m not a fan of Twitter, but how I feel doesn’t matter when it comes to creating a community and letting people know about what we have to offer. Many people these days primarily access the internet through their mobile devices, not a computer. Their primary interfaces are Facebook and Twitter. During the last few years, comments and discussion on the Segullah blog have decreased, and we’re fairly certain its because most people are reading posts on their phone and would rather just ‘like’ things than take the time to type out a comment. Unfortunately that’s reality and we’re trying to figure out how to work within that reality. We’ve had a lot of discussions about this at Segullah and have embraced social media as a way to reach our audience because that’s the best way to do it. One of our staff members manages our Facebook page and Twitter accounts. We post a link to each day’s post on the blog, and we also advertise new journal content when it has been posted. Occasionally we link to other types of content, but we primarily use Facebook to drive traffic to the blog and journal.
Facebook can also be a good place to build community. Some sites have created groups where people can have conversations with each other about related topics–I’m not sure if we want to do that. It might be better to keep the conversation confined to the blog for various reasons. We also have a private Facebook group for Segullah staff, where we can have conversations like this one about our mission and focus, staffing issues and other matters, and personal stuff. We used to have a robust message board for staff, but for various reasons those conversations have migrated to the Facebook group. Our editors are still using the message board to work on documents together, but I know that some of that shared editing is possibly moving to Google Docs. There isn’t any reason for everyone to be physically in the same location to have a robust, functional organization that gets stuff done. I have people I’ve worked with for years that I’ve never actually met in-person.
When running a volunteer organization like this, you have to plan for staff burnout and turnover. It’s just going to happen–people may care deeply about the organization, but there are times in our lives when we have to step back for a while. The organization needs to be bigger than the people involved. There needs to be an organizational structure with defined positions that are not dependent on the skills or location of a particular person–that makes it easier for transitions to happen. As I mentioned earlier, some sort of message board, email group, or hangout needs to exist for staff.
What I see right now as the biggest priorities for AML are creating a solid online “home” (an integrated website with the blog, awards, reviews, conference information, etc.) and to let people know about what we are doing and how to participate. Honestly, the last conference was a major fail for me. It took place 2 miles from my home and I didn’t know anything about it other than a few rumors from people who thought they might know something. I wasn’t able to go because I didn’t find out any solid information until two days beforehand. If there is no Facebook announcement and no website I can visit with an agenda, I can’t plan to attend. Having a conference without advertising isn’t any better than no conference at all. Some of the ideas floated about partnering with other organizations are great–I know that has been done in the past. I would like the annual conference to keep happening, but think that it is not as much of a priority as some of the other things that have been talked about. Adding a writing component may or may not be a good idea–we were going to have a writing conference sponsored by Segullah this past summer, but didn’t have that staff time to do it and we realized that the market for writing conferences in Utah is pretty saturated right now.
There are many things to love about AML and I want it to keep going. It does have a place somewhere out there in the ecosystem of Mormon culture, and we also have a rich legacy that we don’t want to lose. However, it seems we’ve reached a point where we need to change or die–and I don’t think anyone wants the AML to die. Thank you Theric for starting this conversation.
Excellent observations, Jessie. It’s tough to figure out where to put resources because discussion is so all over the place.
For example, while blogs are not seeing as much discussion activity or traffic, I think they are still important to initiate sharing and discussion in the various social media spaces. I’m also seeing a lot of talk among people that it’s better to not trust all your content to Facebook because it keeps changing the way it displays posts to users.
Yes, I think blogs and websites are still the best places for content for a lot of reasons. I’m reluctant to hand Facebook too much control of what I create or to assume that things that happen there are somehow within my ultimate control or will continue to be accessible in the future. There are also issues with how Facebook works as an interface with users and who gets to see your posts, but I’m not sure what better options there are. The death of Google Reader combined with the rise of Facebook has left a lot of people waiting for us to tell them about new content on our websites, rather than seeking it out for themselves. It would be wrong to assume that Facebook is the best option or only option to contact users, but I don’t think that an awareness of its shortcomings should prevent us from leveraging it.
On the suggestion of posting book reviews on the blog: I’d be in favor of that. Would it be better to post them on the main AML blog, or make a “sister” blog that is specifically for reviews?
I think a secondary page on the blog just for reviews would be good for now, and then add it as a page to the main website when it is up and running again.
.
It could be a tab at the top of the page. Blog / Reviews / Awards, say.
Yep.
Well, Jeff Needle here. Just a few words. First, yes, the review process is alive and well, and I’ve been posting them, as directed, to forums.mormonletters.org. I hope it’s back up again. And yes, I post the reviews to Mormon Library. I also, upon request, post them to the mormon library Facebook page. If anyone here wants to get the reviews sent individually to them, this is very easy. Send your request to jeff.needle@gmail.com, and I’ll add you to the list.
Thanks.
.
What’s the url for the Facebook page?
If it is considered desirable, I’ll be happy to post reviews here. If someone will direct me on whether to post them to the general blog, or to a sublist of some sort, I’ll get that going as soon as possible.
In the meantime, even though I have over 100 reviewers on the reviewer list, I have a desperate need for new reviewers who can really write and are willing to do the work on time. Contact me privately at jeff.needle@gmail.com if you’re interested. Thanks.
Try https://www.facebook.com/groups/171816186193234/
.
Thankee.
(Facebook’s search function is lousy.)
.
Correction: that link didn’t work for me.
I still blame Facebook.
Just another two cents. I hope the reviews get more exposure on the blog/website. If they end up posted in a secondary area, please (to whoever is in charge of such things) please have active live links somewhere on the front page – so much work and time by Jeff and the reviewers should not be buried from view.
.
Exactly. Visibility will keep participation high. I’m waaay behind on my reading of AML reviews.
As a newbie to MoLit, and as a mother of eight children, who holds a calling that takes up too much time for me to volunteer for anything significant, I feel rather lost in this discussion. But I value AML, and I hope it continues until I am at a point in my life where I can help out and participate more. Thank you, all, for keeping it going. Please keep it going.
I’m excited by this discussion, and nervous. I’m trying desperately to finish my third book for Zarahemla and raise some kids. I’m going to spend some time this week to think about how I could best contribute, but I have to say I’d like to go to Africa with Margaret.
Rather than risk it getting lost in threaded comments above, I decided to write a post for A Motley Vision that addresses some of my thoughts about how a revived AML decides what works it focuses on: Mormon narrative art — interesting, not serious