|
Perhaps the most endearing comments through the years of “The CampChuck Reviewer” refer to the Manufactured Mailbag, including not infrequent questions about whether these perennial letters to the editor are real.
Consider the following letter and response from the 1993 edition:
|
Dear Editor,
My husband gave me one of those looks. He says, “Pinny.” He calls me Pinny. He says, “Pinny, those letters to the editor aren’t real. Don’t you get it?” I says, “Hiney.” I just always called him Hiney. I says, “Hiney, I don’t always get it, but I get it sometimes.”
That’s okay, isn’t it?
|
Pinhedda Hiney, Hollowtater, ID
|
Dear Pinny,
It’s better if you get it just once, but sometimes is probably enough.
|
|
Ed. |
Every letter to the editor is prescreened before it falls through the cracks in the sideburns of CampChuck.
| Several years of feedback loop across the first 31 years of “The CampChuck Reviewer.” By far, most frequent is “How many did you guess right,” or “You guessed well (or not so well) this year.”
It’s always heartening to hear that “The CampChuck Reviewer” is a point of reference on Oscar night or when selecting films to view.
This special retrospective edition will not include analysis of the movies, directors, actors and actresses, or supporting actors and actresses vying for Oscars this year. Yes, CampChuck predictions appear on the main page, but this 32nd annual edition is essentially a catalog of decades of letters to the editor.
Why? Because it’s fun. And because this special edition can be produced, almost entirely, prior to the crunch time between the Academy Awards nominations on January 25 and Oscar night February 27. This mitigates some of the complications of a first ever “snowbird” residence (from the last week in January through March) in Green Valley, Arizona. (See the "Snowbird Arizona 2011" link.)
This less fettered, temperate winter adventure will include its own expression of the CampChuck newsletter tradition.
|