From: owner-aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com (aml-list-digest) To: aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: aml-list-digest V1 #853 Reply-To: aml-list Sender: owner-aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com Errors-To: owner-aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com Precedence: bulk aml-list-digest Tuesday, October 8 2002 Volume 01 : Number 853 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2002 18:07:29 -0600 From: "Jacob Proffitt" Subject: RE: [AML] Sitcoms - ---Original Message From: S. Malmrose > > One gripe I have with sitcoms is how the fathers are always > portrayed as stupid, bumbling goofs. It works on the Simpsons > (probably because every man really is Homer). But it gets > irritating on sitcom after sitcom. Watch Damon Wayans' "My Wife and Kids". Excellent show and done with Wayans' characteristic bold touch that manages to remain (somehow) relevant, careful, and truthful. Funny stuff and the dad doesn't come off as the perpetual buffoon--maybe because it's co-written by the guy playing the dad. Jacob Proffitt - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2002 18:20:27 -0600 From: "Jacob Proffitt" Subject: RE: [AML] Sitcoms I'm glad you're working on an LDS sitcom, Eric! That's heartening news. I hope we get to see the fruit of your labors. An observation: I really enjoyed the "George Lopez" sitcom last night--it was on after "My Wife and Kids". It was funny enough I suppose, but it was also interesting, new, different, and had an obvious issue/relevance that I found intriguing (without stray attacks on white men). It explored cultural artifacts and integration as well as some identity issues that held my interest throughout. Frankly, I think it'd be useful to explore for ideas and adaptation from an LDS point of view. Jacob Proffitt - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2002 18:16:43 -0700 (PDT) From: "R.W. Rasband" Subject: Re: [AML] New Sugar Beet - --- Amy Chamberlain wrote: > Since I wrote that editorial, let me give you a few of my thoughts on > it. > > My intent with it--and I know that intentions do not always come through > clearly--was NOT to make fun of the 9-11 victims, as Debra assumes it > was. > It was, instead, to make fun of the Tammy Millers of the world--those > Mormons who don't know the details, don't want to know the details, and > insist on viewing everything as "God's will," no matter how horrible and > tragic the situation. > I didn't know Amy wrote this piece but I should have recognized her usual panache. I didn't have any trouble getting that the target wasn't the 9/11 victims, but the bubble-headed reaction of some Mormons to any tragedy. (Like the person who says there's not really such thing as a Mormon tragedy, since in the long run we all get exactly what we deserve.) Jonathan Swift once said about satire something like, "The horse only bucks when the spurs bite." ===== R.W. Rasband Heber City, UT rrasband@yahoo.com __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? New DSL Internet Access from SBC & Yahoo! http://sbc.yahoo.com - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2002 19:21:46 -0600 From: "Paris Anderson" Subject: Re: [AML] Sitcoms "Covell, Jason" wrote: So here's a pop quiz to throw into the mix: what > pilots do you remember as being particularly bad that went on to be quite > good (or very good) in the series? The pilot for the I LOVE LUCY was worse than dreadful. Everyone seemed careful and unsure. It made Lucy, the perky redhead, look like she was on valium. It made me think spending the weekend with Loraina Bobbit might not be a bad idea. Paris Anderson - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2002 21:28:49 -0600 From: "Scott Parkin" Subject: Re: [AML] _Charly_ (Film) (Review) Dorothy Peterson wrote: > All the Mormon > publishers have had an opportunity to publish it and all have rejected it, > and guess what the common tenor of their reasoning was: It is TOO LITERARY > for their readership. One Mormon publisher used those exact words. What > does that say for the Mormon reader? I think it says absolutely nothing about the Mormon reader. It says that the publishers have clearly defined formulae for success and are unwilling to experiment too far outside those lines. The publishers cater to a specific subset of readers that they know about and are certain they can reach. They aren't interested in readers that aren't interested in the titles they publish. But I think the readers *are* there, and most of them don't buy a thing in the LDS market because they looked once and found nothing interesting so they walked completely away. Since the major publishers won't bite unless a book falls into one of their clearly defined categories, we have to either accept the lockout and walk away or we have to find ways to make a different kind of novel available to readers through alternate channels. If there really are readers out there who are interested in fiction that's "too literary" for Covenant or DB the only way we're going to discover them is by shouting from the rooftops that there are other alternatives in our cultural literature--and make sure those alternatives really exist. We need to find a way to keep costs down, increase awareness, and keep it real until satisfied readers start telling each other about this alternative press. Eventually, the number of new readers buying books from a small publisher will get the attention of the larger publishers and they will either offer their own line or buy out the little guy--or cede that share of the market and be happy with the niches they've staked out. Either way, the reader wins. Unless those readers don't exist and I'm just hallucinating the potential demand. How many sales does it take to prove a concept in publishing? Who's willing to work with me on an experiment to find out? Let me know in a private note. I think we need to know for sure, and I'm not sure the anecdotal evidence I'm seeing right now proves anything about what readers want so much as it proves what publishers know they can sell. Completely different things with completely different proofs. Inquiring (and deeply frustrated) minds want to know... Scott Parkin - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2002 21:37:30 -0600 From: "Scott Parkin" Subject: Re: [AML] Movie Clean-up Commentary Ivan Wolfe wrote: > The sad thing is - for most films, a cleaned up version readily exists that > could easily be put on any DVD release with no hassle - the Airline versions. > Those are (usually) edited to a "general broadcaast TV" standard. > SO there is no extra work involved - and if the directors, etc. truly felt that > there was only one version and editing would have been bad, then they wouldn't > have allowed a airline version in the first place. The problem is that it was someone other than the filmmaker who created that edit. What I'm talking about is a film re-edited *by the original filmmaker* into one or more alternate versions so that the question of artistic vision and integrity is removed. *If* the filmmakers are willing to work that hard. *If* the public is really willing to buy multi-verioned DVDs over the single versioned kind. It can be argued that Clean Flicks et al have proven at least a small market; now the question is to determine the actual size of that market segment--and whether they'll buy multi-version DVDs over hard-edited video tapes or on-the-fly digital remixes. If the sales numbers will support it, the technology is already in place. Scott Parkin - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2002 21:46:46 -0600 From: "Scott Parkin" Subject: [AML] Lost Mormon Literary Classics Are there some works of classic Mormon literature that you would like to own but that you can't seem to find anywhere? I'm trying to compile a list of classic LDS lit that may be out of print or generally unavailable. I know, for example, that Gideon Burton reprinted some LDS classics that had been discontinued but not forgotten, and that he sells them a few copies at a time at the annual AML conference and elsewhere. There's _Under the Cottonwoods_ and _The Rummage Sale_ and a few other titles. What else would you like to see made available again? I would love to see your lists of lost Mormon classics (of any type, literary or not) and why you think they ought to be made available to modern audiences. I'm most interested in what you'd like to see more than what you don't. Your ideas are much appreciated. Thank you. Scott Parkin - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2002 21:50:33 -0600 From: "Scott Parkin" Subject: Re: [AML] Loving _Brigham City_ I liked _Brigham City_ so much that I literally stopped at Media Play on my way home to buy _God's Army._ I had heard about GA but wasn't really interested in another "missionaries are silly" flick. But BC created the trust for me and made me go back and try the other. I can hardly wait for the next film, and I hope it will build even more trust for viewers so that they go back and buy *both* of Dutcher's prior LDS titles. Trust is a tricky thing and sometimes takes several titles to establish. Scott Parkin - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2002 21:48:14 -0700 From: "Richard R. Hopkins" Subject: Re: [AML] Mormon Publishing Options (was: Mormon Culture) Richard Dutcher wrote > Thanks for the good PR, Scott, but the truth of the matter is: because of > BRIGHAM CITY's financial failure, I'm having a bugger of a time trying to get > another film financed. I may be forced to direct SINGLES WARD 2 just to put > food on the table. Do it, Richard! And show them how to make a good LDS comedy in the process. Your stock will go through the roof. BTW, there are several copies of the DVD and video of Brigham City at our local Blockbuster (in Murray) and they are ALWAYS rented out! I have yet to be in there when even one was available to rent. Richard Hopkins - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2002 21:12:59 -0700 From: "jana" Subject: Re: [AML] Loving _Brigham City_ Our Albertson's has several copies of BC for rent--pretty strange (but cool) for Orange County, CA. Jana - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 04 Oct 2002 02:47:54 -0500 From: "kumiko" Subject: [AML] Punch Drunk Love Here's an early review of the new Adam Sandler movie "Punch Drunk Love," in which Sandler faces off with 4 Latter-day Saint brothers, who are played by the real-life Latter-day Saint Stevens brothers from Utah. The movie opens nationwide October 18th. http://www.indiewire.com/film/reviews/rev_02Cannes_020522_Punch.html Excerpt: "The other major plot thread is the telephone scam that Barry gets caught up in when he innocently calls a phone sex line. Once the Utah-based scam artist and mattress salesman Dean Trumbell (played Philip Seymour Hoffman, who's been in all of Anderson's films), has his credit card information, he doesn't want to let Barry go. Pursued by some hillbilly Mormon thugs sent by Trumbell, Barry decides to join Lena in Hawaii where they discover and profess their love." LDSFilm.com - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 04 Oct 2002 09:03:33 -0600 From: "Eric R. Samuelsen" Subject: [AML] Re: Sitcoms Quick response to Preston Hunter's question: >But may I >ask why are trying to make a sitcom. Surely this is the most difficult = type >of TV show you could attempt to do. Wouldn't it be easier to try to = >create a drama? Quick answer: this project happened because this was what the kids wanted = to do. This was entirely a student initiated project. They came to us = with a proposal for a sitcom writing and producing class, a very detailed = and well-thought-through proposal. We really don't have the resources to = do this; I'm involved on top of a full load, as are the other faculty who = are involved. But I've said it before and I'll say it again; BYU students = are really something special. When they say to us 'we want to do this. = This is important,' we'd be pretty poor teachers if we didn't do all we = could to help make it happen. Eric Samuelsen - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 04 Oct 2002 09:35:33 -0600 From: margaret young Subject: [AML] re: Seattle Fireside [MOD: Apologies that this message is going out too late to make Margaret's request about the book signing (at the end of the paragraph) relevant...] Thank you Seattlites for helping me arrange a fireside. I heard from Levi Peterson, which was such a treat, and from Susan Malmrose, who connected me up with her stake president, and from several others--all of whom I thank wholeheartedly. We're hoping Levi's connections and Susan's stake can fill a chapel. I don't have the address yet, but the fireside is set for 7:00 on Oct. 20. I'll post the address as soon as I get it so anyone out there can attend and invite their friends. Incidentally, we NEVER sell or even talk about our books when we do firesides. We talk about the pioneers, who happen to be characters in our books, but we do no selling. That's a really big thing for Darius, who tries mightily to keep an marketing limited to in-store activities. And truth told, I really hate book signings. I love to talk about the Black pioneers, but I hate sitting behind a desk and smiling at people who are trying not to be caught by a salespitch. I love it when people I know stop by and chat (especially if they're aware that I might need to stop talking to do my job of marketing the book), so please drop by the University Mall (Provo) during Ladies' Night (Saturday 6-8). [Margaret Young] - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 4 Oct 2002 11:39:32 -0400 From: "Tracie Laulusa" Subject: Re: [AML] Mormon Publishing Options (was: Mormon Culture) I don't understand how film distribution works, but I was very disappointed that Brigham City didn't make it out to OH as God's Army did. I think it would have done well. LDS members here are hungry for things they consider LDS. And it would have built on the success of God's Army. Tracie Laulusa - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 04 Oct 2002 09:15:52 -0700 From: Robert Slaven Subject: Re: [AML] Sitcoms From: "Eric D. Snider" > >Susan M.: > >Anyway, I know a television writer, and when I went to LA last month > >expected it to be such a big hit. We discussed how > >television/Hollywood works--someone stumbles onto a successful > >premise, and then everyone else rushes around trying to copy it. > >Nothing original ever seems to happen by design. > > This has always been my beef with the way Hollywood thinks, in TV and > to some extent in movies. A show comes along that's well-done and it > becomes popular, and the TV people say, "Oh, people must want more > shows like that!" And they rush out imitations. "Who Wants to be a > Millionaire" scores, so they figure we want game shows. "Friends" is > popular, so they think we want sitcoms about a gang of friends. > "Survivor" is a hit, so they think we want reality shows. > > What they never seem to grasp is that what people want is GOOD shows. > We don't care what the genre is. Even people who say they don't care > for sitcoms would like one if it were funny. People who don't like > heavy, hour-long dramas will change their minds if they see a good > one. > John Cleese (of 'Monty Python' and 'Fawlty Towers' fame) was recently at the Banff Television Festival, and I saw an interview with him on CPAC (Canadian analogue to CSPAN). He said that it would be impossible to make a series like Monty Python's Flying Circus or Fawlty Towers nowadays in commercial television, for a few reasons: * If it's not a hit right away, they drop it. (MPFC didn't really 'take off' until halfway through its first season on BBC.) * If it doesn't stick to a predictable formula, they won't even buy it in the first place. (MPFC's only formula was not to have a formula.) * If it's not going to have a bunch of similar, predictable, factory-made episodes, they won't bother, 'cause they want a series that will make the magical '100' number for syndication. (Fawlty Towers was two six-episode seasons, made about three years apart. MPFC, for all its fame, was only four seasons totalling 45 episodes [13,13,13,6].) Mind you, although Cleese's examples show how things would *not* be done in the Hollywood/network way, perhaps they are the example of how an intelligent, well-made, potentially-popular LDS sitcom could be made. My advice to potential LDS sitcom writers might be like this: Don't worry about selling it to the networks, don't worry about making 13 episodes with a bible for 87 more, don't worry about churning them out like sausages. Do like Cleese and his first wife* Connie Booth did with Fawlty Towers; take your time to write half-a-dozen really good episodes, then rehearse them really well (don't try to get it all done in one week), then film them, then show them wherever you can. (I can't believe KBYU wouldn't be a good place to start, and perhaps some specialty channels might be interested. In Canada, both the Comedy Channel and Vision TV (religious programming) would love to see something like that to fill the gap between South Park and MPFC reruns.) Anyhow, if you get a chance, learn what you can about Cleese and Booth's experiences with Fawlty Towers and see what you can make of that. Remember that when the British Film Institute got together to pick the best 100 British TV shows of all time, Fawlty Towers was #1 and Monty Python's Flying Circus was #5. http://www.bfi.org.uk/features/tv/100/ ObFootnote: * Cleese and Booth were married when they did the first six episodes, but the marriage was strained by then (not by the series). When they did the second six, they had divorced by then, but were still friendly enough to write another marvelous set of shows. (And yes, MPFC is rude enough to turn off most LDS, but Fawlty Towers, while it may not be completely G-rated, is nonetheless an amazing example of the comic art. If you've never seen it, get to your video store PDQ and rent it; the twelve episodes usually come on four tapes. There is a book called 'The Complete Fawlty Towers' that contains all the scripts that's well worth searching for [perhaps on Ebay]. And no, you can't have my copy! Learn what you can from the master of comedy!) Robert ********************************************************************** Robert & Linn-Marie Slaven www.robertslaven.ca ...with Stuart, Rebecca, Mariann, Kristina, Elizabeth, and Robin too 'Man is that he might have joy--not guilt trips.' (Russell M. Nelson) - --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.394 / Virus Database: 224 - Release Date: 2002/10/03 - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 4 Oct 2002 13:54:47 EDT From: RichardDutcher@aol.com Subject: Re: [AML] _Charly_ (Film) (Review) In a message dated 10/3/02 8:31:06 PM Mountain Daylight Time, dorothy@lds-index.org writes: << All the Mormon publishers have had an opportunity to publish it and all have rejected it, and guess what the common tenor of their reasoning was: It is TOO LITERARY for their readership. One Mormon publisher used those exact words. >> Maybe if we took the words out of our books, they would be less literary, and more acceptable to the publishers. Richard Dutcher - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 4 Oct 2002 12:10:42 -0600 From: "Thom Duncan" Subject: RE: [AML] _Charly_ (Film) (Review) >-----Original Message----- > >I have to add to Richard's cynicism. I have a novel that >earned a second place in Marilyn Brown's novel contest a >couple of years ago that is now with an agent who is trying to >get it into the national market. The agency has told me they >consider it a fine piece of work. All the Mormon publishers >have had an opportunity to publish it and all have rejected >it, and guess what the common tenor of their reasoning was: >It is TOO LITERARY for their readership. One Mormon publisher >used those exact words. What does that say for the Mormon reader? It says more about the Mormon editor than the Mormon reader, imo. I go back to the days when Deseret Book said it wouln't publish fiction because Mormons don't buy fiction. After the slight fiction books of Shirley Sealy and Jack Weyland changed that, I heard the LDS publishers say that Mormons would never buy thick books. Lund has changed that. Will Mormons accept good literary fiction. Of course they will. It has to be good, though. Thom - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 04 Oct 2002 14:31:22 -0500 From: "Preston" Subject: [AML] Vance Mellen, Director I'd like to mention a director most people on this list have probably not heard of: Vance Mellen, a Latter-day Saint film director with an extremely distinct vision and body of work. I personally saw him perform years ago while I was a BYU student, and it was an experience I never forgot. I was impressed then, and I look forward to seeing more from him. You can check out his resume, films, and projects he's working on at his website: http://www.mellenheadprods.com/ Vance is planning to direct his award-winning screenplay "Revelations." He is still in the process of looking for a producer and additional backing. "Revelations" is an interesting script, and really can't be compared to anything being done by any LDS director I can think of. It's dark, but funny, and definitely affecting. Here is a new bio we are posting: Vance Mellen Lives in Chicago, Illinois. Writer/director. Graduated in 1994 from Brigham Young University (BYU), BFA in film direction. Graduated in 1997 from the Art Institute of Chicago, MFA in film. Has taught at the American Academy of Art from 1998 to the present. Mellen wrote, directed, shot, starred in, and edited the experimental video "Screatures" (1997), which includes 16mm film and computer-generated imagery. From 1990 to 1997 he produced a short film each semester while he was a film student. Has written screenplays for two films which he hopes to direct: "Revelations" (2001) and "Angel of Death" (1997). "Revelations", about a Kansas preacher who tries to jump start the Apocalypse by training a young insurance salesman to be the Anti-Christ, was a Sundance Screenwriters Lab finalist. "John Brown, Angel of Death" is a historical drama about an obsessive Abolitionist's drive for penance atHarper's Ferry, and garnered Mellen an Illinois Arts Council Grant. Was a semifinalist in the Chesterfield, Cyclone, Empire and New Century screenwriting competitions in 1997 and 2000. - - Preston - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 04 Oct 2002 17:01:54 -0500 From: "Preston" Subject: [AML] "Charly" Press Release FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Contact: Mary Jane Jones Media Relations, Excel Entertainment Group 801-358-7020; mjjones@xelent.com CHARLY Packs Emotional Punch; Filmmakers are Overwhelmed with Response from Moviegoers Salt Lake City, UT=afAdam Anderegg had so many phone calls and emails over the past week from teary-eyed moviegoers, he can't return them all. The 32-year old director of Jack Weyland's CHARLY, which opened in theaters along the Wasatch Front last Friday, is pleased to see his film strike such a chord with audiences. And he's not the only one. Distributor Excel Entertainment Group has also been flooded with emails from fans of the film who have been touched by the plot and the message. Some of the stories that have come pouring in have special significance. One woman wrote to tell that her own personal life story very closely mirrored the life of Charly, as portrayed by Heather Beers in the film. This woman had come to Utah, as Charly does in the film, skeptical of what she might find. Like Charly, she found the man of her dreams, who is now facing with her the trial of her life * she has been diagnosed with lymphatic cancer. She said Beers' performance as Charly gave her hope to continue her own personal fight. Another man wrote that he had been married twice, only to see both his first and second wife battle with cancer. He first stumbled across Jack Weyland's book while dealing with the death of his first wife, and it helped him through not only that life-shattering experience but also the similar circumstances surrounding the passing of his second wife. Now remarried, he is enjoying his grandchildren and recommending the movie "Charly" to all his friends and family. At early screenings of the film, some movie-goers were surprised to see packets of tissues handed out before the film began. By the end of the movie, many of those people had opened up their packs and were dabbing wet eyes through smiles. Similar stories have been pouring in from all directions, illustrating that the impact Weyland's novel had twenty years ago is still being felt. The book that changed a generation is showing that it can speak even more strongly to the hearts of movie-goers everywhere. ### PHOTO CAPTIONS: The cast of Charly sign autographs and pose for photos at the Premiere of Jack Weyland's CHARLY, held last week at Jordan Commons (photo courtesy of Excel Entertainment Group). HEATHER BEERS in her breakthrough performance as Charly in Jack Weyland's CHARLY (photo courtesy of Focused Light Films and Kaleidoscope Pictures). - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 5 Oct 2002 10:26:24 -0600 From: "Scott Parkin" Subject: Re: [AML] Mormon Publishing Options (was: Mormon Culture) R.W. Rasband wrote: > If "Charly" is the new template for > Mormon cinema, that means it's not just a sappy, mediocre movie. It's the > Attack of the Fluff Monster. It's hype, man. Pure hype. Many reviewers will give it a smile because it's a feel-good special and they know it's a safe recommendation for most viewers. Those least inclined to like it already know what the story is and have already decided to avoid the film--that leaves the people who read and liked the book, or a vast crowd of unknowables. The safe review is to give it a qualified recommendation "if you like that sort of thing." But where's most of the rhetoric about "template for Mormon cinema" coming from? The film's producers? It's author? The PR house that's hyping it as the moral alternative? I'm not hearing a lot of critical acceptance of either the book or the film in terms of its story, though apparently the film itself was well constructed and competently produced. They call it marketing, and it's something I've seen precious little of with the more "literary" films. I think it's an aspect of the personality of the filmmakers. The more artistically inclined filmmakers want viewers to see the value of the film without having to explain it to them--it's the only way to have that artistic quality truly validated. If we go out and tell them it's an artistic masterpiece we're just hucksters and fakes; the praise has to start from the re/viewers or it's not real. But people won't buy something that hasn't been praised by trusted sources--at least not in the Mormon community. That's why blurbs are such a big deal, those quotes that appear on the back cover or in the first couple of pages of a book. That's why reviews on AML-List or in Meridian or even the Deseret News are such a big deal. Is it against the rules to hype films or books that have literary or artistic presumptions? It must be, because we don't see a lot of it. Or is it that the artistic types want external validation? Or is it that the artistic types have become so fatalistic about their chances of success that they won't even speak to "ordinary" readers/viewers, effectively creating their own barriers to those consumers? Did Richard Paul Evans and Kenny Kemp teach us nothing? We need to learn hype! We need to learn to market. If we can do that, we can sell product. Not force it down the throats of the unwilling, but expose the number of truly willing consumers--and possibly kick a few of those undecided consumers over the line. Maybe only a few at first, but then more and more as new and different kinds of Mormon stories are told that can truly reach a wider audience. People won't buy if they don't know it's there. They won't know it's there if we don't tell them. We need to learn to speak well--and often--about our own work. We need to learn to market ourselves. Scott Parkin - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ End of aml-list-digest V1 #853 ******************************