According to Rebekah A. Grossman: > From firstname.lastname@example.org Tue Jul 29 22:58:18 1997 > From: email@example.com (Rebekah A. Grossman) > > I want to put in 2 cents about publicity. Perhaps "publicity" isn't the > right word, or rather is too limited a word. "If we build it they will > --or will not--come" has been evoked in the service of a few house > discussions this summer, and I think **building** is the point. Things > will in some way accrue by sheer gravity, but a concerted effort makes it > more likely that things will **happen**. (Double asterix to suggest > grand scale.) > > I think that an integral part of the success of the house's overall > mission is that we bring the Penn community (in all of it's extensions) > and our guests (readers, etc.) together. This means that we not only > provide events we think people will like--of which people have thought > up some great ones and I know there will be more--but that we **make > sure** that our guests have an audience--a real audience: that at > least comfortably (i.e. some gaps allowed) *fills* the rather small room > downstairs in the front. A plan for attendence makes a cycle that > works: Penn people **do** get a chance to benefit from house events > (beyond the hub and beyond our thinking them up) and our guests get the > chance to really be the benefactors (beyond the honorarium), which is > what the whole thing's about. > > While throwing our Web page and calendars and posters and announcements into > the general news blitz of the university community and the hosts otherwise > drumming up attendees on an ad hoc basis is an aspect of publicity* > that is right and true and strong, attendance at quite a few events last > year suggests we could do better by our mission. We are talking about > creating events that are exciting and engaging, but what would make that > more so than an ongoing engagemnent with more people?! It makes sense to > **build relationships** in a broader sense than we have thus far: to present > house events to faculty/staff as a real resource for their classes while > also presenting it to the general Penn community (in particular students) > as not only a resource but a place to **be**--in *either* case engaging, > provocative, ongoing-- > > Now the key word is *present*. This goes beyond anything easy about > publicity. Kerry mentioned developing relationships with faculty and staff > (this including TA's and adjuncts). That means direct contact--or more > direct than the news blitz. And developing such relationships is > probably beyond work study students--looking at a class plan to explore > how X event might fit in, for example. I'm not sure what the > assistant's job summary entails beyond publicity--likely a lot. Anyway, > I'm adding to Kerry's succinct statement to try to bring this aspect > of house work around to where it touches the heart of the whole project. > Obviously, I think it's tremendously important. And there are some ideas > shooting around about how to do it, so we'll see...Certainly it couldn't > hurt. > > RG > > -- > Rebekah Grossman > Department of Folklore and Folklife > University of Pennsylvania > > "I believe what you say, but I know it will all turn out > differently."--Henry Miller
According to Vance Bell: > From firstname.lastname@example.org Wed Jul 30 06:01:12 1997 > From: email@example.com (Vance Bell) > According to Rebekah A. Grossman: > > > > I want to put in 2 cents about publicity. Perhaps "publicity" isn't the > > right word, or rather is too limited a word. "If we build it they will > > --or will not--come" has been evoked in the service of a few house > > discussions this summer, and I think **building** is the point. > > I think I have to agree with Rebekah Grossman's points regarding the need > to envision "publicity" as a practice that includes community and > connection building. Although, my comments were directed at the basic > structural task of getting the word out it, we don't want to fall into the > self-assured stance of thinking that is merely enough. > > Last year, the task of publicity (in the regular sense) was > not always handled responsibly. The policy was typically one where the > sponsor of the event was required to handle the majority of work. > The house staff as a whole did in fact pitch in, but often one of the two > parties did not complete what was necessary (and I will say that of > myself in the later Spring when other responsibilties were calling and my > energy was low). We should probably have a coherent and standard > procedure for "getting the word out," a series of tasks to be fulfilled > and a clear idea of who will be responsibile for carrying them out. Since > part of these responsibilties have fallen to the Assistant Coor., I > expect Nate will coordinate these activities. I would be able to sit down > with him at some time if he'd like and write something up -- a sort of > "how to" list or primer... > > > I think that an integral part of the success of the house's overall > > mission is that we bring the Penn community (in all of it's extensions) > > and our guests (readers, etc.) together. > > In addition to this we should more seriously consider the community > outside of Penn as well -- that hasn't typically been our emphasis > regarding publicity. > > > Now the key word is *present*. This goes beyond anything easy about > > publicity. Kerry mentioned developing relationships with faculty and staff > > (this including TA's and adjuncts). That means direct contact--or more > > direct than the news blitz. And developing such relationships is > > probably beyond work study students--looking at a class plan to explore > > how X event might fit in, for example. > > This is a great point, although it seems from the way we organize events > that the considerations would only be retroactive, that is, going to a > professor or TA and saying we have "such and such" coming up, would you be > able to work it to your class plan, as opposed, to planning events with > the help and enthusiasm of actual classes and their instructor. To get > the coorespondence to be anything more that coincidental would require > serious advanced planning. Perhaps Rebekha would like to start us > down the road vis-a-vis Folklore? > > Best, > > Vance
According to Nathan T Chinen: > From firstname.lastname@example.org Wed Jul 30 13:41:52 1997 > From: email@example.com (Nathan T Chinen) > > Rebekah, Vance, et al: > > I'm glad that this issue has come up. When Kerry and I first met to > discuss our House ideas for the upcoming year, we both agreed that this > was an area that could use much improvement. If there's one thing I want > to accomplish this year, it's the not-so-simple task of making the House > more accessible to the Penn community at large. For whatever reasons, > the majority of Penn students either have no idea what the House is, or > feel that it is intellectually exclusive. Last semester, I spoke with a > number of freshmen who came to the House for the music on Thursday nights > and, after realizing what the WH is, wanted to get involved in other ways. > In this case, the music brought them in; they wouldn't have come to the WH > otherwise. > > I firmly believe that more people involved means more discussion, ideas, > and a healthier House climate. And whatever changes are made, I don't > think the House is in any danger of losing its identity. > > Because of my work in Penn's performing arts office (again, as assistant > to the coordinator -- my perpetual calling!) and at the City Paper, I > already know quite a bit about publicity at Penn and beyond. In > addition, Kerry and I are in the process of redefining publicity efforts > at the House, and by the time I start working, we'll have a pretty clear > task list to work from. Still, there are probably a few tricks that I'm > not aware of. Feel free to suggest things I might not know -- like which > professors I should meet with. > > Obviously, we all want to disseminate as much information as we can. And > we want all of our visiting writers/readers to have a full House. I'll be > doing everything I can to that end, as will Kerry and the WH work-study > students. We will always appreciate your involvement as well, and will > most likely call upon HUB as a resource from time to time. > > Nate
According to David Deifer: > From firstname.lastname@example.org Wed Jul 30 15:12:02 1997 > From: David Deifer
> > sometimes publicity efforts are too open ended and impersonal. leaving > flyers around campus or listings in local papers don't net such a positive > result. perhaps a writers house reach-out system of publicity would work > better. simply, once a month (or week), hubster's make an effort to bring > 1 person or 2 to an event-- individuals that have never been to writers > house. rather than have kerry or a work-study act as the house host, > individual hubster's could show the house and make their visitors feel > comfortable (make a pot of coffee, play chess or twister). it's the > personal touch of students and participating staff and faculty that make > the house a home. before we consider turning publicity into a mega PR > machine, we should also look at improving the smaller pieces of running a > successful event/program/etc. > > > --d.
According to Nathan T Chinen: > From email@example.com Wed Jul 30 15:31:57 1997 > From: firstname.lastname@example.org (Nathan T Chinen) > > I completely agree with Dave on this point. The House is a personal place, > and getting individuals interested will only happen if we invest ourselves > in communicating with them. We all have non-HUB relationships, and we > should urge these people to come out for specific events. The House Band > has been a word-of-mouth affair, but regular attendees would bring a few > people with them. > > Nate
According to Rebekah A. Grossman: > From email@example.com Wed Jul 30 18:10:16 1997 > From: firstname.lastname@example.org (Rebekah A. Grossman) > > I think everything everyone's said on this subject has been great. > Boy--you guys sure do **respond** and fast: what great promise that holds! > > And of course I'll talk to folklorists...and more-- > > R
> According to Heather Starr: > > From email@example.com Wed Jul 30 15:38:35 1997 > > Subject: Re: Publicity > > Date: Wed, 30 Jul 1997 15:38:30 -0400 (EDT) > > > Just my two cents as somebody who has gone to at least three or four > House events this past semester as a result of flyers around campus -- I > really like David's suggestions of *personally* inviting people because > that means they are simultaneously being introduced to the House, not > just going to the event that is of interest to them. That personal > introduction will make it much more likely that the person will return or > get involved or join a group at the House, rather than just go to one or > two events a semester. Just as long as it doesn't become exclusive -- > like "whose friend are you?" when a strange face comes in the door. > > Based on my own experience, I came to hear Gerald Stern and John Weiner & > others, and all of those times I came in, sat down and listened, maybe had > some cheese, and then left without having talked to anybody unless I knew > > them from somewhere else. So I'd like to figure out ways we can work on > that, too -- introduction and retention, in addition to just getting > people in the door. > > Heather