My colleague Jonathan L. Fischer talks with the Post's Ned Martel, who says D.C. should be on par with New York and LA when it comes to getting first-run indie films:

So are Martel and his sources right? I called Peter Knegt, a box-office analyst and associate editor at Indiewire, who says that generally speaking, D.C., Chicago, Boston, and Austin have the highest indie-flick box office following the Big Two. He's sympathetic to the local cinema owners quoted in Martel's piece, who complained about losing out on press buzz and national campaigns. He points out that some limited release films, like TheDescendants recently, do open in cities besides New York and L.A. But Knegt mentions a few reasons why most indie movie distributors aren't about to ditch their tiered release system.

Opening only in New York and L.A. is a way for distributors (particularly smaller ones) to limit their risk, especially if they're worried a film might not have legs. "It’s risky to put a film in 10 or 20 theaters in its first weekend," Knegt says. "If it sort of tanks, you’re screwed." Good box office in New York and L.A. can help prove a film is viable. "Some people might want to see Shame right now, but there are people at bigger theaters who want to see" how the film sells out of the gate, Knegt says.

Jon has lots more over at Arts Desk. Read the rest.

The results? The intervening five months have been dense with offbeat personalities, but Martel’s bylines haven’t focused on the rise of Rick Perry, the antics of Herman Cain, or other conventionally defined campaign narratives. A sampling:

• Headline: "The Two Freds"
• Date: Nov. 1
• Subject: Moderate Republican congressman Fred Upton gains power by moving right
• Democratic Narrative Enlivenment Factor: Medium. The woe-is-Washington story about partisanship isn't exactly terrain less covered. But, on the plus side, it is about politics.

• Headline: “What (Not) to Wear”
• Date: Oct. 29
• Subject: Politician costumes are not popular this Halloween.
• Democratic Narrative Enlivenment Factor: Low. So, 1,000 Americans—in a non-election year—tell a pollster that they’d rather go as Lady Gaga than Sarah Palin?

• Headline: “Purple Reign”
• Date: Oct. 14
• Subject: Michelle Obama’s choice of an ultra-violet gown by a Korean-American designer for a state dinner honoring South Korea’s leader
• Democratic Narrative Enlivenment Factor: Low. It’s a state dinner story. (Though Mrs. Obama’s husband will be on the ballot next year.)

• Headline: “TV’s Night to Flaunt It”
• Date: Sept. 19
• Subject: Reports from the red carpet outside the Emmy Awards
• Democratic Narrative Enlivenment Factor: None. Unless you count the fact that Julianna Margulies (who was “much too much adorned with tumor-sized crystals”) plays a pol’s wife.

• Headline: “Marking a Spectacle of Yourself”
• Date: Sept. 18
• Subject: Presidential flack Jay Carney is the latest Washington figure to wear hipster glasses.
• Democratic Narrative Enlivenment Factor: Moderate. Not much of a narrative here, but if the semiotics of eyewear are a new political-culture divide, that’s interesting. Sort of.

• Headline: “Terps’ Sartorial Victory Remains in Dispute”
• Date: Sept. 7
• Subject: The University of Maryland’s new football uniform
• Democratic Narrative Enlivenment Factor: None. Unless the drama is so veiled that regular folks can’t follow it, Oprah pal Gayle King’s opinion on her alma mater’s outfit is not a 2012 factor.

• Headline: “Love and a 12-Gauge”
• Date: Aug. 29
• Subject: Congressman Leonard Boswell fights off intruders in his house
• Democratic Narrative Enlivenment Factor: Moderate. It’s in Iowa! And it’s a compelling yarn! Unfortunately, it’s not about the 2012 race.

• Headline: “In Case of World War III, His Treasure Box is Packed”
• Date: Aug. 15
• Subject: The curator who helps decide which National Gallery of Art pieces go in special storage for a quick emergency move
• Democratic Narrative Enlivenment Factor: None. Unless Michele Bachmann starts calling for the destruction of the Smithsonian.

• Headline: “Art-loving Lawmaker Frames a Turf Battle”
• Date: June 20
• Subject: Rep. John Mica’s plans to expand the National Gallery of Art
• Democratic Narrative Enlivenment Factor: Moderate. Calling the scrum “an epic turf battle in Washington” may be a bit much, but it does have power and ego.

• Headline: “Politics of Portrayal in Too Big to Fail”
• Date: May 23
• Subject: What happened when actors in HBO’s financial-collapse movie met their real-life counterparts
• Democratic Narrative Enlivenment Factor: Moderate. Washington bigs spinning thespians to get positive portrayals? Interesting. Lack of verdict on whether they succeeded? Not so much.

The buzz around town today is all about Sally Quinn's new low, aka a column in this morning's Style section in which she explains all about a wedding-scheduling snafu in her own family.

For all of you who have substantive things to worry about, this is what the piece was about: In recent days, there've been published reports about how the columnist's son, Quinn Bradlee, is scheduled to get married on the same day as the granddaughter of Quinn's husband, Washington Post legend Ben Bradlee. So Quinn used this week's edition of her Style column, "The Party," to rebut the negativity in those reports, and to assert that even a "so-called expert" (herself, that is) on the art of entertaining can slip up now and again.

The comments section has been downright abusive, as in: "TimPage1 wrote: When the brilliant and legendary Henry Allen had a dust-up at the Post with some reporters, he referred to their article as "the second worst piece ever printed in Style." This led to a heated question on the Washingtonian blog — what was the WORST piece ever printed in Style? There's a new champion today. Unbelievable."

Another glorious takedown comes from Tom Scocca and Choire Sicha, writing on the fabulous The Awl.

Of course, TimPage1, Scocca, Sicha, and myself are punching a pretty easy target here, and perhaps a target that loves nothing more than serving as a target. But the newsworthy thing about this particular abomination is not so much just how bad the column is, how self-unaware Quinn is, or anything like that. She can be as bad as she wants to be.

The real questions are for her editor, Style editor Ned Martel, and here's just a start:

1) Mr. Martel: Is this the sort of material you envisioned when you launched the column?

2) Mr. Martel: In the column, Ms. Quinn references "tensions" within her family, yet she never explains what those tensions were. If your columnist made a passing reference to tensions within any other family, or tensions within a company, or tensions within a book club, wouldn't you demand further explanation of those tensions?

3) Mr. Martel: How is it that there was no overlap on the guest lists for the two weddings under discussion here?

4) Mr. Martel: Your columnist is using the increasingly precious space in the print edition of the Washington Post to rebut criticism aired in other media outlets. Is this something that's encouraged at the paper? If someone attacks another columnist or reporter, is that space going to be available for further rebuttals? Could you carve out some column inches just for this purpose? And why are there no links to said criticism?

5) Mr. Martel: Your columnist slimes her husband in print, saying she instructed him "to put the date [of his granddaughter's wedding] on his calendar, and he did not. A warning to wives everywhere!" Did the husband have a chance to comment for the column?

6) Mr. Martel: Did you read this column before it was published?

Alas, Mr. Martel is not going to answer those questions. After ringing him up this afternoon, here's the conversation that ensued:

I asked Martel if I could interview him about the column. He responded, "I am going to decline to comment."

I told him it's just about the column, nothing terribly sensitive: "That is the way it’s going to be."

I told him that it's generally been the case that editors at the Post speak up in defense of their journalism, and Martel said, "I am going to forward your questions to Kris Coratti." Kris Coratti is the paper's spokesperson, and the last time we checked in with her, she was declining to tell us about the various editions that the paper prints each day.

Winding down the conversation with Martel, I told him that refusing to speak about what the paper had printed "stinks."

"Oh, sorry," he responded.

Another victory for the Brauchli Doctrine!

The author of a new Washington Post Style section column on entertaining as well as a book on the same subject has lofty goals for her get-togethers: "I want everyone who leaves my house to leave feeling better about themselves," said Quinn in an interview with City Desk.

Judged against her own standards, Quinn may have stumbled last Friday night.

The event was a holiday bash for Style staffers, and the venue was not Quinn's house but the Georgetown residence of Style co-boss Ned Martel. In any event, Quinn, the queen of the party, felt compelled to play the headlining role, delivering the keynote toast. According to attendees and Quinn herself, the toast hit on the following themes:

I've been with Style for 30 years, and Style is back! Back to where it was in the good old days. I talk to people these days who read Style every day and it's been a long time since I've heard that. There's energy and creativity and vibrancy now. Ned and [co-boss] Lynn [Medford] are doing great work. Blah, blah.

When asked how people should have responded to the message, Quinn responded: "I think they should have been ecstatic."

Ecstasy, though, was scarce among this crowd. "Everybody thought [the toast] was inconsiderate of all the people who’ve been there for some time, that it was a failing operation that people didn't read," says a source.

Another interpretation from another attendee: Quinn was singing the praises of the section decades ago, back when she was a star social correspondent—i.e., the "good old days"—and now, when she is again a regular contributor, via her weekly column "The Party." "This was clearly Sally talking about Sally," says the attendee.

No narcissism here, protests Quinn. "I wasn’t talking about me. I was talking about the energy and excitement that we had, and I see that now and it’s just thrilling."

A couple of partygoers claim that Martel was wincing when Quinn was gushing over the turnaround in Style quality, a charge that Martel denies. "I have never winced at anything that Sally Quinn has said." As to the elegance of Quinn's toast, Martel took a pass: "I think it’s best for that night to exist without the host’s next-day or next-week commentary."

Whatever the feelings about Quinn's attempt at holiday cheer, the gossip that lingers days later attests to a number of issues:

Issue No. 1: Quinn is right that Style is improving, as City Desk has pointed out previously.

Issue No. 2: The quality and avant-garditude of the Style section is one of the great agonies of the Washington Post. Oh, it was so awesome decades ago, goes a popular refrain. Everyone loves to wax nostalgic about its classic writers. Hendrickson! Allen! Quinn! The debate about when the section was great and when it sucked is the journalistic equivalent of "Man, it's cold outside"—a waste of breath that'll never accomplish anything. When the section turned 40 early this year, Style writer Hank Stuever tilted at the craziness:

There's a kind of longtime Washington Post reader who is only too smug about informing us how great Style was in the 1970s, or the '80s or the '90s (the early '90s, they sniff, like oenophiles distinguishing vintage). We are certain that by the end of Style's first week, someone complained that it was better on Monday and Tuesday. At a Style staff meeting a few years back, art critic Paul Richard, who's been here since the Earth cooled, said that anyone who tells you Style was so much better back-when should be condemned to crank the microfilm and forced to read it, day in and day out.

Issue No. 3: Quinn couldn't abide a certain top editor at the Post. When asked to expand on her claim that Style is back, Quinn obliged: "I would say that Ben [Bradlee, former Post executive editor and husband of Quinn] invented Style and he really cared about it. It was priority No. 1. When he stepped down as editor, it was not the No. 1 priority anymore. And when Marcus took over, it was a big priority for him."

Let's see—think there might just be a subtle little elbow in there between the lines? What do you know—that non-priority period just so happens to coincide with the editorship of Leonard Downie Jr., who ran the Post newsroom from 1991 to 2008.

But this is one pissing match for which Downie won't whip it out. When informed of Quinn's analysis, he declined to comment.

Issue No. 4: Quinn is a lovely person to talk to, a true believer in fine entertaining, perky-yet-tough, a great family woman, a co-moderator of an innovative Post Web page on religion, and surely many other good things, but her "The Party" column isn't one of the things contributing to the Style section's resurgence. Thus far, it's a jumble of reflections and peeves from a woman for whom entertaining is a touch too important. And if you actually read it, there's no way to avoid the self-aggrandizing land mines that can hit you at any point. My fave thus far: "One of the nicest compliments I ever got was at a large New Year's Eve party I had. A man came over to me and said, 'I love this party. Everyone here looks so beautiful.' (Candles, rose-colored walls and pink light bulbs never hurt.)"

Let's mark the start of hostilities as mid-week. That's when, according to an informed source, Allen raised questions about a Roig-Franzia story about a woman who had undergone multiple abortions. In the back and forth, Roig-Franzia allegedly called Allen a "dick." No punches were thrown.

Peace prevailed until Friday morning, when Style staffers convened to discuss their journalism. According to sources, Roig-Franzia at one point in the meeting reached across the table and grabbed Allen's notepad, tearing a page from it. Allen barked, "Give me my fucking notebook." Roig-Franzia complied, pushing it back across the table.

After that incident, not much went according to the Post Stylebook. Allen, an assignment editor for Style, learned that one of his reporters, Monica Hesse, had been tasked by Style co-boss Ned Martel to do a funny-type story coming off the big news on the congressional ethics investigation. Allen wasn't apprised that Hesse had been so assigned and let Martel have it. "Next time you want to assign a story to one of my writers, you come talk to me. I'm right here," Allen said to Martel, according to a Post source. They discussed the matter and came to an amiable conclusion.

The story then moves from errors of protocol to errors of journalism. Allen eventually got his hands on the copy that Hesse and Roig-Franzia had been dispatched to generate. It was a "charticle" on famous incidents in which key actors in history have unwittingly coughed up sensitive information to the wrong people.

One of the headlining incidents in the charticle was how a Confederate solider had lost some military plans of Robert E. Lee in a field that later found their way into Union hands. The original story reportedly said that the offense occurred in Virginia. Wrong–Maryland.

There were other errors as well.

Allen made clear his displeasure with the integrity of the piece, proclaiming that it was the "second-worst piece I've ever had handed to me in 43 years," according to a source. The first-worst was a mistake-ridden profile of Paul Robeson that never saw the printed page. Those 43 years include Allen's 39 years of service at the Post along with a tenure at the New Haven Register.

The veteran editor gave pretty much the same sharp-elbowed spiel to both Hesse and Roig-Franzia. Hesse responded by asking for the story back so that she could iron out some of the wrinkles.

Roig-Franzia responded by saying, “Henry, don’t be such a cocksucker.”

At that, Allen leapt into action, shoving Roig-Franzia. He then popped him in the cheek. According to an eyewitness account, Roig-Franzia didn't try to match the 5-11, 200-pound Allen punch for punch, instead opting for more of a civil-rights-movementy kind of stance.

Into the one-sided faceoff jumped Chris Richards, the Post's pop-music critic. One of the first responders, Richards stood between the hostile parties. Brauchli reportedly intervened as well.

After the set-to, Allen spent some time behind closed doors with managers. Brauchli told him that the Post just can't have this sort of conduct in the newsroom. Allen agreed. They left it at that.

Then it was on to the office of Style co-boss Lynn Medford, who was apparently briefed by Brauchli on what to say to Allen. Medford told Allen that Brauchli had said that this was a new era at the Post and we can't have violence in the newsroom. (What, did the smelling-salts lady take a buyout?) Another message from Brauchli to Allen via Medford: You can't come into the newsroom again for your entire career.

That sanction is not as harsh as it sounds: Allen's last day was to be Nov. 20. He is 68, had already accepted a buyout, was working on contract at the time of his lunge, and had already announced his retirement.

Of his swing, Allen says, "The last time I threw a punch at anybody was in the spring of 1963 in Parris Island, S.C., in Marine Corps recruit training." Allen served in Vietnam for four months. Roig-Franzia hung up when called on this matter.

UPDATE: Be sure to check out City Paper's exclusive reenactment of this historic event: Allen v. Roig-Franzia ~ The Movie!