July 22, 1997
According to Rebekah A. Grossman:
> From hub-owner@dept.english.upenn.edu Tue Jul 29 22:58:18 1997
> From: rebekahg@sas.upenn.edu (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 hub-owner@dept.english.upenn.edu Wed Jul 30 06:01:12 1997
> From: vbell@dept.english.upenn.edu (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 hub-owner@dept.english.upenn.edu Wed Jul 30 13:41:52 1997
> From: nchinen@dept.english.upenn.edu (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 hub-owner@dept.english.upenn.edu 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 hub-owner@dept.english.upenn.edu Wed Jul 30 15:31:57 1997
> From: nchinen@dept.english.upenn.edu (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 hub-owner@dept.english.upenn.edu Wed Jul 30 18:10:16 1997
> From: rebekahg@sas.upenn.edu (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 hstarr@pobox.upenn.edu 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