Theric’s recent post led to an outpouring (120 comments and counting) of ideas and speculation on the future of AML, how to get there, and who will take it there. I noted that I would try to assemble said gush of words into something concise and actionable (as in, “ready to be acted upon,” not, “grounds for a lawsuit”). The following attempts to be comprehensive, but I certainly may have missed or misunderstood certain comments. Please feel free to offer further revisions, corrections, questions, gripes, etc.
Alright, then. To business. As suggested by Wm, the following is divided into two parts, “triage” (what needs to be done now) and “ambitions” (what can be done later, once the victim is stable).
NOTE: If your name appears at the end of an item after “Volunteers” do not fret. You have not been locked in. I am just going off of what I gathered from reading the comments, trying to cast a broad net. Hopefully, individual assignments and responsibilities will be finalized in time.
TRIAGE
Website – There seems to be a very solid consensus about this one. If we can get the website back up and running and add as much content as possible (reviews, archives, the history/narrative of AML, etc.), our visibility skyrockets, our relevancy rises, and our community grows. This also includes coordinating with Jeff Needle and Andrew Hall to better harness and expand their invaluable work. I like Tyler’s idea of helping to further Andrew’s efforts to curate and link to all manner of MoLit related content (the “bazaar” appeal as named by Jonathan L.). The Digital Humanities Now model (as suggested by Tyler) can (should) be adapted for AML. It needs to be a collaborative, sustainable effort. VOLUNTEERS: Elizabeth Beeton, Jonathan Langford, Dallas Robbins, Michael Ellis
Social Media – Facebook and Twitter. To drive traffic. To promote and remind and provoke and display. VOLUNTEERS: Scott Hales
Awards – As many pointed out, getting seriously organized with the awards gives AML standing as an arbiter of quality, brings together writers, readers, and publishers, and sparks thoughtful discussion (as well as controversy!). We need to come up with a transparent and systematic way of nominating and judging. VOLUNTEERS: Theric Jepson, Tyler Chadwick, Wm Morris (publicity), Joe Plicka, Margaret Young
Board/Leadership – We need a board that will meet (on the internet, of course), somewhat regularly. We need a treasurer to keep tabs on our finances. We need a secretary to maintain membership rolls. We need you. VOLUNTEERS: Scott Hales, Jonathon Penny, Joe Plicka, others I may have missed?
Recruitment – We need to court critics and writers who have drifted off, or are up and coming, or have just plain never heard of us. I know a couple people whose interests align with AML but have just assumed the organization was kind of asleep, or not interested in them (as Scott mentioned, some are unsure who AML is for). I hate how this feels like another version of “tell five friends,” or “shouldn’t everyone have the opportunity to hear this glad message,” or, heaven forbid, “SPAM!” (as Mormons, that hits pretty close to home), but we don’t have to don the uniform and grab the bullhorn. Just selectively invite the most viable candidates to participate and let the internet do the rest. Jonathan Langford offered to scour some databases for stragglers who are doing work in MoLit but haven’t connected the dots to AML, and might be persuaded to share their work. Other efforts here could be fruitful.
2015 AML Conference/Seminar/Gathering – This is last under triage, because while it is something that we need to think about very soon, it’s not as urgent as the above. Hawaii is not going to happen until 2016. In the meantime, we could decide to do something this coming spring (or summer, or winter). Much has been bandied about. Should it be an online conference, a small gathering in conjunction with another conference (MSH), or something along the lines of Tyler’s proposed MoLit seminar (and/or creative workshop/seminar)? (In the future or even now, another discussed option was sponsoring a session at a larger conference like RMMLA, Sunstone, or maybe, someday, at MLA or AWP themselves.) If Tyler’s seminar idea gets traction, I would be glad to participate. It sounds like it has the potential to deeply engage a small group of willing but distracted folks and produce something memorable and meaningful that could go right up on the AML website. VOLUNTEERS (includes those who suggested or expressed interest in any of these ideas): Scott Hales, Tyler Chadwick, Joe Plicka, Theric Jepson, Jonathon Penny, Wm Morris
AMBITIONS
AML/LDS Writers Workshop Hawaii 2016 – I’m on this. It’s undoubtedly a beast to even think about. It could be incredible. Thank you for those of you who gave me feedback on your desires/abilities to attend. The big question right now is timing. February, May, or July? Then we tackle scope. And housing. VOLUNTEERS: Joe Plicka, Margaret Young, Luisa Perkins
Irreantum (or successor) – This is something I actually feel confident about offering to help with. My experiences with editing and publishing lit journals are not decades deep, but solid enough to stand on. Questions about money (printing, subscriptions) notwithstanding, there seems to be a fair amount of interest in having some sort of AML skin in the publishing game (does that expression make anyone else titter?). We can continue the discussion about format and audience on a future post. A few common themes: broader format, roving editorship and theme issues, online publication (maybe an additional print run). VOLUNTEERS: Jonathon Penny, Theric Jepson, Michael Andrew Ellis, Joe Plicka
MORE AMBITIONS/PIES IN THE SKIES
Many more ideas were suggested that sound super dreamy and super awesome (many offered by Randy Astle). Maybe a day will come when AML has the personnel and resources to pursue things like:
MoLit online course (Tyler has led out on this so far and maybe it will become his thing apart from AML, it’s not so much a pie in the sky really, maybe it could even be serialized in Irreantum), AML podcast, smaller workshops/conferences around the country, a MoLit app, a web series, an AML Press (Amazon Fulfillment style)
Okay, so what did I miss? And where do we go from here?
And PLEASE, if you would like to add your name to any of these items, PLEASE let me know. We need as much or as little as you can give.
So far it looks like a smaller group of about half a dozen folks who are ready to pitch in. (And a few who are already doing all they can.) Not sure if that will be enough to carry us, but we’ll start down the road and see who else shows up. In the age of the internet, you never know who will drop by.
Joe,
This is a great summary. Thanks for your work on this. Yes, I want to help on the website and with Irreantum 2.0. I also wouldn’t mind taking a small role on the board, such as the membership person.
Michael
.
For now, I’m happy to stand where my name has been placed.
Thks Th.
I’m happy with the above. Thanks, Joe, for pushing on with this.
I’m not sure how membership on the AML board is determined. However, that’s another place where I’d be interested in serving, assuming that board business can be conducted electronically. In terms of interests/populations served, I probably should be counted primarily as an independent scholar, and as a liaison to the LDS sf&f community.
Speaking of which… would there be interest in an AML-sponsored session at LTUE (Life, the Universe and Everything) for some topic related to science fiction/fantasy and Mormonism? If so, I can start poking around to see if something can be arranged.
.
Stephen Peck, Michael Collings….should be easy to pull off.
Thx Jonathan. I like the idea of a liaison. I’ll put you down for the board. I think if there is enough interest/work for an AML session at LTUE, that would be a great gesture and coming together. Will you look into it?
I can help with some of the website stuff, especially thinking through the site architecture/navigation and content plan.
I can also help, if needed/desired, with figuring out board structure and how to organize its activity so that it functions well virtually.
I’d also note that we shouldn’t ignore those who have helped out AML in the past. Not all of those volunteers may feel comfortable speaking up in blog comments, so consulting with them in private should be a priority.
Thanks Wm. You are an integral part of building a bridge into the future. I would appreciate any and all suggestions/ideas/history lessons.
Elizabeth Beeton is going to start rebuilding the website/blog. She may need some help soon enough with that. I definitely would need help figuring out the board structure. I will get back to you with that.
And, yes, let me know who else we should contact privately. A few more voices are trickling in, voices from the past. Mo’ people mo’ bettah.
I’m willing to fill some role on the board, if needed, Joe.
Per the conference: I’ll check into the MSH schedule and see if it would be possible to plan something alongside that next year, or even to have an AML session or two there.
Also: even if we did something f2f, we could also plan a virtual something-or-other. I’m for giving the seminar a go. Scott and I have already opened a dialogue re: that.
Awesome, Tyler. I’ll put you down. Will you let me know what you find out about MSH?
Like I said, I would make time to do the seminar.
One more thing for the triage items (perhaps the most vital): what hashtag are we using to discuss Mormon literature via social media? I vacillate between #molit and #mormonlit. Consensus?
#mormonlit takes more characters but it is more friendly to non-insiders.
That’s my thought as well, Wm.
I tend to use #molit because it is shorter, but I too like how #mormonlit allows for name recognition…
I just mentioned this to Scott and Theric both on Twitter: my vote is for #MoLit.
#molit is sexier. #mormonlit is pragmatic, and are nothing if not pragmatic. #molit seems to keep the focus on lit, while #mormonlit screams Mormon, not that that’s a bad thing . . . but we do so much proselyting . . . it might be assumed to be part of our marketing reach . . . I don’t know . . .
I did a very unscientific poll on Twitter, and most people prefer #MoLit. Although it was pointed out that #MoLit could also be literature from Missouri. #irony
Missouri! Ha.
Is it too crazy to dump the “Mormon” in favor of LDS? #LDSLit?
.
That’s an old discussion I’m not excited to rehash, but I think Mormon suggests the wider AML tent more than LDS does.
I’m with Th on that one.
So am I. Mormon is edgier…
LOL. I get it, but somehow it’s funny to me that “Mormon” is edgier. 😉
Also: I can’t seem to track down who it is that currently runs AML’s social media presence…
Scott, Have you tried Kathleen Woodbury? I will ask around as well . . .
I am happy to continue to help with Irreantum as designer/typesetter, whether we decide to go with print or ebook or another format.
Marny,
Thank you! That is awesome. Layout is the most terrifying part of the process to me. It would be great to have someone who knows what they’re doing.
Joe
Joe and Marny,
I don’t have experience with print publishing, but I have created a few ebooks using HTML and a program called Calibre. I would be happy to help in that respect as well.
Michael
Thanks Michael. Again, those are skills I do not have. If Irreantum gets going again, it’s definitely going to be part (if not all) digital.
Yours,
Joe
I’m late to the conversation (thanks for the tag, Tyler) but just want to say thank you, all, for still caring about AML. Reading this brought me hope that I hadn’t felt in a long time. My heart is still in AML, particularly Irreantum, which I think is, or at least was, the most valuable thing about AML, there being nothing like it anywhere else. I also always loved the annual meetings and hope that they will somehow continue. Though the conversations in the hallways between sessions were as valuable to me as the sessions themselves, I loved the papers I heard there and will never forget some of them. Aaaah, let us not lose the meetings! I wouldn’t be able to travel to one (and for this reason I hope they’ll continue to be held in the Mormon Corridor, at least every few years, anyway), but I think if you got the word out you could get scholars from Claremont and elsewhere to travel to them.
Thanks Darlene. Nice to meet you. Please keep hanging around the blog and contributing to the discussion and to a possible reboot of Irreantum. Hopefully there will be more conferences and opportunities to gather and hobnob and commune.
I’m in, Joe. And I nominate Mel Larson for the board, and Margaret if she’s willing. I know she’d advise wisely but not override decisions to institute change.
I’ll check with the MSH leadership about the possibility of a three-fold presence at the Spring conference: a session we sponsor on Mormon Arts, a panel discussion, and a group reading. If even one of those gets approved, it’s something. I’d be happy to chair, and I think Tyler will be there, so he can share those duties. He’d be great on the panel.
(And now I see that Tyler already raised this: so we’ll coordinate and get back to you.)
Thanks for the chest compressions, Joe!
Wait, Jonathan! Are you nominating me for something representing responsibility?? That means fistfights with James Goldberg.
…Okay, fine. I’m in. 😉
Joe, I’m always looking for a reason/excuse/cause/ticket to get back to Laie, sooner rather than later. If I can help out I would be glad to.
Hooray!
Who am I fistfighting?
Me, James. ME. It’s Five Books vs. Martyrs all over again. Put ’em up.
Thanks Melissa! Or should I call you Mel?
I will let you know when things are getting off the ground. What’s your connection to Laie? We definitely need support for a possible 2016 here.
I was born in Kahuku and lived in Hau’ula and Laie (my parents both worked at BYUH) until the summer before my 13th birthday, when my family moved to Utah.
Cool. Sounds like a familiar story around here. Hope to meet you when you return.
*Jonathon. Apologies.
Thanks Jonathon! I’ll put you and Mel Larson down for the board. Margaret is great and we will definitely need her close by. Yeah, get back to me when you and Tyler figure out what’s going on with MSH.
Talk to you soon.
I’m willing to help out with Irreantum as well. I was book review editor when the journal ended, and I’d love to be part of it again.
Thanks again, Scott! Noted.
I’m happy to help out with awards and to offer guidance/advice to anyone who is interested in resurrecting Irreantum. My heart is still with that journal. I wouldn’t go so far as to call it “my child” or anything (after all, Chris Bigelow did give birth to it). It’s more like a teenager I took under my wing and let live in my house for a few tough years to see if I could straighten her out. You can extend that metaphor however you’d like. 🙂
I will say one thing that led to my own burnout: sometimes it felt like Theric and Wm. represented Irreantum’s entire audience (not counting the AML and Irreantum editorial boards of course, and the people who had pieces published, and my mom). Back in the AML’s heyday all sorts of people were a part of the conversation and Irreantum felt like an extension of that conversation. It was a vibrant community, even if it was relatively small. And I realize that there were a number of people who read and appreciated Irreantum during the 5 years I was involved with it, but it became a smaller and smaller number over time, and very few of these people were engaging in conversation about Mormon literature, even if they were reading it privately. This might sound pessimistic, but even if we can summon a handful of dedicated volunteers, those volunteers will have a hard time committing the tremendous amount of time and energy necessary to keep things afloat if there isn’t a responsive community involved with the AML.
I will say, though, I always looked forward to what Theric and Wm. had to say. The two of them kept me going for at least a year more than I otherwise would have gone. Having even two vocal people you don’t want to let down means something.
::beams::
.
Irreantum was always worthy of attention, even when not so many people were talking about it.
Thanks Angela. I can totally see why Irreantum burned out. And I can see why bringing it back feels dicey. It is dicey, and we need to consider exactly who our audience is and what kind of journal it can support. I would love to position Irreantum as something more like Portland Magazine, a publication that seeks out writing under the tricky and broad banner of “spiritual,” but isn’t absolutely aligned with a particular tradition (thought the editor is Catholic). I think the magazine is inspiring and respectful, while challenging and thoughtful. Not sure if anyone else would share this vision. If not, we’ll try something else.
I think we’re a little ways off from that, yet. But, if it happens, I will be finding you. In the meantime, thanks for offering with the awards. I will probably be contacting you soon about that.
Yeah, Joe! Put me down for recruitment. I talk to quite a number of people for the Year in Review, so I can try to use those contacts to try to bring people in.
Andrew, you are CEO of recruitment. 🙂 Thank you. Hopefully we will have a bustling website to send people to soon, and the promise of an event or two.
I can help out on website stuff. I’m a long-time WordPress techie, and I’ve helped out a bit in the past: For the past three and a half years, the AML email list has received automated messages announcing each new blog entry, and all those emails originate from my own server.
Eric, thank you. I will pass your name along to Elizabeth Beeton, who is taking over the AML web presence. Is there an email address where we can reach you at?
Joe
Sure, my Gmail address is probably best: eric.d.dixon@
I hesitate to chime in here as I’m one who “left” the AML years ago–or at least allowed myself to fade away. But I’m curious enough (and nostalgic enough) to wonder what the AML is going to do that’s any different from what they did before?
I mean, yes, I got busy. Work and home commitments pulled me away from active participation, but let’s be honest: if I was still getting interesting conversations and engaging analysis of LDS literature I’d have found the time to continue even if I had to withdraw from the infrastructure support roles I’d acquired.
You see, the thing is that my own disaffection came when I perceived the AML to be drifting from an open forum welcoming to all into the same skeptical, academic, and, yes, liberal bent that is already served by existing venues (Sunstone for the disaffected and Dialogue for the disaffected who haven’t yet made a full break with orthodox doctrine… yet). For a long time, the AML served as the only venue where an openly conservative LDS member could discuss literature in an accepting, sometimes analytical, but always interesting and respectful way. A few bad actors spoiled that by engaging in community-cleansing activity with cheap rhetoric and sophist argument that went unchecked and unchallenged often enough that continuing participation became an unbearable drag. I cannot tell you how many times I’d hear from fellow conservatives giving me private support they were afraid to express publicly lest they be targeted in the same way I often was.
And that’s before you even get to the question of genre literature, which has no outlet for discussion, analysis or critique that isn’t predicated on condemnation or an automatic second-class status designation. This is a true shame as many of our best writers are genre writers, whether Carla Kelly in romance or the two Brandons in fantasy (to name genres I am personally engaged in). I’d *love* to discuss the LDS works in those genres. But not in a venue that is going to be hostile to either the genre or my own mostly-faithful gospel perspective.
So tell me, is this a return to the academic brand of discussion with little interest in a broader discourse regarding LDS literature? Or is this an actual attempt to revive that open examination that will welcome actual faithful members and those who lack credentials who are nevertheless interested in intellectual and reasoned discussions of all things (LDS) literature?
As far as I can tell, ya’ll have one shot at this. Subsequent attempts will be seen as a continuum of what you start here. I encourage you to start as you mean to go on because many of us interested in LDS literature who have no venue for our interests may look in… once. But it won’t take much to convince us that this is just more of the same of what we have already concluded has no place for our participation…
What kind of activities do you think would be interesting to you, Jacob? Are you talking about a discussion forum? What sort of things do you think AML might do for you that you don’t see LDStorymakers doing right now? (I think of them as an existing forum for faithful Mormons interested in genre fiction, for example.) You’ve spoken of AML in comparison with Dialogue and Sunstone. How would you like to see AML differentiate itself from LDStorymakers? What do you think are/could be/have been its strengths in comparison with them?
Well for one thing, Storymakers hasn’t given me the right time of day (especially when I offered to do a workshop on self-publishing when the conference was right in my back yard).
My politics and writing are libertarian-to-conservative and quite in-your-face at that, but I’ve gotten a lot of love from the Sunstone and Dialogue people who can overlook it (distasteful as it is to them—and it is, trust me).
Storymakers doesn’t have a place for me (and writers/readers like me) and you don’t want to have.
Tell me, is Carla Kelly part of Storymakers? Or would she be persona non grata as well, since BYU UNinvited her to speak on a panel when they found out she writes for Harlequin?
There’s plenty of room between Storymakers and AML.
I appreciate Jacob’s concerns (and have missed his voice). I think informal discussion is important, but the days of emails lists and forums and, to a certain extent, blogs (yes, I see the irony in relation to the discussion we’re having) are gone. And social media, while fun, is diffuse. On the hand, that makes it less likely that the problems Jacob describes are going to crop up. On the other, it means that diverse voices need to be included in a very intentional way in the more formal projects that the new AML engages in. Otherwise, they will look elsewhere. Or go silent.
This is part of what makes the field so difficult to organize/further. It’s also part of what makes it interesting.
Jacob, I can relate and empathize. I hope to be able to bridge that gap.
That said, there is one commenter in #MormonLit spheres who is quite insulting with his conservative politics, harsh on others who don’t toe his line, and generally thinks anything he doesn’t approve of or like should be labeled Mormon fiction.
So the disdain isn’t limited to the left and those who snub genre.
Jacob, I’m glad you chimed in. This kind of conversation may be slightly awkward/uncomfortable for some, but it absolutely needs to happen.
That said, I have not been around for history/conflict/disillusionment you describe. That may be a good thing, or not, or both, depending on how you look at it.
The messiness you describe, the tension between so-called liberals and conservatives, perceived orthodox or unorthodox Mormons, will probably always be there in some form. But that doesn’t mean we can’t have a broad, respectful conversation. I care little for any of these labels, and hope that we can move past them for the most part. It’s hard, of course, with something that lives so close to our core (our faith). But I don’t see why it can’t be an inclusive and positive experience for most.
As long as I’m a part of the conversation, I will reject anything resembling “community-cleansing” and welcome discussions on anything that seems interesting or important to an LDS audience, including Carla Kelly, Brandon Sanderson, and anything else. The internet, as well as a large chunk of the academy, has mostly collapsed the categories of high-brow and low-brow, and severely questioned the idea of genre/pop writing as being something completely separate from literary/art writing. At least that’s how I see it.
Will people still have widely varying opinions/interpretations regarding specific works and authors? Undoubtedly. Will some of those opinions/interpretations be irreconcilable? Yes. Will people occasionally feel irritated or even hurt, whether they should or not? I hope not, but probably yes. Does that invalidate AML? I don’t think so. Like we always say about the church, it’s people. People who are imperfect, people who are mostly sincere and good-hearted, but prone to lapses of judgment and decorum.
It’s hard to deny that the dominant mode of academic discourse is one of skepticism and interrogation. It can be good thing, but needs to be checked and balanced. I see AML as neither a branch of the academy, nor a mutual admiration society. It exists somewhere in between the two, I guess. We’ll see. Academics sometimes need to check their pet topics and criticisms at the door. But not just academics. Everyone needs to open up a little and let themselves be challenged and led and surprised, whatever direction that may go. That’s why we read in the first place, I believe, to be challenged, led, and surprised. To gain compassion and emotional intelligence.
Jacob, there is a place for you here. I hope you stick around. Thanks for all you have contributed thus far.
If I either missed it or misread, I apologize, but this is my question: What is AML’s mission statement? I think that would be a good place for all of us to reboot and rebuild.
My forthcoming guest post takes a stab at that. I wanted to wait for that to go up, though, until after Joe did his follow-up post. So hopefully that will be up in the next few days.
.
QUICK!!!!!!!!! SOMEONE POST ERIC SAMUELSON’S ARTICLE ON MISSION STATEMENTS!!!!!!
Yes, please. Is it not google-able?
.
I thought I had a soft copy, but I can’t find it….
Here you go:
https://web.archive.org/web/20080509074950/http://www.mormonletters.org/events/AMLprezaddress.htm
Excellent!
Love this bit:
“What we believe in, what we honor, is good writing: literature, and the effective criticism of literature. Because we’re the Association for Mormon Letters, we honor good writing by and about Mormons. But the poet cannot say to the playwright, we have no need of thee, nor again the essayist to the romance novelist, I have no need of thee. We can certainly discuss, with precision, kindness and insight, how a particular work functions in our culture, or the effectiveness of the prose or any other matter relating to what a particular work seems to be trying to achieve and how well it achieves it. We value criticism. What we can’t do is excommunicate any genre or approach or style or form. Mormon literature can be transcendent or transgressive, or both, or neither. We embrace it all.”
Seems like things really started to snowball toward our present state a year or two after Eric’s address (not that he had anything to do with that, of course)…
I’d love to help with the website and social media side of things.
Thanks, Christopher. I’ve got you down, and will tell Scott Hales (social media) to get in touch with you. Is there a preferred email address we can reach you at, or are you already plugged into everybody via Facebook? I’m terrible at Facebook so I kind of forget that’s how it’s done these days . . .
Christopher and I are already Facebook friends, so we are connected in that way. And he interviewed me once, so he’s OK in my book. I think it’s a good idea to have several admins on these social media platforms to ensure coverage and keep content moving.
Perfect. Thanks for moving on this.
We had to stick together when the “outsiders” pegged us “provincial.” I was there when Scott Card wrote his first novel, “Song Master.” (Or maybe it was his second.) Now he’s big–a national “pro.” And that has happened for others, also, James Dashner, for example–not mentioning Mormonism especially, but getting our love out there. I am so impressed with the enthusiastic response. The world needs us. They sometimes don’t know it. But that’s no excuse for wilting on the vine. (Hoorah for resurrections!)
Folks,
I read that mission statement, but it really doesn’t answer the question of what AML is trying to accomplish.
Are you guys trying to be THE news source for LDS-related writing?
Or are you trying to promote LDS fiction as an alternative to porn and strip joints (as kind of suggested in that mission statement)?
Or be the place to chat about LDS fiction academically?
Or something else?
Some people might be tempted to say all the above and more! But it’s my experience that everything goals lead organizations into the Dumps of Dissolution.
I just let my SFWA membership lapse because SFWA cannot demonstrate any bang for buck (time or dollar), even if membership does bestow the feeling of being special. SFWA holds a whole bunch of activities and spends a bunch of money but makes no attempt to measure how successful the allocations of time and money are. They do2 have overall objectives, but it’s hard to see how well their allocations support them.
I just joined ITW because they actually seem to have their crap together. They’re all about marketing and promoting members’ books. I’m not saying that needs to be AML’s goal. Only that ITW knows what it’s trying to do and can measure how well it’s doing it.
So anyway. Before I can get excited about a group, I need to know if I’m excited about what they’re trying to accomplish. Can someone enlighten me on what AML is trying to do?
John:
Excellent questions.
That’s exactly the problem that AML has had in the past — a diffusion of focus and disagreement over what that focus should be and a lack of compelling articulation of who the AML was for (and not for). So what we’re trying to do is figure out where we stand on the answer(s) to that question and, simultaneously, the right set of volunteers and activities to support that. That makes things a little awkward right now. If things work, then what will emerge is something that can answer your question in the way you want it answered.
But also: if you have some thoughts on what you are in need of/interested in, now would be a good time to express them.
I’m new around here…just thought I’d say hello and offer any help. I teach and run the writing center at BYU-Idaho, and have several current and former tutors who would likely be interested in AML as well. Just a couple thoughts. What Joe said above about re-imagining Irreantum is spot on. I loved the journal but I think a re-invention more than a resuscitation is in order. For starters, as cool as the name Irreantum is, I think its a little too insider and esoteric to generate general interest.
Also, I like the idea of a Hawaii conference and would definitely attend.
Let me know how I can help.
Sheldon,
Thank you for stopping by. I will certainly track you down when the time comes. Once the site is back up and running, please send your students over to join the conversation and maybe even join AML. As for Irreantum, send me any other ideas or thoughts you have. I want to get as many perspectives as possible.
I really hope Hawaii happens and you get to come.
Talk to you later,
Joe