reviews are in!!

I am the reluctant writer. Oh sure, I write a lot and in different modes. But this book project? (really, we need to rethink the ways in which *books* create these forms of approval ... the ongoing dream ...). As you know, I've been trying to launch this documentary-style ethnographic narrative (aka "book") amid my life's 4 billion obstacles. I know i'm not spesh in this, but for real. I am proud that I finally put out a proposal (2 months ago'ish). It is a point of pride to give up the yearning to audiences. So I am lingering on that for a moment. Now, there's this: Yesterday, I received reviewer's notes, along with my fine, fine Editor's plan for advancing. 

I am terrifically grateful to these people who are taking time to help me make this happen. Sure, I better werq, and with the packing and moving and whatnot, it will be *interesting*, challenging, but the plan before me is doable, so much so that last night, I had a lucid epiphany about the introductory chapter, something about merging some existing passages in a way that makes more sense. This reconfigured introduction will explicitly define the conceptual frame, moreso than the current work, which assumes a lot on the part of my readership, a common trait in my work, one that I see as ennobling, avoiding condescension. But it's also a move that ambiguates in ways many readers do not appreciate, I realize. Still, I opt for trust over what feels like oversimplification and condescension. 

So then, this new intro articulates more clearly my use of 2 of the main figures (film critic André Bazin, and rhet/comp scholar Robert Connors) I reference to frame this history I'm tracing and the ethnographic mapping I am indulging as a way of telling the story of this emergent field I've been calling "film-composition."

Of course, this reflection comes prior to reading the reviewers' comments. I will get to that soon. I need to build up to it. I am the reluctant writer.