The next Association for Mormon Letters conference will be held at BYU-Hawaii on March 4-5, 2016. I have agreed to head up the AML awards committee again this year. I would like to ask everyone’s opinions on some items.
First, there has existed a rule that an author should not win an award in the same category two years in a row. I am not sure when the rule started, but it has been around since at least the 1990s, and was made to encourage a diverse group of winners. I’d like to ask everyone, do you think the rule should stay? One person recently commented to me, “I think the rules . . . were made to diversify the awards and keep them from looking too insular. We have a bigger pool of writers now and don’t need to be concerned. And in fields like sports, the “dynasties” are important ways to build a sense of history anyway. It’s good for observers to see who is able to consistently compete and win without artificially limiting them.” What do you think?
I am assuming that the categories will be about the same as last time. They were:
Comics, Creative Non-fiction, Criticism, Drama, Film, Middle Grade Novel, Novel, Picture Book, Poetry, Religious Non-Fiction, Short Fiction, Young Adult Novel
Are there any suggestions for modifying or adding to these categories?
There will be the Smith–Pettit Foundation Award for Outstanding Contribution to Mormon Letters, a lifetime achievement award. Last year we also had “Honorary Lifetime Membership” awards, but since the AML membership model seems to have gone by the way, I think that a different term should be used for additional achievement awards. Perhaps “Outstanding Achievement”.
Last time we named “finalists” about a month before the conference. I like doing that, but I think that the numbers got a bit unwieldy, so we should limit the number of finalists to four.
I will be asking people to be judges or participate on judging panels for the various awards. The awards with lots of works to consider in particular should have a panel of judges, to help sort through the works. I hope to bring some variety into the judging, inviting many who have not been a judge before. If you have any suggestions for judges, please contact me privately (mormonlit AT gmail).
I know there is the Short Fiction award, which is awarded to a author’s collection. But I think it would be interesting to see an actual Short Story award, given to an individual work published in the previous year. Just my two cents. (I think it could apply to a single essay award as well.)
Thanks Dallas. Actually, the “Short Fiction” awards have been awarded to both collections and individual short stories in the past. The term appears to have been applied to either kind of work. A “Short Story” category has also been used 3 times in the past, only to individual short stories. The past three years “Short Fiction” awards have been given just to individual stories. In 2011 a “Short Fiction” award was given to a collection, and a “Short Story” award was given to an individual story, just as you suggest we do. I could see us doing that this year, if there are deserving works.
Thank you, Andrew, for coordinating this effort. I think the awards are a key part of AML’s legacy, and I’m glad to see someone so thorough and capable organizing the effort again.
As to rules: I think it’s important that the awards be able to point current and future readers to the best works in the field. So I’m definitely for fewer eligibility restrictions.
As to categories: I think the list you mention works well. There was an “online writing” award at least two separate years. It’s a bit odd and unwieldy as a category, but I think having an award there helps raise attention to the interesting work people do in online forms. Though I understand that each additional award means extra judges, more work drafting citations, and more awards to make. So it may not make sense to add any more.
“First, there has existed a rule that an author should not win an award in the same category two years in a row. . . . What do you think?”
I believe there have been some winners in the past who have recused themselves from future awards after winning multiple awards in the same category. I think that’s a classy move which avoids the problem of one major player dominating the awards for years at a time. However, I wasn’t aware that there was any rule about winning two years in a row, and I don’t think such a rule should exist or be enforced.
1. While not unanimous, the feedback I have gotten back on various media has been overwhelmingly for ending the “no two years in a row” rule. So for this year I support removing that rule.
2. By email, Gideon Burton suggested, “If the conference is conducted as a Google Hangout on Air it can accommodate participants from 10 varied locations / computers at a time, with nearly unlimited live viewers watching on YouTube (and text chatting if they wish). This also auto records the event and keeps it posted on YouTube. Could be a way to accommodate both virtual presenters and audiences. An official AML lei could distinguish the on-site speakers.” I like that idea. Also, maybe a Utah Valley location should be picked as a secondary location, with a big screen, so a group could be there and participate in the conference? Surely BYU-Provo and BYU-Hawaii have done teleconferences in the past, so that there is an existing infrastructure that can be used. Does anyone know about that?