From: Marilyn Brown Subject: Re: [AML] Sexuality in LDS Lit Date: 31 May 2000 15:21:24 How does the other .01 percent arrive? Marilyn Brown At 04:34 PM 5/23/00 -0600, you wrote: >There are over 5 billion of us on this planet, and I dare say that 99.99 percent of us arrived here by sexual means. >[Dave Wilkinson] - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Christopher Bigelow" Subject: Re: [AML] Creative Writing Master's Programs Date: 31 May 2000 15:48:45 -0700 Most programs require a writing sample. I think BYU accepted about 50% of applicants to the M.A. program, without = regard to emphasis. I think both Boston Uni. and the Uni. of Utah, two MFA programs I applied = to but was rejected by, both only admitted 12 people to the creative = writing program. * * * * * * Interested in novels, stories, poems, plays, and films by, for, or about = Mormons? Check out IRREANTUM magazine at www.xmission.com/~aml/irreantum.ht= m. >>> Darlene Young 05/31 10:59 AM >>> We've talked about the language requirement for admission into an MFA program. Could someone tell me what other requirements to expect? Do I have to have already published? Will a writing sample be required? How hard is it to get into one? =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D Darlene Young __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send instant messages & get email alerts with Yahoo! Messenger. http://im.yahoo.com/=20 - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Eric Eliason Subject: [AML-Mag] Re: [AML] Sexuality in LDS Lit Date: 31 May 2000 16:16:01 -0700 Harlow, I read your synopsis of Purple Twinkies and think it is brilliant. I hope you write it. I think the perfect irony would be for both characters to emerge from there sordid past fully spiritually converted and mainstream LDS from this and be faced with the question of "So how did you meet?" from cheerful innocent Mormons in their ward. Cheers, Eric Eliason - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Morgan Adair" Subject: Re: [AML] Where's our LDS Garrison Keillor? Date: 31 May 2000 16:37:02 -0600 >>> dmichael@wwno.com 05/30/00 11:36PM >>> > >Is _Tom Sawyer_ a great book? I would classify it as such. Does it show >the people of Missouri with all their foibles? Sure. Is it negative? Not >even. Was it offensive to the people it depicts? I would think only to >the most easily offended. Did Mark Twain become a Missouri outsider >looking in to write it? _Tom Sawyer_ is a good book, perhaps great; a sentimental favorite. >I don't see why a similar book couldn't be written about Mormons, >lovingly showing them in all their human glory without giving any hint >that the core of their existence is being criticized. In fact, I >question whether some of these overly critical books about Mormons are >honest. As much as I've praised Peterson's _Backslider_, I don't think >it represents an accurate picture of typical Mormons. I don't think it >communicates to outsiders what being a Mormon is all about--in fact, I >think it reinforces an inaccurate impression that we're a bunch of >semi-loony cultists. > >Is this sort of thing necessary for literature to be great? Twain is remembered more for _The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn_. Huck Finn is a great book, and it was critical of and offensive to the = people=20 it depicted (offensive, at least, to those who recognized Twain was = writing=20 about them). What Huck, Frank Windham, and Terry Walker (_Dancing Naked_) have=20 in common is what Twain called a "deformed conscience." The pious of=20 Huck's society told him slavery is right; Frank grew up with undeserved=20 shame and fear of God; Terry's family had a legacy of irrational homophobia= . =20 The greatness or near-greatness of these books lies in how they make us=20 look at the values our societies have given us. I don't know if literature = has to=20 do this to be great, but this is the type of literature, so all the great = literature I=20 know does it. Even the warm, sentimental, _Lake Wobegon Days_ has a=20 few pointed remarks for the narrow-mindedness of some of its characters.=20= (Perhaps Sam Taylor's _Heaven Knows Why_ fills the same niche in the=20 Mormon literature ecosystem.) MBA [Morgan Adair] - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Thom Duncan Subject: Re: [AML] Where's our LDS Mark Twain? Date: 31 May 2000 17:12:07 -0600 Matthew Hamby wrote: > > What about Dutcher's "God's Army"? Doesn't that count as an accurate > description, looking from the inside. It was certainly a good depiction of > typical events in my mission. > No, because I don't think it speaks as effectively to those outside our faith. Some things, like the healing, are just so beyond the understanding of the non-Mormon audience, that they would form a stumbling block. Thom - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Thom Duncan Subject: Re: [AML] Re: Where's our LDS Amy Tam? Date: 31 May 2000 17:17:42 -0600 Ivan Angus Wolfe wrote: > > I think we have our Mormon Amy Tan/Mark Twain. The names are Orson Scott Card > and Dave Wolverton/Farland. When they claim their Pulitzers, then let's talk. > But they are faithful members. So does that automatically cast them out of the > running? I tend to think it shouldn't. I will admit that Card's _Saints_ come closest to being an objective look at Mormonism by an insider. Perhaps his science fiction background is why it hasn't received the attention it deserves. Thom - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jonathan Langford Subject: [AML] Re: Where's our LDS Amy Tam? Date: 31 May 2000 23:10:47 -0500 I have to say that I wonder just how possible it is to simultaneously please both the Mormon and the non-Mormon world. I think Thom raises a very astute point with his comment on the fact that Amy Tan, Chaim Potok, etc., seem to be writing primarily for outsiders--or from a perspective outside the culture they are describing. I don't agree that it's necessary to be outside the culture in order to talk about it objectively. For one thing, I think objectivity is a myth, like people saying they don't have a temperature when what they mean is that they don't have a fever. You can't help but have a subjective position in relation to what you write about. If anything, an intimately close relationship to the thing you're describing ought to give you special perspectives. (Practically, what I actually believe is that both types of perspectives--all types, really, I should say; I doubt there are ever only two--have their value.) Regardless of the position of the writer, though, I think that writing for an audience outside the community is different than writing for an audience inside the community. A Mormon artist can choose to do either one--this, I think, is the idea behind Ben Parkinson's distinction between Missionary Fiction and Deseret School fiction--but it's hard to do both simultaneously. And not necessarily desirable. I suspect there are some stories that will inherently appeal more to community members, and that's okay. Which doesn't invalidate the point made by Chris Bigelow and others, that it would be nice to have author's writing about Mormon culture in a way that could be appreciated from outside the community. All I'm saying is that regardless of whether the artist is a faithful Church member or not, I think that we may find that art that does this well for an outside audience may not satisfy a Mormon audience--not necessarily for reasons of audience maturity, but simply because it's a *different* audience. And that's okay. Jonathan Langford speaking (not all that coherently, I'm afraid) for myself, not the List jlangfor@pressenter.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Derek1966@aol.com Subject: [AML] Jerry JOHNSTON, "Waiting for a great Mormon novelist" Date: 31 May 2000 23:36:16 EDT In a message dated 5/31/00 11:02:00 AM, ChrisB@enrich.com writes: <> WAITING FOR A GREAT MORMON NOVELIST By Jerry Johnston Published in Deseret News, Wed. June 28, 1989 As book editor for the Deseret News, I'm always getting asked when that great Mormon novelist is going to come along. We have several respectable novelists--Linda Sillitoe, Scott Card, Doug Thayer. But people are waiting for a blockbuster, a Mormon Mailer of sorts. I'm the first to admit I make a better pundit than prophet, but I think there's a blockbuster Mormon novelist out there, too. I base that feeling on several things. To begin with, all the ingredients of strong American literature are here. The South--with its sense of family, religious underpinnings and problems with identity--produced Twain, Faulkner, O'Connor, Welty and dozens of other fine writers. Those same forces are percolating in Mormon Utah. What we need is someone to pull them all together. "If there's going to be a great Mormon novelist," Wallace Stegner once told me, "my guess is it will be a person who left the fold, but is working back toward it." I know what he's saying. It's a question of finding the proper perspective. Today, Mormon fiction is written by people who are so much a part of the culture they can't see it as others might, or by people who have so little inside information about Mormons their insights are worthless. I think the writer we need--the one with perspective--will resemble the Latin American novelists--Garcia Marquez, Isabel Allende and Jose Donoso. The're come to trade in "magic realism." They write realistically about their cultures, but they add fantastic, supernatural elements to their novels--elements that take readers by surprise. Garcia Marquez says he simply writes reality as his people live and perceive it. When gypsies come to life in his books, when women get caught away to heaven while hanging out their bedsheets, that's just the way the world works down south. It's also the way the world works here. Let me tell you two stories. In "One Hundred Years of Solitude" by Garcia Marquez, an old patriarch grows frail and senile. Finally his wife is forced to tie him to a tree in the back yard just to keep track of him. When he finally dies, the people in town wake up to a carpet of daisies--millions of daisies layering the streets of the town. Compare that with the story my aunt Jessie Lou told me just last week. "The night your great-grandfather died," she said, "he was dressed in his Sunday best. He said he was waiting for his brother to come for him. That night, when everyone had left and he was alone, he stepped out onto the porch. The next day they found him lying in the snow. The doctor said he died before he hit the ground. They found him with a Book of Mormon clutched to his chest. One of the pages had been bent in the fall. A scripture on the page told about one of the God's chosen reaching the Promised Land." To write stories like that, you have to do what the Latin American authors do. You have to report them. Straight. If you allow cynicism to creep in, or try to use them as "faith-promoting incidents" or view them with dewy, wide-eyed innocence, the story will lose its power as literature. To write them right, you have to relate them in a non-judgmental tone with the warmth of a writer who loves the culture, loves stories and takes them at face value. When we find a writer who's able to do that, then we'll have our Dickens. - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Larry Jackson Subject: [AML] MN John GATES, _Brigham's Day_ Date: 31 May 2000 23:49:05 EDT Publishers Weekly pg71 22May00 A4 [From Mormon-News] New Thriller Covers 'Bloody Secrets Of Mormon History' (Brigham's Day) Publishers Weekly pg71 22May00 A4 By Sybil S Steinberg Brigham's Day John Gates. Walker, $23.95 (204) ISBN 0-8027-3344-1 NEW YORK, NEW YORK -- A new thriller by novelist John Gates has a Mormon setting and uses Mormon characters and history. But Publishers Weekly says that the book is 'formulaic' and uses 'stock characters and creaky plotting,' which undermine the novel. The plot as described by Publishers Weekly shows a limited knowledge of Mormonism. Attorney Brigham Bybee is a divorced, recovering alcoholic who's career was ruined after he filed suit against a 'high Mormon church official.' Ruined, he agrees to help another attorney defend a murder case in Kanab, where he discovers that a 'secret Mormon police force' committed the murder to cover up an old document concerning the Mountain Meadows Massacre that might embarrass the Church. Publishers Weekly's review wasn't all negative. It did say that Gates "keeps his story moving briskly and garnishes his tale with well-chosen local details and enough Mormon history and lore to awaken the reader's interest in the alternate culture that thrives in Utah." It also reports that the book, which is released next month, will be an alternate for the Quality Paperback Book Club. See also: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0802733441/mormonnews More about "Brigham's Day" at Amazon.com >From Mormon-News: Mormon News and Events Forwarding is permitted as long as this footer is included Mormon News items may not be posted to the World Wide Web sites without permission. Please link to our pages instead. For more information see http://www.MormonsToday.com/ Send join and remove commands to: majordomo@MormonsToday.com Put appropriate commands in body of the message: To join: subscribe mormon-news To leave: unsubscribe mormon-news To join digest: subscribe mormon-news-digest - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Gae Lyn Henderson" Subject: RE: [AML] Where's our LDS Mark Twain? Date: 01 Jun 2000 01:00:04 -0600 Rob Pannoni presents an intriguing frame from which to view _The Backslider_: "However, I disagree with your assessment of _The Backslider_. I think it works because we do see ourselves in it, or at least a part of ourselves. Frank is spiritual in his own way, but his spirituality is immature. If you were to use the moral/spiritual development framework in Fowler's _Stages of Faith_, Frank would be stuck at one of the very literal stages typical of young children. We all go through these early stages. And aspects of previous stages often stay with us even though we progress to a more adult-like perspective. The holding on to earlier stages is particularly true in mormonism, where the emphasis is on following the moral guidelines given to us by our leaders (as opposed to developing our own internal moral compass). While I don't know many church members who are as extreme as Frank, I see elements of his perspective in myself and other church members I know. Perhaps we know intellectually that God doesn't work the way Frank envisions Him, but emotionally, Frank's feelings of guilt, his vision of God as a strict taskmaster and his perception that God expects us to sacrifice the pleasures of life still resonate with us." Until I get a chance to read Fowler's book, tell me what moves people into the more adult-like stages of faith? Is it merely age and experience? Is it breaking rules and experiencing consequences? I'm guessing that as we realize the negative results of some of our pleasures, that we find out fun is not all fun. You suggest that the church emphasis "on following the moral guidelines given to us by our leaders" may short-circuit that process. I'm wondering if what the prophet or even the bishop advises has less impact than what mom and dad enact. Perhaps we as LDS parents are so concerned about helping our children avoid negative consequences that we sometimes allow less agency than is necessary for growth. Do human beings see God, as Frank does, as a "strict taskmaster" if their parents act out that role? Perhaps one of the most enlightening aspects of Levi Peterson's work is to help us examine the authoritative frameworks we perceive around us and figure out where they came from and whether we owe them allegiance. Gae Lyn Henderson - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Gae Lyn Henderson" Subject: [AML] RE: Where's our LDS Amy Tan? Date: 31 May 2000 23:48:27 -0600 [MOD: Quotation marks added around Todd's original comments for ease of reading.] Great post Todd. I agree particularly with these words: "A vital and engaging Mormon literature is going to involve our beliefs on family, salvation, progression, and repentance. It will not try to convert people or hold people to their beliefs. The scriptures are for that purpose. Literature has other jobs, and I think that one of them is to create opportunitites to practice empathy." Yes! Let me add some ideas on a couple of other things you mention. You said: "Most of our big time contemporary writers are not fully active in the church (as Thom Duncan pointed out). To name names would be in horrible taste, but suffice it to say, there are at least a half dozen national-level writers who exist on the margins of the church because no room has been made for them." The idea that "no room has been made for them" is troubling. If there is little tolerance (in the church, in LDS culture)for the intellectual, the artist, then such people may be marginalized unfairly, even cruelly. I have to question, though, the cause-and-effect process of marginalization that has occurred. Maybe these national-level writers have pulled themselves away from church activity because of lifestyle choices. Perhaps they don't conform strictly to the rules that govern "worthiness" (to use a loaded term). I agree that there is "little room" made in the church for people when they construct a life that is alternative in some sense. But what to do about it? Are you suggesting that the group reconfigure to accept more deviation from the norm? Ironically, I think that alternative-lifestyle positioning is a key point in what makes some authors marketable nationally. Sympathy exists for the individual who can't (or doesn't) fit into the authoritarian (at least so-perceived) group. And good writing emerges from conflict. The insider-outsider position produces tremendous inner conflict. I listened to one national-level writer speak at BYU--she mentioned her lack of a temple recommend. Tears rolled down her cheeks. It was extremely moving because the insider-outsider dilemma was being enacted visually before the audience. And yet, what are the reasons for the insider-outsider positioning? Does such a fate befall any intellectual who is vocal? I hate to think so. I wonder if intellectuals often use their critical thinking skills and writing ability to question the constraints placed on church members. Nonintellectuals who want to rebel just quit going to church and take up with a new set of friends. On the other hand, intellectuals dramatize and analyze the separation process. They are perceived as dangerous because their rhetorical skill may invite others to question the benefits/risks of obedience versus rule-breaking. I suppose that questioning process is important and valuable stuff. So I guess I find myself agreeing with you that there needs to be room for questioning in our (or any) culture without resultant marginalization. "To paraphrase recklessly from the BYU mission statement booklet, "There is no such thing as a risk-free literature (the booklet says "education" in the place of "literature"). The general body of the church does not want either of those things to be true. We are, generally, like sheep: we value safety over risk. This is incomprehensible to me because the riskiest thing any of us have ever done is side with Christ. To have chosen the plan of agency is more dangerous for some than BASE jumping off the Transamerica Tower or free climbing El Capitan in Yosemite. Still, we all made that choice. "Why did we all become such ninnies, worrying about art and so forth? The over-availability of credit is going to destroy more temple marriages than any novel or collection of short stories ever will, and how many Saints have four, five, six credit cards but won't read serious fiction because they're scared that it will drain the holiness out of the home. "Give me cash on the barrel head and LOLITA any day." You are very persuasive here Todd. I agree we don't want to run away from the challenge that art (or education) represents. Maybe we are ninnies if we only "worry" bout art. But I think we do want to, if not worry, then at least think very carefully about art. We want to inquire into the assumptions it makes, the values it endorses, the lives it may change. We can worry (or be concerned) about such matters and at the same time cherish art and embrace it for enriching us, for teaching us, for shaking us up. I think the artist needs to consider the consequences of what she is proposing in her creations. Yes, novels and collections of short stories are risky stuff. That is their wonder! Interaction with art enacts change in human lives--such power is exactly why art is magnificent and valuable. Yes, art is risky, but I wouldn't want to exclude that kind of risk from my life; I don't want an "unexamined life." Let's not pretend, though, that we aren't dealing with dynamite. To use an (obscure?) musical example, when Diana Krall sings "Peel me a grape" what exactly is she proposing? Gae Lyn Henderson - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "D. Michael Martindale" Subject: [AML] Re: Galaxy Quest Date: 01 Jun 2000 00:54:59 -0600 Beth Hatch: > Please, I'm dying to know. What are these jobs? I can't tell you what David Howard had in mind, but mine is a computer operator on the graveyard shift. I'm here all alone all night, I start up a data processing job, wait for it to run, check to see it ran okay, then start up the next. The "wait for it to run" part is the part that qualifies it as a writer's ideal job. -- D. Michael Martindale dmichael@wwno.com ================================== Check out Worldsmiths, the new online LDS writers group, at http://www.wwno.com/worldsmiths Sponsored by Worlds Without Number http://www.wwno.com ================================== - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Todd Robert Petersen" Subject: Re: [AML] Divorce Date: 01 Jun 2000 08:03:07 -0500 The way that this thread has shifted over to divorce is interesting to me in a number of ways. The primary one, which has connections to Mormon Literature, is this: One fundamental assumption in the church is that people should not get divorced. I've known a number of people who did, whose lives could not have progressed, whose hubands came out of the closet or slept with their best friends, or who beat them, or who slipped into madness and refused to have intercourse with them, or who were violent. I've known some people who got married because they thought that divorce would be better than committing adultery, and they were so close to having sex outside of marriage that they figured they'd get married anyway. I have born witness for them in the Temple. I dated a woman who left her non-member husband because he threatened to murder their child if she took him to church to have him blessed and named in a Mormon ceremony. All of the people mentioned are LDS. They go to church. Their stories are useful to us. To shuttle them away because they are hard to look at is like locking your invalid mother in the back room because she's unsightly or mildly demented and curses to herself. I knew a kid who bore his testimony and told about how his dad beat him and his mother nearly to death. The kid's father in in prison right now. The kid's still mad (He has trouble walking now) and rightly so. He bore his testimony, but he said that his life is still hard. I have a friend who processes child abuse claims for Utah County. She said the number of claims that cross her desk that have to do with ostensibly "good Mormon" families would make your head spin. My friends who are family therapists with practies in Orem say the same thing. Much of what's been mentioned on this thread assumes that the world is much simpler and less violent than it really is. Some people haven't, and I'm very happy for that. Why is it that so many assume that our literature wouldn't explore those avenues of human experience, not to applaud them, but to warn or to uncover? The scriptures and conference talks can't really explore these very important aspects of Mormon lives, but literature can. In fact, Mormon literature is obligated to, in many ways. I think that it is dangerous to suggest, with our literature, that everything's going to be okay. It will be okay for many, more or less, ultimately, but ultimately sometimes means on the other side of the veil. Unfortunately that's where literature stops, and it should stop there. For some it will not be okay, they will fail. Our literature needs to tell those tales to. Mormon literature, for the most part, has failed to embrace the tragic, which is why it hasn't really taken off. It is not necessary to sugar-coat anything or to be unnecessarily crude, but we need to be true. The facts are that some people do wrong and don't get punished. Some people do right and continue to suffer. Some people get cancer even though they obey the word of wisdom (me). Some people smoke and drink until they are 100 years old. Some people sleep around and get AIDS, some people don't. If we start covering up reality because it doesn't jive with our Sunday school manuals, it's still a cover up, still a kind of lying. Todd Robert Petersen - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: debbro@voyager.net Subject: Re: [AML] Sexuality in LDS Lit Date: 01 Jun 2000 10:44:30 -0400 In a petrie dish Debbie Brown On 31 May 2000, at 15:21, Marilyn Brown wrote: How does the other .01 percent arrive? Marilyn Brown At 04:34 PM 5/23/00 -0600, you wrote: >There are over 5 billion of us on this planet, and I dare say that 99.99 percent of us arrived here by sexual means. >[Dave Wilkinson] [MOD: I'll add my two cents here so as to not take up an extra post. As I understand it, there are a very few human births that take place by means of parthenogenesis--I forget whether that's the term for when it happens in humans--anyway, where a mother can have a daughter who is genetically identical to herself, without any father being involved. I don't know what other end-runs there may be around sex in human reproduction.] - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "lynn gardner" Subject: [AML] Re: Where's our LDS Amy Tan? Date: 01 Jun 2000 08:25:40 -0700 Thom Duncan wrote: will be in trouble with somebody, if only the local ward > members who can't believe how Sister Jones can write such sexy love > scenes while still being the Relief Society President, or how Brother > Smith can have that antagonist say "that word" and he being a High > Priest and all... All too true. I was Stake Relief Society President for several years and when my first couple of books came out, there were those who were aghast that I would write love scenes, (although very tame love scenes.) Of course, the fact that they were reading pretty steamy stuff in other books didn't matter - I had tarnished the office of Stake RS President for them. Go figure. However, I am taking careful notes on this subject and when my husband and I return from our mission, I'm thinking of taking up the challenge and writing the story of my Welsh ancestors who came to America on the urging of the missionary who converted and baptized them, then turned his back on them when they arrived on his doorstep in Utah, and follow the generations through today. And like Darvell, I feel I'll need some formal training to do it since my one year at BYU a hundred years ago, and all the workshops and conferences and classes I've attended since that time probably haven't prepared me sufficiently to do it justice. Lynn Gardner (probably the only unlettered person on this list!) - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Jason Steed" Subject: Re: [AML] Creative Writing Master's Programs Date: 01 Jun 2000 08:37:21 PDT >We've talked about the language requirement for >admission into an MFA program. Could someone tell me >what other requirements to expect? Do I have to have >already published? Will a writing sample be required? > How hard is it to get into one? > >===== >Darlene Young I would say, by and large, most MFA programs do NOT require a foreign language to get in, and won't require one as part of the program. A few, like UNLV's, will require a semester abroad, or something like that... Most programs require a certain number of courses, usually consisting mostly of writing workshops, and most will require you to take at least one workshop in the genre you're not working in (i.e. if you're there as a fiction writer, you'll have to take at least one poetry workshop). Other than these courses, and your thesis--which will be a booklength ms--there isn't much else. A program may require a minor in something, or (as with my program at U of Idaho) a couple courses in another art form (drawing, painting, etc.). But that's about it. Also, if you hunt around, you can find programs that are 1 year, 2 years (standard), and 3 years long--and this, along with the other details, may be important to you in deciding where to go. As for applying, yes, you will need a writing sample, and for most programs this is the most important part of the application, so you'll want to polish it up real nice (usually about 20 pp). Letters of recommendation are important too, and of course IF you have publications, that certainly won't hurt--but I think most don't have these yet... So many schools have MFA programs these days, that it's no so big a deal where you go anymore--it used to be that the only programs worth mentioning were Iowa, Houston, Stanford, and maybe 1-2 more. Now, you can find good, published, award-winning, well-respected writers nearly everywhere (because it's hard to make money as a writer, so they have to teach). The best thing to do is check out university web sites, find out who the faculty is, degree requirements, application requirements, etc. Happy hunting! Jason ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Jason Steed" Subject: Re: [AML] Where's our LDS Bernard Malamud? Date: 01 Jun 2000 09:00:59 PDT As Morgan pointed out, _Tom Sawyer_ is not generally considered a "great book"--it's usually grouped with 'teen' or 'young' literature and is not thought to be anywhere near the greatness of _Huck Finn_. And it's impossible to deny that _Huck_ is highly critical of the South, slavery, piety, and just about everything else it comes in contact with. Is this what's needed for great literature? I don't think so--not necessarily, anyway, though it is common in great books. I think what is essential to any _good_ literature, though, is a very real, very deep or profound, and very pertinent sense of conflict. After all, conflict is what produces plot, no? For Twain, the conflicts were numerous, mostly between ideals and reality; and I think this is often going to be the case in Mormon literature: reality just doesn't match up with the ideal. Thus, I think we have very fertile ground for good, even great literature. But I still don't think that literature has to be critical of the Church, or its members. Usually, when a book is critical of society, or an institution, or a belief system, it is classified as satirical. And, as mentioned, while many of the great books have elements of satire, or are in fact classifiable as entirely satirical, there are many of the greats that lack (or avoid, or have no use for) satire. One good example might be Bernard Malamud (pick a book--_The Assistant_, _The Magic Barrel_, etc.). Malamud was a Jewish writer who, along with Saul Bellow and Philip Roth, put Jewish literature on the map back in the 1950s. Malamud is perhaps the most explicitly Jewish (with regard to religion, not ethnically or culturally) of the three, and the conflict in his stories and novels is essentially the same as that of Twain--the disparity between reality and ideals/expectations. And Malamud's writing is full of humor, too--but without the biting satire of Twain. I think the key is that Malamud's characters are Jewish, but that isn't central to the conflict. They are explicitly Jewish, their Jewishness may be central to plot, etc.; but the conflicts Malamud explores are those of the human condition (Malamud even said, at one point, "all men are Jews, they just don't know it"--meaning, he saw Jewishness as a metaphor for the human condition, which is one of exile, alienation, sorrow and hardship, but also humor and joy). I think if we, as Mormons, allow Mormon-ness to be explicit, even crucial, but focus on conflicts that are universal (use Mormon-ness metaphorically, as Malamud did with Jewishness), then we can create a Mormon literature that examines and explores the human condition, that will reach a wide audience (as Malamud did, and does), and that will yet avoid unwanted criticism of the religion or the institution to which it is tied. Jason Steed ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Christopher Bigelow" Subject: [AML] Jobs for writers Date: 01 Jun 2000 10:53:34 -0700 D. Michael Martindale wrote: <<>> I don't think I've ever worked more than 15-20 hours a week (on my BUSIEST = weeks) at my "full-time" jobs as an editor/writer. I've used the "extra" = time to do all manner of personal things, from e-mailing (mostly on = AML-List), to working on publications such as my family's semiannual = journal and the quarterly Irreantum, to occasionally typing fiction. (But = with fiction, I've generally only worked on it after all other possible = distractions have been attended to first, including straightening my = office, down to paperclips sorted by size.) Although my deepest-held = desire would be to become a successfully published novelist, I spend most = of my discretionary time and energy elsewhere, because I balk at the = creative discipline of writing fiction. I find that working as a writer/editor is quite cushy. Generally you have = deadlines, but I've rarely had anyone try to baby-sit me through the = actual process of getting something ready for the deadline. As a result, = on corporate propaganda jobs I tend to do the very minimum at the very = last minute, leaving me much free time to do other things that appear as = work to passers by (although, as a hedge against the occasional screen = scrutinizer, I'm not above keeping a work document open so I can click on = it if needed--or even having a big header on a fiction manuscript that = makes it look like work). Writing and editing are somewhat mysterious to = many corporate types, who probably slaved over papers in college to get = them halfway decent, so they tend to just leave you alone and let you work = your professional magic, as arcane to many people as law or medicine. If = you're capable enough to get things written and edited quickly, they don't = know how long it takes you. An interesting question is, Should a would-be fiction writer work as a = corporate propagandist (note middle of that word) or technical writer? = Some people might argue that you only have so much writing energy, so you = should work a day job that doesn't drain it. However, I think using your = writing skills daily at a corporate job helps hone and develop them. At = the Ensign magazine, I learned a lot about how to write for a mass = audience, and currently I'm learning a lot about how to sell stuff as a = marketing writer. I'm lazy enough that it's good to be forced to keep = using my writing skills, which can't help but spill over into fiction = whenever I can get myself focused on that.=20 But with an attitude and an approach like mine, I think I'm pretty close = to topping out in my field unless I can get motivated to become "proactive"= and "take ownership" and move into some kind of management role. I think, = however, that I will coast as a writer for another 10 or 20 years before I = start bucking for more responsibility that would eat up my discretionary = time at work. I tend to channel any extra ambition I feel into doing = things like Irreantum and writing fiction, not into carving out some kind = of corporate management job. Maybe if I haven't gotten anywhere by the = time I'm 40 or 50, I'll go corporate, but until them I'm a drone whose = main interests lie outside the hive. As far as ethics go, I guess I could probably work up some guilt if I = tried, but I figure that as a salaried employee the emphasis is on what I = accomplish, not how I spend my time. In fact, my immediate supervisor = works out of her home, so she is not at all a servant of the clock. I'm = not a servant of the clock either, though I sit in the corporate data = warehouse all day, sucking mp3s through the T1 teat (but as an occasional = Metallica downloader, I just got banned from Napster along with 300,000 = others). If an employer doesn't give me enough work to keep me busy at my = level of efficiency, I don't take it upon myself to go looking for things = to fill my time.=20 My only regret is that if I had really leveraged all my available time = during at various "full-time" jobs over the past 10 years, I could have = written at least a novel a year. Oh, well, maybe I'll start typing on my = novel again tomorrow. But today I need to read the Onion and check = inside.com, and edit the next issue of Irreantum one more time before it = goes to design, and keep up with my e-mails, and do a little proofing for = the corporation, and meet my wife for lunch, and stop at the post office, = and surreptitiously read Entertainment Weekly during an afternoon = corporate meeting, and maybe meet with that one guy about that one writing = project I'm supposed to start . . . Of course, if there's an economic downtown and lay offs happen, I'd = probably be one of the first to go, with my attitude. Oh, please don't = throw me into the briar patch. Chris Bigelow * * * * * * Interested in novels, stories, poems, plays, and films by, for, or about = Mormons? Check out IRREANTUM magazine at www.xmission.com/~aml/irreantum.ht= m. - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: debbro@voyager.net Subject: [AML] Re: Where's our LDS Amy Tan? Date: 01 Jun 2000 14:59:35 -0400 Not at all Lynn, I'm only a HS graduate, and everything I know about writing, editing, reporting, and so on, I learned from doing and making mistakes and sheer stupidity. The stupid part was saying "sure, I can do that" and was then editor of the ward newsletter for five years but which led to a job as an editor for a small community newspaper. BTW, this may be just my opinion, but the job of ward newsletter editor is one of the most unappreciated and thankless callings in the church. No one ever seems to have trouble telling the editor how the newsletter should be written, but when asked to write something for it, they can't be bothered. ANd then if you do get someone to write an article for you, and you dare to edit it, boy, there is only one word to describe that editor, for as we all know, no one ever needs editing. Debbie Brown Lynn Gardner (probably the only unlettered person on this list!) - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Tracie Laulusa" Subject: [AML] Unlettered (was: Where's our LDS Amy Tan?) Date: 01 Jun 2000 15:19:42 -0400 If by "unlettered" you mean no degree then you are certainly not alone. Tracie -----Original Message----- And like Darvell, I feel I'll need some formal training to do it since my one year at BYU a hundred years ago, and all the workshops and conferences and classes I've attended since that time probably haven't prepared me sufficiently to do it justice. Lynn Gardner (probably the only unlettered person on this list!) - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jonathan Langford Subject: [AML] June Editorial Date: 02 Jun 2000 07:21:01 -0500 It's been a month now that I've been moderating AML-List. It's been a learning time for me--and a time that's required some patience and tolerance on the part of List members, as you've had the experience of watching me fumble around and make some mis-steps as I've struggled to master these new duties. Well, mastery is still far from me; but we all seem to have survived the experience thus far, and I'll continue to try and muddle through. This month has presented a clear example of the kind of boom-and-bust cycle that's fairly common on the List. At the beginning of May, while conversation hadn't died down entirely, still things seemed to be going at a fairly slow pace. Toward the end of the month, though, several new topics got going that prompted extensive discussion. (I've noticed that sex-in-literature topics, in particular, tend to have that effect.) Right now, conversation is pretty heavy. But things will die down again--and revive again--and so on. That's just the way things go. I'd like to spend a couple of minutes talking about the process and criteria I use in forwarding posts to the List. The software we use automatically "bounces" all posts from the List to my e-mail address. However, because of the way the system works, I don't see the authors of those bounced posts or their subject lines when they show up in my in-box. Until I open up each post and read it, I don't know who it comes from or what it's about. So when I first download a set of messages, I can't tell at a glance how many List members they come from, or what the mix of topics is--or how many of them might be private or administrative posts to me as moderator. This has some implications for how I process the posts. Generally, I don't read through all the posts before I start sending them. Instead, each time I open a post, I start with the assumption that I'll be sending it out as soon as I finish reading it, and before I read the next post in the stack--unless something I see while I'm reading it causes me to set it aside into the overflow or discard file. Some of the most common reasons for me to set aside a post include the following: * If it's off-topic for the List--that is, not related in some clear way to Mormon letters, or violating one of the other List guidelines related to what's on- and off-topic. There are, of course, degrees of off-topic-ness. Fairly often I'll let through a post that's not strictly on-topic, but contributes (in my judgment) to the ongoing discussion. I'm more likely to be strict on this when List volume is heavy, or if the discussion as a whole seems to be going off-topic, or if I can tell that the post will prompt replies that are also mostly off-topic. * If it seems to go beyond disagreeing with another List member's point of view toward flaming, name-calling, or disrespect for (to quote the List guidelines) "the integrity, opinions, and beliefs of others." This is an area that's clearly subject to a great deal of interpretation. Typically, what I do in these cases is to send back a message to the author of the post, explaining how it's out-of-bounds and sometimes giving suggestions for how it could be revised to preserve the main point without seeming to become personal. The goal isn't to avoid disagreement on the List, even vigorous disagreement; but to keep this, as much as possible, a place where people of varying opinions can feel free to voice those opinions in an atmosphere of mutual respect. * If the post is very short and doesn't add much to the conversation--for example, if it simply agrees with what someone else has said without amplifying on it, or if it provides a fact that has already been given by someone else. For example, I recently asked if someone had information about the LDS writer of _Galaxy Quest_. Several List members wrote in with information. In this case, I happened to read ahead, and was able to forward the posts that gave more detail and put several other posts into the discard pile that simply gave a name and a quick identification. (Let me remind you again, though, that usually I don't read ahead, so this isn't always the way it happens!) * If I've already sent out several posts that day by the same author, especially on the same topic. Generally, I prefer to send out no more than 2-3 per person per day (with exceptions, of course, for people like Larry Jackson who are forwarding news items to the List). This isn't just to keep down the volume, but also to try to keep a balanced conversation, with many voices contributing. If I notice several comments by one person in the in-box, sometimes I'll sift through them and send out the one that seems to me the meatiest and most stimulating--but more often, because of the way I operate, I'll simply send the first couple I get to, then reluctantly put the others into the overflow--whence, I must tell you, they very seldom come out again. (Let me add that if you've sent in a message you care particularly about, and it hasn't shown up, please send it again with a follow-up query. Sometimes items do get lost, or buried in my files...) It's been a fun and interesting month. I'd like to get some of our more regular columns going again--Ed Snow, among others, has talked very promisingly of a Return to AML-List--but this past month, my energy's been taken up largely with simply getting used to the job of moderator and doing the AML-List Highlights column for Issue 6 of _Irreantum_. (Something I believe I've now successfully handed off--it was a fun job, but time-consuming, and I'd rather not continue with it while serving as moderator.) But we'll hope that in another month, I have more definite news along those lines to report. Meantime, back into the fray-- Jonathan Langford AML-List Moderator - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Richard R. Hopkins" Subject: Fw: [AML] Divorce in LDS lit. Date: 01 Jun 2000 14:15:04 -0600 I did a fair amount of family law as a lawyer in So. Cal. and decided then that I would never get a divorce (unless I had a really good biblical reason, I suppose, but nothing like that has ever surfaced in my marriage). But I know good members who have, sometimes for biblical reasons and sometimes not. The Moderator would rather I don't go into issues relating to the grounds for divorce for reasons with which I agree, but I do think it helps to understand what grounds have been identified scripturally as acceptable for divorce, because if we are to write about divorce, there are often distinctions to be made, since I believe a divorce without biblical grounds requires repentance. (How do you repent of divorce? Easy. Never get a divorce again! :-)) Anyway, I don't want to get into a big discussion about what are and what are not biblical grounds, unless the Moderator thinks we can do it right -- staying on topic and all. But the point is this. I have a novel in progress that originally explored this theme a little. It was in a draft, but I got quite a negative reaction to my divorced hero. My hero even had one of the biblical reasons for divorce, but still none of the women liked him. It would be interesting to know what this list thinks. Do women always dislike divorced heroes? Why? Is there a way the story could be written so as to make the divorced hero acceptable? The problem is this: If you have a story about someone in their late thirties or early forties, and you want a romance, how can you do it if the hero is not divorced? Do you have to write about a guy who's never been married? I don't think that's as realistic and interesting as a hero who's been divorced, and the only other alternative is for him to be a widower, and I'm sorry, that really stretches credibility. How many women die before 40 these days? Okay, then, tell me ladies, would you prefer a hero to be a widower (pining for his lost love), or a divorcee (finally ready to meet the love of his life)? I'm very curious! Richard Hopkins> - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Larry Jackson Subject: [AML] MN OSTLING/OSTLING, _Mormon America_ Date: 01 Jun 2000 23:41:09 EDT Tribune 28May00 A4 [From Mormon-News] Mormon America Criticized For Being Too Favorable (Revelations) Chicago Tribune 28May00 A4 http://chicagotribune.com/leisure/books/article/0,2669,SAV-0005280336,FF.html By Chris Barsanti 3 new books illuminate Mormonism, Tibetan Buddism and Paradise itself MORMON AMERICA: The Power and the Promise By Richard N. Ostling and Joan K. Ostling HarperSanFrancisco, 454 pages, $26 CHICAGO, ILLINOIS -- While many Mormons have been disappointed with Richard and Joan Ostling's book "Mormon America" because they feel it is too harsh on the LDS Church, Chris Barsanti, writing in the Chicago Tribune, criticizes the book for being too soft on Mormonism. Barsanti calls the book "worshipful," and says that stance colors what could be a groundbreaking work. Barsanti does say that the book is welcome, and that it is full of "detailed information about Mormon history, beliefs and controversies," but says that the Ostling's conclusions come closer to hagiography than objectivity. He says that while the Ostlings dispute the idea that Mormonism is a fringe religion, "they do little to disprove it." He claims the description of Mormon history "tries unsuccessfully to evoke sympathy" and claims that the Ostlings detail "every wrong ever witnessed on the Mormons," but soft-pedal troubling events like the Danites and the Mountain Meadows Massacre. See also: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0060663715/mormonnews More about "Mormon America: The Power and the Promise" at Amazon.com >From Mormon-News: Mormon News and Events Forwarding is permitted as long as this footer is included Mormon News items may not be posted to the World Wide Web sites without permission. Please link to our pages instead. For more information see http://www.MormonsToday.com/ Send join and remove commands to: majordomo@MormonsToday.com Put appropriate commands in body of the message: To join: subscribe mormon-news To leave: unsubscribe mormon-news To join digest: subscribe mormon-news-digest - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "D. Michael Martindale" Subject: Re: [AML] Where's our LDS Mark Twain? Date: 01 Jun 2000 15:12:53 -0600 Morgan Adair wrote: > Twain is remembered more for _The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn_. > Huck Finn is a great book, and it was critical of and offensive to the people > it depicted (offensive, at least, to those who recognized Twain was writing > about them). > > What Huck, Frank Windham, and Terry Walker (_Dancing Naked_) have > in common is what Twain called a "deformed conscience." The pious of > Huck's society told him slavery is right; Frank grew up with undeserved > shame and fear of God; Terry's family had a legacy of irrational homophobia. > The greatness or near-greatness of these books lies in how they make us > look at the values our societies have given us. I think there's an important difference here. It's one thing to attack cultural defects and hypocricies, something I would have no problem with and I think an insider member of the church could do--albeit one who would have to have the courage to face knee-jerk criticism from less insightful members. But when one starts criticizing the theology itself, which often seems to get lumped into the mix with the "inder-outsider" writer trying very hard to be objective, then the line is crossed and the writer has placed him/herself squarely on the other side. Not that I'm outraged when someone chooses to do that. But I question whether that's necessary to write great literature about Mormons. -- D. Michael Martindale dmichael@wwno.com ================================== Check out Worldsmiths, the new online LDS writers group, at http://www.wwno.com/worldsmiths Sponsored by Worlds Without Number http://www.wwno.com ================================== - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "D. Michael Martindale" Subject: Re: [AML] Re: Where's our LDS Amy Tam? Date: 01 Jun 2000 15:20:54 -0600 Matthew Hamby wrote: > > What about Dutcher's "God's Army"? Doesn't that count as an accurate > description, looking from the inside. It was certainly a good depiction of > typical events in my mission. Thom Duncan wrote: > No, because I don't think it speaks as effectively to those outside our > faith. Some things, like the healing, are just so beyond the > understanding of the non-Mormon audience, that they would form a > stumbling block. It's true that _God's Army_ was told to an LDS audience and technically wouldn't qualify as an "Amy Tan" example. But without a great deal of trouble it could have been tweaked to reach a non-LDS audience and is therefore still useful as an example. Is there _that_ much difference between showing some of our warts to the world and showing them to ourselves in a medium where the world can easily listen in? Either way, the storyteller is facing criticism from his fellow members if they don't like it. Thom Duncan wrote: > > I think we have our Mormon Amy Tan/Mark Twain. The names are Orson Scott Card > > and Dave Wolverton/Farland. > > When they claim their Pulitzers, then let's talk. Ooooooooooooooh, that one got my dander up! Surely as an SF aficianado, Thom, you understand how great literature can be written in that genre and still be entirely snubbed by the literary elite handing out the awards. -- D. Michael Martindale dmichael@wwno.com ================================== Check out Worldsmiths, the new online LDS writers group, at http://www.wwno.com/worldsmiths Sponsored by Worlds Without Number http://www.wwno.com ================================== - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "D. Michael Martindale" Subject: Re: [AML] Jerry JOHNSTON, "Waiting for a great Mormon novelist" Date: 01 Jun 2000 15:38:01 -0600 This is an exciting article for me to read! But I have to warn you, if your hubris tolerance level is low, you'd better not read on. I am writing a novel right now that exactly fits these requirements for the "great Mormon novel." Yet I don't consider myself to be "someone who left the fold, but is working back toward it." I consider myself to have been in the fold all along. However, I do consider myself somewhat of an outsider when it comes to Utah culture. Is this the real need for the LDS Amy Tan? To feel outside the culture, not the religion? I haven't been keeping track, but I wonder now if all those who are trying to say only lapsed or lasping LDS members can write the great Mormon novel are Utah born and bred, and therefore have a hard time separating culture from religion themselves? >From their point of view, it might appear that some level of rejection of the religion itself is necessary for the required objectivity. As someone Minnesota born and bred, I don't have any problem seeing how someone could be outside the culture but inside the religion. And let's face it, if there ever will be a great Mormon novel that is acclaimed as such by both members and nonmembers, it will have to be one that tells the truth about the people, but respects the religion. If either ingredient is missing, one or the other faction will reject the classification of the novel. Wouldn't it be fantastic if I was writing the first great Mormon novel! But whether it proves to be that or not, I believe my efforts are an existence proof that it can be done without the author being a "lost generation" type. All the correct variables are there--except one: do I have the writing skills to pull it off? That one's a BIG if. -- D. Michael Martindale dmichael@wwno.com ================================== Check out Worldsmiths, the new online LDS writers group, at http://www.wwno.com/worldsmiths Sponsored by Worlds Without Number http://www.wwno.com ================================== - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Valerie Holladay Subject: [AML] Multiple Points of View (was: Sexuality in LDS Lit) Date: 01 Jun 2000 15:08:52 -0700 (PDT) --- harlowclark@juno.com wrote: > It's unwritten partly because I've been trying to > define the story's narrative voice, . . . I have > considered different ways of approaching the story, > for example, telling it from a parent's pov and not > quoting the exchanges, but that only tells us what > it's like from the outside. With the various personalities and viewpoints involved, I'd love to see each person tell it the way he/she sees it. Is that an option, Harlow? I've enjoyed quite a few books where the author allows each character to tell what happened from his/her POV. I like first person but third person works well also. Though for your story, I think first person would be a better vehicle for the intensity of the issues. I think it would be fascinating to hear the wife, the ex-, the new husband, the parents, everyone seeing (or choosing to see) things a certain way, painfully honest or stubbornly self-deceptive, trying to earn the readers' sympathy and convince them to see their side of the story. I love the idea of seeing the same event through different eyes; people have completely different takes on the same event. (I'm always amazed when my sister starts telling stories about things that I remember very differently.) Offhand I can think of a few books that do this in the LDS market, at least in the third person (Ben Parkinson's books follow the lives of four different missionaries and rotates among them) and a few national ones come to mind (like Goldsmith's *The Bestseller* or Gaffney's *Saving Graces.* Sometimes the POV change is pretty systematic, sort of a *rotating chronological* and sometimes it's a bit more loose, switching between scenes or chapters but not as evenly balanced. I think Dean Hughes and Gerald Lund do this kind of thing so we can follow the different lives of all their characters. I belonged to a writers' group for several years and we tried an assignment that taught me a lot. Someone devised a sentence that would be our starting place for a two-page story and we all reported back with it at our next meeting. The sentence was *Mrs. Tracy kissed me,* and it was amazing to see the different directions the story took. The only female at the time, I was a bit annoyed with it since I felt limited as the "me." Then I thought, *This is fiction. The me 'isn't' really me." So I wrote it from a male point of view. Then tried a female point of view - as a child, as a teenager, as a lover. Everyone had a different story and voice. I was drawn to the child's perspective and then found myself in the middle of a personal essay, describing an event from my childhood, with *Mrs. Tracy* as my old baby-sitter. I know there's a school of thought that says a book or story can only have one POV, and while I agree that too many POVs can clutter a scene and dilute the emotion and reader-character connection, if done well, the characters can reveal themselves through what they say (and don't say) and how they say it. (Fans of *Flowers for Algernon* may call it blasphemy - or stupidity - but imagine getting into Charley's story, then stepping into the mind of the teacher(?) who is falling in love with him, then that of a co-worker who consistently belittles him, then is intimidated by his growing intelligence, then feels guilty afterward; and maybe, too, the mind of an *objective* (read *unfeeling*) lead analyst who sees Charley only in a series of charts and graphs. Granted, a single viewpoint does it very well; this is just a different way of telling a story and getting into people's heads.) Any possibilities, Harlow? Any thoughts, outcries, hear-hears from the other readers/writers/critics? Valerie Holladay __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send instant messages & get email alerts with Yahoo! Messenger. http://im.yahoo.com/ - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: eedh Subject: [AML] Re: Divorce Date: 01 Jun 2000 16:26:32 -0700 Todd Robert Petersen wrote: "Why is it that so many assume that our literature wouldn't explore those avenues of human experience, not to applaud them, but to warn or to uncover? The scriptures and conference talks can't really explore these very important aspects of Mormon lives, but literature can. In fact, Mormon literature is obligated to, in many ways. I think that it is dangerous to suggest, with our literature, that everything's going to be okay." I think this could be very helpful to teach young people about courtship and engagement. I knew a girl who had some concerns about her fiancee. The night before she was to take out her endowments she became more concerned. She called a friend and confided these concerns, and the friend assured her that Satan was just trying to stop her from doing what was right. She went ahead with the endowment and then the marriage. Things were very difficult for her. I agree that literature is in a unique position to point out the red flags and problems in life and show that sometimes the pat, easy answers don't work. Beth Hatch - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Darlene Young Subject: [AML] Prouxl and Turrow Date: 01 Jun 2000 17:03:49 -0700 (PDT) I've been reading back issues of Irreantum and I saw Scott Turrow and Annie Prouxl mentioned in the "news" section. Could anyone tell me what connection these authors have to Mormon letters? Are they LDS? (And is this Annie Prouxl of "Shipping News"?) ===== Darlene Young __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send instant messages & get email alerts with Yahoo! Messenger. http://im.yahoo.com/ - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Shawn Ambrose Subject: RE: [AML] Sexuality in LDS Lit Date: 02 Jun 2000 01:29:58 -0400 Pornographers do not own all the discourse on sexuality. There is no sexual silence in the church or anywhere else. Something about sexuality is always being taught, by example if not out loud. Now, there is an unfortunate measure of ignorance and of false teaching. Just because we do not discuss it in public forums does not mean it's not being taught. We teach every time we turn on or off the TV. We teach every time we kiss our spouses or yell at them instead. We teach when we think we're not teaching. When I was a little, little girl, I remember walking out of my bedroom at night to where I could see into my parents' bedroom. They heard me and told me, with some embarrassment in their tone, to go back to bed. I remember thinking they were in an awkward position to sleep, even with blankets on. It was not until later that I made the connection. By then, because in public they showed respect, love, and service to each other, I understood that they also loved each other in bed. Timid about sex, no, we're not. Timid about shouting it abroad, yes. Do you really need to know all the gory details? (insert your own gory, messy details here) No! If you think just about the mechanics of sex, it's kind of gross, I mean, all those bodily fluids all over. In order to appreciate it fully you need the right attitude and the right conditions. When I was pregnant with our fourth child, I went to a pro-life clinic to get a free pregnancy test. While I waited for the results, they asked me to look over the materials they had gathered for pregnant mothers to view. I was happily married with no intention to abort; I could not find anything to watch or to read that applied to me. It was all anti-abortion, but not pro-anything else. There were no pointers on how to care for an infant. There were no referral materials to adoption agencies. There were not even any videos giving good nutrition hints; they were all Don't do this, Don't do that, Don't abort, Don't abandon your baby. There was nothing positive. I pointed this out to the clinic personnel. She seemed surprised to realize that they had presented no viable alternatives in a way that made them easy to get to. It occurs to me that this happens in our homes and churches. The church leaders are trying to address this, in part by holding a joint Relief Society and Priesthood meeting once a year on Sunday morning. They explain the church's stand on unmarried pregnant women and their children. They explain the job of LDS Social Services. They try to address the parents so that parents will teach correct attitudes. Does it always get through? Of course not. Specific examples of behavior do not belong in Sunday meetings. If you have a question, go to your bishop in private. There are severe limits to what can be said over the pulpit because it does not apply to all ages. We are mortal. Alas! 'Tis our lot to be imperfect in this life! Melinda L. Ambrose - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Shawn Ambrose Subject: [AML] _Galaxy Quest_ and Sexuality in LDS literature Date: 02 Jun 2000 01:58:49 -0400 When I first mentioned _Galaxy Quest_ on the List, I said, "I don't recommend it particularly, but the premise fascinates me." Now. I enjoyed the movie. It was hilariously funny. I even paid two dollars and fifty cents per day for a week straight to rent it. We watched it at least once a day, except Sunday, and on about four days I watched it twice. Then we returned it. We might rent it one more time so my husband can see it, but that'll be it. No more. But, you say, at that rental price you could have bought the tape. Yes, I could have. I chose not to, LDS screenwriter or no LDS screenwriter. I am comforted, in fact, to know that David Howard didn't write all that. I didn't buy it because a) there were too many crude words, and b) the heroine's costume was too revealing, especially near the end. As an adult I can mentally say, "that's funny but not what I'd do". My children, however, are still learning what appropriate and what's not. Their mental filters are rudimentary at best. (My oldest child is 8.) We've taught our children that there are some words we don't say, some styles we don't wear, some things we don't do. Another example: Disney's cartoon, _Hercules_. It was very popular with several families in our ward. One of the Relief Society presidency brought it to Homemaking for the kids in the nursery to watch. I brought my children in while it was playing. Now, I had borrowed the video from the library and watched it myself first, which I do with every children's movie whose advertisements make me nervous. I asked the Relief Society counselor to turn it off because my children are not allowed to see it. She was shocked and embarrassed. She turned it off and apologized, saying she had no idea that it was at all objectionable. Her small children watched it. Another mother was present. She asked me why. I told her it was because the characters in _Hercules_ are rude to each other. She laughed at me. She said something to the effect of "With all the big problems in the world, you're worried about rudeness?" Yes, I am worried about rudeness. Disrespect is a capital offense in my household. Thou shalt not sass thy parents. Thou shalt not ridicule thy siblings. If my son acted like the characters in _Hercules_, my son would sit on a chair a long time. That's ignoring the images portrayed of gods and goddesses-another major objection, which I did not explain. My question: how do you write for such diverse tastes? And, how do you expect to make money unless you can find a way to tie these diverse tastes together? And while we're at it, I can proudly say that our three-year-old can watch any of our videos safely without supervision, excepting only _Schindler's List_. I admit that this includes all four Star Wars movies. Is it hypocritical? Maybe. A little. Am I perfect? No. The fact is, I find the pervasive wrong stereotypes of sexual relations far more disturbing than the violence in which Good battles Evil and Good usually wins. You never see Leia hop in bed with Han or Luke. (You never see them sleep, period, but that's beside the point.) Some of you seem to advocate total honesty and completeness in depicting sexual relations. Okay, why isn't Christ's sex life detailed in scripture? He was mortal, therefore a sexual being. What gives? Melinda L. Ambrose - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Ivan Angus Wolfe Subject: [AML] Where's our LDS Pulitzer prize winner? Date: 02 Jun 2000 05:11:52 -0600 (MDT) Thom Duncan said something like this (I lost the original message): (in relation to OSC and Dave Wolverton) >when they've recieved a pulitzer, then we can talk I don't really put much stock in the Pulitzer prize, as I have often seen political motivations as the reason for the reward than any literary value inherent in the work But since OSC won both the Hugo and the Nebula (Speculative Fictions' Highest honors) two years in a row for a book (Ender's game) and a sequel (Speaker for the Dead) - that's about as close as any SF writer can get to a Pulitzer. --Ivan Wolfe - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Jerry Enos" Subject: Re: [AML] Re: Where's our LDS Amy Tan? Date: 02 Jun 2000 06:58:39 -0600 Lynn, you can't be the only unlettered person on this list. All I have is an Assosiates degree majoring in Pre Occupational Therapy. I'm getting quite an education trying to keep up with everything that's being said on this list. Half the time I'm completely lost. Konnie Enos [MOD: That's okay. Some of us are completely lost even when we're the ones talking!] - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Darlene Young Subject: Re: Fw: [AML] Divorce in LDS lit. Date: 02 Jun 2000 07:28:43 -0700 (PDT) Richard Hopkins asks if we would rather read about a divorcee or a widower. I wouldn't mind the divorcee at all, as long as I could be absolutely convinced that the divorce was deeply disturbing to him. I would like to see him still struggling with self-acceptance and maybe self-doubt about his decision. I would like to see some very good reasons for the divorce. Accurate or not, there is a belief that many divorces are caused by men who are just not able to keep a commitment over a lifetime. If I could be reassured that this guy isn't a "bailer" (one who bails), I would be free to hope for romantic success in his life. ===== Darlene Young __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Photos -- now, 100 FREE prints! http://photos.yahoo.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: reid9 Subject: Re: [AML] Jobs for writers Date: 02 Jun 2000 09:37:46 -0500 Christopher Bigelow wrote: > An interesting question is, Should a would-be fiction writer work as a corporate propagandist (note middle of that word) or technical writer? I work as a tech writer, ad writer, newspaper stringer - or whatever in order to pay the bills. Knowing the bills are paid really helps my creative process. :) My sister, Maureen Tan,(no relation to Amy) wrote both of her novels while working as the editor of an engineering magazine. I think having to work the other jobs helps you to organize yourself and set priorities. (Just like when I had a part-time job during college I had better grades than when I didn't have to work.) > My only regret is that if I had really leveraged all my available time during at various "full-time" jobs over the past 10 years, I could have written at least a novel a year. Okay - no offense meant :):):)- but one of the most frustrating things about being a writer is when people say, "Oh, yah, I'm a writer too - I have this great idea for a novel." I'm not saying that you don't have the ability to write a great novel, as a matter of fact, I'm betting that you do. But what seperates the men from the boys, the chickens form the roosters and the boysenberries from the thorns - is writing. Every day - writing - sometimes really good stuff - sometimes, awful stuff - but that discipline of writing. > Oh, well, maybe I'll start typing on my novel again tomorrow. But today I need to read the Onion and check inside.com, and edit the next issue of Irreantum one more time before it goes to design, and keep up with my e-mails, and do a little proofing for the corporation, and meet my wife for lunch, and stop at the post office, and surreptitiously read Entertainment Weekly during an afternoon corporate meeting, and maybe meet with that one guy about that one writing project I'm supposed to start . . . Been there, done that - so, somedays I have to actually delete e-mails without reading them (hate to break it to y'all) because I have to choose what I have time to do that day or that week. I used to belong to a screenwriters list that was so prolific that I would get about 150 e-mails every day. I never had time to write - and know what, neither did the really prolific writers. All they wanted to do was talk about screenwriting. The Internet's a wonderful tool - but it can also be a deadly time waster. > Of course, if there's an economic downtown and lay offs happen, I'd probably be one of the first to go, with my attitude. Oh, please don't throw me into the briar patch. One of the best things that happened to me was having the company I work for sold to Nationsbank. I was working fom home - about 2 hours from the office and Nationsband decided that they really didn't need me. AHHHHHHHHHH!!!! What could I do? Where could I go? Well, I started writing - because I had to - and it has been wonderful (not always easy) but wonderful ever since. Terri Reid - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Darlene Young Subject: Re: [AML] Where's our LDS Mark Twain? Date: 02 Jun 2000 07:39:23 -0700 (PDT) D. Michael Martindale wrote: *** I think there's an important difference here. It's one thing to attack cultural defects and hypocricies, something I would have no problem with and I think an insider member of the church could do--albeit one who would have to have the courage to face knee-jerk criticism from less insightful members. But when one starts criticizing the theology itself, which often seems to get lumped into the mix with the "inder-outsider" writer trying very hard to be objective, then the line is crossed and the writer has placed him/herself squarely on the other side. *** That's just the trick, isn't it? The fact is that it isn't always clear just what is theology and what is culture. Ten people will give you ten different opinions on whether "women should stay home to raise their children" is theology/commandment or cultural. This very ambiguity is why I enjoy reading Levi Peterson so much. I don't always agree with him, but I like being forced to evaluate where I draw the line between theology and culture. But I have a hard time recommending Peterson to most of my friends because I think they would not enjoy the discomfort of this evaluation process. (As was mentioned before, many of us choose safety.) In life and in my reading, I like asking myself, "Is there room for this person/attitude in the church? Should there be? What is the purpose of the church after all? What is it we all have in common when we show up for meetings, call ourselves Mormon?" I believe the Great Mormon Novel will force us to ask these questions. Great literature asks what it means to be human. Great Mormon lit. will ask what it means to be Mormon. I believe, however, that it can be done with faith and hope. Cynicism and apostasy are not necessary to a great novel. Some discomfort might be, though. ===== Darlene Young __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Photos -- now, 100 FREE prints! http://photos.yahoo.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Christopher Bigelow" Subject: Re: [AML] Prouxl and Turrow Date: 02 Jun 2000 10:08:33 -0700 I believe they both have Mormon characters in their novels that were = listed. But Kent Larsen put that section together and could speak better = than I can. (Yeah, it's the Proulx of _Shipping News_.) * * * * * * Interested in novels, stories, poems, plays, and films by, for, or about = Mormons? Check out IRREANTUM magazine at www.xmission.com/~aml/irreantum.ht= m. >>> Darlene Young 06/01 5:03 PM >>> I've been reading back issues of Irreantum and I saw Scott Turrow and Annie Prouxl mentioned in the "news" section. Could anyone tell me what connection these authors have to Mormon letters? Are they LDS? (And is this Annie Prouxl of "Shipping News"?) =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D Darlene Young __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send instant messages & get email alerts with Yahoo! Messenger. http://im.yahoo.com/=20 - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Thom Duncan Subject: [AML] Re: Where's our LDS Amy Tam? Date: 02 Jun 2000 10:48:17 -0600 > Thom Duncan wrote: > > > > I think we have our Mormon Amy Tan/Mark Twain. The names are Orson Scott Card > > > and Dave Wolverton/Farland. > > > > When they claim their Pulitzers, then let's talk. > > Ooooooooooooooh, that one got my dander up! Surely as an SF aficianado, > Thom, you understand how great literature can be written in that genre > and still be entirely snubbed by the literary elite handing out the > awards. Yes, of course. But we weren't talking about Mormon Robert Heinleins but Mormon Amy Tans. I believe Card will go down in SF history as one of the great ones, with David Farland a close second. Thom Duncan - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Marilyn Brown Subject: Re: [AML] Where's our LDS Mark Twain? Date: 02 Jun 2000 10:51:48 Michael wrote: "As much as I've praised Peterson's _Backslider_, I don't think it represents an accurate picture of typical Mormons." Thank you, Michael! I wrote a paper about this several years ago for the AML conference. I was so glad to see someone supporting this view! Rob says "I don't know many members who are as extreme as Frank." Well, Rob, I think that's the whole point. We don't need to be represented as an extreme child. I don't see myself in any of Levi's characters (although I too praise his writing, as he is an absolutely wonderful writer, and I just hee-haw reading him--though I know an outside reader is also hee-hawing at the whole Mormon thing!) I like to see great pieces of literature written by Mormons that I can really identify with. Some that show the darks, the whites as we REALLY know them, the guilts, the joys, the sorrows, literature that can actually make a hero out of a modern Mormon. I think God's Army came very close! And there are others that are coming closer. The world doesn't care to listen in yet. We've got to get as good as Levi to interest them. Marilyn Brown - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Marilyn Brown Subject: Re: [AML] Jerry JOHNSTON, "Waiting for a great Mormon novelist" Date: 02 Jun 2000 10:59:47 This is well said, Jerry! So good! I have long felt this way about the tone of our work, and I would love to see what you do with the story of your Grandfather's death! Marilyn Brown [MOD: I don't think Jerry Johnston is actually on the List. Rather, this is an article of his from several years ago that was graciously typed in for the List by John Perry, I believe.] - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Thom Duncan Subject: Re: [AML] _Galaxy Quest_ and Sexuality in LDS literature Date: 02 Jun 2000 11:01:59 -0600 [Melinda] Shawn Ambrose wrote: > > When I first mentioned _Galaxy Quest_ on the List, I said, "I don't > recommend it particularly, but the premise fascinates me." > > Now. I enjoyed the movie. It was hilariously funny. I even paid two > dollars and fifty cents per day for a week straight to rent it. Speaking of movies, you'll probably get a kick of the fact that in the _Mission Impossible: 2_, the villain is named Shawn Ambrose. Thom Duncan - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Jerry Enos" Subject: Re: [AML] Divorce in LDS lit. Date: 02 Jun 2000 11:49:51 -0600 Ten years ago I had a friend that I was very interested in dating. He was tall and very good looking, plus he had a slight acsent. Any way he was interesting to listen to and very easy on the eyes as well. As far as dating him, he never showed the slightest interest, but he did introduce me to my husband. Something I am very grateful for and have named my son after him. My point is he was divorced. Something I learned after I had known him a little while, but it did not color my opinion of him at all. Well not negativly any way. I learned about it when he mentioned missing his son. He was a good man who wanted to be a good father but his ex-wife wouldn't let him. Maybe if you protray your hero as the wronged party, who tried to stay married but his mate wouldn't stand for it, then maybe more women would accept him. Me personally I don't judge a guy as a bad marriage risk until he has been divorced more then once. Then I start to wonder if maybe he is the reason. But then again if I was shown that it was his own bad choice in partners rather then his personality or disposition then I would give him another chance. Konnie Enos - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Darlene Young Subject: Re: [AML] Multiple Points of View Date: 02 Jun 2000 10:47:18 -0700 (PDT) Valerie Holladay says: "(Fans of *Flowers for Algernon* may call it blasphemy - or stupidity - but imagine getting into Charley's story, then stepping into the mind of the teacher(?) who is falling in love with him, then that of a co-worker who consistently belittles him, then is intimidated by his growing intelligence, then feels guilty afterward; and maybe, too, the mind of an *objective* (read *unfeeling*) lead analyst who sees Charley only in a series of charts and graphs. Granted, a single viewpoint does it very well; this is just a different way of telling a story and getting into people's heads.)" Your mention of the co-worker who feels guilty later reminds me of an idea I've had for a story. At times in my life I have discovered that something I did many years earlier hurt someone deeply. Not always has it been possible to approach the person again to apologize. Other times I have simply regretted acting a certain way without knowing for sure that it was hurtful to someone. But I have always been fascinated with the thought that when another person knowingly or unknowingly hurts me they might someday come to realize it on their own and then wish they could dip back into my life and make it better. (This concept helps me to forgive hurts, by the way--knowing that anyone who hurts me is constantly changing, and that the eternal "them" might not have done it, even if the temporary "them" did. Not quite the same as thinking "someday he'll be sorry!") Anyway, it seems that some experimentation with point of view might lead to a great story about regret: show the pain over a lifetime that an incident causes, and show the person who causes it really regretting it and wishing they could find a way to connect and apologize--then show how they both find peace. ===== Darlene Young __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Photos -- now, 100 FREE prints! http://photos.yahoo.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Kathleen Woodbury Subject: [AML] Re: Where's our LDS Amy Tam? Date: 01 Jun 2000 13:25:12 -0600 At 11:10 PM 5/31/00 -0500, Jonathan Langford wrote (speaking for himself): >Which doesn't invalidate the point made by Chris Bigelow and others, that >it would be nice to have author's writing about Mormon culture in a way >that could be appreciated from outside the community. All I'm saying is >that regardless of whether the artist is a faithful Church member or not, I >think that we may find that art that does this well for an outside audience >may not satisfy a Mormon audience--not necessarily for reasons of audience >maturity, but simply because it's a *different* audience. And that's okay. It occurs to me that the challenge here may be for an LDS insider to write something from a non-LDS point of view and get it to work. Could this be any more difficult than a woman writing from a man's point of view and getting that to work? At 08:25 AM 6/1/00 -0700, lynn gardner wrote: >Lynn Gardner (probably the only unlettered >person on this list!) At 03:19 PM 6/1/00 -0400, Tracie Laulusa wrote: >If by "unlettered" you mean no degree then you are certainly not alone. And if by "unlettered" you mean no creative writing degree, you are even less alone. (Mathematics and mechanical engineering degrees here, for what it's worth.) Kathleen Dalton-Woodbury workshop@burgoyne.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "D. Michael Martindale" Subject: Re: [AML] _Galaxy Quest_ and Sexuality in LDS literature Date: 02 Jun 2000 15:47:04 -0600 Shawn Ambrose wrote: > Some of you seem to advocate total honesty and completeness in depicting > sexual relations. Okay, why isn't Christ's sex life detailed in scripture? > He was mortal, therefore a sexual being. What gives? Whoever advocated that? Honesty, yes. Completeness? Not me, anyway. I've always argued for the minimum of details to get the point across, without being distractingly coy. There could be several reasons why Christ's sex life isn't described in the scriptures. One, it wasn't relevant to the message of the New Testament. Two, like good Catholic priests, maybe he didn't have one to speak of. Three, the writers of the time may have had a cultural aversion to writing about such a thing. But I can't believe the reason is because we shouldn't ever write about sex. Otherwise you'd have to start chopping up the Old Testament right and left. -- D. Michael Martindale dmichael@wwno.com ================================== Check out Worldsmiths, the new online LDS writers group, at http://www.wwno.com/worldsmiths Sponsored by Worlds Without Number http://www.wwno.com ================================== - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "D. Michael Martindale" Subject: Re: [AML] Multiple Points of View Date: 02 Jun 2000 15:59:18 -0600 Valerie Holladay wrote: > I know there's a school of thought that says a book or > story can only have one POV, and while I agree that > too many POVs can clutter a scene and dilute the > emotion and reader-character connection, if done well, > the characters can reveal themselves through what they > say (and don't say) and how they say it. What school is that? The vast majority of novels I read have multiple points of view. The novel I'm writing now relentlessly followed a single point of view for the first several chapters. My writers group began complaining that they wanted to get into certain other characters' heads. I rewrote to accomodate, and they and I all agree the result is a wonderful improvement. Sure, too much of any good thing isn't necessarily good. But that hardly demands that we stick to one POV, expecially over a novel length story. -- D. Michael Martindale dmichael@wwno.com ================================== Check out Worldsmiths, the new online LDS writers group, at http://www.wwno.com/worldsmiths Sponsored by Worlds Without Number http://www.wwno.com ================================== - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Marianne Hales Harding" Subject: [AML] Re: Divorce in LDS lit. Date: 02 Jun 2000 16:15:55 MDT >It would be interesting to >know what this list thinks. Do women always dislike divorced heroes? Why? >Is >there a way the story could be written so as to make the divorced hero >acceptable? While I agree that I would like the divorcee that Darlene (?) characterized in her post, my first reaction was that I'd rather have a widower. Or even a man who for some credible reason didn't get married and finally has a chance at love. Total knee-jerk reaction. I know of many wonderful real-life stories of marriages that are second marriages for both (via divorce) that are wonderful love stories and all of that, but it seems like a divorced hero would make the story a lot about divorce (in order to clarify that this is a "good" divorcee as opposed to a "bad" divorcee, since we tend to classify them as such) and I'm more interested in the "luv." One reader's opinion. Marianne Hales Harding ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Larry Jackson Subject: [AML] SLOVER, _Joyful Noise_ Date: 02 Jun 2000 21:46:56 EDT Has anyone mentioned that Tim Slover's play, _Joyful Noise_, will be presented by Pioneer Theatre Company this fall (November 29 - December 16)? Hallelujah for Tim! Larry Jackson ________________________________________________________________ YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET! Juno now offers FREE Internet Access! Try it today - there's no risk! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj. - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Larry Jackson Subject: [AML] Divorce in LDS lit. Date: 02 Jun 2000 21:46:56 EDT Richard Hopkins: ... (How do you repent of divorce? Easy. Never get a divorce again! :-)) The problem is this: If you have a story about someone in their late thirties or early forties, and you want a romance, how can you do it if the hero is not divorced? Do you have to write about a guy who's never been married? I don't think that's as realistic and interesting as a hero who's been divorced, and the only other alternative is for him to be a widower, ... _______________ I think there is another alternative, although it would be difficult to pull off. How about a love story about a couple who have a really ho hum marriage -- not necessarily tottering on divorce -- but where one of them decides to spice up the marriage in a big way? He (or she) recalls that life as a newlywed couple was wonderful and decides to "become young" again and revitalize the marriage? You could cover the pushes and pulls of false starts and the mismatch of the couple as one tries to improve and the other hangs back, then as the first starts to give up the other catches the vision and the relationship swings the other way, and so on, though dashed hopes and hillarious humor and life's little adventures until they become equal again in their relationship, but this time (hopefully) at a much higher plane of joy. "Make it a love story," I understand, was the advice the producer was given in the remake of that movie about the big boat that hits an iceberg in the North Atlantic and sinks. Can't remember the name just now -- didn't see the film. :-> Love is powerful stuff. Larry Jackson ________________________________________________________________ YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET! Juno now offers FREE Internet Access! Try it today - there's no risk! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj. - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Rob Pannoni Subject: [AML] FOWLER, Stages of Faith (was Where's our LDS Mark Twain?) Date: 02 Jun 2000 15:57:45 -0700 Gae Lyn Henderson wrote: > > Until I get a chance to read Fowler's book, tell me what moves people into > the more adult-like stages of faith? Is it merely age and experience? Is > it breaking rules and experiencing consequences? I think it's probably accumulated experience combined with the soul's natural, inexorable quest for spiritual progress. This quest can cause people to take different paths according to their individual needs, even when they may not consciously recognize those needs. I don't recall the book addressing the issue of what causes transitions. The objective isn't to get people to move to advanced stages, but to help them recognize where they are and where they might eventually arrive. I think the framework has interesting applications to mormon art, so I'm going to give a (longish) description of his theory. Note that Fowler's approach may be controversial or even offensive to some because it implicitly challenges the way we often perceive the church. If you don't like to encounter things that are challenging, you might want to bail out now. Fowler was a Harvard divinity student who became a social science researcher. He conducted a study based on interviews with six-hundred or so people from many cultures and belief (or non-belief) systems. He uses the word "faith" in its broadest possible sense--one's core belief in ultimate reality. So, for example, the atheist who places his faith in science as the ultimate reality might also go through these stages. Fowler found that across all cultures and belief systems, people seem to follow a similar trajectory in their moral/spiritual development. Fowler's labels for these stages are gobbledygook to me, but here is the general gist of the stages as I understand them: Stage 1. In the first stage, our "faith" is based primarily on physical sensations and creating predictable response patterns in our environment. Our earliest faith is that our primary care giver will meet our needs if we signal them. Later, we accept as true what we are told with little ability to distinguish between fantasy and reality. Each tenet is taken as true with no attempt to reconcile contradictions or evaluate the source. Stage 2. The second stage is characteristic of school age children. At this stage, we seek to impose rationality on the world and we begin to construct meaning through stories. We use myths (like superhero stories) to shape the pattern of our lives, but we attempt to distinguish between what is true and what is not. Stage two is characterized by a very literal interpretation of events and a sense that there should be immediate justice. Stage two kids (and adults) get extremely disturbed when the world doesn't work the way it is supposed to. In some cases they simply refuse to acknowledge anything that doesn't fit the expected pattern. Most adults get beyond stage two, but not all. I see Frank in _The Backslider_ as being primarily in this stage. (Isn't it fun to analyze characters as if they were real people?) Stage 3. This is the conventional stage, the most common for adults. At this stage we define our faith by reference to the groups to which we belong and the norms of society. This is the stage in which churches and other social institutions hold sway. The church provides the norms and the support system to help its members live happy, safe and productive lives. Stage three is the home of the insider/outsider dichotomy. At this stage, we ARE church members--it is the core of our identity. Stage 4. Fowler calls this stage "Individuative/Reflective." At this stage, we begin to recognize and grapple with the contradictions inherent in the beliefs we have derived from our social and religious institutions. This leads to constructing individual moral values that are independent of outside norms, although there may still be overlap. Breaking one's dependency on outside norms requires a lot of courage and can be very traumatic. It means leaving the safety of what others say is right for unknown ground. People in this stage may consciously rebel against the standards and beliefs they have previously held, much like teenagers rebel against their parents as part of the journey toward establishing their own unique identities. Some may become bitter toward the institutions that previously defined their identity. Others struggle to balance their own internal moral beliefs with their membership in the community. This is probably where many of the Mormon "fringe" writers are and perhaps also many ex-members who write critically of the church. Stage 5. Relatively few people reach this stage and almost never before mid-life. Fowler describes it in this way: "Stage 5, as a way of seeing, of knowing, of committing, moves beyond the dichotomizing logic of Stage 4's 'either/or.' It sees both (or the many) sides of an issue simultaneously. Conjunctive faith suspects that things are organically related to each other; it attends to the pattern of inter relatedness in things, trying to avoid force-fitting to its own prior mind set." At stage 5, people often reconcile themselves to their cultural communities. Confident now of their own moral compass and able to live with the contradictions inherent in life, people at stage five may pursue community life with renewed vigor, although it is a very different experience from stage 3 conventionality. People at stage 5 tend to be nonjudgmental. Aware of the limitations of human knowing and the complexities of life, they are willing to accept other people's reality as equally valid (for others) as their own is for themselves. Stage 6. This stage, which Fowler calls "universalizing faith," is the pinnacle of spiritual development. At this stage, faith becomes selfless. While stage 5 focuses on how to create the best life for oneself in a complex world, the final stage turns outward. People at stage 5 [MOD: I think this must be a mistype for 6] give up their own lives for the sake of those around them. Like Christ, they turn faith into action, crusading for good with the insight of experience and without regard for personal well being. There are only a handful of people who achieve this (at least in mortality). The people who do arrive at this stage tend to have enormous impact on the world. Fowler uses the example of Mother Theresa. I would put Joseph Smith in this category. Note that the stages are, in a sense, cumulative. You don't lose the perspective of previous stages, you simply add to them. Also, movement from stage to stage is not in clear steps. A person may be at stage 3 in some parts of their life and at stage 2 in others. Or they may slip back and forth between stages depending on the situation. Personally, I believe that cultures may follow a similar trajectory--the rebellious 60s breaking ties with social institutions was probably the beginning of stage 4 for our society. I hope that we are now moving beyond that to an era earmarked by internalized morality and a coming-to-peace with the complexities and ambiguities of human existence. Some will undoubtedly be uncomfortable with this framework because it puts institutional church life at the mid-point of our spiritual progression rather than at the end. Also, implicit in any stage theory is an element of judgment that later stages are superior in some way to earlier ones. Fowler acknowledges the normative aspect of his "description," but doesn't see any other way to present his conclusions. Interestingly, any sense of judgment that someone might feel towards other's progress disappears at higher stages. In other words, the further along you are in the stages, the less likely you are to feel superior to others at earlier stages. Each person progresses at their own pace and in their own way. From this perspective, the only "wrong" is to not be authentic to your own genuine spirituality. Personally, I've found this framework to be very helpful in thinking about my own life and about mormon literature. I think people are likely to respond to art created by those who are at a similar stage of faith (or what might be called "world view"). Those at the conventional stage seek literature that reinforces those conventions. Those at stage 4 seek art that acknowledges the weaknesses and paradoxes inherent in conventional norms. It feeds their growing moral and psychological independence. Those at stage 5 will respond to art that presents the ambiguities and subtle inter-relationship of things without trying to resolve the contradictions and without becoming paralyzed by the inability to resolve them. The stages of faith framework also suggests that there might be more to the fringe mormon experience than church culture not allowing intellectuals, artists and free thinkers enough space within the church. The willingness to establish one's own moral independence may be an important growth stage that simply can't be avoided. I'm not suggesting that one has to actually leave the church to reach higher stages, but some may need to distance themselves, at least temporarily, in order to move forward in their personal spiritual progress. The insight gained from this process certainly doesn't make them "objective" about the church. But it may provide fertile ground for artistic achievement--especially since the process may also unbind them from the the conservative church culture that might inhibit creativity or constrict their expression. Of course, this is only one way of looking at the world. You could also conclude that the framework is simply wrong. I can only say that I find much of it consistent with my own experience. Your mileage may vary. -- Rob Pannoni Rapport Systems http://www.rapport-sys.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Larry Jackson Subject: [AML] MN Osmond's work gets her past troubles: USA Today Date: 02 Jun 2000 21:46:56 EDT [From Mormon-News] Osmond's work gets her past troubles USA Today 31May00 P2 http://www.usatoday.com/life/lds013.htm By Donna Freydkin: Special for USA Today WASHINGTON, DC -- LDS Entertainer Marie Osmond has been through a difficult year. Following the birth of her seventh child, Matthew, she suffered a severe bout of post-partum depression. And this past January, she split from her husband of 13 years, Brian Blosil. Now, Marie says she is recovering from these difficulties, "I'm as happy as I can be. You take every day a day at a time," she says. Her explanation for her happiness is that her work has helped her recover, "Work has always brought me happiness." Last fall, her work as a talk-show host (along with her brother Donny on the syndicated Donny and Marie show), gave her a forum to talk about the depression. She hope that going public with the depression has helped others too. "Maybe it just helped a couple of people, and that's worth it, to me." But if responses through e-mail, letters and calls are any indication, her public disclosure helped more than just a few people, "I was absolutely overwhelmed by the hundreds of thousands of e-mails and letters and calls . . . that came in from women saying, 'Thank you for giving it a name.'" But going public with her depression wasn't easy for Marie. She says that going public was a "very tough" process. "I hid it for a long time," she says. Marie adds that she also got some relief from the depression by working on a now nearly-finished book on her battle with depression. A release date has not yet been set. In contrast to her public disclosures on depression, Marie won't talk about her separation from her second husband, Blosil. But she does say that she doesn't think the divorce has harmed her image, in spite of the fact that it hasn't always worked in her favor, "I think there has been a stereotype that if you're a certain type of image, that you're naive and goodie-goodie," she says. "And I think the biggest educational process that I have laid out there with people is, 'How can you be in this business as long as I have and be naive?' There's no way. It's just a matter of choices." Osmond was scheduled to speak to the National Press Club on Wednesday on the state of children's health care, the area where she does most of her charity work. Yesterday, for the fifth consecutive year, Marie was scheduled to take 50 children to the White House for the Children's Miracle Network, the charity she co-founded with "Dukes of Hazzard" star John Schneider. Today, she will appear on the 18th annual Children's Miracle Network telecast live from Walt Disney World. See also: http://www.cmn.org Children's Miracle Network >From Mormon-News: Mormon News and Events Forwarding is permitted as long as this footer is included Mormon News items may not be posted to the World Wide Web sites without permission. Please link to our pages instead. For more information see http://www.MormonsToday.com/ Send join and remove commands to: majordomo@MormonsToday.com Put appropriate commands in body of the message: To join: subscribe mormon-news To leave: unsubscribe mormon-news To join digest: subscribe mormon-news-digest - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Larry Jackson Subject: [AML] MN Deseret News endows 4 universities: Deseret News Date: 02 Jun 2000 22:52:57 EDT [From Mormon-News] Deseret News endows 4 universities Deseret News 25May00 D3 http://www.deseretnews.com/dn/view/0%2C1249%2C175006864%2C00.html Scholarships to go to Y., U., USU, WSU students SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH -- William James Mortimer, the publisher of Deseret News, recently announced the establishment of endowed scholarships for print journalism at four Utah universities. The announcement came at the banquet celebrating the 150th anniversary of the newspaper. $150,000 will be divided equally between the University of Utah, Brigham Young University, Utah State University, and Weber State University. Each school will receive $37,500. The endowment will be permanent, and five percent will be awarded to recipients each year. Deseret News editors will select recipients based on recommendations from the university faculties. Those eligible will have demonstrated excellence in the field of print journalism, and will have at least one more year of college to finish. Each will receive a $500 cash award, summer employment, and the scholarship money that will be applied toward tuition. Those who are selected to receive this honor will be named Deseret News Scholars. Names of all recipients will be recorded on a plaque at the Deseret News building. >From Mormon-News: Mormon News and Events Forwarding is permitted as long as this footer is included Mormon News items may not be posted to the World Wide Web sites without permission. Please link to our pages instead. For more information see http://www.MormonsToday.com/ Send join and remove commands to: majordomo@MormonsToday.com Put appropriate commands in body of the message: To join: subscribe mormon-news To leave: unsubscribe mormon-news To join digest: subscribe mormon-news-digest - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Larry Jackson Subject: [AML] MN EVANS, _The Dance_ Looks at Father/Daughter Relationship: Date: 02 Jun 2000 22:52:57 EDT NewsNet 29May00 A2 [From Mormon-News] Evans' "The Dance" Looks at Father/Daughter Relationship (New book takes a look at father/daughter relationship) BYU NewsNet 29May00 A2 http://newsnet.byu.edu/print_story.cfm?number=9706 By Janel Esplin: NewsNet Staff Writer PROVO, UTAH -- Esplin reviews LDS author Richard Paul Evans' book "The Dance," saying it "will inspire any father or daughter to ponder the way life was for them." The book looks at the relationship of a caring father and a dancing daughter. Through the book, Evans follows the daughter as she dances through each stage of her life, starting with her first carefree twirlings in the yard to the dance on her wedding night. The father silently observes these dances, smiling at his daughter. It isn't until his death that the daughter realizes the significance of his presence at each dance. While the father is near death, the daughter expresses pain at the thought of dancing without her father watching. He tells her that she must always dance, because he will always watch. Esplin credits Evans with clearly describing the feelings that "only a father and daughter can understand." She says, "Daughters will wonder what their own fathers thought of them as they grew up. The minds of any father will be flooded with fond memories of his own daughter's 'dances' through life." Esplin says that the story's simple, child-like appearance belies a story that can only be fully understood by an older audience. Esplin also praises the paintings of Jonathon Linton, which she says, "effectively convey each stage of the daughter's life and help the reader to understand how the father would have felt as he watched her grow and develop into a woman." See also: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0689823517/mormonnews More about Richard Paul Evans' "The Dance" at Amazon.com >From Mormon-News: Mormon News and Events Forwarding is permitted as long as this footer is included Mormon News items may not be posted to the World Wide Web sites without permission. Please link to our pages instead. For more information see http://www.MormonsToday.com/ Send join and remove commands to: majordomo@MormonsToday.com Put appropriate commands in body of the message: To join: subscribe mormon-news To leave: unsubscribe mormon-news To join digest: subscribe mormon-news-digest - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Larry Jackson Subject: [AML] MN _God's Army_ #1 movie in Utah for 2000!: Excel Entertainment Date: 02 Jun 2000 22:52:57 EDT Press Release 2Jun00 A4 [From Mormon-News] God's Army is the #1 Movie in Utah for 2000! Excel Entertainment Press Release 2Jun00 A4 SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH -- God's Army is the top grossing film in Utah thus far in 2000. According to data from ACNielsen EDI, God's Army has significantly outgrossed such Hollywood blockbusters as Erin Brockovich and Mission to Mars , which opened at approximately the same time as God's Army. Top ten grossing films in Utah: 1. God's Army $867,588 2. Gladiator $736,590 3. Erin Brockovich $663,543 4. U-571 $519,729 5. Galaxy Quest $501,591 6. Return to Me $468,722 7. The Tigger Movie $427,521 8. Mission to Mars $423,080 9. Scream 3 $415,202 10. The Green Mile $398,967 (data compiled from ACNielsen EDI reporting theaters from January 7, 2000 through May 25, 2000) The ranking comes just as God's Army is being featured in Entertainment Weekly as an example of a true independent film finding it's niche and triumphing at the box office. According to Entertainment Weekly, God's Army is one of "a new breed of stealth features -- independently financed and distributed, and seen by audiences largely ignored by Hollywood." A similar article ran on May 15 in the Hollywood Reporter, a daily national entertainment news publication. That article compared successful marketing techniques used by God's Army and another religious film, The Omega Code. Both films ignored traditional means of mass marketing and targeted a specific niche market. "I've always been irritated by the way Mormons are portrayed in the movies," says Richard Dutcher, God's Army writer/producer/director/co-star. "So negatively and one-dimensionally, if at all. We never see real, true, flesh and blood Mormon people in a film." Dutcher's attempt to portray such flesh and blood Mormons in God's Army struck a chord here in Utah, where Mormons make up the dominant culture. As God's Army opens in theaters outside of Utah, it has continued to create considerable buzz for a low- budget independent film. The film has sparked positive reviews from papers like the L.A. Times, LA Weekly, Las Vegas Weekly and the Arizona Daily Star, in addition to positive reviews from the Salt Lake Tribune and Deseret News. Television stations in Los Angeles, Sacramento, Portland, Las Vegas and Phoenix have covered God's Army openings. Here in Utah, several stations covered the March 10 Salt Lake opening and KSL-TV did a story on the God's Army opening in Hollywood. The L.A. Times called God's Army "a sensitive and thoughtful probe into questions of faith." Mel Parkinson of Las Vegas Weekly admitted to attending a screening with some apprehension, but was relieved to report that his fears "were largely unfounded." Parkinson commended the acting and called God's Army a "worthwhile cinematic experience for non-believers." Ron Stringer of LA Weekly not only favorably compared God's Army with films like Glengarry Glenn Ross and The Apostle, but also encouraged someone in the mainstream to distribute the film to a broader audience. Currently playing in 10 states, including Alaska and Texas, God's Army will continue to expand across the country, opening on the eastern seaboard by the end of summer. >From Mormon-News: Mormon News and Events Forwarding is permitted as long as this footer is included Mormon News items may not be posted to the World Wide Web sites without permission. Please link to our pages instead. For more information see http://www.MormonsToday.com/ Send join and remove commands to: majordomo@MormonsToday.com Put appropriate commands in body of the message: To join: subscribe mormon-news To leave: unsubscribe mormon-news To join digest: subscribe mormon-news-digest - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Jim and Laurel Brady" Subject: [AML] Re: Divorce in LDS lit. Date: 02 Jun 2000 21:34:27 -0600 > Richard Hopkins asks if we would rather read about a > divorcee or a widower. How about neither? There is something very compelling (and appealing to motherly instincts) about a man who, through no fault of his own, is just not able to find "the one" until he's in his thirties or even forties. Back when I was in my mid twenties, I dated a couple of never-married men who were in their thirties. It didn't work out with either of them, but we remain good friends. It's been twenty years, but I still remember the longing they both struggled with, and the lonliness and despair that comes from so many near-misses. These fellows were not weird, dorky, or homely--in fact, they were both stunningly good looking, had good jobs, owned their own homes, active in church, the whole thing. When they finally did meet "the one" they both fell head over heels quickly, married gorgeous women, and were both great husbands and fathers, and called to Bishoprics in less than three years. I don't know if it's a personal bias or not, but that's the kind of hero I prefer--maybe because I myself got married in my late twenties and experienced that same hopelessness and despair. (Come to think of it, my first adult novel has exactly that kind of hero....) Laurel S. Brady - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Jim and Laurel Brady" Subject: [AML] KALPAKIAN, _These Latter Days_ (was: Where's our LDS Mark Twain?) Date: 02 Jun 2000 22:30:57 -0600 Someone wrote: It's one thing to attack cultural defects and hypocricies, something I would have no problem with and I think an insider member of the church could do--albeit one who would have to have the courage to face knee-jerk criticism from less insightful members. But when one starts criticizing the theology itself, which often seems to get lumped into the mix with the "inder-outsider" writer trying very hard to be objective, then the line is crossed and the writer has placed him/herself squarely on the other side. ***** I read a very interesting book years ago: "These Latter Days" by Laura Kalpakian, whose religious affiliation I have no clue about. It begins in the 1890's in Salt Lake City, then moves to Idaho, then to Southern California. It follows a woman who is raised in a pious home, who marries the only man who will have her, and follows him away from the comforts of her father's home to live on a farm in Idaho. Her husband eventually proclaims himself a prophet and informs her he intends to marry a second wife in spite of the fact "the church don't hold with polygamy anymore." She takes her children and escapes from him, going to California to live a lie--calling herself a widow. Some of her children stay with the church, some do not. The last third of the book explores the lives of her children as they grow and face their own challenges and internal struggles, inside and outside of the church. I was struck by the author's honest examination--not of the church, but of the issues that troubled this woman, and how she struggled to come to grips with them. It must have been a tough time for members of the church--first having to accept polygamy and its ramifications, then suddenly having to do a 180 and reject it. My mother in law, who was quite "Mormon" in her approach to life, found the book offensive. I, on the other hand, am also very religious, very active, and very committed to my Mormon beliefs, but I was not troubled at all. I was intrigued by the writing, some of which was very, very good. As for the author's agenda: Clearly, the woman in the book was not happy with the church, but also clearly, she could not shake her underlying faith, even when she no longer lived according to her faith. I didn't feel it was an attack on the church, simply an examination of one woman's life that happened to include the church during a time that was difficult for some members. The woman chose her own path, excluding those aspects of her religion that she could not tolerate, but never completely abandoning either the church or her own principles. I would be very interested in learning more about the author--If she is, or ever was, LDS, I'd be very surprised. There was no trace of trepidation in tackling issues, but likewise, no apology, no soft-pedaling. But it didn't strike me as having been written in a spirit of wrath or overt bitterness. Perhaps that's why I found it so intriguing--it just laid the cards on the table and went on it's way. Simply a book about people who lived a hard life in hard times and did what seemed best. The author did, though, have more than a nodding acquaintance with not only scriptures and theology, but also the culture and idiosyncracies of church members. I'd be curious to hear from anyone else who's read it, as far as your reaction. Laurel S. Brady - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Jim and Laurel Brady" Subject: [AML] KALPAKIAN, _These Latter Days_ (was: Where's our LDS Mark Twain?) Date: 02 Jun 2000 22:30:57 -0600 Someone wrote: It's one thing to attack cultural defects and hypocricies, something I would have no problem with and I think an insider member of the church could do--albeit one who would have to have the courage to face knee-jerk criticism from less insightful members. But when one starts criticizing the theology itself, which often seems to get lumped into the mix with the "inder-outsider" writer trying very hard to be objective, then the line is crossed and the writer has placed him/herself squarely on the other side. ***** I read a very interesting book years ago: "These Latter Days" by Laura Kalpakian, whose religious affiliation I have no clue about. It begins in the 1890's in Salt Lake City, then moves to Idaho, then to Southern California. It follows a woman who is raised in a pious home, who marries the only man who will have her, and follows him away from the comforts of her father's home to live on a farm in Idaho. Her husband eventually proclaims himself a prophet and informs her he intends to marry a second wife in spite of the fact "the church don't hold with polygamy anymore." She takes her children and escapes from him, going to California to live a lie--calling herself a widow. Some of her children stay with the church, some do not. The last third of the book explores the lives of her children as they grow and face their own challenges and internal struggles, inside and outside of the church. I was struck by the author's honest examination--not of the church, but of the issues that troubled this woman, and how she struggled to come to grips with them. It must have been a tough time for members of the church--first having to accept polygamy and its ramifications, then suddenly having to do a 180 and reject it. My mother in law, who was quite "Mormon" in her approach to life, found the book offensive. I, on the other hand, am also very religious, very active, and very committed to my Mormon beliefs, but I was not troubled at all. I was intrigued by the writing, some of which was very, very good. As for the author's agenda: Clearly, the woman in the book was not happy with the church, but also clearly, she could not shake her underlying faith, even when she no longer lived according to her faith. I didn't feel it was an attack on the church, simply an examination of one woman's life that happened to include the church during a time that was difficult for some members. The woman chose her own path, excluding those aspects of her religion that she could not tolerate, but never completely abandoning either the church or her own principles. I would be very interested in learning more about the author--If she is, or ever was, LDS, I'd be very surprised. There was no trace of trepidation in tackling issues, but likewise, no apology, no soft-pedaling. But it didn't strike me as having been written in a spirit of wrath or overt bitterness. Perhaps that's why I found it so intriguing--it just laid the cards on the table and went on it's way. Simply a book about people who lived a hard life in hard times and did what seemed best. The author did, though, have more than a nodding acquaintance with not only scriptures and theology, but also the culture and idiosyncracies of church members. I'd be curious to hear from anyone else who's read it, as far as your reaction. Laurel S. Brady - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "mcnandon" Subject: RE: [AML] Divorce in LDS lit. Date: 19 May 2000 02:20:27 -0600 To Richard Hopkins re widower scenario. How about a man (a bishop) who lovingly took full care of an invalid wife with MS for 10 years. During this period Heavenly Father mercifully shut down his sexual functioning as if He had turned off a switch in his brain. After his wife died, the stake pres. kept him on as a single bishop which was unusual. He had absolutely no interest in remarriage. He only wanted to enjoy this freedom, to ride his motorcycle and continue serving. One year later he met a divorced woman who had been burned by marriage and was not looking either. On the third date a strange thing happened. He was saying goodnight when that which was taken away was restored. It was like he had been struck by lightning. This turned out to be a marriage made in heaven with all the trimmings. Sometimes there really are happy endings. Nan McCulloch - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Barbara@techvoice.com (Barbara R. Hume) Subject: [AML] Re: Divorce in LDS lit. Date: 03 Jun 2000 22:56:51 -0700 >The problem is this: If you have a story about someone in their late >thirties or early forties, and you want a romance, how can you do it if the >hero is not divorced? Do you have to write about a guy who's never been >married? The fact is that most women are a bit leery of 40-year-old guys who have never been married. That doesn't mean they make assumptions about the man's sexual orientation or his fixation on his mother--it's that someone that age who has never been married will most likely have unrealistic ideas about marriage--the same unrealistic ideas he had twenty years earlier. A man who has been through the experience before, whether divorced or widowered, will know that romantic fervor does settle down, that women don't look as good when they first wake up as they do after an hour in front of the bathroom mirror, that wives don't take too well to a list of barked orders, and other important facts. I have no objection to having the hero of a novel be divorced. What I'd like is for the character to have learned something from his previous marriage, so he won't make the same mistakes. It's also good if he's forgiven his former wife for whatever she contributed to the problems between them. It would be silly to assume that a divorced person is morally inferior or somehow unworthy of marriage. Because our culture (yes, including the Mormon sub-culture) so poorly prepares people for marriage, and because contemporary life puts so much stress on a marriage, it is, as you say, logical that a single man of that age is probably divorced. They say that if you've never met a perfect man, just marry his widow. I suppose it goes both ways! barbara hume - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Shawn Ambrose Subject: RE: [AML] Divorce in LDS lit. Date: 04 Jun 2000 01:10:01 -0400 I would definitely prefer a widower. A woman has a tremendous, vital need to feel secure, to have security. If that means clinging like a vine to her husband, a woman will do it. If that means marrying for money, a woman will do it. If that means swearing off unfaithful men as a breed and going it alone, a woman will do it. The perception, in my case, is that a divorcee may not stay forever. There are mitigating circumstances, of course, but for a woman with an eternal perspective, you're taking big chances getting involved with someone whom you know has split up before, whether entirely his decision or not. Most divorces are not cut and dried, all one person's fault. (Maybe I'm wrong, but I can only tell you my opinion.) Melinda L. Ambrose - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Cathy Wilson" Subject: Re: [AML] Jobs for writers Date: 04 Jun 2000 14:13:10 -0600 Working as a freelance ghostwriter/editor/researcher, I set my own hours and my hourly fee ($30) makes it so if I work four hours a day, I'm in fat city (that of course depending on having enough clients and self-discipline). I don't know what would be harder--to string out long projects on a corporate job (in an office) or to work laser-focused and intensely four hours a day. I work very fast and focused and get a great deal done in my daily hours, but if I'm sick (or if a kid is sick) a day may go by without earning anything :(. Still, I sure get a lot of interesting projects. There's a site, www.bizymoms.com, that lists businesses by mothers at home. I listed my ghostwriting business there, and for some wonderful odd turn of fate, it shows up first hit when you do an aol search for ghostwriting. I have had some WONderful and wonderfully interesting clients from that site, including writing a cookery book for a Chinese gentleman from Taiwan (I get paid for cooking experiments too :) love it). Ah, internet. It's a wonderful way to create relationships, business and otherwise :). Still, by working as intensely as I do, after that I don't often feel like shifting into creative mode and working on my own projects. Wish there were a simpler alternative to making a living. . . . Cathy (Gileadi) Wilson Editing Etc. 15 East 600 North Price UT 84501 435-637-8744 - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jonathan Langford Subject: Re: [AML] Jobs for writers Date: 05 Jun 2000 14:43:06 -0500 Chris Bigelow wrote: > >I don't think I've ever worked more than 15-20 hours a week (on my BUSIEST >weeks) at my "full-time" jobs as an editor/writer. Lest you all think that professional writers/editors have it unbearably cushy, I'd like to speak out and add my observations to Chris's. I used to be a full-time writer/editor type at an educational technology company. Although I often put in long work weeks when we were on a deadline, I also spent a fair amount of time walking around, chatting with coworkers, etc. Frivolously spent time, in other words--or at least, so it might seem. For the last several years, I've been self-employed as a writer and editor. One of the things I've found is that I simply can't work steadily on a writing or editing project for hours on end without taking those breaks. It's even worse when I'm working on several projects at once (usually the case). That's one reason I participate on AML-List. I simply can't move from one thing to another without giving my brain some breathing-space. There are famous exceptions, but a number of professional writers such as Frederik Pohl (science fiction writer) set their writing quota at about four pages a day. That's not very much. But over the course of a career, Pohl has written a great number of important and well-written books. >From my experience, if you simply write straight through, the well runs dry, the brain loses its springiness, and a whole host of other unappetizing metaphors. This may be one reason why fewer writers and editors do huge amount of great writing in their "free time." In some ways, it's not really free--it's just back-burner time. (At least, that's what I prefer to think. Or else I've really wasted a *lot* of time over the years...) Jonathan Langford Speaking for myself, not the List jlangfor@pressenter.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "J. Scott Bronson" Subject: Re: [AML] SLOVER, _Joyful Noise_ Date: 05 Jun 2000 15:37:56 -0600 > Has anyone mentioned that Tim Slover's play, > _Joyful Noise_, will be presented by Pioneer Theatre > Company this fall (November 29 - December 16)? And I will be directing a production of Tim's March Tale for Actors Repertory Theatre Ensemble (ARTE) at the Castle Theatre in Provo this Summer. We'll run in rep with The Merry Wives of Windsor starting around the 23rd or 24th of August through Sept. 16. The script has been substantially revised since its production at BYU a number of years ago. If I can do this fabulous play the service it deserves, we'll have a great show. I've got a pretty strong cast already, so I'm not too worried. I'll remind you all again as the performance dates approach. J. Scott Bronson--The Scotted Line "World peace begins in my home" We are not the acolytes of an abstruse god. We are here to entertain--Keith Lockhart - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Hamilton Fred Subject: Re: [AML] FOWLER, Stages of Faith (was Where's our LDS Mark Twain?) Date: 05 Jun 2000 16:20:02 -0600 (MDT) This is only a simple initial response to Rob's summary of Fowler's system: a. I find nothing in it which explains the human response to diety, It seems it is only a human's response to a human perception of diety. b. It is only viewed from an individual, a sole perspective. "Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself", " priesthood", and "eternal marriage" are three covenant religious responses which carries faith beyond the individual to at least a partner or the community faith which must be acknowledged in our theology, and therefore, its literature. Social Science literature or theories about faith frequently only focuss on the individual, suggesting that there is only a closed way of us explaining "God, the individual can only be explained in human knowing. But, if God exists, His existence is the Truth, and not the human rationalization of it. True faithful literature, therefore, is an individual attempt at arriving at His truth. Not trying to explain Him with "only the human" as part of the equation. The paradox and miracle of truely good "faith" literature is that without being able to fully see, some come close to offering a "shared" literary perspective of which other thoughtful individuals may catch a glimpse. A literature which only claims to speak of "my god" falls into Fowler's trap. A literature which struggles to show "our God", through the efforts of its characters and writer to portray that veiled reality, offers itself as more successful literature to me. We reconcile ourself to God, he does not reconcile Himself to us. These are the flaws I find with Peterson's Backslider, and Fowler's heirarchy if we would apply their concepts to life or to literature. Please remember, though, that this is only my initial, and at that, a very fallible reaction to Rob's post. His post has, at last though, offered me the words to develop one explanation of what has always troubled me about Peterson riveting, but ultimately flawed novel. Thank you Rob. Skip Hamilton - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jacob Proffitt Subject: Re: [AML] Divorce in LDS lit. Date: 05 Jun 2000 17:56:40 -0600 On Sun, 4 Jun 2000 01:10:01 -0400, Melinda Ambrose wrote: >widower (pining for his lost love), or a divorcee (finally ready to meet= =20 >the love of his life)? I'm very curious! >Richard Hopkins> > >I would definitely prefer a widower. A woman has a tremendous, vital = need=20 >to feel secure, to have security. If that means clinging like a vine to= =20 >her husband, a woman will do it. If that means marrying for money, a = woman=20 >will do it. If that means swearing off unfaithful men as a breed and = going=20 >it alone, a woman will do it. > >The perception, in my case, is that a divorcee may not stay forever. = There=20 >are mitigating circumstances, of course, but for a woman with an eternal= =20 >perspective, you're taking big chances getting involved with someone = whom=20 >you know has split up before, whether entirely his decision or not. = Most=20 >divorces are not cut and dried, all one person's fault. (Maybe I'm = wrong,=20 >but I can only tell you my opinion.) If you are a woman in your thirties, there are really only two categories= of safe single men (note that this is generally speaking and not a guarantee--just a matter of probability). One, a recent convert. They = are safe-ish because they know they made mistakes in their past and they've probably taken steps to repent and move on. Two, the widower. He's = single through no fault of his own (barring he murdered his wife). A man who has been single all his life is problematic. In my experience with singles wards (as an outside observer watching friends), it has = become clear that any strong, faithful man will not have trouble finding a = strong faithful woman willing to be his companion. Even if he's ugly, fat, bald AND disabled. He can even insist that his wife-to-be is cute. A single, faithful brother past his thirties has something weird going on--he's = being too picky or he has some other hang-up that is preventing him from = marrying. The hang-up can be external (like with Steve Young having complicating factors of fame and riches) or internal (like he's gay or wants something unrealistic or harmful in his wife). Either way, something is wrong and needs to be taken care of before marriage is advisable. Any story that deals with a man who has been single all his life and wants to treat him = as a romantic subject needs to account for how he has managed to remain = single and doesn't want to be any more. A man who is divorced is problematic, too. A divorce says something = about a man. If he is at fault for the divorce then he has some serious = repenting to do for breaking such an important covenant. But even if he *isn't* at fault for the divorce, you have to know that his judgement is suspect. = He made a major mistake with one of the most important decisions you can = make. We don't have arranged marriages any more. He chose the woman he married (and correspondingly, she chose him) and the failure reflects on him. = Now, we all make mistakes and that in itself isn't that tragic. But a woman looking for romance from a divorcee is going to add extra scrutiny to = make sure that a) he realizes that he *made* a mistake, b) he knows what the mistake(s) was, and c) he has taken steps to not make the mistake(s) = again. i.e. he has to have repented. And it's *always* tricky to tell if = someone else has repented. That's why converts are safer than divorcees. They = know they made mistakes and have gone through the conversion process. Now, don't get me wrong. I know that everyone makes mistakes, and we're = all imperfect. A divorcee isn't necessarily "damaged goods" *right*now*, but they have unmistakenly been damaged and will have to make doubly sure = that the damage has been repaired. Personally, any romance that happens in the 30's plus has some tough = ground to cover. Divorcee is more realistic than widower and convert has been = done to death. That means that you will have to deal with aspects of a = romance that just won't exist in a typical romance novel. But that shouldn't be = a big surprise. Frankly, Eric Samuelsen's "the Way We're Wired" was an excellent example of the post thirty romance. The main heroine was a divorcee and you could see her overcoming the effects of that divorce = even though she was in no way personally responsible for it. And the hero had= an unmistakable hang-up he had to overcome that had left him single all this time (at least in my nearly year-old memory of the play.). Jacob Proffitt - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Tracie Laulusa" Subject: RE: [AML] Divorce in LDS lit. Date: 05 Jun 2000 20:37:19 -0400 I think, because it seems the majority of marriages break up because the man is unfaithful or decides he want to marry his careers or what have you, women have a very hard time sympathizing with, or believing a story that puts the guy in a "no fault" position. Now, don't jump all over me. I'm not saying there aren't cases that the woman is not the instigator but that it seems that in the majority of cases it is the guy. I agree that rarely is it so cut and dried that one person is totally at fault. I think I would be more interested in a guy, who though he didn't commit the adultery or wasn't the one who walked out of the marriage, was far enough away now that he could see his fault in the failure. That he wondered if he was capable of not making the same mistakes again. Or, if he was at fault, had some very heart changing experience in the interim that made him a very different person than he was in the first marriage. I *do* think that women have trust issues with guys that were divorced, especially if he was unfaithful in the process. I have a friend who left his wife, had an affair with a married woman who promised to leave her husband and didn't, has now many years later married another woman, and wonders why his wife has a bit of a challenge trusting him with female friends. Well, duh. What could he possibly expect? I do have some questions in my mind about all the talk about this "one and only". I wouldn't touch Thom's comments about his friends adultery with a ten foot pole, though I've had plenty to say in my head about it (Woops, I guess I did just touch it with a ten foot pole-but not an eight foot one). Does everyone really believe there is a "one and only", that until you find this mysterious person everything that has gone before has been somehow not the right experience, that finally finding this "one and only" make all the mistakes, sins or whatever happened along the way somehow right because it led you on the path to this ultimate destiny? Does all literature of a romantic nature have to foster this "Saturday's Warrior" type image? Tracie Laulusa - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: AEParshall@aol.com Subject: Re: [AML] Re: Divorce in LDS lit. Date: 05 Jun 2000 21:15:36 EDT << The fact is that most women are a bit leery of 40-year-old guys who have never been married. >> Sounds like ANY variety of romance would suit somebody. As a never-married 40-something woman, I think I'd enjoy a story with 40-something never-marrieds as characters. If he's flawed, she is probably flawed in similar or complementary ways; making the adjustment to marriage where both parties were as clumsy and naive as teenagers but with all the life experience of older singles just might be a great story. As for divorced heroes, I would definitely answer this question differently today than ten years ago. Divorced men in their 30s often have a first family to support, while the children of divorced men in their 40s are on their own or just about ready to be. As a 30-something reader I would have shied away from a hero with that kind of baggage; ten years later there would seem to be a light at the end of that tunnel sucking resources away from the second family. Cold hearted? Yeah, but it's a definite romance-quenching consideration. Richard, it looks like you need to open up the Baskin-Robbins romance division of your publishing company with a flavor for everyone. Ardis Parshall AEParshall@aol.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Shawn Ambrose Subject: RE: [AML] FOWLER, Stages of Faith (was Where's our LDS Mark Twain?) Date: 06 Jun 2000 00:06:35 -0400 Rob Pannoni wrote a summary of Fowler's Stages of Faith. I have seen these concepts before, applied to children's moral development, for the purpose of helping parents teach their children to move towards the highest, which is altruistic faith. When I was in high school, an English teacher asked my class what our goals were. Some said to party, some to get good jobs, to have families. I said, "To be the very best that I can be." The teacher said, "Knowing your parents, you would say that." His attitude seemed to be that it was an unrealistic goal. Our literature should let people know that it's not unrealistic, it's not impossible to be very good. But too often we are uncertain and critical ourselves, not positive. I guess it reflects the fact that we are not that advanced, ourselves, yet, and so find really high achievers like Mother Theresa "unrealistic". Melinda L. Ambrose - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Larry Jackson Subject: [AML] MN BERRETT, _Sacred Places_, A Comprehensive Guide to Early Date: 06 Jun 2000 07:26:31 EDT volumes: Orem UT Daily Journal 31May00 A1 [From Mormon-News] [AML-LIST MOD: This isn't, strictly speaking, a "Mormon literature" notice, but it sounds to me like a fascinating resource, not just for specific story ideas but also as a way of looking at ourselves as a culture. Whatever that means. And List volume isn't too high today... Thanks again to Larry for forwarding these items.] Emeritus professor and colleagues produce LDS history volumes Orem UT Daily Journal 31May00 A1 http://www.ucjournal.com/StoryLink.php3?id=1446879&c=1130314&s=8 By Laurie Williams Sowby: Journal Publications PROVO, UTAH -- Such questions as exactly where, according to LDS Church belief, did Moroni appear to the Prophet Joseph Smith the first time, where is Adam's altar, and where did the original pioneers of 1847 camp when they came to the Salt Lake Valley, have been answered in a new series of books called "Sacred Places," now being published by Bookcraft. The "monumental" series, researched by LaMar C. Berrett, professor emeritus of LDS Church History and Doctrine at BYU, and seven other BYU religion professors, were carefully researched and contain footnotes and complete bibliographical references. The six volumes are subtitled, "A Comprehensive Guide to Early LDS Historical Sites." The first volume, recently released, focuses on significant LDS sites in New England and Canada, while the second, due out in the fall, will deal with sacred places and events in New York and Pennsylvania. The books will provide many new and important facts, and will contain 128 new accurate and scaled maps to help people locate sites. In addition, 946 photographs, will help readers visualize places and events in both bygone and modern times. >From Mormon-News: Mormon News and Events Forwarding is permitted as long as this footer is included Mormon News items may not be posted to the World Wide Web sites without permission. Please link to our pages instead. For more information see http://www.MormonsToday.com/ Send join and remove commands to: majordomo@MormonsToday.com Put appropriate commands in body of the message: To join: subscribe mormon-news To leave: unsubscribe mormon-news To join digest: subscribe mormon-news-digest - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Steve Perry Subject: [AML] FCMA Pearl Awards - date shifted Date: 06 Jun 2000 09:46:02 -0600 >The 2000 PEARL Awards were originally scheduled to take place at the Grand >Theater in Salt Lake City on June 8. Over the past week, however, >management of the Grand Theater discovered some damage to the theater, and >in the interest of public safety have temporarily closed the theater for >repairs. > >As a result, the 2000 PEARL Awards will take place on Thursday, July 27 >and will move to the McKay Center at UVSC. > >Still scheduled to perform are Michael McLean, Ryan Shupe & the >Rubberband, Brett Raymond, Julie de Azevedo, Cherie Call, Hilary Weeks and >Lex de Azevedo & the Millenium Choir. Making special appearances are Kurt >Bestor, Kenneth Cope, Thurl Bailey, Peter Breinholt, Gerald Ottley and >Steven Kapp Perry. > >The PEARL Awards honor those who have achieved excellence in >faith-centered music. Two special awards, a Lifetime Acheivement Award >and a Community Service Award, will be presented. > >Additional details on the live internet broadcast and the tape-delayed >television and cable broadcasts are forthcoming. [MOD: Thanks to Steve Perry for forwarding this notice to the List.] - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Shawn Ambrose Subject: [AML] Marriage in LDS Literature Date: 06 Jun 2000 00:18:23 -0400 Larry Jackson I think all marriages go through ho hum stages, as well as fabulously wonderful stages. I notice we as Saints tend not to view the very ho hum-ness of it as a necessary part of life. Our literature, to be honest, should include a recognition that life can be very dull and lifeless, so to speak, at times. When you've just put in the fourteenth load of laundry for the day and your daughter comes to you with poopy pants while her brothers are making mudpies and her sister is leaving clean clothes on the floor, you get tired of it. I'm sure it's not all creating new worlds for Heavenly Father, either; sometimes it's just making it storm again on the Eastern seaboard and then that volcano and those windstorms whipping up wild fires. Erma Bombeck became famous simply because she could laugh at all these little things, and make us laugh at them, too. A man and a woman would each choose different things to revitalize a marriage. It would be funny to recognize their differing priorities. He would buy her lingerie which she'd rather not wear. She would change the oil in her car herself without telling him, so that he mistakenly changes it again. They'd both work to improve their sex life, but in different ways. She'd bathe. He'd brush his teeth. They'd start dating each other again. She'd bring a novel to read between innings. He'd be caught snoring during the ballet. Their children would get jealous of the time Mom and Dad start spending together! Yup, it could be hilarious, and it could help improve marriages worldwide. Barbara hume Silly me, I got married so I could spend time with my sweetheart. He works full time and I parent full time and we hardly see each other except in passing. How could we be better prepared for this? My parents modeled work, work, and more work, and learning, as their example. It prepared me pretty well, but I still tend to balk at the amount of work required to keep a home and family going. While literature doesn't have to be boring, it should show that sometimes life feels boring. Melinda L. Ambrose - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Shawn Ambrose Subject: RE: [AML] Jobs for writers Date: 06 Jun 2000 00:28:03 -0400 <From my experience, if you simply write straight through, the well runs dry, the brain loses its springiness, and a whole host of other unappetizing metaphors. This may be one reason why fewer writers and editors do huge amount of great writing in their "free time." In some ways, it's not really free--it's just back-burner time. >> Jonathan Langford This really makes me feel better. On those rare occasions when I do get 6 or 8 hours away from my children and my husband, I can't sit down and write solidly for even an hour straight. I thought it was because I was so used to being interrupted every 5 to 10 minutes without fail. Well, maybe I am out of the habit of doing one thing uninterrupted, but still, I feel better knowing that others don't write entire novels at a sitting. Melinda L. Ambrose - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: harlowclark@juno.com Subject: Re: [AML] Peter SAMUELSON, Joseph & Emma Movie Date: 06 Jun 2000 00:20:45 -0700 On Fri, 26 May 2000 01:15:04 Randall Larsen writes: > I announced a similar project at the Cannes Film Festival in 1984. It > was entitled Nauvoo: Joseph and Emma. I was promised the rights to > Sam Taylor's book Nightfall at Nauvoo which fills in the gaps in the > written record with the Oral traditions of the Taylor's and the Young's. > The treatment for this film was advertised in a Festival publication. > Unfortunately the anticipated funding fell through. > At the time I was working with Orson Welles. I asked Orson if he was > interested in the project. Too religious he mumbled. He passed up the chance to play up the Nauvoo Expositor angle, "It might be kind of fun to start a newspaper." He could have had Joseph Smith call out "Rose Blood" as he leaps from the window. > I sent a letter to Redford's Warner Bros. office asking Redford > if he was interested in playing Joseph. I got a polite letter back > wishing me luck. It seems Redford always plays winners. > The martydom scene would have been out of character. We know Joseph had a gun in Carthage Jail, Redford could simply have reshaped history a bit, given Hyrum (played by that guy that makes salad dressing) a gun and had them rush out of the jail at the mob, then freeze the frame while we hear volley after volley of shots. For dramatic effect he could have had a voice-over say, "Hand me that bowie knife," then dissolve the whole shot in a divine lightning strike. (Is anyone else hearing the Monty Python theme music and imagining a big foot stomping the mobsters?) For people who might worry about twisting history just a bit there could be a disclaimer at the beginning, like "Not that it matters, but most of this story is true." > How much do you tell however, the Plural marriage and Polyandry is > difficult for lifetime members of the church to understand. We have > not experienced living the principle. How much can you tell to a > non-member audience? (Shifting tone.) There's an enthymeme, here, an unstated premise. People usually don't state premises that seem obvious, but I'm not sure it's at all obvious that if lifetime members have a hard time understanding polygamy and polyandry non-members will have an even more difficult time. One reason lifetime members have such difficulty is that our culture is hesitant to talk openly about them, and for good reason. Many of us descend from people who might end up in prison if they talked about polygamy. My great grandmother, Annie Waldron Clark, went to live with her husband's parents when she got pregnant, and they (she and Charlie and his parents) could tell no one who she was, not even other family members. They let it be supposed she was the wife of an apostle in hiding. There's a passage in her journal where she talks about showing her baby to her sister-in-law, Annie Clark Tanner (herself a plural wife), who said that she would call her father Wallace's grandfather. Annie replied that she would never tell Wallace otherwise. Eighty-odd years later when Wallace was about the age my father is now ("I worry about Dad, he's getting forgetful.") the family decided to publish Annie's journal, and he read it. When he got to the part about Annie's not being able to reveal the identity of her baby's father, he was furious. He was so furious that people should not know who his father was that he wanted to rip that page out of the diary. I just found this out three years ago at the family reunion. (Where there were several who bear the same relationship to him that I do to his grandfather, g-g-grandchildren. It astonishes me. My parents celebrate their 59th antiverserary this year, and in two years I will have a sixty-year-old sister--I feel like that e.e. cummings poem about how "old age keeps putting up" keep out signs and youth keeps ripping them down.) I was surprised my grandfather didn't know, but I don't suppose his parents wanted to talk about the wounds of living underground (perhaps in the same way that former slaves interviewed in the WPA oral history projects didn't want to talk much about the Underground Railway, so that even today some Railway stations remain unknown.) Non-Mormons don't have that psychic wound to contend with about polygamy and might be able to accept the practice as part of the story's moral universe if it were presented from the right pov, which might be the magical realism Jerry Johnston was talking about in his "Waiting for the Great Mormon Novel." > Hopefully I will have a shot at doing Joseph's story someday. > I will ask my agent to pitch my treatment one more time. Tell him to pitch it as God's Army, the Prequel, or maybe God's General: Prophet Joseph Smith. (No, it'll never fly, people don't like to laugh an be serious in the same post, doofus.) Harlow Soderborg (also a Lloyd, a Boyce and a Waldron) Clark ________________________________________________________________ YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET! Juno now offers FREE Internet Access! Try it today - there's no risk! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj. - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Scott and Marny Parkin Subject: Re: [AML] Multiple Points of View Date: 06 Jun 2000 07:23:22 -0600 D. Michael Martindale wrote: >Valerie Holladay wrote: > > > I know there's a school of thought that says a book or > > story can only have one POV, and while I agree that > > too many POVs can clutter a scene and dilute the > > emotion and reader-character connection, if done well, > > the characters can reveal themselves through what they > > say (and don't say) and how they say it. > >What school is that? The vast majority of novels I read have multiple >points of view. A number of "How to Write a Bestseller"-type books suggest that one of the hallmarks of successful (read "sells a lot of copies") novels is a fairly rapid rotation among three to five POVs. I know it's fairly common in some genres, including thrillers and epic fantasy. I think the rule most of us were pounded with was that switching POV within the same scene was bad form. Some even suggest staying with a single POV throughout a single chapter. This seems general wisdom in the modern writing establishment. Which can make reading some older fiction (as recent as the early-to-mid 1900s) an odd experience. This one-POV-per-logical-scene concept is relatively new, but it's informed at least one full generation. I was reading Maureen Whipple's "The Giant Joshua" and was often distracted by POV changes not only with the same scene, but within the same paragraph--and several times within the same sentence. It was wonderful for getting many different thoughts into the same scene, but it was definitely confusing at times for my weakened, modern sensibility. I like the idea of one POV per scene. Sure, use dialog and observation to show us how all the characters feel, but only give us the direct perspective of one character at a time. FWIW. Scott Parkin - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Rob Pannoni Subject: Re: [AML] FOWLER, Stages of Faith Date: 06 Jun 2000 09:29:52 -0700 Skip Hamilton wrote: > > The paradox and miracle of > truely good "faith" literature is that without being able to fully see, > some come close to offering a "shared" literary perspective of which other > thoughtful individuals may catch a glimpse. A literature which only > claims to speak of "my god" falls into Fowler's trap. A literature > which struggles to show "our God", through the efforts of its characters > and writer to portray that veiled reality, offers itself as more > successful literature to me. I must say that despite the fact that I find Fowler's framework useful, I have some sympathy for this view (if I understand what you are trying to convey). I think that Fowler's framework is perhaps too individual-centric--too quick to discount the value of spiritual community and shared belief. Even those who reach stage 6, the pinnacle of the hierarchy, are often part of communities, although typically they build their own. Balancing the needs of the community with the individual progress of its members is one of the great dilemmas of religious life. -- Rob Pannoni Rapport Systems http://www.rapport-sys.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Christopher Bigelow" Subject: Re: [AML] Divorce in LDS lit. Date: 06 Jun 2000 10:34:08 -0700 Jacob Proffit: <<>> One thing I'd like to see literature explore is whether God ever sets = people up in marriages that he knows will--and should--end in divorce. I = believe he does, just in the same way he may allow someone to contract a = disease that requires a traumatic cure. To say that any man who marries = the "wrong" woman has made an error in judgment denies the possibility = that the Spirit led him into that decision--but as a trial, not a = blessing. That is what happened in my case; I believe I earned the trial = in consequence of some unchaste behavior earlier in life. By submitting to = a difficult spouse and making the best of the marriage covenant, I believe = I had the opportunity to demonstrate repentance for earlier misuse of = marital relations--and the divorce, instigated by the other party, came as = a sweet relief to me. That's another great theme for Mormon literature: in = what way are our trials customized by God to help us in our personal = pathways of repentance and perfection--or to what degree do they come from = our own errors or from chance? I guess my point is that a bad marriage = can be orchestrated by God and is not necessarily always the result of our = own bad judgment. Divorce is very often misused, but sometimes it is a necessary cure. Is it = necessarily a failure if you have to take chemotherapy to eradicate a = malignant tumor? Of course, your earlier lifestyle choices may have = contributed to the formation of the tumor. The trick is to make sure = YOU'RE not the malignancy in the marriage (and although both partners make = mistakes, in cases of divorce one person is usually quite flawed in some = way, morally or emotionally or mentally or spiritually). In any event, = divorce as an element of contemporary literature has all kinds of = interesting potential for exploring the mortal condition. Speaking from experience, Chris Bigelow * * * * * * Interested in novels, stories, poems, plays, and films by, for, or about = Mormons? Check out IRREANTUM magazine at www.xmission.com/~aml/irreantum.ht= m. - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Steve Perry Subject: Re: [AML] Divorce in LDS lit. Date: 06 Jun 2000 10:34:37 -0600 > From: "Tracie Laulusa" > > I think, because it seems the majority of marriages break up because the man > is unfaithful or decides he want to marry his careers or what have you, > women have a very hard time sympathizing with, or believing a story that > puts the guy in a "no fault" position. Hmmm, wouldn't the story be more interesting if he _doesn't_ start from the "no fault" position. He's got somewhere to go--several different directions in fact--and she's got more to wonder about, misunderstand, etc. :-) Steve P. S. In _any_ real human relationship, is there really such thing as a "no fault" position for either person? That's something worth exploring in a book. - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Clark Goble" Subject: RE: [AML] Divorce in LDS lit. Date: 06 Jun 2000 10:34:06 -0600 ___ Jacob ___ | A man who has been single all his life is problematic. In my | experience with singles wards (as an outside observer watching | friends), it has become clear that any strong, faithful man | will not have trouble finding a strong faithful woman willing | to be his companion. ___ I'll try to keep this on literature... I promise. But... If all is wanted is finding a strong faithful woman who wants to get married, then of course you are right. But then that's probably why the divorce rate has been getting so high. All that people feel is needed is a strong faithful companion. The importance of a RELATIONSHIP is somehow devalued. Where does this devaluation come from? Presumably our literature. At least I can't see where else people would learn this pernicious idea. ___ Jacob ___ | Any story that deals with a man who has been single all his life | and wants to treat him as a romantic subject needs to account for | how he has managed to remain single and doesn't want to be any | more. ___ Basically what I think Jacob and others on that side of the discussion are saying is that anyone who doesn't fit into the ideal LDS archetype will not be believable to an LDS audience. I'd say that probably these non-ideal folks are coming to make up the majority of the church, of course. As someone said last week, a divorce with no real blame isn't believable to this 'ideal' Mormon community. I agree. However perhaps what literature ought to be doing is showing that these 'ideal' situations aren't that realistic. There are a lot of people in the church divorced through no real fault of their own. Who are single and don't have these weird emotional issues Jacob alludes to. And so forth... (For the record I'm 30 and single, so I may be a bit touchy on the issue) -- Clark Goble --- d.c.g@att.net ----------------------------------- - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Steve Perry Subject: Re: [AML] Divorce in LDS lit. Date: 06 Jun 2000 10:37:19 -0600 > From: Jacob Proffitt > Subject: Re: [AML] Divorce in LDS lit. > > Frankly, Eric Samuelsen's "the Way We're Wired" was an > excellent example of the post thirty romance. The main heroine was a > divorcee and you could see her overcoming the effects of that divorce even > though she was in no way personally responsible for it. I agree that the heroine and her daughter see it this way. The book doesn't really tell us, but lets us either believe her or not. Steve - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Cathy Wilson" Subject: Re: [AML] Divorce in LDS lit. Date: 06 Jun 2000 13:06:30 -0600 Tracie writes: Now, don't jump all over me. I'm > not saying there aren't cases that the woman is not the instigator but that > it seems that in the majority of cases it is the guy I think this is a matter of who you run into. Many of the women I know (me, too) have experience with men that were impossible--abusive, unresponsive, weird in a variety of ways. On the other hand, my husband Russell has many friends whose first wives were impossible--irresponsible, unresponsive, just plain mean. I have almost never met any women like that, but there you are. The bottom line is that divorce, like marriage, is so individual. I think that you cannot categorize divorcees, men or women. That is what would make a story about such individuals fascinating. The important stuff is how a remarriage works--how the spouses deal with the old stuff from the other relationships, how the kids and parents interact, how the new partners create a better relationship. I know from my present experience--and my observation of a number of second marriages--that you can have the fairy tale late in life. "Who could have known?" Russell and I chuckle (in a Slavic accent) as we ponder the joy in this second marriage. To be absolutely realistic, though, you'd need to write about the single years too. Tell you what: someone describing the LDS Singles Dances could have a heyday :). Cathy (Gileadi) Wilson Editing Etc. 15 East 600 North Price UT 84501 435-637-8744 - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Randall Larsen" Subject: Re: [AML] Peter SAMUELSON, Joseph & Emma Movie Date: 06 Jun 2000 09:30:15 -1000 Harlow Clark and Listmembers, Orson probably wouldn't have settled for the part of Joseph. He would have played God or Satan. On the carthage jail scene: The roseblood works here.. I was reading an anti-mormon book whose title escapes me the book says that Joseph said O lord my God, if there is a God, as he fell. Of course everyone since Reed Durham knows that Joseph was trying to give the masonic distress call O Lord My God is there no help for the window's son. Roseblood and window are related in ways I can't explain here. > > At the time I was working with Orson Welles. I asked Orson if he was > > interested in the project. Too religious he mumbled. > > He passed up the chance to play up the Nauvoo Expositor angle, "It might > be kind of fun to start a newspaper." He could have had Joseph Smith call > out "Rose Blood" as he leaps from the window. > > > I sent a letter to Redford's Warner Bros. office asking Redford > > if he was interested in playing Joseph. I got a polite letter back > > wishing me luck. It seems Redford always plays winners. > > The martydom scene would have been out of character. > > We know Joseph had a gun in Carthage Jail, Redford could simply have > reshaped history a bit, given Hyrum (played by that guy that makes salad > dressing) a gun and had them rush out of the jail at the mob, then freeze > the frame while we hear volley after volley of shots. For dramatic effect > he could have had a voice-over say, "Hand me that bowie knife," You see it doesn't work because Joseph's not an outlaw at least he does not think of himself as one. > > How much do you tell however, the Plural marriage and Polyandry is > > difficult for lifetime members of the church to understand. We have > > not experienced living the principle. How much can you tell to a > > non-member audience? > > (Shifting tone.) There's an enthymeme, here, an unstated premise. People > usually don't state premises that seem obvious, but I'm not sure it's at > all obvious that if lifetime members have a hard time understanding > polygamy and polyandry non-members will have an even more difficult time. > One reason lifetime members have such difficulty is that our culture is > hesitant to talk openly about them, and for good reason. Many of us > descend from people who might end up in prison if they talked about > polygamy. > I acknowledge the unstated premise. My dad still can't acknowledge that some of his ancestors were involved in authorized post manifesto polygyny. > > Non-Mormons don't have that psychic wound to contend with about polygamy > and might be able to accept the practice as part of the story's moral > universe if it were presented from the right pov, which might be the > magical realism Jerry Johnston was talking about in his "Waiting for the > Great Mormon Novel." Agreed. When I was at Berkeley Nightfall at Nauvoo was required reading in Religion Class. So the gentiles got better history than those who took the course from Hyrum Andrus. > > > Hopefully I will have a shot at doing Joseph's story someday. > > > I will ask my agent to pitch my treatment one more time. > > Tell him to pitch it as God's Army, the Prequel, or maybe God's General: > Prophet Joseph Smith. > Those are reasonable suggestions. Joseph was sort of a Patton type. > (No, it'll never fly, people don't like to laugh an be serious in the > same post, doofus.) > > Harlow Soderborg (also a Lloyd, a Boyce and a Waldron) Clark > _______________ Thanks. Randall Larsen _________________________________________________ > YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET! > Juno now offers FREE Internet Access! > Try it today - there's no risk! For your FREE software, visit: > http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj. > > > > > - > AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature > http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Cathy Wilson" Subject: Re: [AML] Jobs for writers Date: 06 Jun 2000 13:42:13 -0600 > > < writing or editing project for hours on end without taking those breaks. > >From my experience, if you simply write straight through, the well runs > dry, the brain loses its springiness, and a whole host of other > unappetizing metaphors. That is why I complain so much about being a ghostwriter. I use up all the juice on other people's stuff. When people ask me what kind of writing I do for a living, I have replied "Prostitutional." Russell has asked me not to say that, though. He says it denigrates the very good work that I do and that it just makes him feel bad for me :). If I could just put together a couple of months doing the creative work I have blossoming inside, with the time and focus I use on others' projects, I imagine I could do some miraculous creating. :) Cathy - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: harlowclark@juno.com Subject: Re: [AML] Re: Sexuality in LDS literature Date: 06 Jun 2000 14:46:30 -0700 On Sat, 20 May 2000 14:07:42 Melissa Proffitt writes: > the fact that sex is *private* has become > transmuted to mean that it's *dirty*. Remember that _obscene_ doesn't mean _dirty_, it means _off-stage_, the skene being the performing space in a Greek theater. Sex is obscene not because it's dirty but because it's not to be shared with an audience. But words pick up connotations, and it's difficult to keep something that is secret (and privacy is a form of secrecy) from being shameful, especially if the secrecy involves the vulnerability and intimacy of nakedness. > A good novel is like a window into someone else's life--as though the > characters are real people who just happen to be able to tell you > what they're thinking. To some degree, reading a description of > sex between such characters is like peeking through their > bedroom window. I wrote a short novel several years ago about a philosophy student at BYU whose marriage is in deep trouble but he doesn't know it except in his dreams. I thought I was writing about exhaustion, about the physical toll having a new baby in the house takes on parents, about the physical toll of getting up at three a.m. to work and trying to go to school full time and have some kind of night life, that is about the lives of people I saw around me. I found as I reworked the story, and after, that I was writing about not only the exhaustion of a marriage, but the exhaustion of the wife's sexual resources and desires. I found I had created a character with a deep ambivalence towards sex. Interesting how characters develop themselves, and how you don't always know when you're exploring something where you'll end up. (I love that line in Roethke's "The Waking," "I learn by going where I have to go.") It can be disquieting to find yourself in an unfamiliar sexual world, as either a reader or writer. >While I can understand readers not wanting to read graphic > descriptions of sex, it's their objecting to even the mention of beds > or nakedness or kissing that scares me. It suggests a fearfulness that > cannot possibly be healthy for a married couple--particularly one that > has children and has therefore presumably had sex at least *once.* I'm not sure reticence is the same as fearfulness. I have occasionally edited personal materials out of my posts, not out of fear particularly, but a certain shyness (no, I haven't tried powder milk biscuits--don't know any Norwegian bachelor farmers), a privacy. Harlow S. Clark ________________________________________________________________ YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET! Juno now offers FREE Internet Access! Try it today - there's no risk! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj. - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: dlaulusa@copper.net Subject: [AML] Cover Letters for Picture Books Date: 06 Jun 2000 18:32:18 -0700 (MST) I have a question mainly for picture book writers. What are the main differences between a cover letter and a query? I have read _Children's Writer's and Illustrator's Market_ and numerous articles on the web with out finding any answer. The consensus seems to be the author sends the entire picture book manuscript and, instead of a query, a cover letter. But I can't figure out what exactly should be in the cover letter-except somewhere the statement that you are making simultaneous submissions if you are. Anyone have any knowledge? Tracie - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "R.W. Rasband" Subject: [AML] _The Testament of One Fold and One Shepherd_ Date: 06 Jun 2000 17:28:47 PDT My sister and her kids were in town this week from Phoenix, so one of the things we did was go see "The Testament of One Fold and One Shepherd" at the Joseph Smith Memorial Building in Salt Lake (I have been too intimidated to get tickets before this because of stories about large crowds.) It seems almost irreverent to comment on this film as if it were just another movie, because it isn't. There's the old saying, "Thou shalt not read the Bible for its prose." Keeping this in mind, here are a few observations. This film is fully the equal of the most expensive, elaborate Hollywood-produced effort. The sound, special effects, costumes, sets, photography and acting are on the same level as anything made for a paying American audience. This is the first church film this can be said about; its a quantum leap over even "Legacy." The decision was obviously made to make this film as entertaining as possible, given the restraints imposed by respect for scripture. Thus, the climax somewhat resembles a Spielberg-Lucas movie set in ancient America. I did not feel, however, the annoyance I frequently feel at the manipulations of a big-budget flick. Here the technique was in a good cause. It is impossible to tell one ethnic group from another in this film. Everyone has the same light brown skin. The words "Nephite" and "Lamanite" are never uttered. At one point the father, Helam, has to literally save the life of his grown son, Jacob, who has fallen in with a secret combination. I thought how rare it is you see a depiction of a strong competent male parent these days. Because our culture worships youth, most parents, and especially most fathers, are depicted as boobs. Whereas in real life it is very common for young people (myself included) to make stupid mistakes out of sheer inexperience, and then your parents have to bail you out. The link between generations is a strong theme is this film. The villain, Kohor (the leader of the secret combination), has a pseudo-British accent--he sounds like Olivier in "Richard III." I half-facetiously wonder how well this will go over with English tourists. Lastly, the finale of this film is really something to see. I feel awkward describing it in words because of the events involved. Suffice it to say it has been shot and edited with the utmost forcefulness and will rock you back in your seat. Hours later, after the spiritual impact had faded somewhat, I thought to myself "Now, *that's* how you end a movie!" The most important thing you will take away from "Testaments", of course, are your feelings. My own were humbled and grateful. It has been designed as a missionary tool, but this film is a must-see for LDS audiences, if only to find out what the church and its artists can accomplish when they really set their minds to it. R.W. Rasband Heber City, UT rrasband@hotmail.com ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "R.W. Rasband" Subject: Re: [AML] Divorce in LDS lit. Date: 06 Jun 2000 17:58:39 PDT >A man who has been single all his life is problematic. In my experience >with singles wards (as an outside observer watching friends), it has become >clear that any strong, faithful man will not have trouble finding a strong >faithful woman willing to be his companion. Even if he's ugly, fat, bald >AND disabled. He can even insist that his wife-to-be is cute. A single, >faithful brother past his thirties has something weird going on--he's being >too picky or he has some other hang-up that is preventing him from >marrying. >The hang-up can be external (like with Steve Young having complicating >factors of fame and riches) or internal (like he's gay or wants something >unrealistic or harmful in his wife). Either way, something is wrong and >needs to be taken care of before marriage is advisable. Any story that >deals with a man who has been single all his life and wants to treat him as >a romantic subject needs to account for how he has managed to remain single >and doesn't want to be any more. As a single man in his 30's I am greatly troubled by some of the generalizations I have been reading in this discussion. If some of us seem "weird", maybe its partly because of anxiety produced by having to face attitudes like these on a regular basis from other members. I half-humorously thought that Steve Young made it a little more acceptable for the rest of us--obviously I was mistaken. R.W. Rasband Heber City, UT rrasband@hotmail.com ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Larry Jackson Subject: [AML] MN BYU Museum of Art displays "Depression Era Printmakers": Date: 07 Jun 2000 01:17:12 EDT Press Release 31May00 D3 [From Mormon-News. This exhibit is already in progress.] BYU Museum of Art displays "Depression Era Printmakers" BYU Press Release 31May00 D3 PROVO, UTAH -- "Depression Era Printmakers," a new exhibit featuring prints from the Great Depression of the 1930s, will be on display at Brigham Young University's Museum of Art beginning Thursday (June 1). The exhibition will be on display in the Warrace and Alice Jones and Paul and Betty Boshard Gallaries on the museum's second level. Admission is free. The "Depression Era Printmakers" exhibition features works by Mahonri Young, LaConte Stewart, James T. Harwood, Joseph A.F. Everett and Elzy J. Bird. The in-house curator for the exhibition is Dawn Pheysey. The exhibition of 42 prints focuses more on the printmakers themselves than on the images they created. With few opportunities for other work, the printmakers eagerly accepted Federal Arts Project commissions. Interestingly, their prints, with few exceptions, show little consideration of the national catastrophe that defined and shaped the era. In 1937, Elzy J. Bird became the chief administrator of the Federal Art Project in Utah. He was responsible for matching sites and commissions with out-of-work artists in the state during the Great Depression. "They paid us to paint!" wrote the 91-year-old Bird in an opening essay for the exhibition catalogue focusing on printmakers in Utah. "You could hardly hear the music of the on-going Depression," he wrote. Bird and his fellow artists depicted landscapes, urban vignettes and rural scenes that presented a surprisingly positive view of life during the Depression years. Their work also demonstrates an expertise and sensitivity in graphic art techniques such as wood and linoleum cut, etching, serigraphy and lithography. A public lecture presented by Dan Burke, head of Utah Museum Services and author of "Utah Art of the Depression," will be held Thursday, July 27 at 7 p.m. in the Museum Auditorium. Burke will focus on Utah art history during the Depression. Admission is free. The Museum of Art is open Mondays through Fridays from 10 a.m. until 6 p.m. with extended hours on Mondays and Thursdays until 9 p.m. The museum is also open on Saturdays from noon until 5 p.m. - ### - Mormon News Editor Note: Mahonri Young, LaConte Stewart and James T. Harwood were all LDS Church members. >From Mormon-News: Mormon News and Events Forwarding is permitted as long as this footer is included Mormon News items may not be posted to the World Wide Web sites without permission. Please link to our pages instead. For more information see http://www.MormonsToday.com/ Send join and remove commands to: majordomo@MormonsToday.com Put appropriate commands in body of the message: To join: subscribe mormon-news To leave: unsubscribe mormon-news To join digest: subscribe mormon-news-digest - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Gae Lyn Henderson" Subject: RE: [AML] FOWLER, Stages of Faith Date: 07 Jun 2000 00:19:40 -0600 I have to agree with both Skip Hamilton and Rob Pannoni here as they talk about the community aspect of faith. I suppose as we focus on understanding and recognizing internal spiritual experience, we may tend to forget how much of personal testimony is forged through relationships with others. Eugene England's essay, "Why the Church Is As True As the Gospel," helps me think about this important aspect of worship. He points out that "besides being the repository of true principles and authority, the Church is the instrument provided by a loving God to help us become like him, that is, to give us essential schooling--experiences with each other that can bind us together in an honest but loving community; which is the essential nurturing place for salvation." A great example I can think of that illustrates this in Mormon lit is a wonderful short story, anthologized in _Bright Angels and Other Familiars_, about the Sunday School class members that request the removal of their too-liberal thinking teacher. The new "safe" arch-conservative teacher runs afoul of his predecessor in some very funny in-class interchange. The story shows us a very healthy "opposition in all things" (even in church). I also want to respond to Rob's comment that "I think that Fowler's framework is perhaps too individual-centric--. . ." Today in U.S. culture we see a resurgence of interest in religion, but much of it is not within traditional venues. Religious movements such as popular new-age spiritualism may leave behind the traditional congregation and revel in meditative practices and the individual inner experience of God. While we may tend to critique such practice as "individual-centric," nonetheless individuals who are struggling with orthodoxy (Fowler's Stage 4) may find meaning through such emphasis. And I would not want to dismiss any attempt to find God--the individual/personal relationship with God corresponds with Mormon doctrines of personal revelation and our belief that all human being are endowed with the light of Christ. Yes, people come to know God as they look inside themselves. Of course, Mormon doctrine also presents the fascinating paradox: it postulates God as a physical being, a separate being. God (the light of Christ) is within; and God is also the Other, the Unknown, the One Without. Gae Lyn Henderson - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Morgan Adair" Subject: Re: [AML] FOWLER, Stages of Faith Date: 07 Jun 2000 01:07:58 -0600 Fowler's _Stages of Faith_ would be a good tool for analyzing Terry=20 Tempest Williams' _Leap_. The book begins with Williams saying that=20 she has left the "city" she was brought up in: " I once lived near the shores of Great Salt Lake with no outlet to the = sea. "I once lived in a fault-block basin where mountains made of granite=20 surrounded me. These mountains in time were hollowed to house the=20 genealogy of my people, Mormons. Our names, the dates of our births=20 and deaths, are safe. We have records hidden in stone. " I once lived in a landscape where my ancestors sacrificed everything=20 in the name of belief that we can be creators of our own worlds. "I once lived in the City of Latter-day Saints." Williams has been in Fowler's stage 4. Throughout the book, she=20 recounts how her ties to the church have been strained or broken.=20 According to Fowler, movement from one stage to the next is=20 precipitated by a faith crisis. Williams' crisis results from her = encounter=20 with a painting, Hieronymus Bosch's "Garden of Earthly Delights."=20 Williams is fascinated with the painting, and spent many hours studying=20 it over a period of months at the Prado Museum in Madrid. The painting=20 elicits memories and emotions, and brings Williams to re-evaluate her=20 relationship to her Mormon heritage. At the end of the book, Williams has moved on to stage 5. She has=20 returned home to Utah, not to the Great Salt Lake, but to the aptly- named Paradox Basin, near Moab. She is reconciled with her Mormon=20 heritage, but her relationship with the religion and culture can never=20 be the same it was when she was a young woman (with stage 3=20 conventional faith). "I now live in a landscape where the wind creates windows, windows=20 that become larger and larger through time until they turn into arches=20 one can walk through. "I am the traveler returning home after having wandered through a=20 painting." MBA [Morgan Adair] - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Neal W. Kramer" (by way of Jonathan Langford ) Subject: [AML] PARKINSON, _Into the Field_ (review) Date: 07 Jun 2000 14:20:41 -0500 The following is a review of Benson latest novel, _Into the Field_. Title: _Into the Field_ Author: Benson Parkinson Publisher: Aspen Books Date of Publication: 2000 Pages vi-viii, 1-226 Soft cover "For Without Me Ye Can Do Nothing" Since I thoroughly enjoyed Benson Parkinson's first novel, _The MTC: Set Apart_, I have really looked forward to the follow-up, the second in what should be at least a three-novel series. _Into the Field_ did not disappoint, though it did surprise. The adventures of Elders Wilberg, Rignell, Jeppsen, Anthon, and Fergason are even more intense and challenging than their preparation for missions and the two months they spent together in the MTC, which were the focus of the first novel. The language, culture, and weather of France all require significant adjustment. The details of daily missionary life are hard to master, from riding bicycles in the rain to learning to limit pastry intake. Their new companions are less than perfect missionaries. The few investigators they do teach break their hearts. The local members aren't always helpful or friendly. At first, it seems like these young men will not be describing their twenty-two months in France as "the best two years of their lives." Parkinson is not one to sugarcoat the missionary experience. His fictional MTC was very like the real place. Elders and sisters struggled with homesickness, companions did not like each other, some elders were aloof, others light-minded, thinking more of girlfriends than the gospel. Parkinson's elders even broke the rules, though they were always anxious to be good. Some couldn't learn the language, some struggled with memorizing the discussions, but all were blessed enough to survive the Provo compound and enter the field. His fictional France Toulouse Mission provides more of the same. From perpetual rain to blighted government housing, we are shown a grey world in which discouragement is never more than an angry woman's curse away. Even with all these challenges, though, Elders Wilberg and Jeppsen sadly have their missionary experience first corrupted by their fellow elders. Lazy, discouraged missionaries populate their districts and zone. They waste time everywhere, anxiously avoiding contact with anybody except other missionaries. When they do visit a non-member, they have lost the courage to teach discussions. They look more like Americans in a study abroad program than servants of the Lord. Anthon and Rignell have a little better luck. Rignell's companion is a devoted, hard worker. But he has no creativity, and his perspiration outweighs his inspiration. He is not happy to tract the days and weeks away, but he is certainly willing. Rignell obediently follows. But despair will be their ultimate destination, if something does not change. Anthon is sent to an unorthodox, somewhat rebellious, successful missionary. "Beach," as he is infamously known throughout the mission, is a native elder who baptizes wherever he goes. He also shows little respect for traditional missionary methods or the mission rules. His success is still transitory though, as his converts remain active only as long as he stays in the area. I was surprised at the physically and spiritually dreary world these elders entered. I was also angry for them. They deserved better from their companions. At this point in the story--about 100 pages in--I wondered whether I was reading a novel or a memoir. I had to shake myself a little to remember I was reading LDS fiction. Mormon fiction has not shown us many missions in this much turmoil. Missionary stories have tended to focus on the teaching and the baptizing--or the sexual misadventures of individual elders and sisters. Mormon folklore, on the other hand, is replete with whispered rumors of missions or zones gone bad, with elders being rebuked, sent home, and generally chastised. Through this missionary underground we even hear of mission presidents suddenly released or church troubleshooters coming to clean up the mess. So I was beginning to wonder whether I was feeling honest suspense (How and when will this change!?) or I was reading the overwhelmingly bitter experience of an elder beaten down by his mission. (Not unusual for European missionaries at all.) Thank goodness for the Burns conference! Hope arrives just in time in the form of an inspired church leader who confronts the missionaries with their failings and inspires them to repent--or be sent home. We are not surprised that our MTC elders work hard to pull it together--each in his own way, building on strengths we saw or suspected while they were in the MTC. I must admit that Parkinson had me practically on my knees, praying that each of these missionaries would have good missions, filled with spiritual vitality and just enough success to keep them humble instead of discouraged. The second half of the novel begins their salvation and my relief. I think many readers will need to be forewarned that that the first few chapters are disheartening. I also think that is a fairly accurate view of the the feelings of many young missionaries, though the laziness of some elders seems slightly exaggerated to me. Ultimately, however, this is a book about surviving adversity by receiving small gifts of grace. Each missionary who honestly seeks to serve finally finds a blessing. The challenge for readers and characters alike, though, is learning to recognize the blessings in the midst of the harsh reality of missionary life in France. The blessings appear in the daily effort to work harder, to leave the apartment on time, to keep studying the discussions, to listen to the Spirit, to be more friendly with investigators and members, to suddenly discover that you really do love these wonderful people. I especially enjoyed how Parkinson allowed these little revelations to sneak up on you. One moment, the work is is distressingly difficult; the next moment, you can know the missionaries are on the Lord's errand and that He is walking beside them. Exactly like a real mission. Therein lay my relief following the revelations of a mission gone "pagan" in the earlier chapters. Another strength of the novel is Parkinson's understanding that missionary work can become a tedious grind for even the best elders or sisters. He also understands that the most effective way to do the work has yet to be discovered. Therefore, through a variety of crises, he invites us to think carefully about how we honestly want to do this work. The crises are common to missionaries everywhere. Tracting is endlessly dull, yet it is the most obvious way to try to contact people. But it is often a monumental waste of time because it returns so few investigators for the amount of time invested. Friendshipping and fellowshipping are more successful, but they require the members to know and trust you. Teaching by the Spirit is very difficult. And even when investigators decide to be baptized, it is tricky business to know whether they have truly been converted. Within months, even days, of their baptism, many new members simply disappear. Retention rates are low. This all raises questions whose answers are crucial to the success of missionary work throughout the church. Should missionaries focus only on baptizing? How should members be included in the work? Why does the Lord send so much inspiration so freely and then allow the would-be convert to back out at the last minute? Why do the lukewarm get baptized, while those who would be strong, committed members, often decide against joining? Parkinson offers no simplistic answers, but he helps us see how central they are to the work. That, in turn, invites each of us sometimes too tepid members to reconsider our commitment to the work and support for missionaries around the world. Should you buy this book? Absolutely. Should you read it? Absolutely. Should you be more anxiously engaged in this work? Yes, indeed. We can only hope that more writers will work this hard to engage us spiritually and intellectually about issues fundamental to our church membership. Benson Parkinson encourages us through his fiction to move beyond our flighty enthusiasm for missionary work to the bedrock principles of hard work, deep commitment, and simple faith. Indeed, he follows the admonition of Elder Maxwell: "The enthusiasm of 'I'll baptize a thousand on my mission!' is best tempered by 'I'll go where you want me to go dear Lord . . . I'll do what you want me to do,' letting 'God give the increase.'" (Neal A. Maxwell, _Men and Women of Christ_ [Salt Lake:Bookcraft, 1991], 25.) We can only hope that LDS publishers will take more risks in the future on books like this one and that the growing LDS audience for spiritually compelling, serious fiction will buy books like _Into the Field_--and even give copies to their friends. Neal Kramer - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jonathan Langford Subject: Re: [AML] Divorce in LDS lit. Date: 07 Jun 2000 06:49:16 -0500 Jacob Proffitt wrote: >A divorce says something about a >man. If he is at fault for the divorce then he has some serious repenting >to do for breaking such an important covenant. But even if he *isn't* at >fault for the divorce, you have to know that his judgement is suspect. He >made a major mistake with one of the most important decisions you can make. Although this reflects a common attitude, I wonder if it's the only possible attitude. Is it possible for the Lord to sanction a marriage and for it then not to work out? I think so. I think LDS theology accepts the possibility that a decision can be a right one at a given point in time, and then become wrong through later human choices. I see here all kinds of potential for different--conflicting--views of marriage, and of a protagonist's past marriage, for Mormon literature, particularly if the author is willing to entertain the notion that a marriage can be a right decision at the time, worthily entered into, and then choices by one or both partners make it fail later on. Or do we believe that if we're sufficiently righteous and wise, the Lord will always grant us the spiritual insight to avoid a marriage that ends badly? I think that's often what we subconsciously believe in Mormon culture, but I'm not sure we're justified in thinking so. Anyway, I can imagine both the protagonist himself/herself, and his/her friends, taking the attitude of "So, was I unrighteous (that I caused the marriage to end) or stupid/out of tune with the Spirit (to enter the marriage in the first place)?" (Rather reminds me of the New Testament question, "Who sinned, this man or his parents, that he was born blind?") Both of which options make one feel really good about oneself and confident about entering into new relationships, yeah right. (Signal for irony.) (This whole discussion reminds me, by the way, of--well, of a lot of things; but most particularly of a very dear friend of mine who's single and will shortly be turning 40. A few years ago, she told me that the bishop in the ward where we were both living rather hesitantly asked her in an interview, "So, have you ever considered marriage?" She said that because she really liked and respected him, she didn't react in any of the ways she was tempted to, like saying, "Why, no, marriage had never occurred to me, what a thought." But she was definitely tempted.) Jonathan Langford speaking for myself, not the List jlangfor@pressenter.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: AEParshall@aol.com Subject: Re: [AML] Divorce in LDS lit. Date: 07 Jun 2000 08:09:34 EDT In a message dated 6/7/2000 5:55:44 AM Mountain Daylight Time, cgileadi@ns3.burgoyne.com writes: << Tell you what: someone describing the LDS Singles Dances could have a heyday :). >> More genre fiction -- the Mormon Horror Novel. Ardis Parshall AEParshall@aol.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Thom Duncan Subject: Re: [AML] Divorce in LDS lit. Date: 07 Jun 2000 08:45:47 -0600 Cathy Wilson wrote: > Tell you what: someone describing the LDS Singles Dances could have a > heyday :). > As evidence by Carol Lynne Pearson's bitter-sweet musical, _The Dance_. Thom - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Richard R. Hopkins" Subject: Re: [AML] Divorce in LDS lit. Date: 07 Jun 2000 09:16:42 -0600 I really want to thank everyone for their comments in this thread and encourage the continuation of this discussion. All the emotional as well as literary comments are a great help to me in trying to build the hero's character, which I can see now really must be that of a divorcee. There's just too much to be explored for me to miss that opportunity. -----Original Message----- >But then that's probably why the >divorce rate has been getting so high. Actually, I've seen the most recent statistics. The divorce rate in Utah is notably below the national average, which itself has dropped to about 25%, surprisingly low in my mind. But what I'm talking about in the story I'm writing is a "good," 14-year, temple marriage, and that presents very special problems. For your information, the divorce rate among temple-married LDS is a surprisingly low 6%. >(For the record I'm 30 and single, so I may be a bit touchy on the issue) > >-- Clark Goble Thirty is nothing, Clark. Many men in my family did not marry until their early thirties and they were very happy in their marriages and entirely "normal" in every other respect. It just took them longer to find the right one. Of course, it becomes more difficult to make certain changes in your life, changes that are necessary in order for a man to successfully live with a woman, the longer you wait after about 25 to get married, but imagine a hero in his early forties and still unmarried. I think we're getting into a whole different and very difficult situation for a hero that age to have never been married. Don't you think? If a hero is, say, a bishop, and his wife "goes off the deep end" and divorces him. What issues do you see arising? I had a great Stake President once who had this very experience. I often wondered what was involved, and though I knew his family quite well, I never asked them about it. (I've always felt the urge to respect people's privacy, not a really good trait for an attorney, unfortunately.) His wife was a little strange, then suddenly became very strange and divorced him. What issues do you think he had to grapple with? Is there fault on his side? What would be interesting to explore in a situation like that if you were writing it? Richard Hopkins - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Thom Duncan Subject: Re: [AML] _The Testament of One Fold and One Shepherd_ Date: 07 Jun 2000 09:15:38 -0600 "R.W. Rasband" wrote: Here are my observations about the film, using this email as a starting point (I'm too lazy to write my own review, so I'll piggy-back on this one.) > This film is fully the equal of the most expensive, elaborate > Hollywood-produced effort. The sound, special effects, costumes, sets, > photography and acting are on the same level as anything made for a paying > American audience. The invented story, however, is pedestrian in the extreme, and is about as riveting as limp Ramen. > This is the first church film this can be said about; > its a quantum leap over even "Legacy." > The decision was obviously made to make this film as entertaining as > possible, given the restraints imposed by respect for scripture. Thus, the > climax somewhat resembles a Spielberg-Lucas movie set in ancient America. The climax, however, is in the wrong place. Instead of it being, as it is now, at the destruction of the Nephite city, it should have been where the story demands it, the coming of Christ. Instead, there are all these great special effects of the city falling apart, burning, etc. and then when Christ appears, it's like -- here's this whispered sound you can't quite hear, this beam of light, and Christ appears, descends a few feet, and there he is. Arnold Frieberg got it right. The coming of Christ *should* have happened way high up in the sky; we should have seen the descending form of a man encased in light; the people below shouldn't have been able to hardly look up without shielding their eyes; as He descends, some should have slowly realized who this was, fallen to their knees, etc. As it now is, Christ appears, and the people react like it happens everyday. >I > did not feel, however, the annoyance I frequently feel at the manipulations > of a big-budget flick. Here the technique was in a good cause. Interestingly, that's exactly why I felt annoyance: because they did not use the big-budget effects in the right place. They should have been pulling out every stop for the descent of Christ. In the BofM, his descent is clearly THE climax of the entire book; in this film, it is almost an afterthought, and clearly anti-climactic to the destruction of *one* city, by the way. > It is impossible to tell one ethnic group from another in this film. > Everyone has the same light brown skin. The words "Nephite" and "Lamanite" > are never uttered. Not only that, but the love interest was no more ethnic than I was and her brown skin makeup was decidedly lower than professional standards. > At one point the father, Helam, has to literally save the life of his grown > son, Jacob, who has fallen in with a secret combination. I thought how rare > it is you see a depiction of a strong competent male parent these days. Can you see the similarity between this story and the one for Legacy. The believing parent, the unbelieving son? The story was no completely predictable that it held no suspense for me. How could a viewer not have known, for instance, that Jacob would come back to the fold? And was anyone surprised when the monument fell on the Lamanite Leader? And, of course, Helem would get his eyesight back. > Because our culture worships youth, most parents, and especially most > fathers, are depicted as boobs. As opposed say, to the strong fatherly character (the King) in _Braveheart_, or the similar character played by Richard Harris in _Gladiator_? > Lastly, the finale of this film is really something to see. I feel awkward > describing it in words because of the events involved. Suffice it to say it > has been shot and edited with the utmost forcefulness and will rock you back > in your seat. Hours later, after the spiritual impact had faded somewhat, I > thought to myself "Now, *that's* how you end a movie!" That's okay, I took the responsibility upon myself to describe the ending of the movie which was a disappointment for me, considering how it could have been done. > > The most important thing you will take away from "Testaments", of course, > are your feelings. My own were humbled and grateful. It has been designed > as a missionary tool, but this film is a must-see for LDS audiences, if only > to find out what the church and its artists can accomplish when they really > set their minds to it. > It must be seen, yes. Technically, it is far and away the best thing the Church has ever produced. But, as with all other Church films, it is *too* respectful of the material, so that the characters speak too much in the BofM idiom, even the fictional characters. And the coming of Christ, though performed in the film very accurately according to scripture, was virtually stripped of any emotional appeal (as far as I was concerned), except for what the viewer might already have about the story. Parts of Legacy actually brought tears to my eyes. I sat like Al Gore throughout the performance of Two Testaments. Having said all the above, I admit that my view may have been colored by the fact that, when we went, we couldn't buy any tickets, and were told we could "probably" get in if we stood in the overflow line. So, an hour before show-time, we get in line and end up sitting because standing an hour is out of the question. Everyone with tickets gets in, then we go in -- There are at least half the seats unoccupied. Why was I made to stand in line for an hour when I could have gotten my ticket and walked around Downtown SLC for a while, then just gone into the performance without having to wait? So I was not a happy camper by the time the show started. That may account for my less then enthusiastic review. Though I don't think so. Thom [Duncan] - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Jim and Laurel Brady" Subject: Re: [AML] Divorce in LDS lit. Date: 07 Jun 2000 10:00:35 -0600 I think that you cannot categorize divorcees, men or women. Precisely. And so many times, in popular LDS literature, there is such an effort to make the characters "perfect" and the result is pure sap. Which is one of the reasons I initially suggested the hero should be neither widowered or divorced but never married. In my opinion, the widowered or divorced ploy (with the divorce being absolutely no fault of his) is simply an effort to allow him to be "perfect" so the reader will accept and like him. In reality, there are so many wonderful potential stories in people who are truly flawed--the divorced man who knows the divorce was in large part due to his fault, the shrewish, manipulative, self-centered wife or ex-wife, the older single male or female with quirks or extreme expectations, the widowed man or woman who actually is relieved to be once again single and feels huge guilt over this...these people are much more real than stereotyped, cardboard "perfect" folks. [Laurel Brady] - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Richard R. Hopkins" Subject: Re: [AML] Divorce in LDS lit. Date: 07 Jun 2000 10:20:28 -0600 -----Original Message----- >I do have some questions in my mind about all the talk about this "one and >only". >Does everyone really believe there is a "one and only", that until you find >this mysterious person everything that has gone before has been somehow not >the right experience, that finally finding this "one and only" make all the >mistakes, sins or whatever happened along the way somehow right because it >led you on the path to this ultimate destiny? Does all literature of a >romantic nature have to foster this "Saturday's Warrior" type image? > >Tracie Laulusa Interesting you should ask. My story has a fantastic (but largely true!) twist on this, and explores how that "myth" has affected my hero's expectations, prior marriage, etc., but I won't let all the cats out of the bag here. Personally, I found my "one and only." I'm quite certain about that (I was told months in advance when I would meet her, and years in advance, her name--other things too, but they're too personal). But I'll tell you this for sure, it didn't solve all our problems. It's still been a challenge learning to be happy together, to live together in a way that will ensure we enjoy each other's company for eternity, getting over past problems, the mundane things that are part of every married person's life. And that's even though she's one of the most beautiful and charismatic women in the world! Yeah, guys, beauty doesn't solve everything. The fact is everyone has to work out the same problems and learn to live with one person successfully. That's why divorce is usually a cop-out. You think you'll get a better deal with someone else, but think again. You'll just have different challenges learning to live together. Ultimately, you have to learn that lesson, and it only comes by sticking to the job. That might be something good for a story to bring out. Or do you think it will require some kind of sex therapy manual for Latter-day Saints? Richard Hopkins - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Rob Pannoni Subject: Re: [AML] Divorce in LDS lit. Date: 07 Jun 2000 10:17:32 -0700 Christopher Bigelow wrote: > > One thing I'd like to see literature explore is whether God ever sets people up in marriages that he knows will--and should--end in divorce. I believe he does, just in the same way he may allow someone to contract a disease that requires a traumatic cure. To say that any man who marries the "wrong" woman has made an error in judgment denies the possibility that the Spirit led him into that decision--but as a trial, not a blessing. I don't have trouble with the possibility that God inspires us to do things that lead to outcomes we don't expect or for reasons that are not obvious to us. I have a little harder time with the idea of marriage as God's punishment for past mistakes. I tend to think our mistakes bring their own punishment without any help from God. I would probably spin it a little differently and suggest that the experience might have been for lessons that couldn't be learned in any other way. But this whole discussion has left me feeling a little uneasy. There seems to be this great need for finger-pointing. There is an explicit assumption that if a marriage fails it is because someone was either sinful or defective. People change and grow. Sometimes their growth takes them down separate paths. Why not a novel about a marriage between two good, faithful people who simply find that after many years together their paths have diverged? Perhaps they have simply exausted all of the possibilites of the relationship. Personal growth has turned to stagnation. There is no animosity, just a shared sense that they have come to the end of the road. Perhaps the same spiritual witness that bound them together is now saying it's time to move on, even though there is no reason they can point to that anyone else would understand. The lack of a logical reason for the breakup might make this the most heartbreaking tragedy of all. -- Rob Pannoni Rapport Systems http://www.rapport-sys.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jacob Proffitt Subject: Re: [AML] _The Testament of One Fold and One Shepherd_ Date: 07 Jun 2000 12:50:51 -0600 On Tue, 06 Jun 2000 17:28:47 PDT, R.W. Rasband wrote: >The most important thing you will take away from "Testaments", of = course,=20 >are your feelings. My own were humbled and grateful. It has been = designed=20 >as a missionary tool, but this film is a must-see for LDS audiences, if = only=20 >to find out what the church and its artists can accomplish when they = really=20 >set their minds to it. Excellent Review. I saw this movie a month or so ago and I still feel = the impact of it sometimes. It is the best example of using the spirit in = your art. The director and/or editor have an excellent, light touch that made this a forceful, spiritual event rather than just another afternoon at = the movies. It's ten times better than Legacy hoped to be. Not to say that it is perfect in every way. There were a few scenes I thought were unnecessary (Jacob's visit home on his way out of town was = kind of confusing) and some that went a little too long. I'd have preferred = to have those scenes cut some in order to add a scene or two with the girl = and her mother (I wanted just one scene where the mother explains her former beliefs and how she got to where she is now). But I don't know if the change would have hurt the rest of the movie so = I'm not really complaining. If you're in the neighborhood, make sure you = take the time to see this movie. Unlike "God's Army" it isn't likely to open = in theaters across the states. Jacob Proffitt - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Kathleen Woodbury Subject: Re: [AML] Cover Letters for Picture Books Date: 07 Jun 2000 13:29:22 -0600 At 06:32 PM 6/6/00 -0700,Tracie Laulusa wrote: >I have a question mainly for picture book writers. What are the >main differences between a cover letter and a query? I have read >_Children's Writer's and Illustrator's Market_ and numerous >articles on the web with out finding any answer. The consensus >seems to be the author sends the entire picture book manuscript >and, instead of a query, a cover letter. But I can't figure out >what exactly should be in the cover letter-except somewhere the >statement that you are making simultaneous submissions if you >are. Anyone have any knowledge? Query letters are what you send to an editor to ask if the editor would like to see something you have written. (You always include a self-addressed, stamped envelope with a query letter, by the way.) Cover letters are what you send to the editor =with= the story you have written. In query letters you give a short description of the thing you want to send (and if it's a novel, be sure you are talking about a finished novel and tell the editor that it is finished). In cover letters you tell the editor that you are submitting "Title of Your Story" for the editor's consideration. (And that's all you need to say, though you can mention that you have also included a self-addressed, stamped envelope for the editor's response--if you don't want the manuscript back and are including a business- sized envelope with only one stamp on it, you can mention that, too, and you can say that it is (or isn't) a simultaneous submission.) If you have any professional credits, or if you have professional expertise (say, you're sending a story about an archaeological dig and you've actually been on one or several) relevant to the story, you can mention those things in the cover letter. You should know that when I have served as a fiction editor, though, I have not paid a lot of attention to what is in the cover letter. I would look at the name, address, etc, and make sure the title of the story is in the letter, and then I'd file the cover letter for my records with a "received by" and the date written at the top. Some editors use cover letters as a nice place to put their coffee (or hot chocolate) cups while they read the manuscript. In fact, unless the guidelines specifically state that the editor wants you to include a cover letter, and if all you have to say is that you're submitting "Title of Your Story" to the editor, you don't need to include a cover letter at all. It is obvious to the editor that you are submitting the story. I hope this helps. Kathleen Dalton-Woodbury workshop@burgoyne.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Ivan Angus Wolfe Subject: Re: [AML] PARKINSON, _Into the Field_ (review) Date: 07 Jun 2000 13:54:23 -0600 (MDT) Neal Kramer wrote: > At this point in the story--about 100 pages in--I wondered whether I was reading a novel or a memoir. I had to shake myself a little to remember I was reading LDS fiction. Mormon fiction has not shown us many missions in this much turmoil. Missionary stories have tended to focus on the teaching and the baptizing--or the sexual misadventures of individual > elders and sisters. Mormon folklore, on the other hand, is replete with whispered rumors of missions or zones gone bad, with elders being rebuked, sent home, and generally chastised. Through this missionary underground we even hear of mission presidents suddenly released or church troubleshooters coming to clean up the mess. So I was beginning to wonder > whether I was feeling honest suspense (How and when will this change!?) or I was reading the overwhelmingly bitter experience of an elder beaten down by his mission. (Not unusual for European missionaries at all.) > I also think that is a fairly accurate view of the the feelings of many young missionaries, though the laziness of some elders seems slightly exaggerated to me. I haven't read the book, but from yoru descriptions of it - I don't think the laziness can be exaggerated - I had two (in a row even and they were my first two) companions who would sleep in till noon, go out on pretense of tracking, but really to work on their latest bike tricks like mastering bunnyhops or wheelies, and then flirt with some of the local Lao girls (Lao speaking mission stateside), come back to the apartment about 6 pm and play cards with the other missionaries until midnight. Parkinsosn's novel sounds somewhat softer than what I experienced. Luckily, my next three companions (one I spent 10 months with) were amazing and I finsished my mission on a great note with honest, sincere and earnest missionaries. > Ultimately, however, this is a book about surviving adversity by receiving small gifts of grace. Each missionary who honestly seeks to serve finally finds a blessing. > I especially enjoyed how Parkinson allowed these little revelations to sneak up on you. AMEN to that. Sounds like Parkinson has finally written a book that is true to the missionary experience. I was on a mission and was discouraged because my work did not seem to fit the mold of stories in the New Era or the church videos I'd seen. A Mission really was drudgery and hard work, waiting for those "small gifts of grace" that kept you going until the next one came along. Of course, I also feel that the church films and New Era stories have a purpose and should continue. But there needs to be more of what it seems Parkinson has written (and Dutcher has filmed - though Parkinson's seems to go deeper from the review). --Ivan Wolfe - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Edgar Snow Subject: [AML] Re: Sexuality in LDS Literature Date: 07 Jun 2000 13:21:13 -0700 (PDT) As I've followed this thread off and on I've been reminded of an important work of Mormon literature that contains significant amounts of frank sexuality: The Song of Solomon. Sure, it's not considered scripture (see the JST footnoted statement from Joseph Smith), but I think we still consider it acceptable literature. Why even the LDS institute manual covers it, as I recall. And, even though Joseph thought it uninspired, a direct quotation from The Song of Solomon is used 3 times in the D&C: "As fair as the moon, clear as the sun, and as terrible as an army with banners" (see SoS 6:10 and compare to D&C 5:14; 105:31; and 109:73). I find this all very curious (for me, of course, that's the way I like things). If you believe the D&C language comes directly from God, how do you account for the quotes from SoS? If you believe Joseph had a lot of input in dictating the D&C revelations (which I believe must have been the case--another topic for another day), that means he likely read the entire SoS (there are only 8 chapters in the book) and liked this passage enough to quote it 3 times in revelatory contexts. Ed Snow ===== My collection of humorous essays entitled _Of Curious Workmanship: Musings on Things Mormon_ has just been released and can be ordered from Signature Books at 1-800-356-5687, or from their website at http://www.signaturebooksinc.com/curious.htm or from Barnes & Noble at http://shop.barnesandnoble.com/booksearch/isbnInquiry.asp?userid=5SLFMY1TYD&mscssid=HJW5QQU1SUS12HE1001PQJ9XJ7F17G3C&srefer=&isbn=1560851368 __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Photos -- now, 100 FREE prints! http://photos.yahoo.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Clark Goble" Subject: RE: [AML] Divorce in LDS lit. Date: 07 Jun 2000 13:29:01 -0600 ___ Tracie ___ | I'm not saying there aren't cases that the woman is not the | instigator but that > it seems that in the majority of cases | it is the guy | ___ Cathy ___ | I think this is a matter of who you run into. ___ I have to agree with Cathy. I personally have known more guys treated poorly by wives than vice versa. However Tracie brings up a good point. If you are writing about this, how believable your basic story is well be in large part determined by your audience. Rather than deal with divorce, let me use a different example with perhaps stronger emotion. Consider stories about abusive Bishops, such as Evenson's last novel. Many of us who've never had such encounters tend to be repulsed by the basic premise. That keeps us from getting into the book. Those who sympathize with the premise, because of their own past experiences, will buy into the book more. Now how this fact is dealt with depends upon the goals of the author. Are you trying to show to this ignorant audience the experiences of this other group? (I don't think Evenson was doing this - I think he was preaching to the choir) Likewise I think with divorce or even the issue of older singles, you have to deal with your audience. The average content "all is well in Zion" Mormon probably won't understand any of these situations unless put into a negative context. (i.e. anyone divorced is bad, anyone single is of their own doing, etc.) So if you are writing to this large body, you have to really show and explain how this could happen. It takes a lot of persuasive skills I think. -- Clark Goble --- d.c.g@att.net ----------------------------------- - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: cratkinson Subject: RE: [AML] Divorce in LDS lit. Date: 07 Jun 2000 15:42:00 MDT Richard Hopkins wrote: >The problem is this: If you have a story about someone in their late >thirties or early forties, and you want a romance, how can you do it if = >the hero is not divorced? Do you have to write about a guy who's never >been married? Hello. My name is Christine Atkinson. I've been lurking here for a few fascinating weeks but felt the need to squawk a little on this topic. While I believe it's true that making the man a widower is the easiest an= d nicest way to get around the Why Is He Single? dilemma, it is not the mos= t interesting and is certainly not the most realistic. As a 30-year-old si= ngle woman (Yikes! Unlettered and unmarried. Can I possibly fit in here?), I= can tell you that there are very few widowers my age out there. In fact, I d= on't think I know even one. There are a few more never-been-marrieds than wido= wers, but the truth is, most unmarried men around my age are divorced. = Listening to his divorce horror story and looking at pictures of his kids= are things I've come to expect on a date. I've met my share of jerks and los= ers but I've also met nice guys whose marriages simply didn't work out. If I refused to date divorced men for the reasons people have cited here for n= ot having the main character be a divorcee, I'd not only miss meeting the ni= ce guys, I'd probably never leave my house! I suppose my point is that I'd certainly prefer reading about characters who've learned a few things and made better decisions the second time aro= und to reading about a perfect man whose perfect wife died and he was perfect= ly sad until he met a perfectly lovely woman and remarried to perfect wedded= bliss. An exaggeration, I know, but real people are more interesting to = read and to write than are characters who've never made mistakes, never had regrets, never wished for a cosmic undo in their lives. = I'm a sucker for a good romance, but - maybe because this is the reality = I live with - I'd much rather read about flawed people making it work than perfect people finding instant joy. I don't really want to read the Morm= on version of a Harlequin Romance. I've been fascinated by the posts on this topic so far. Especially by th= e fact that there have been indirect comments about single men in their thi= rties and forties being problematic or weird, but there have not been any simil= ar comments about women. Why? Is it just that we are unwilling to say thes= e same things about women or is there a different perception of unmarried women? Christine Atkinson ____________________________________________________________________ Get free email and a permanent address at http://www.netaddress.com/?N=3D= 1 - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jacob Proffitt Subject: Re: [AML] Divorce in LDS lit. Date: 07 Jun 2000 16:59:33 -0600 On Wed, 07 Jun 2000 10:17:32 -0700, Rob Pannoni wrote: >People change and grow. Sometimes their growth takes them down separate >paths. Why not a novel about a marriage between two good, faithful >people who simply find that after many years together their paths have >diverged? Perhaps they have simply exausted all of the possibilites of >the relationship. Personal growth has turned to stagnation. There is no >animosity, just a shared sense that they have come to the end of the >road. Perhaps the same spiritual witness that bound them together is >now saying it's time to move on, even though there is no reason they can >point to that anyone else would understand. The lack of a logical >reason for the breakup might make this the most heartbreaking tragedy of >all. Your scenario assumes that people grow independently. I don't think that people do. We are influenced by those around us. If a couple is growing independent of each other then something is seriously wrong. When you = get married, you're supposed to pay attention to one another. Couples who = grow apart do so because they are neglecting something important--whether intentional or not. I have a hard time imagining such a thing happening = in a home where the Spirit is a welcome guest. Jacob Proffitt - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Barbara@techvoice.com (Barbara R. Hume) Subject: Re: [AML] Divorce in LDS lit. Date: 07 Jun 2000 17:12:47 -0700 You're a single man in his 30s? Hey, I have a single daughter in her 30s! Don't worry, she's not at all like me! barbara hume >As a single man in his 30's I am greatly troubled by some of the >generalizations I have been reading in this discussion. If some of us seem >"weird", maybe its partly because of anxiety produced by having to face >attitudes like these on a regular basis from other members. I >half-humorously thought that Steve Young made it a little more acceptable >for the rest of us--obviously I was mistaken. > >R.W. Rasband - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Clark Goble" Subject: RE: [AML] Divorce in LDS lit. Date: 07 Jun 2000 15:07:03 -0600 ___ Richard ____ | Actually, I've seen the most recent statistics. The divorce rate | in Utah is notably below the national average, which itself has | dropped to about 25%, surprisingly low in my mind. ___ After constantly castigating people for quoting hearsay as facts, I went and did it myself. I've heard about the high divorce rate so much of late that I was starting to believe the rhetoric around here. Thanks for the stats. Where did you find them? Are they available online? So get rid of everything I said about high divorce. I still think it is pretty high here in Provo. But that's just anecdotal evidence. (I'm amazed at how many people seem to get divorced around here - usually because they were idiots while dating because of the pressure to marry here) ___ Richard ___ | ...but imagine a hero in his early forties and still unmarried. ___ I guess that would depend upon the story. I mean in Hollywood films and most novels the hero is single. Often the hero is also in his late 30's or early 40's. i.e. Tom Hanks, Arnold Swartzenegger, Mel Gibson, etc. For a Mormon, it certainly would be unusual, however. But then whether that is a good or bad thing really depends upon the goal of your story and the audience you are writing for. If you want a character the audience will empathize with more, then you want to character to resemble them. If you want to show the audience something they tend to repress, then perhaps a different character would be best. And of course if you are writing a archetypal romance, then having a single or divorced character is a must. For such a book I'm not sure a single character is worse than a divorced one though. In some ways a single person might be better because a lot of the baggage Mormons associate with divorce wouldn't be present. But of course there is the additional baggage that people tend to think single males over 25 to be at best odd and at worse a threat. ___ | If a hero is, say, a bishop, and his wife "goes off the deep end" and | divorces him. What issues do you see arising? ___ Well at a minimum there is the issue of the church wanting all leadership positions held by non-divorced men. I know they strongly discourage calling divorced men. (Purportedly because they will be biased in dealing with divorce, or so I'm told) The man wouldn't be able to work in the temple either. (The over 31, male and single rule) I'm rather sure that whether guilty or not many in the congregation would blame the Bishop for sinning in some way as well. Heaven knows there will be lots of pressures on the poor fellow. However that might make an interesting story. Of course I'm not sure the average member would appreciate it. -- Clark Goble --- d.c.g@att.net ----------------------------------- - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Clark Goble" Subject: RE: [AML] Divorce in LDS lit. Date: 07 Jun 2000 17:53:52 -0600 ___ Christine ___ | I've been fascinated by the posts on this topic so far. | Especially by the fact that there have been indirect comments | about single men in their thirties and forties being | problematic or weird, but there have not been any similar | comments about women. Why? ____ It has a long tradition in Mormon literature and speaking, unfortunately. It goes back at least to Brigham Young who said any man over 25 who was single was a threat. Unless they've changed the rhetoric of late in the single-adult firesides, there was always an undertone that it was the man's responsibility to take care of the over 25 women. If they weren't then they weren't magnifying their priesthood. Go back through talks in the 70's and early 80's and the rhetoric was a lot harsher. They've toned it down of late, probably due to the changing demographics (which follow national trends). However it is still strong, especially in Utah. I'm sure that with little effort I could collect a series of quotes, but it really is a bit afield for this list. Having said that though there are plenty of comments about weird single women as well. It's just that most guys know better than to bring them up. It's especially difficult for a single guy who never has been married to date a divorced woman with kids. I rarely even do it anymore just because the whole thing is so difficult to deal with in my ignorance. ___ Christine ___ | If I refused to date divorced men for the reasons people have cited | here for not having the main character be a divorcee, I'd not only | miss meeting the nice guys, I'd probably never leave my house! ___ It is difficult to write or speak about what you haven't experienced. Isn't that one of the first things they teach you in creative writing? Write what you know about. That's not to say you can't push the boundaries. However the further you get away from your own experience the less authentic it sounds. It is a very good author indeed who can write about backgrounds other than their own and do it well. Consider a suburban Mormon trying to write _Boyz in the Hood_. Probably wouldn't come off terribly well. In the same way I suspect the average American Mormon, especially in the west, married fairly young and really doesn't know what it is like to be single in ones thirties. They judge it by their experiences when they were 18-22. If they went to BYU it is even more distorted. They wonder, "why can't they just do what I did," not realizing that the entire environment and options are different. (i.e. where exactly do you go to meet someone over 25, other than bars and clubs?) The same is true of people trying to deal with divorcees and so forth. Outside of the main areas of Mormonism, where there are probably a greater number of people who've joined the church as singles or divorced, things are probably different though. I know they were back home where 'nuclear families' are the minority. -- Clark Goble --- d.c.g@att.net ----------------------------------- - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Barbara@techvoice.com (Barbara R. Hume) Subject: RE: [AML] Divorce in LDS lit. Date: 07 Jun 2000 18:06:34 -0700 >I'm a sucker for a good romance, but - maybe because this is the reality I >live with - I'd much rather read about flawed people making it work than >perfect people finding instant joy. I don't really want to read the Mormon >version of a Harlequin Romance. Perfect people finding instant joy is certainly not what romance novels are about. > >I've been fascinated by the posts on this topic so far. Especially by the >fact that there have been indirect comments about single men in their thirties >and forties being problematic or weird, but there have not been any similar >comments about women. Why? Is it just that we are unwilling to say these >same things about women or is there a different perception of unmarried >women? Women are perceived as being desperate to marry, and men as desperate to avoid it. I don't know where these stereotypes came from--probably from the time when women had to marry or starve, and men had to watch out for being targeted as meal tickets. Besides, there seem to be many more women out there, and the ratio gets worse and worse as people get older. We've all seen the rows and rows of blue-haired widows in church, but never rows and rows of bald-headed old coots. I read someplace that if all the marriagable men in America actually got married, there would still be 3 1/2 million women left over. So the single guy in the novel Richard is talking about will probably know at least one woman whose theory is that with the odds so bad, she might as well concentrate on fame and fortune and forget about men. barbara hume - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Cathy Wilson" Subject: Re: [AML] Divorce in LDS lit. Date: 07 Jun 2000 20:56:53 -0600 Another interesting topic for some LDS novelist would be to depict how a ward treats a divorced person. I know I was treated with infinite kindness but incredible distance. Russell was treated like an invisible man. Some divorced men are not even home taught till they are remarried--validated, made into a person again. The reality we have to examine is--many many latter-day saints get divorced. Half, I hear. I never thought I'd get divorced, but, well, I did. For about four years I was a divorced woman, and treated VERY differently than I was/am as a married woman. As I follow the discussion here, I can't help but notice the stereotypes--if a person is divorced, there has to be something WRONG with him or her. Maybe. (YOu can certainly get that impression at the singles dances. . .oy!) But then again, maybe not. Someday I will find the courage to write about how I experienced choosing marriage both times; the first time, I felt I should marry even though I didn't know the person well. The second time, ah well, with apologies, it's Saturday's Warrior again :). Marriage made in heaven. Cathy (Gileadi) Wilson Editing Etc. 15 East 600 North Price UT 84501 435-637-8744 - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "mcnandon" Subject: RE: [AML] Cover Letters for Picture Books Date: 04 Jun 2000 11:27:20 -0600 In a *query* letter you explain your project simply, outline the competition, specify your expertise or familiarity with the material and demonstrate that there is something additional "out there" for the editor to read. An editor will not want to take on a project too similar to one already published or in the works. You state that if they are interested you will send them a full outline or first chapter of your proposed book. A *cover letter* is usually not necessary, but if you do send one remember that less is more. Just give information that is important to the understanding of the manuscript or tell why you are the perfect person to write it. (I paraphrased this info from Jane Yolen's _Writing Books for Children._) Nan McCulloch - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: CDoug91957@aol.com Subject: Re: [AML] Re: Sexuality in LDS Literature Date: 08 Jun 2000 02:00:26 EDT In a message dated 00-06-07 19:26:22 EDT, Ed Snow writes: << As I've followed this thread off and on I've been reminded of an important work of Mormon literature that contains significant amounts of frank sexuality: The Song of Solomon.... And, even though Joseph thought it uninspired, a direct quotation from The Song of Solomon is used 3 times in the D&C: "As fair as the moon, clear as the sun, and as terrible as an army with banners" (see SoS 6:10 and compare to D&C 5:14; 105:31; and 109:73).>> I'm glad someone besides me has noticed this! But not everyone appreciates having this pointed out. About 25 years ago, my Gospel Doctrine teacher in a Provo ward was the son of a very well known and popular LDS writer on scriptural and political topics. He warned us against reading the Song of Solomon because it was "sheer pornography." I pointed out the D&C uses of the S of S, and he said, in some consternation, "Well, you have to be very careful with it." The same teacher refused to discuss in class the story of Judah's encounter with Tamar (Gen. 38) because it was such a "tawdry tale." (If he had learned to read the scriptures in a so-called "literary" way--the subject of a recent thread--he might have been able to see how that story stands in counterpoint to Joseph's encounter with Potiphar's wife.) << If you believe Joseph had a lot of input in dictating the D&C revelations (which I believe must have been the case--another topic for another day),>> This touches on another recent thread (Reading the Scriptures), on the problem of the authorship of the scriptures, whether they are to be read as human artifacts with special divine approval or as dictated directly by God. <> Or, if the scriptures are dictated by God (the position I think my old Gospel Doctrine teacher would take), He must have read the S of S and liked this passage enough to quote it. I think the point I'm really trying to make here is that these two polar opposite reactions--Ed's and my GD teacher's--to the Song of Solomon and the Prophet's use of it (I agree with Ed's view on that) are indicative of the width of the chasm between literary and nonliterary LDS and between LDS views of sexuality. Literary treatment of sexuality involves not only a problem of decorum, as measured against some absolute standard, but also a serious problem of audience. Colin Douglas - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "D. Michael Martindale" Subject: Re: [AML] Divorce in LDS lit. Date: 08 Jun 2000 00:40:40 -0600 I'm glad Richard has decided to make his protagonist a divorced man. >From what has been said here, it sounds like such a protagonist is desperately needed. I'm appalled at the statements made about divorced men. Words like "bigoted" and "ignorant" come to mind, but I'm afraid if I use them, Jonathan will bump my message, so I won't. Are there those of you who really believe that men are substantially more defective than women, more at fault in relationships, more screwed up if things don't work? If so, why are these attitudes considered acceptable, when comparable ones about race would be mercilessly condemned? Or comparable ones about women, for that matter? Write about that divorced protagonist, Richard. Show a normal example of such a person as an antidote to the two-dimensional villainous image that is apparently so rampant. Showing people of non-white race as normal in films and television shows helped to combat the utterly unrealistic image many whites had of them. Some of that medicine ought to help in this case too. -- D. Michael Martindale dmichael@wwno.com ================================== Check out Worldsmiths, the new online LDS writers group, at http://www.wwno.com/worldsmiths Sponsored by Worlds Without Number http://www.wwno.com ================================== - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Andrew Hall" Subject: [AML] FILLERUP, _Beyond the River_ Date: 08 Jun 2000 23:21:17 JST Several people have mentioned that they are impressed by Levi Peterson's _The Backslider_, but aren't ultimately satisfied by it because the characters are too bizarre to relate to, or because of what they see as a too negative view of the Church. For those people (in fact for all of you) I strongly recommend Michael Fillerup's 1996 novel _Beyond the River_, (Signature). I just finished reading it a few weeks ago, and although I don't feel up to writing a full review (besides, there is a better one than I could write already in the archives), I must say that we are blessed to have such an excellent LDS artist in Fillerup. He is as good a "literary" writer as Peterson, although he does lack Peterson's flair for humor. Like Peterson he depicts struggles with faith in deep, intriguing ways, which certainly forced me to stop and reexamine my own ideas and actions. His characters tend to be much more "regular Mormon guy" types, however, with the kind of family and Church pressures that are more familiar to the average reader than the situations Peterson depicts. I don't think that is what makes him so good, I don't mind Peterson's weirdness, after all. But I would think it would make his work more accessible. Instead, however, we haven't talked about him hardly at all here on the list. The list members were supposed to read the book once in 1996 for our short lived monthly book club, but only a couple of people wrote in to say anything. I find his low profile very surprising, since he has written so much great Mormon literature. Since the late 1980s he seems to have had at least two quality short stories published in Dialogue or Sunstone every year, and seems to win a First Prize in the Sunstone fiction contest every year. His 1980s stories were collected in the 1990 book _Visions and Other Stories_ (Signature). Half of the stories are set on Indian reservations in the Southwest. Now there are more than enough stories out there for another collection. For example I loved his story "Pioneers," (Dialogue, 1997), which juxtaposes the challenges faced by the pioneers with the different (but just as tough) problems of a contemporary Mormon father. These are great stories, although I admit they are often quite a downer. Fillerup has now joined Peterson and Margaret Blair Young in my trimvurative of great "literary" contemporary Mormon writers. Oh, speaking of MB Young, that reminds me of another subject. We have also talked about depicting divorce in literature, and in her collection of stories _Love Chains_ (Signature, 1997), Young depicts the impact of broken LDS marriages, remarriage, and blended families in simple but powerful ways. She is really my favorite of the three, somehow her work satisfies something in me more than any other LDS author. Now I'm off to bed, because we need to get up by 3:30 to get into Tokyo in time to catch a plane to Fukuoka, to attend the Temple Dedication there on Sunday. It'll be my first dedication, and President Hinckley will be there. Plus we used to live in Fukuoka, so we're looking forward to seeing our old friends. Andrew Hall Nagareyama, Japan ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Richard Johnson Subject: RE: [AML] Divorce in LDS lit. Date: 08 Jun 2000 14:17:20 -0400 At 03:07 PM 6/7/2000 -0600, you wrote: >Well at a minimum there is the issue of the church wanting all leadership >positions held by non-divorced men. I know they strongly discourage calling >divorced men. (Purportedly because they will be biased in dealing with >divorce, or so I'm told) The man wouldn't be able to work in the temple >either. (The over 31, male and single rule) I'm rather sure that whether >guilty or not many in the congregation would blame the Bishop for sinning in >some way as well. Heaven knows there will be lots of pressures on the poor >fellow. However that might make an interesting story. Of course I'm not >sure the average member would appreciate it. > > >-- Clark Goble --- d.c.g@att.net ----------------------------------- You just live in the wrong part of the country. Around here we have divorced High Counselors, divorced Elders Quorum Presidents, and singles over 30 in all kinds of positions (Execultive Secretaries, EQP's, Young Men's Presidents, Ward Clerks and assistants, as well as the occasional Bishop's Counselor and Branch President. About the only callings from which they are restricted are Bishops and Stake Presidents). I don't know about the temple, we have one of the small temples, and a lot of people are going up for training.. I confess I find myself bridling at some of the cliche characterizations of unmarried (not divorced) men over thirty that have been posted. Somehow I think many of these cliches are products of "Happy Valley" culture. I have three unmarried sons between thirty and forty. One has problems and is effectively out of the church, but I think the other two are pretty cool. (actually, so is the other one--) Richard B. Johnson Husband, Father, Grandfather, Puppeteer, Playwright, Writer, Director, Actor, Thingmaker, Mormon, Person, Fool I sometimes think that the last persona is the most important http://www2.gasou.edu/commarts/puppet/ Georgia Southern University Puppet Theatre - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Todd Robert Petersen" Subject: Re: [AML] Divorce in LDS lit. Date: 08 Jun 2000 09:24:24 -0500 Clark Goble wrote: > Rather than deal with divorce, let me use a different example with perhaps > stronger emotion. Consider stories about abusive Bishops, such as Evenson's > last novel. Many of us who've never had such encounters tend to be repulsed > by the basic premise. That keeps us from getting into the book. Those who > sympathize with the premise, because of their own past experiences, will buy > into the book more. Evenson took the basic premise of a corrupt bishop from horror stories he had been told by frinds of his in the church. So, in a sense, anyone who is upset by that book, needs to also be upset, to a certain extent, by some coorupt things that unfortunately exist, not only in our church, but in ALL churches. So, the issue is not what we'd like in our literature, but that which reflects what happens in our world. The scriptures tell us that Satan is going to lead many of us to hell by getting us to say "all is well in Zion." (something Clark also alluded to). As writers are we going to join Satan in creating a climate where Satan can clap rings into our noses or are we going to use our talents to point out the lapses in Zion, the potholes and problems? If you think all is well in Zion, talk to the bishops in Provo/Orem. Dean Hughes was a bishop (or in a bishopric) in Provo for a time, and he told me that he saw every crime in his ward short of murder. Why we feel this overwhelming need to write only about active, good-doing people escapes me. For example, I'm in the Elder's Quorum in my ward, and I look at our ward list of 179 and count 45 to 50 active people which is approximately 25%. The literature that we've been talking about directly concerns a small percentage of the experience in my church community. Of course, these numbers are only for the purpose of illustration, but I think they point to something interesting. Great literature is often "tragic" (a term I use loosely). In other words, it covers people who blew it, who messed up their lives, the lives of their families, and the existence of their countries. And in those tragic stories, they usually aren't redeemed (i.e. Macbeth loses his head, Hamlet gets skewered, Oedipus carves out his own eyes and wanders the countryside.) What about LDS tragedy? Certainly church hitsory is rife with it. Emma Smith's story might be considered tragic in some ways. Mountain Meadows. I do not think that there is any danger in kids taking Macbeth as a role model. In fact, that concern is absurd. However, if literature is merely to entertain (Horace would say "delight") then I guess we should want it to simply match our tastes. But the other half of Horace's dictum is that it should also instruct, which is not always pleasurable or what we want. Literature that instructs should show us the results of bad choices, give us some sense that, in some cases, one can act with so much pride and with so little concern for others that there is no turning back, that sometimes we do get on a train with a one-way ticket to Palookaville. Although we can repent, people do not always do it. It seems reasonable to me that our literature should, in some ways, deal with that. Todd Robert Petersen - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Christopher Bigelow" Subject: [AML] Movies in 2000 Date: 08 Jun 2000 10:52:38 -0700 With occasional lapses, I try to note all movies I see in my planner, and for my journal periodically I type them up and either grade them or rank them in order of my preference. Following are my movies noted so far in 2000, ranked in my order of personal liking and also grouped into three broad categories: Thumb clearly up, for me: High Fidelity Wonder Boys Erin Brockovich God's Army U-571 Run Lola Run (did I forget to note "The Insider," or did I see it last year?) Thumb vascillating: Gladiator (too "epic") Being John Malkovich (too silly in parts) Your Friends and Neighbors (not memorable) The Talented Mr. Ripley (airbrushed, remote) Three Kings (jumbled, overdone) The Cider House Rules (too sentimental) The Hurricane (longish) The Sixth Sense (second viewing; not as satisfying as first time) Bowfinger (not to be taken seriously) Galaxy Quest (not to be taken seriously) The Straight Story (slow, simplistic) The Winslow Boy (slow, muted) Boys Dont' Cry (opaque) Hideous Kinky (slow, laborious) Hillary and Jackie (turned into melodrama) My Life So Far (not memorable) My Son the Fanatic (slow, laborious) The Limey (cold) Thumb clearly down: Return to Me (cloying) Twin Falls, Idaho (boring) Anna and the King (conventional) Dinosaur (kiddie) The Story of Us (unconvincing) Dogma (obnoxious) (By the way, for last year I thought "Election" was a lot better than "American Beauty.") In the interest of getting to know each other's tastes more, does anyone else want to give us their recent movie listing in some form or another? And maybe some of these are worth discussing from a Mormon POV. Chris Bigelow * * * * * * Interested in novels, stories, poems, plays, and films by, for, or about Mormons? Check out IRREANTUM magazine at www.xmission.com/~aml/irreantum.htm. - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Richard Johnson Subject: Re: [AML] Divorce in LDS lit. Date: 08 Jun 2000 14:03:31 -0400 At 05:12 PM 6/7/2000 -0700, you wrote: >You're a single man in his 30s? Hey, I have a single daughter in her 30s! >Don't worry, she's not at all like me! > >barbara hume > Me too! Clark, take note ;-> If she saw this post I'd be a dead man. I think she is convinced that if they still had arranged marriages I would ship her off to the first available slot. Richard B. Johnson Husband, Father, Grandfather, Puppeteer, Playwright, Writer, Director, Actor, Thingmaker, Mormon, Person, Fool I sometimes think that the last persona is the most important http://www2.gasou.edu/commarts/puppet/ Georgia Southern University Puppet Theatre - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jacob Proffitt Subject: [AML] Single LDS Men (was: Divorce in LDS lit.) Date: 08 Jun 2000 14:33:16 -0600 As the only one I remember commenting on single men being problematic, = I'll go ahead and respond to Richard on this. I will preface this by noting = that so far, my voice is a lone one and I haven't received any validation by anyone else on this issue. So you are perhaps a bit hasty if you are = going to draw broad conclusions about culture from my statements. On Thu, 08 Jun 2000 14:17:20 -0400, Richard Johnson wrote: >I confess I find myself bridling at some of the cliche characterizations= of >unmarried (not divorced) men over thirty that have been posted. Somehow= I >think many of these cliches are products of "Happy Valley" culture. I = have >three unmarried sons between thirty and forty. One has problems and is >effectively out of the church, but I think the other two are pretty = cool. >(actually, so is the other one--) I have to admit that my comments are based on areas I have lived where a large population of LDS people are present. Thus, there is a wide = audience of single people and ample opportunity for singles to meet each other and develop relationships. Most of my observations occurred outside of Utah, but still in relatively high LDS populated areas. In a place where there are only six or seven choices for potential mate, = you are going to come up with undoubted difficulties finding a compatible companion and I can see how it would be easy to reach advanced years (oh dear, I just called 30 advanced) as a single man. In fact, I saw exactly that plight in some of the German wards I attended as a missionary. However, I stand by my statements that I would find it unrealistic to = depict a never been married single man in his thirties in a population with many LDS people around without some reasonable explanation that has kept him single. *Something* has happened outside of the ordinary to make this happen. My tendency is that the something is likely something negative about the man. It's harder to believe that a mass delusion has happened = to all the available women. In areas I have lived in with enough of a = single population to support a single adult ward with average attendance over = 150, there is such a selection of beautiful, talented, faithful women that I = have a hard time imagining not being able to find someone compatible to love. The selection of LDS single men above 30 is *much* smaller, so I don't = have the same reservations about single women over 30. The competition is = much more fierce. My sympathies go out to single women in the church over 30. Jacob - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: harlowclark@juno.com Subject: Re: [AML] Jerry JOHNSTON, "Waiting for a great Mormon novelist" Date: 08 Jun 2000 14:49:23 -0700 On Wed, 31 May 2000 23:36:16 EDT Derek1966@aol.com forwarded: > > WAITING FOR A GREAT MORMON NOVELIST > By Jerry Johnston > Published in Deseret News, Wed. June 28, 1989 When I saw this I thought, Oh good, Jerry's back at work after collapsing in the Dallas-Fort Worth Airport on May 3. Then I looked at it again and realized it was written back in 1989, 11 years ago. Then I looked at it again and realized it was published on my birthday, so it must be meant for me. In fact, it was written about the time I was working on a sort of magical realism story, a variant on the three Nephites stories. > They're come to trade in "magic realism." They write realistically about > cultures, but they add fantastic, supernatural elements to their their > novels--elements that take readers by surprise. Just after reading this I was reading Florence Child Brown's _I Cannot Tell a Life_ and came across this passage about a church meeting in Mexico: "When it came time for the speaker, she started to interpret. I told her thanks but it was coming to me in English. So she interpreted it to Linda instead. It was a marvelous experience. I had always heard about the gift of tongues and the gift of interpretation. Now I had a testimony of it for myself. The message of the talk really hit home. It was about keeping faith even in times of adversity" (288). So not only is she hearing the gospel in her own language, she's hearing a message she needs to hear, especially at a moment when she's watching her husband fall in love with her daughter-in-law. BTW, that chapter ends with one of the best scenes I've seen recently: >>>>> When we pulled into the parking lot where Bill Jr.'s car was, he said, "I can't wait to get home and file for a divorce, naming my dad as correspondent." I spoke up, "Why would you do a fool thing like that?" "Because they are in love," he said. "Well, you ought to be glad that they love each other. Most in-laws don't get along as well as they do," I responded. Bill Sr. and Linda didn't say anything. <<<<< Anyone who can come up with that line about filing for divorce ought to be a playwright. Maybe he could even get together with someone like Marilyn McMeen and start a theatre. And the dramatic timing is impeccable, said not simply to his mother, but his father and wife as well. Do I sound heartless? I think one mark of an artist is the ability to see dramatic potential even in scenes that are personally painful to the artist. > Garcia Marquez says he simply writes reality as his people live and > perceive it. When gypsies come to life in his books, when women > get caught away to heaven while hanging out their bedsheets, > that's just the way the world works down south. > > It's also the way the world works here. This reminds me of a comment Benson Parkinson made about "Church publication policy" back on Nov 9, 1999 in the "Exaggerated Experiences (part 2)" thread: >>>>> On a similar line, never do they use strawman arguments, as they once did, or criticize other churches' teachings or even compare them to ours. State what you know, simply and clearly, and bear testimony. That seems like a strong rhetorical stance to me, even if it is the flip side of what I consider a weak stance: If you can't say anything nice don't say anything at all. The strong stance, many people would be surprised to learn, comes from President Packer and is a big part of what Correlation is all about. <<<<< Benson bracketed this statement with two moderator warnings that Correlation is off-topic, which may have stopped some discussion on the topic. It doesn't surprise me at all that President Packer is behind this rhetorical stance. Listen to his stories. Listen to other stories in General Conference. Listen to the stories you hear in church meetings, and not just over the pulpit. Several years ago, in a paper called "Feeding Stories to the Lion." (Association for Mormon Letters Annual, 1997.) I suggested that we have a rich heritage of oral storytelling in the Church, but we usually don't think of it as such because we tell the stories in formal settings, from meetings to fathers and sons outings campfire talks. (At the last outing my bishop described a scout trip when he was a deacon or teacher. The quorum had gone out to the sand dunes with a dune buggy and the Spirit told him not to go riding, but everyone else insisted, so the Spirit said, "If you do, wear a seatbelt," so he kicked someone out of a seat with a seatbelt and put it on--the only person wearing a seatbelt. He described the buggy coming down wrong from a jump and turning over. "It was almost surreal, watching everything roll." (I realized later he had used the word _surreal_ and thought nothing of it.) "I don't know why the Spirit only warned me," he said.) So you have a testimony, told as a story which acknowledges the question of why God warns some people of disasters and not others. I like that a lot, teaching the Gospel through stories. It's much more effective than teaching through propositional logic. Which reminds me of another quote from Benson Parkinson, speaking of Richard Bushman's AML fundraising lecture last October (14-OCT-1999 BUSHMAN, "Finding a Voice in Post-Colonial Mormonism"): "Another component of his voice that I don't think he commented on is that he states, scholarship can't tell us whether Joseph Smith saw God, but it's clear his followers acted like he did, so in telling their stories I'll speak as though they did. He told the AML audience that one thing he delights in is when people get halfway into his book and suddenly stop and look up and say, 'Wait a minute, you really believe this stuff!'" I like that approach a lot. It has a lot of promise for Mormon fiction as well as scholarship. So pray for Jerry Johnston's return. He still has good words to give. Harlow Soderborg Clark ________________________________________________________________ YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET! Juno now offers FREE Internet Access! Try it today - there's no risk! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj. - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jacob Proffitt Subject: Re: [AML] Divorce in LDS lit. Date: 08 Jun 2000 15:02:18 -0600 As the only one who has said anything potentially derogatory about = divorced men (that I can recall), I'll go ahead and respond to D. Michael. It = should be noted that I remain alone in my comments and haven't received any corroboration or validation so it's a little premature to call this a cultural issue. On Thu, 08 Jun 2000 00:40:40 -0600, D. Michael Martindale wrote: >I'm appalled at the statements made about divorced men. Words like >"bigoted" and "ignorant" come to mind, but I'm afraid if I use them, >Jonathan will bump my message, so I won't. Are there those of you who >really believe that men are substantially more defective than women, >more at fault in relationships, more screwed up if things don't work? If >so, why are these attitudes considered acceptable, when comparable ones >about race would be mercilessly condemned? Or comparable ones about >women, for that matter? I never said that divorced men are more defective than divorced women. = The discussion was about an over 30 male protagonist in a romance situation. =46eel free to apply my statements about divorced men to divorced women. A divorce says something negative about you whether you are a man or a woman. Even if that someone was not at fault in the divorce. If you are divorced, it is clear that something likely *was* wrong with you. You = made an eternal choice and were unable to keep it eternal. If that something = is still wrong, then there is a flag that should legitimately be raised. = Now, this doesn't *have* to be the case. I don't speak for God, and I can't judge what revelation someone else has or hasn't received, but I'd be willing to bet that if God ever does lead someone to enter an eternal covenant He knows will be broken that it's a pretty rare occurrence for = some pretty specific reasons. Marriage is an incredibly important decision. It is so important that it= is the *only* ordinance where two mortals make covenants to each other. All the other covenants are made between us and God. Only marriage includes someone else. I agree that we tend to take that a little lightly in the mad-to-be-married culture prevalent in our LDS youth. As a result of = this pressure to get married, sometimes bad decisions are made. I'd also like to reiterate that just because someone made bad decisions = in the past doesn't have to mean *anything* about who they are now. Some of= my favorite people on this list are divorcees and I can see that whatever = their mistakes in the past, they are wonderful, caring, great people to be = around right now. Even so, if I were in the market to marry them, I would take special care= to make sure that some potentially marriage-breaking flaw isn't still = present. It may be a momentary pause, but it's a pause nonetheless. And frankly, it's a necessary pause. And it should be only one of many pauses made during the courtship process. Jacob Proffitt [MOD: I think this is a legitimate issue for discussion on this thread--but let's keep in mind that the focus should be on how the various Mormon views of marriage, divorce, etc., are or should be reflected in Mormon literature. That leaves a lot of open ground for discussion--but in the end, the discussion should keep coming back to literature.] - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Thom Duncan Subject: Re: [AML] Divorce in LDS lit. Date: 08 Jun 2000 15:32:15 -0600 Todd Robert Petersen wrote: > > If you think all is well in Zion, talk to the bishops in Provo/Orem. Dean > Hughes was a bishop (or in a bishopric) in Provo for a time, and he told me > that he saw every crime in his ward short of murder. In 1994, I stood on my front porch in North East talking with a member of my ward who taught abnormal psychology at BYU. During the course of the conversation, he said to me, "Thom, within one mile of where we're standing, every possible kind of sexual perversion you could imagine is being perpetrated on an almost daily basis." On another occasion, I was at a wedding reception and was talking to a practicing therapist who told me she specialized in Bishops, and she quoted a rather significant percentage of Bishops who are in treatment at any one time. Yes, Zion has a dark underbelly. It does us no good as writers to pretend it doesn't. We don't have to wallow in it, necessarily. We don't have to write stories like Evensen does, if we don't feel so moved. But we should acknowledge and then move on. > Why we feel this overwhelming need to write only about active, good-doing > people escapes me. I used to feel this way also, but Barbara Hume has convinced me that, just because something exists, doesn't mean we *have* to writer about it. My personal preference remains: stories about shiny happy people make me ill, but I don't expect other Mormon writers to share my distaste. Having said that, I just noticed my sig file automatically pop up at the end of this post. It describes a series of books I've been writing since 1990 which are decidedly NOT the kind of thing I prefer. The Moroni Smith books (considered by some as juveniles, by others as magic realism -- to me, they are pure adventure in the Indiana Jones style) are clean, the characters are just a little thicker than cardboard -- basically tongue-in-cheek pure fun, with the occasional history lesson on Mormon Urban Legends thrown in for good measure. I quite enjoyed writing the three (so far) episodes. Our culture and religion is large enough to contain all kinds of literature: the dark and the sublime, the noble and the tragedy, the literary and the genre. -- Thom Duncan Read the further adventures of Moroni Smith, the LDS Indiana Jones! The long-awaited second episode in the Moroni Smith LDS adventure series, _Moroni Smith: In Search of the Gold Plates_ is now available as an e-book at the Zion's Fiction web page: http://www.zfiction.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Clark Goble" Subject: [AML] RE: Sexuality in LDS Literature Date: 08 Jun 2000 13:29:27 -0600 ___ Edgar ___ | If you believe the D&C language comes directly from God, how do | you account for the quotes from SoS? ___ I don't have any problems with the Song of Solomon - it has historically been a fairly influential text. However the above seems almost akin to an argument by etymology. Just because a text expresses itself with a particular phrase doesn't mean it agrees with context of the original phrase. Also the amount of inspiration for particular phrases in inspiration is debatable. Many Mormons disagree with how much Joseph was involved in the translation or speaking of texts. It might be that the phrase conveyed an idea God wished to express so he took it out of Joseph's mind without worrying about it's connection to the Song of Solomon. It may have been that Joseph got an idea from God and used a quote from the Song of Solomon to express it - possibly not even aware it came from the Song of Solomon. Or perhaps God really did want to quote the Song of Solomon. No one really can say for sure. My own feeling is that Joseph's method of revelation was at least qualitatively like my own or others I know. In that case we usually get general ideas or concept and then express them as best we can. ___ Edgar ___ | If you believe Joseph had a lot of input in dictating | the D&C revelations (which I believe must have been | the case--another topic for another day), that means | he likely read the entire SoS ___ As I said above, it might not be *that* conscious. However I think it a safe assumption that Joseph read the Song of Solomon. He grew up reading the Bible to some degree. Even the comment in the JST implies he'd studied it enough to decide it wasn't inspired literature. -- Clark Goble --- d.c.g@att.net ----------------------------------- - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Cathy Wilson" Subject: Re: [AML] Divorce in LDS lit. Date: 08 Jun 2000 15:49:01 -0600 Playing devil's advocate to Jacob, who said: Marriage is an incredibly important decision. It is so important that it is the *only* ordinance where two mortals make covenants to each other. All the other covenants are made between us and God. Only marriage includes someone else. I agree that we tend to take that a little lightly in the mad-to-be-married culture prevalent in our LDS youth. As a result of this pressure to get married, sometimes bad decisions are made I would ask: Is it possible for ANYbody to choose well at hormone-hot 21? Observing my grown children, and remembering myself, young people are so immature. They really only grow up when they get closer to 30, I think. It is so hard to make a good marriage decision when your personality and character are still so formative. In fact, I think it is hard to make one generally. . . I recall an LDS friend, a widow, who went with a guy for four years. They traveled together and spent a LOT of time together. She thought she knew him. Then, when they married, she found he was an altogether different character. She didn't go into the details, but evidently the realities were quite bizarre. The marraiage was annulled a few months after the marriage. So yes, to Jacob, choosing who we marry is one of those paramount choices. Knowing that, and observing how few really good marriages seem to be around, I often muse: how does anyone even dare to get married, anyhow? Add to that the schizoid messages we give our young people about sex: NO NO NO bad bad bad; then, after a short temple ceremony, YES, do anything you like (and you have all heard those horror stories about how young husbands, so long denying themselves sex in order to stay chaste, hurt their new wives by their uncontrolled appetites). It's a wonder that marriages work at all. I am saying all of this of course in the context of a totally blissful second marriage--but that happened after 24 years in a terrible one. Cathy (Gileadi) Wilson Editing Etc. 15 East 600 North Price UT 84501 435-637-8744 - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Thom Duncan Subject: Re: [AML] Divorce in LDS lit. Date: 08 Jun 2000 15:58:07 -0600 Jacob Proffitt wrote: > A divorce says something negative about you whether you are a man or a > woman. Only if the person doing the judging discounts free agency. It is quite possible that a divorce may be entirely the fault of the other person. > If you are > divorced, it is clear that something likely *was* wrong with you. You made > an eternal choice and were unable to keep it eternal. Even God couldn't keep his family together for all eternity. What was *wrong* with him? I know. He believed in free agency too much. Maybe he should have forced the one third of the hosts of heaven to not rebel. > If that something is > still wrong, then there is a flag that should legitimately be raised. Now, > this doesn't *have* to be the case. I don't speak for God, and I can't > judge what revelation someone else has or hasn't received, but I'd be > willing to bet that if God ever does lead someone to enter an eternal > covenant He knows will be broken that it's a pretty rare occurrence for some > pretty specific reasons. The scriptures abound in God telling his children to do things that otherwise break covenants: Nephi killed Laban, Abraham lied, etc. It is not inconceivable that God may direct a man or woman to divorce for a reason we don't fully understand. Now THAT would make an interesting story (to bring this back to literature). What about a man (or woman) who is in a marvelous marriage. One day they get a revelation sort of like: Build it and he will come that they should get divorced. Forget it. Before I divulge more. I like that idea so much, *I'* going to write it. No one else can touch. Forget I ever said it. It's a bad idea anyway. No, really, you don't need this idea -- you probably have enough all ready .... -- Thom (rushing to his word processor even as we read) - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Clark Goble" Subject: RE: [AML] Divorce in LDS lit. Date: 08 Jun 2000 16:14:38 -0600 (I'll keep this on the literature and avoid most tangents) ___ Jacob ___ | A divorce says something negative about you whether you are a | man or a woman. Even if that someone was not at fault in the | divorce. If you are divorced, it is clear that something | likely *was* wrong with you. You made an eternal choice and | were unable to keep it eternal. ___ Remember though that saying 'something is wrong with you' tends to have the connotation that you did something wrong or you are a defective person. Lets change the situation to a very similar one. Each of us is divorced from God because of *our* acts. We are at fault. However because of *our* acts something is wrong with God. His family is separated and broken up. Now take a step back from that and ask yourself - are you comfortable with saying there is something wrong with God? I'm not. I think we do need to watch our rhetoric in these matters. Connotations often communicate what we don't intend. On the other hand I think the LDS view of our divine family has some very interesting archetypes for dealing with divorce. Those archetypes, not found in most other faiths, really would be an interesting undertone in any story. Let us also remember that quiet a few of the early prophets of this dispensation had at least one divorce. So those divorced in the church are hardly unique. Of course people in the church feel very uncomfortable bringing those divorces up. ___ Jacob ___ | I'd be willing to bet that if God ever does lead someone to enter | an eternal covenant He knows will be broken that it's a pretty | rare occurrence for some pretty specific reasons. ___ Hmm. I assume you mean led to a covenant broken by an other person. After all most covenants God leads people to will be broken. While marriage is the covenant we think of as being a two way bonding, it isn't the only community like covenant. In Mosiah 15 we read of baptism as that sort of covenant between the person and the new community of Christ. We bind ourselves to them, albeit not as in marriage, even though probably most converts fall away. You certainly have a point, so don't get me wrong. I just think things are a little more complex than you let on. I honestly think that just because God tells us to do something doesn't mean that events will be ideal, good or even eternal. (Even if they might be) One can't help but wonder about the story of Joseph and Emma. The expunged version reads like an ideal tale. The unexpunged version makes one wonder if Joseph is the best example of what you say wouldn't happen. Once again though, like the many early divorces, this is an issue which our literature is largely silent about. Perhaps that is a tragedy. ___ Richard ___ | Somehow I think many of these cliches are products of "Happy | Valley" culture. ___ Oh I agree 100%. However we can't underestimate the influence of "Happy Valley" culture on the church. Quite often it is exported as if it were church doctrine. Even where there isn't an influx of people who lived in the Utah region there is the fact that most literature expresses the views of people from Utah. That might be changing slowly, but I bet you will still find that most books have a strong Utah bias. ___ Michael ___ | Are there those of you who really believe that men are | substantially more defective than women, more at fault in | relationships, more screwed up if things don't work? ___ I'd be surprised if they were more guilty on average. However the shape of our culture does affect the stresses on our relationships. Without turning into a feminist let me say that what society holds up as 'the good' to men probably ends up putting more stresses on relationships than what society holds as 'the good' to women. The changing society and the church members conservative view of society affects things too. A woman who wishes to work and be married in the church will be looked at differently than out of the church, for instance. So things cut both ways. If someone is writing a book on this they hopefully will note that a lot of things people do come from society as well as their own stupidity. The whole approach of "let's see what the individual did' isn't always that good. Men (and women) may be guilty of not analyzing their desires and assumptions to see which they are coming from the world. However we all do that to some degree or an other. ___ Michael ___ | If so, why are these attitudes considered acceptable, when | comparable ones about race would be mercilessly condemned? Or | comparable ones about women, for that matter? ___ That is an interesting example. There are two sides to this. One side might say we ought to hold up the ideal in our literature to show that the stereotypes are wrong. So back before women or blacks were in leadership positions we'd see them as such in TV without the problems they would face in real life. But there was an other side that hated these and wanted more realistic portrayals. These people felt, for instance, that the Cosby Show did a disservice because it taught whites that blacks were like the Huxtables (sp?) and racism was over. It's an interesting issue and goes back to my comments the other day about the goals of the author and the audience they are trying to reach. I'm just as bothered as you by some portrayals of singles and divorced people, even when there may be truth in them. But I think the problem is how well the author deals with these people as full, rounded characters. I then think the next issue is how well they communicate their message. Stereotypes can sometimes be quite effective for an author to utilize. -- Clark Goble --- d.c.g@att.net ----------------------------------- - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Barbara@techvoice.com (Barbara R. Hume) Subject: Re: [AML] Divorce in LDS lit. Date: 08 Jun 2000 16:21:24 -0700 > My personal preference remains: stories about shiny happy people >make me ill, but I don't expect other Mormon writers to share my >distaste. Stories about the dark underbelly make ME ill. I don't deny anyone's right to write it or the purpose such literature might serve, but I feel for myself that life is too short to wallow in the mire. Personally, I like happiness, although I think it should be earned, and I think it should result from awareness. But whenever you say "should" you're making a judgment. I just read an LDS novel--a fairly good one, well-plotted, that did not pretend that life is always wonderful if you're LDS--and a book published as a Christian novel. The second was far more gripping and interesting to me. I see now why that is: the characters were real. They had depth and substance. I could believe they existed. One of those characters I will remember and think about for a long time. The characters in the LDS book were basically empty of subtance. They were all surface, like those propped-up building fronts on a movie set. It occurred to me that that's the main problem I have with Mormon fiction. The characters seem to be manipulated by the writer to prove a point rather than to be developed and fleshed out so that they story they live seems inevitable given their characters and personalities. Another problem I have with it, I think, is that the lifestyle set forth as the ultimate happiness would be heck on wheels for me. I recently checked out the last page of a Mormon novel to see what kind of ending it had. The protagonist is deliriously happy because now she's a pregnant housewife. Please tell me that there are other heavens for females! That one would not be mine! We are not all all the same! Stories about housewives are the dark underbelly for more of us than you might think. barbara hume - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Tyler Moulton" Subject: Re: [AML] Movies in 2000 Date: 08 Jun 2000 17:20:06 -0600 As a response to one of the items on Chris's movie list: (This does have = an AML thread if you'll hold on.) I saw the Cider House Rules a couple nights ago and would like to comment = on one aspect of the film. The three people who went with me came away = feeling that the director had used the film as a blatant attempt to = promote pro-choice rhetoric.=20 But my response was very different. While the pro-choice messages were = apparent, they were all delivered through monologue from Dr. Karch. His = statements, however, were patently propagandistic and came across that way = to the viewer. Behind the didacticism--and making a much more subtle, = though far more powerful, statement--were the images of Homer taking the = aborted fetuses out to the incinerator. We never had to see them; but = Homer did, and we saw his response. Those images had far more emotional = impact than any of the dialogue about "choice."=20 So I don't know what (if any) message the director intended on the subject = of abortion. (Now for the AML connection.) Those who write for the LDS market are faced = with the challenge of dealing with issues that will offend many in the = market just by being brought up. No matter how well an author devises a = story, if she or he presents ambiguity on a moral issue, there are those = in our midst who are not going to hesitate to march down to their = bookstore and register their complaints. My three friends at Cider House Rules (all smarter than myself) were = annoyed by the pro-choice content of the film. But all three agreed after = some discussion that it would be extremely difficult to come away from = such a film FEELING pro-choice. The emotional undercurrent of the film = leaned strongly in the opposite direction. But these intelligent, = educated, discriminating viewers initially hated the movie on the grounds = that it was pro-choice propaganda. (We all disliked the film for a wholly = separate set of reasons, but that's another thread.) So is there a way around the audience's knee-jerk reaction to troubling = issues? And when the audience (the market) defines the acceptable = boundaries for a publisher, how does a good LDS writer, whose message may = be powerful but subtle, get their book in print? In our market, mainstream = (read "conservative") publishers are generally hesitant to take on issues = that will stir controversy and draw fire, even when the writing may be = brilliant and the ultimate message redemptive. This market takes offense = easily and tends to hold a grudge. Artists and writers frequently seek to educate the market by pushing the = boundaries of thought. But publishers want books that fit what the market = already wants. Most of those reading fiction are not looking for tutelage = but vicarious life--not escapism necessarily, but experience beyond their = own. But if the experience is too far beyond the accepted norm, it becomes = troubling, disturbing, and offensive. The writer walks a tightrope of wanting to tell a story and explore the = issues that are central to the lives of his/her characters, while also = hoping to be published. The publisher faces the need for the books they = take on to be successful in the marketplace. This is not always a dichotomy, but it frequently becomes one--and in our = market the dividing line can be a moral issue, a doctrinal stand, or even = a literary approach. =20 Does anyone have concrete thoughts on this? Tyler Moulton (I'm still relatively new to the LDS publishing arena, so I'm eager to = learn from those with more wisdom than myself.) - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Clark Goble" Subject: RE: [AML] Divorce in LDS lit. Date: 08 Jun 2000 16:23:42 -0600 Thom and quite few others mention all the sins going on within Zion. I certainly am aware of those, but I don't think most people have direct experience with them. That was my point. That lack of experience will affect how the reader reacts to your work. You have to take into consideration the goal of your work and your audience. As I said, if Evenson's goal was to explain the problems of sinful bishops and abusers in wards, he did a poor job. The people who would most likely accept his work were the people who most likely already agreed. At that point you are preaching to the choir, as I mentioned. I wonder if anyone saw anything new in that book who already held the views? And I wonder how many of those who disagreed with Evenson were swayed by the book, in the off chance they actually read it? I obviously can't say. To me the best part of good literature is what it teaches and how it reaches us. Shakespeare works because it takes disturbing tragedies and shares it with the regular person. (Especially back when the average person could get into his prose - difficult today) So I love Macbeth and Hamlet, but realize that Shakespeare utilizes a lot of stereotypes. I'd further say that while great literature may often be tragic, not all of Shakespeare's great works were tragedies. And a lot of people would rather see a comedy or romance than a tragedy. -- Clark Goble --- d.c.g@att.net ----------------------------------- - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Kent Larsen Subject: [AML] MN Medved Gives God's Army 3-1/2 Stars: Medved Show 7Jun00 A4 Date: 08 Jun 2000 08:00:00 -0400 
From Mormon-News: See footer for instructions on joining and leaving this list.
Do you have an opinion on this news item? Send it to letters.to.editor@MormonsToday.com

Medved Gives God's Army 3-1/2 Stars
(God's Army (Review))
Medved Show 7Jun00 A4

http://www.medvedshow.com/catalog/nidetail.asp?t=MEDV&p=PCAQZAAMY&n=1

SEATTLE, WASHINGTON -- Nationally known film reviewer Michael Medved 
gave LDS film God's Army three and one-half stars in his review 
published on his website. Medved said he found the movie, 
"fascinating, riveting, and emotionally satisfying."

Meved in particular praises the film for its realistic appraisal of 
the struggles that everyone, including missionaries have with faith. 
He says that he was imporessed by  "the inclusion of one character 
who begins to doubt the whole Joseph Smith story  which provides the 
cornerstone of Mormon truth. He struggles over leaving the church and 
the mission, and the movie never simplifies  his problems nor wimps 
out on his sympathetic portrayal. Faith  remains a choice for these 
idealistic characters."

Medved says the performances in the film are, "superior-some of them 
superb-with a level of acting that most mainstream releases could 
rightly envy," and praises the treatment of spiritual matters, saying 
that their portrayal "never seems cheap or manipulative." The review 
also says that the film, while making a case for the LDS faith, does 
it in "a surprisingly subtle, balanced, sophisticated way.  Dutcher 
leaves unresolved questions, refusing to wrap up his gripping  story 
in a neatly-tied, beribboned package.  . . .  The  picture, in other 
words, displays some dramatic integrity."

"You leave the film feeling the same way I've always felt about the 
LDS members I know well in real life: whatever my doubts (and they 
are big ones) about their theology, you can't help liking these 
people," writes Medved.

He goes on to discourage children under 10 from seeing the film 
because of its "intense and serious content." But suggests that 
non-Mormons who have seen LDS missionaries on the street, can get an 
idea of what missionaries go through in "this amazingly accomplished 
effort." Medved concludes noting that the missionaries motto in the 
film is 'Let's Do Some Good Today.' "Whatever your faith, the picture 
has the odd impact of filling you with the same resolve."






>From Mormon-News: Mormon News and Events
Forwarding is permitted as long as this footer is included
Mormon News items may not be posted to the World Wide Web sites
without permission. Please link to our pages instead.
For more information see  http://www.MormonsToday.com/

Send join and remove commands to: majordomo@MormonsToday.com
Put appropriate commands in body of the message:
To join: subscribe mormon-news
To leave: unsubscribe mormon-news
To join digest: subscribe mormon-news-digest
- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Kent Larsen Subject: [AML] MN Needed Gilgal Funds Raised, Date: 08 Jun 2000 08:40:00 -0400 
From Mormon-News: See footer for instructions on joining and leaving this list.
Do you have an opinion on this news item? Send it to letters.to.editor@MormonsToday.com

Needed Gilgal Funds Raised, But Purchase Snagged Over Boundaries
(Gilgal Garden Purchase Snagged Over Boundaries)
Salt Lake Tribune 8Jun00 A4

http://www.sltrib.com/06082000/utah/56234.htm
By Rebecca Walsh: Salt Lake Tribune

SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH -- The Friends of Gilgal have finally raised all 
the funds needed to purchase the garden, and is ready to hand the 
funds to the national Trust for Public Lands, which will buy the 
garden and three nearby homes and turn them over to the city. But, a 
new snag in the deal has appeared because of misunderstandings over 
the property lines.

"Everybody assumed that the fence was what we're buying," said 
Assistant City Attorney Lynn Pace. "Turns out the fence isn't 
necessarily the property line. We need to resolve these boundary 
description problems." The boundary problems need to be resolved 
before the sale is scheduled to close June 19th.

In addition, the fund raising isn't entirely over. While the Friends 
have raised enough to complete the purchase, they still need another 
$50,000 for initial maintenance costs. The initial maintenance will 
include installing new fencing, lighting and a sprinkling system. 
And, on top of that, the friends think they need another $500,000 to 
$800,000 to restore the crumbling statues. None of this initial 
maintenance will change the city's plans to open the garden as a 
public park, just add to the things that need to be done for the 
garden.

The garden is the creation of LDS bishop Thomas Child, a stonemason 
and sculptor Maurice Brooks, who filled the garden with an eclectic 
group of sculptures and stoneworks, many of which reflect LDS themes. 
When Child died in 1963, the garden was purchased by Henry Fetzer, 
who's children are now trying to sell the garden because the 
liability and maintenance have become too much for the family.

The Friends of Gilgal started three years ago, persuading the Fetzer 
family to not sell the garden to a Canadian real estate company that 
wanted to build condominiums. Persuading the San Francisco-based 
Trust for Public Lands to intervene and buy an option on the 
property, they then started raising the money needed to make the 
purchase. The LDS Church pledged $100,000, as did the Eccles 
Foundation. Salt Lake County then pledged $400,000, nearly completing 
the purchase price.









>From Mormon-News: Mormon News and Events
Forwarding is permitted as long as this footer is included
Mormon News items may not be posted to the World Wide Web sites
without permission. Please link to our pages instead.
For more information see  http://www.MormonsToday.com/

Send join and remove commands to: majordomo@MormonsToday.com
Put appropriate commands in body of the message:
To join: subscribe mormon-news
To leave: unsubscribe mormon-news
To join digest: subscribe mormon-news-digest
- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Benson Parkinson Subject: [AML] Divorce (was FILLERUP, _Beyond the River_) Date: 08 Jun 2000 18:33:26 -0700 (MST) | Oh, speaking of MB Young, that reminds me of another subject. We have also | talked about depicting divorce in literature, and in her collection of | stories _Love Chains_ (Signature, 1997), Young depicts the impact of broken | LDS marriages, remarriage, and blended families in simple but powerful ways. This is an important theme in Salvador as well. Benson Parkinson - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Larry Jackson Subject: [AML] Divorce in LDS lit. Date: 08 Jun 2000 22:18:15 EDT Todd Robert Petersen: So, the issue is not what we'd like in our literature, but that which reflects what happens in our world. ... are we going to use our talents to point out the lapses in Zion, the potholes and problems? If you think all is well in Zion, talk to the bishops in Provo/Orem. Dean Hughes was a bishop (or in a bishopric) in Provo for a time, and he told me that he saw every crime in his ward short of murder. _______________ Well then, he was fortunate. But, since I only had to handle one of them, how on earth do I write that story without destroying a few lives? Larry Jackson ________________________________________________________________ YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET! Juno now offers FREE Internet Access! Try it today - there's no risk! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj. - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Gae Lyn Henderson" Subject: RE: [AML] Divorce in LDS lit. Date: 08 Jun 2000 20:36:58 -0600 Jacob Proffitt says: A divorce says something negative about you whether you are a man or a woman. Even if that someone was not at fault in the divorce. If you are divorced, it is clear that something likely *was* wrong with you. Jacob, I have to say I am shocked to read these words. Let me use one of my friends as an example. She was married in the temple and had three young children. Her husband got involved with another woman at work. He had an affair. My friend continued to work to make the marriage work. She attended marriage counseling with her husband. She held on for several years. He couldn't give up the other woman. All her friends advised her to get a divorce. She prayed and tried harder, tried her best to meet her husband's needs. Finally, the blatant unfaithfulness caused her to reluctantly divorce. What is wrong with my friend? I state loudly and clearly: Nothing. In my opinion, she was/is a wonderful woman. I feel confident she will be blessed for her righteousness. I suspect that judgment might fall upon those who fault her. Please, Mormon authors: help contradict in your writing the kind of unfair categorization that would stigmatize my dear friend. Gae Lyn Henderson - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Jerry Enos" Subject: Re: [AML] Movies in 2000 Date: 08 Jun 2000 23:11:09 -0600 Do to finances I don't see many movies and it has been about a year since the last one but I had to comment. Aren't some of the movies on this list rated PG-13 or above? Personaly the only one on the list you gave that I have wished I could see is God's Army. I will not even look at one rated R and I think several times before seeing one rated PG-13. I guess that's another reason I haven't seen many movies in recent years. There aren't enough good ones with acceptable ratings. Any one else agree with me? Konnie Enos - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "D. Michael Martindale" Subject: Re: [AML] Divorce in LDS lit. Date: 09 Jun 2000 00:58:39 -0600 "Barbara R. Hume" wrote: > Besides, there seem to be many more women out there, and the ratio gets > worse and worse as people get older. We've all seen the rows and rows of > blue-haired widows in church, but never rows and rows of bald-headed old coots. > > I read someplace that if all the marriagable men in America actually got > married, there would still be 3 1/2 million women left over. So the single > guy in the novel Richard is talking about will probably know at least one > woman whose theory is that with the odds so bad, she might as well > concentrate on fame and fortune and forget about men. Maybe polygamy wasn't such a bad idea after all. -- D. Michael Martindale dmichael@wwno.com ================================== Check out Worldsmiths, the new online LDS writers group, at http://www.wwno.com/worldsmiths Sponsored by Worlds Without Number http://www.wwno.com ================================== - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "D. Michael Martindale" Subject: Re: [AML] Divorce in LDS lit. Date: 09 Jun 2000 01:53:37 -0600 Jacob Proffitt wrote: > As the only one who has said anything potentially derogatory about divorced > men (that I can recall), I'll go ahead and respond to D. Michael. It should > be noted that I remain alone in my comments and haven't received any > corroboration or validation so it's a little premature to call this a > cultural issue. If you were the only one, you must have said derogatory stuff over and over again, because I'm sure I read more than one message that disturbed me. In fact, I tried to restrain myself for as long as possible, but kept getting disturbed. I'm not going to go back and review (because I'd hate to prove myself wrong) but I swear there were some negative female opinions about divorced men in the mix somewhere. > A divorce says something negative about you whether you are a man or a > woman. Even if that someone was not at fault in the divorce. If you are > divorced, it is clear that something likely *was* wrong with you. You made > an eternal choice and were unable to keep it eternal. And I'm still being disturbed. I suppose technically I must conceded that you're right, but in practice the difference is meaningless. There's something wrong with everyone, old or young, single or married or divorced. I don't see how a person has any greater assurance that the young, unmarried person he or she is considering as a partner is more "whole" than a divorced person--on the contrary, the divorced person is more likely to be entering the relationship with eyes wide open, knowing what to expect. In all cases, serious contemplation must go into the decision to choose a particular candidate. Perhaps the only thing "wrong" the first time through was being naive enough to succumb to the strong pressure in LDS culture to get married, and not having a clue how to choose a good mate, but being too inexperienced to even realize it. There may be more "wrong" in BYU bishops, religion instructors, and firesides, than in former spouses. And that's why I'm glad Richard chose a divorced protagonist. This is a topic similar to the one on sex--so criticial that we can't afford to pussyfoot around with it for fear of offending the fainthearted. Too many people are marrying under pressure and in ignorance, and too many decent people who made mistakes in who they married are getting demonized. The truths about the LDS marriage culture needs to be told. It's ironic that I'm taking this stand, because I am very much opposed to divorce, even under circumstances where a lot of people would say, "These things happen," or "It's better for the children yada yada." If there's anything wrong in a divorced person, it's usually selfishness--the unwillingness to work through things. Both partners generally contribute to a bad relationship, but it's very easy for one selfish partner to stymy any hope of dealing with the problems. In such a case, I would be very reticent to condemn the other partner, who would be willing to work through them. -- D. Michael Martindale dmichael@wwno.com ================================== Check out Worldsmiths, the new online LDS writers group, at http://www.wwno.com/worldsmiths Sponsored by Worlds Without Number http://www.wwno.com ================================== - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Todd Robert Petersen" Subject: Re: [AML] Divorce in LDS lit. Date: 08 Jun 2000 18:56:40 -0500 I welcome Thom's comments, but let me point out a basic "flaw" in his logic, one that has been made often on this list and in other discussions I have had on the topic of what "good Mormon writers" should or should not be written about write about> Thom's discussion of the abnormal psychology professor and the therapist who specializes in bishops was important to me, though I'm sure NOT all that pleasant to think about. Thom said: > Yes, Zion has a dark underbelly. It does us no good as writers to > pretend it doesn't. We don't have to wallow in it, necessarily. I'm not sure that correcting the tendency of LDS writers to look away from that which is damaged in our culture means to wallow in it. I think of the great literature of the last few hundred years. Does Dostoyevski wallow? Steinbeck? Faulkner? To pay serious artistic attention to the problems of a culture can be one way of helping that culture to heal or restore itself. To "pass on" as Thom suggests, indicates an attitude that means that we, as artists don't have to attend to these things. I think that is both dangerous and false. I think the issue here is with the idea of "wallowing" in things. Real writers don't wallow, though they are often accused of it. John Gardner said something once (I think it is in ON MORAL FICTION) that is instructive here. I'll have to paraphrase: Say that there is a volcano full of the skulls of babies thrown in as sacrifice. The writer who simply points out that there are 10,000 dead baby skulls and proceeds to describe each one is to be condemned. The writer who tries to prevent the 10,001st is to be commended. Thus it is intent. What is it that we're trying to do when we turn over the stones in our culture? Thom is right when he says: > Our culture and religion is large enough to contain all kinds of literature: > the dark and the sublime, the noble and the tragedy, the literary and the > genre. Let us hope that the audiences and our leaders recognize this as well. So is it possible to look without wallowing? Yes. Unfortunately, one man's attempt to right wrongs is another man's wallowing. Todd Robert Petersen - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Todd Robert Petersen" Subject: [AML] Race and Culture in LDS Lit. (was: Divorce in LDS Lit.) Date: 08 Jun 2000 19:22:11 -0500 I'm going to steal a thread from Clark. He posed the following question and observation. > Consider a suburban Mormon trying to write _Boyz in the Hood_. Probably > wouldn't come off terribly well. Still, there are Mormons from Compton, Watts, DC, Philly, Southside Chicago, etc. They have something to say, but regular LDS audiences won't be ready to hear it for a while. A suburban Mormon generally doesn't think about African Americans. I'm sorry but this is true. Margaret Blair Young is involved with a wonderful group called Genesis (if I'm not mistaken), which is a group of African Ameircan Saints who are doing some wonderful work in recovering and preparing texts that address the issues of these faithful members. I think that many would love to hear these narratives, but I think that the general body of the church in America, at least, has a real hard time with folks who aren't white, not that we're racist necessarily, but we haven't learned to make room in our culture or our literature for these people. It has been my contention for a long time that if there were ever a black member of The Twelve, one-third of the members in Utah, Idaho, and Arizona would apostasize within a half hour of the announcement. Okay, so that's a bit over-dramatic, but I think the point is sound. We're not over our past relationship with slavery and the priesthood rights of black members. Twenty-two years is not all that long. Of course, I am speaking in sweeping generalities. Broad strokes. Todd Robert Petersen - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Margaret Young Subject: Re: [AML] Divorce (was FILLERUP, _Beyond the River_) Date: 09 Jun 2000 10:24:09 -0600 Thanks for mentioning this, Ben. An interesting note on my current project, relative to the divorce theme: Jane Manning James was abandoned by her husband, and divorced him, then had a brief (2 year) re-marriage with another man. In her own dictated life history, however, she never mentions her divorce, and refers to her first husband, Isaac (who eventually returned to her in Salt Lake--after a twenty-year absence) as her "husband." She even asked President W. Woodruff if she and "my husband" Isaac might be adopted into Joseph Smith's family as children (though as far as I can ascertain, no re-marriage ever took place.). In both the novel and our play _I Am Jane_--which opens in Bill and Marilyn Brown's wonderful Villa Theatre on June 30--we depict this event which Jane was so loathe to speak about. We also address the fact that her first son was fathered by (as family rumor has it) a white preacher--something Jane also did not speak about. We are "uncovering" things about her life which were apparently taboo subjects for her. I'm afraid that's one thing writers do--take off the masks. Wish I had time to comment further. (I also owe Ben an apology for not having reviewed some material he sent me. My co-author and I have had the delightful experience of massively re-writing a couple of chapters when new material came to light, setting our publication date back a week and re-doing galleys. For those of you who are aware of the Church's Genesis Group, you should know that the widow of the first Genesis president--who was set apart by then "Elder" Gordon B. Hinckley--passed away yesterday morning. Funeral Tuesday. You may contact me personally for more details.) Benson Parkinson wrote: > | Oh, speaking of MB Young, that reminds me of another subject. We have also > | talked about depicting divorce in literature, and in her collection of > | stories _Love Chains_ (Signature, 1997), Young depicts the impact of broken > | LDS marriages, remarriage, and blended families in simple but powerful ways. > > This is an important theme in Salvador as well. > > Benson Parkinson > > - > AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature > http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Ivan Angus Wolfe Subject: [AML] Divorce in LDS Lit Date: 09 Jun 2000 10:39:11 -0600 (MDT) In Literature one of the things we explore is various ways of looking at the world. Here are several ways of looking at the statistics/numbers of Divorce: 1. The much vaunted 50% divorce rate comes from comparing new marriages to new divorces - but it ignores the wide pool of already married people. Even using this way of looking at it, LDS Temple marriages only have a 14% divorce rate (it's much higher for non-temple marriages). 2. Or look at this way: If there were 20 people at dinner, and 18 of them had successful, lasting first marriages, and the other two were Elizabeth Taylor and Johhny Carson, you'd have a fairly close to 50% divorce rate, yet only 2 of the people had ever been divorced. It's a bit unfair to use such extreme examples, but many people who do get divorced tend to go through 3 to 4 spouses before settling down (or giving up on it altogether). [The much vaunted "Mormons have a high divorce rate" comes from Anti-mormon propoganda or a misattributed quote (expressed only as opinion, not as fact) from the Deseret news that was repeated over and over again until people stopped questioning it and accepted it without studying it]. 3. Another way of looking at the divorce rate is how often first time marriages stay together - 75% of the time. Any marriage (whether first, second, third, fourth of fifteenth) has a 90% chance of survival. Using this method of looking at the numbers first time LDS temple marriages have something akin to a 93% survival rate. But even there, each way of looking at the numbers (optomistic 90% survival rate, or pessimistic 50% divorce rate) clouds some issues while revealing others. Each one is quoted (and the others ignored) when a person has an agenda to get across. Balance is the key, in Life and Literature. Literature needs to be a bit more focused on both sides of the issues/statistcs unless it wishes to become propogandistic. (Above statisitcs gleaned from a variety of sources, the two main of which are 1. A British travel guide called: "The Xenophobe's guide to the Americans" and 2. the recent BYU press book "Religion, Mental Health and the Latter day Saints", as well as various magazine articles and Newspaper bits) --Ivan Wolfe - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Margaret Young Subject: Re: [AML] Divorce in LDS lit. Date: 09 Jun 2000 10:47:59 -0600 I don't actually have time to write these next two stories down, but I'll do it anyway, since I think they present some possibilities for fiction (which I definitely don't have time to write). My mother was so anxious for me to marry, because I was 24 and not really dating. She was thrilled when I met a man who seemed interested in me--even though he was an active anti-Mormon who had removed his garments. She urged me to "save" him. And I did. Married him in the temple. His "reconversion" lasted two weeks. Looking back at it from this twenty-year distance, I see myself having been set up to "take care" of a man--not only by washing his clothes and cooking his meals, but by being sure he stayed a good Mormon. The sort of burden that image required was more draining than I can express. This particular husband would have temper tantrums whenever the floor wasn't immaculate or if I used the wrong cleanser on the bathtub. And the Church was always the threat: "If you do things right, I'll honor my priesthood. But so far, you don't deserve my even coming to Sunday School." Everything was put on my shoulders (and I suspect my case is not unique). One of the most telling things was that the day I left him, I put several meals in the freezer for him, so he wouldn't be hungry since I wouldn't be there to take care of him. My mother picked me up at the SLC airport and didn't even recognize me. I had gotten so thin because I hadn't been able to hold down food in a long time. Keep in mind that only one person in my entire family--for generations--had gotten a divorce. When my ex husband's bishop phoned me begging me to give the marriage one more try, citing scripture etc., my mother--newly strengthened--got on the phone and said, "Margaret has been through enough. Would you please leave her alone?" It was an epiphanal moment for me. My mother actually loved me enough to let me wear the stigma of divorce--which would also taint her! Honestly, until that day, I felt I had failed to provide the image of "perfect daughter" expected of me. That Mom would protect me in such a way--and at the sacrifice of her own personal ideals--was moving. The other part of this is the other divorce in the family--my great aunt, who had also left an abusive marriage. She wrote me a note on the eve of my divorce. Paraphrasing it, it said, "When I went through my divorce, I was praying one night and felt the presence of angels and even my ancestors--not attempting to sway my decision, but just loving me from beyond the veil. Last night, when I was praying, I felt the same sensation. I did not understand why I should feel it, and then I knew: I was feeling it for you. Margaret, you need to know that you are not alone. There are many beyond the veil who love you and are with you. They will not attempt to persuade you in this very important decision, but you are not alone." It meant more than I can communicate. Now, twenty years later, I am certainly not "the perfect daughter." But I have a marvelous relationship with my mother. My husband is in a stake presidency, through no effort on my part. I happily support him in his calling, and he is amazingly supportive of me. (He spent aroune 60 hours doing detailed editing of the forthcoming novel Darius Gray and I have written.) I enjoy my marriage, and am truly able to appreciate my husband. My laundry room is still a disaster, but my worth is not reduced to my housekeeping skills. Quite a relief, because if I were so defined, I wouldn't be much. [Margaret Young] - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jonathan Langford Subject: Re: [AML] Divorce in LDS lit. Date: 09 Jun 2000 12:19:59 -0500 Okay, I think I need to stick up for Jacob here. (Not that he needs my defence...) How this whole discussion got started was in the question that was asked about the negative associations that go with portraying a divorced guy as a protagonist in a Mormon novel. And from there, the discussion proceeded to a consideration of the negatives and positives of a variety of possible character types in Mormon fiction, including never-married, divorced, widowers, etc. I think it may be useful to make a distinction between several types of "fault" that may or may not be in operation among divorced characters: 1. Sins or problems so serious that they led to and/or justified divorce. 2. Problems that contributed to a poor relationship, which helped create a background for problems leading to divorce. This can include anything from annoying personal habits to unreal expectations about what relationships are/ought to be like. 3. Errors of judgment in entering into a particular marrage in the first place. I think the point Jacob is trying to make is that when you're dealing with a divorced character, it's likely that there are issues in at least one of these areas. A realistic, experienced "other" person dating such a protagonist (whether single or divorced himself/herself) is likely to want to know what those issues are before allowing a relationship to become serious. Of course, there's also the credibility issue--can you really trust one party's account of the problems in a relationship, without hearing the other person's side? (For that matter, it may be that even hearing both sides won't give you what outsiders would consider a truly reliable account.) All of these are likely (in my view) to be part of the dynamic that fictional characters engage in when one of the characters is divorced. Part of the discussion on this thread has centered around just how "inevitable" the fault has to be in one or all of these areas. I've argued in another post that even if a marriage ends, for justifiable reasons, I'm not convinced that this means an error of type 3 above occurred--because I'm not sure there's any guarantee that just because a relationship is entered into properly, with confirmation of the Spirit, it will necessarily remain that way. Both people have their agency, after all. But the point is, I think a divorced character is likely to have felt considerable anguish over this very point. "Was I fooling myself when I thought I felt the confirmation of the Spirit for that relationship? Or did I I blow it by how I acted after my marriage? Or was it not my fault at all? If it's not my fault, shouldn't I have been able to tell in advance that it was a bad idea to marry this person?" And so on. Personally, I would find it hard to sympathize with any character who didn't worry about these points after a divorce--and who didn't find them worrisome when entering into a new relationship. And I would find a character naive who was dating a divorced person and didn't worry some about those points--not really wanting to know all the sordid details about the other person's prior relationships, but wondering just the same just what it was about that previous relationship that caused it to fail. It's like hiring someone who was fired from a previous job: you don't necessarily believe that it was the person's fault (the employer may have been unreasonable), and even if it was, it may be for something that's no longer an issue in the person's life--or that's irrelevant to the job you're hiring the person for--but you still feel the need to get more information, if you can. I suspect this comparison may be offensive to some, and if so, I apologize. But I still think all of this is likely to play a part in a relationship, realistically portrayed, between two characters, at least one of whom is divorced. I think it's terribly important for us not to assume that any given generalization in this area is going to hold true in all--or even necessarily most--cases. On the other hand, any particular story is likely to focus on only one--or at the most, two--characters' individual experiences relating to divorce. So no matter how it's handled, it's likely that the author can be accused (with some justification) of either oversimplifying, or reinforcing a stereotype, or not portraying adequately the negative consequences of divorce, or something--simply because any given story can't possibly portray all types of divorces, with all their myriad complications and consequences. I'd like to also respond briefly to Rob's notion of "no-fault" divorce--of people simply growing apart. This probably happens--but in Mormon culture, it's likely to be viewed as either a result of poor caretaking in a relationship, or inadequate grounds for divorce, or both. I believe that the Mormon view is that divorce is *always a tragedy*--even if it's a tragedy that's become the best possible outcome in a given situation. At the very least, it's a tragedy if both parties entered into the marriage with an LDS view of what it means, or can mean. I think, further, that an LDS audience is likely to believe that anytime a marriage ends--at least a marriage entered into by two LDS characters--there were definitely mistakes made that led to the divorce. Now, the primary mistake may have been entering into the marriage to begin with--but I don't think most mainstream LDS readers will believe in a story that depicts divorce as an event that arises without some mistakes being made, somewhere along the line. I also think (oversimplifying somewhat) that LDS readers are likely to believe that such mistakes generally are correctable if both parties are willing to work sincerely at correcting them. So the fact that they didn't wind up doing so is likely to mean that some blame attaches to one party or the other, or both. It may be that a very well-presented, carefully thought through scenario in an individual story will help to convince readers that there are exceptions to this--but at some point, any story that tries to push this point too far is likely to run (like a brick wall) into deepset LDS beliefs about the importance of marriage and the possibilities of divine help for fixing a marriage that has gone bad, if both parties work at it sincerely. For that matter, given the Mormon mindset--to return to our original fictive scenario--if one character is dating another, divorced character, and the divorced character says something like, "I don't think either one of us made a mistake, we just grew apart"--alarm bells are likely to sound in the mind of the other character, if that character is active LDS. The character is likely to wonder, "Does marriage mean the same thing to this other person that it does to me? How much work is this person willing to put into our marriage when we run into difficulties? Is this attitude the reason why the other person's marriage failed?" Even if those fears wind up being unjustified, I think it's unlikely that they won't arise at all. Speaking for myself, not the List... Jonathan Langford jlangfor@pressenter.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jacob Proffitt Subject: Re: [AML] Divorce in LDS lit. Date: 09 Jun 2000 11:41:01 -0600 On Thu, 08 Jun 2000 15:58:07 -0600, Thom Duncan wrote: >> A divorce says something negative about you whether you are a man or a >> woman.=20 > >Only if the person doing the judging discounts free agency. It is quite >possible that a divorce may be entirely the fault of the other person. While it may be theoretically possible, I find it unlikely to the point = of fiction. Any story that had a truly faultless divorce in it would have a long row to hoe before I could buy it as real. Although, come to think = of it, such a story could have some *very* interesting things to say about judging others and how much you really *have* to judge others in order to choose a mate. >> If you are >> divorced, it is clear that something likely *was* wrong with you. You= made >> an eternal choice and were unable to keep it eternal.=20 > >Even God couldn't keep his family together for all eternity. What was >*wrong* with him? I know. He believed in free agency too much. Maybe >he should have forced the one third of the hosts of heaven to not rebel. Apples and oranges, Thom. Unless you are saying that God got a divorce = in Heaven. Something you'll find a bit difficult to assert with any degree = of authority... >> If that something is >> still wrong, then there is a flag that should legitimately be raised. = Now, >> this doesn't *have* to be the case. I don't speak for God, and I = can't >> judge what revelation someone else has or hasn't received, but I'd be >> willing to bet that if God ever does lead someone to enter an eternal >> covenant He knows will be broken that it's a pretty rare occurrence = for some >> pretty specific reasons. > >The scriptures abound in God telling his children to do things that >otherwise break covenants: Nephi killed Laban, Abraham lied, etc. It is >not inconceivable that God may direct a man or woman to divorce for a >reason we don't fully understand. Right. Exactly. A righteous divorce would fall into exactly that = category. And frankly, the reasons for the above cases aren't that hard to understand... =20 >Now THAT would make an interesting story (to bring this back to >literature). What about a man (or woman) who is in a marvelous >marriage. One day they get a revelation sort of like: Build it and he >will come that they should get divorced. I'd read the story. I'd like to see what kind of conditions it would take... Jacob Proffitt - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jacob Proffitt Subject: Re: [AML] Divorce in LDS lit. Date: 09 Jun 2000 11:44:52 -0600 On Thu, 8 Jun 2000 16:14:38 -0600, Clark Goble wrote: >(I'll keep this on the literature and avoid most tangents) > > ___ Jacob ___ >| A divorce says something negative about you whether you are a >| man or a woman. Even if that someone was not at fault in the >| divorce. If you are divorced, it is clear that something >| likely *was* wrong with you. You made an eternal choice and >| were unable to keep it eternal. > ___ > >Remember though that saying 'something is wrong with you' tends to have = the >connotation that you did something wrong or you are a defective person. >Lets change the situation to a very similar one. Each of us is divorced >from God because of *our* acts. We are at fault. However because of = *our* >acts something is wrong with God. His family is separated and broken = up. >Now take a step back from that and ask yourself - are you comfortable = with >saying there is something wrong with God? I'm not. > >I think we do need to watch our rhetoric in these matters. Connotations >often communicate what we don't intend. If you are going to be careful about the connotations, then you need to = make sure you are comparing apples to apples. We are *not* divorced from God. We didn't break a covenant to come here. A separation is not a divorce = :) Jacob Proffitt - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Todd Robert Petersen" Subject: [AML] Effects of Literature (was: Divorce in LDS lit) Date: 09 Jun 2000 12:51:55 -0500 Larry Jackson wrote: > Well then, he was fortunate. But, since I only had to > handle one of them, how on earth do I write that story > without destroying a few lives? Will somebody give me the title of one of these seriously-written novels that has destroyed somebody's life? (This is just a rhetorical favor.) I'm not sure that the problem is as serious as the town criers are making it out to be. In fact, there are much more important things for us to watch out for. 1) The over abundance of credit 2) Video Games (especially 1st person shooter games like the ones the Marines use to train their soldiers in urban warfare: Duke Nukem and Doom) 3) Internet Porn (which allows pornography to march right in to the home) 4) A culture which degrades women and motherhood in favor of economic growth for the military-industrial complex 5) Self-interest in goverment at all levels How many times is fine clothing mentioned in the book of Mormon as the cause or early symptom of downfall versus the problems of serious literature? Perhaps Satan wants our attentions turned away from the serious issues. Perhaps if we are decrying art as the villain, he will have more freedom to work because he won't be under our direct scrutiny. Todd Robert Petersen [MOD: Any responses should focus *not* on which are or aren't our most serious societal problems, but on whether--and in what ways--literature is a problem, or part of the solution, or both, or neither, or...you get the idea.] - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Melissa Proffitt Subject: [AML] Mormon Lit for Women (was: Divorce in LDS lit.) Date: 09 Jun 2000 13:01:01 -0600 On Thu, 08 Jun 2000 16:21:24 -0700, Barbara R. Hume wrote: >It occurred to me that that's the main problem I have with Mormon = fiction. The characters seem to be >manipulated by the writer to prove a point rather than to be developed = and >fleshed out so that they story they live seems inevitable given their >characters and personalities. =20 >Another problem I have with it, I think, is that the lifestyle set forth= as >the ultimate happiness would be heck on wheels for me. I recently = checked >out the last page of a Mormon novel to see what kind of ending it had. = The >protagonist is deliriously happy because now she's a pregnant housewife. This character is certifiably insane. Speaking as a heavily pregnant housewife who can't remember what her feet look like. :) >Please tell me that there are other heavens for females! That one would= not >be mine! We are not all all the same! Stories about housewives are the = dark >underbelly for more of us than you might think. Just so there's balance, I think. Since it's true there are women who = are pining after being married and pregnant, it's not that this isn't a realistic ending, just that it's not the only realistic ending. I = wonder, Barbara--do you think this kind of lifestyle is actually over-promoted in Mormon novels, or does it just feel like it because you dislike it so = much? (I don't read enough of this sort of novel to know.) I think I see your ultimate point, though--that a good portion of what is published as Mormon fiction is geared toward an audience that doesn't include you, but implies that it *should* include you. Is that an = accurate guess? Let me speculate a little further: in my last ward, I was more or less responsible for any book reviews we did in homemaking (back when = that's what it was called) and in choosing titles, the majority opinion was that books were for escapism. In examining what they liked, it was obvious to= me that their favorite books had characters whose general attitudes and = beliefs were congruent with theirs, regardless of the historical period the book = was set in. In other words, they wanted to read about women who had = experiences like theirs, or women who had experiences that *could* be like theirs = (i.e. they'd read about a woman who miscarries even if they'd never miscarried themselves). I don't want to generalize too far based just on this ward, but assuming that they're a representative population, it suggests to me that one of the biggest markets for LDS fiction is this kind of woman, = who doesn't much care about things like well-fleshed-out characters because that's not what they're reading for (and possibly because they're unconsciously putting themselves in the place of the protagonist). Just a tangential thought. Melissa Proffitt - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "J. Scott Bronson" Subject: Re: [AML] Divorce in LDS lit. Date: 09 Jun 2000 13:32:13 -0600 Todd Robert Petersen: > So is it possible to look without wallowing? Yes. > Unfortunately, one man's attempt to right wrongs > is another man's wallowing. Aye. There's the rub. And there's now way to change that. It's simply incumbent upon us all to ALLOW that others will not always see things as we do. And allow the spirit to work through art as it will, whether we think it should or not. Heck, I once wrote a pretty awful play from which many people seemed to derive some kind of spiritual sustenance for a time. Go figure. J. Scott Bronson--The Scotted Line "World peace begins in my home" We are not the acolytes of an abstruse god. We are here to entertain--Keith Lockhart - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Mike South Subject: [AML] Re: Race and Culture in LDS Lit. Date: 09 Jun 2000 14:04:35 -0600 Todd Robert Petersen said: > Still, there are Mormons from Compton, Watts, DC, Philly, Southside Chicago, > etc. They have something to say, but regular LDS audiences won't be ready > to hear it for a while. When I was a missionary I had a companion from Compton who had a lot of gang experience earlier in his life. He had scars in his leg from bullet wounds and had many stories about growing up where he did. He had a cousin in our same mission who grew up in a poor part San Jose (I think), had a lot of gang experience, and who had to return home briefly to testify as a witness in a kidnapping trial. Yet the church was very much a part of their lives growing up. My companion had a best friend named Mahonrimoriankumr (sp? I really should look this one up). They called him Mahoney for short. You don't get much more Mormon than that. These young men were now fully converted to the gospel and felt the zeal and need to share it. My youth experiences (my teenage years were spent in Northern Ca., Southern Ca., Arizona, and Utah) were wildly different from theirs, and followed along the more "traditional" lines. Yet, we believed in the same Heavenly Father and taught the same Gospel as missionaries. The Spirit was as much a part of my companion's life as it was mine. There must be room to share the stories of those who grew up outside the happy valley culture. I suspect that the choice my companion made to follow the Lord's plan presented a lot more immediate risk to him than my choice did to me. And I think that kind of story is worth hearing. --Mike South - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Richard Johnson Subject: [AML] Re: Race and Culture in LDS Lit. Date: 09 Jun 2000 16:47:48 -0400 At 07:22 PM 6/8/2000 -0500, you wrote: >I think that many would love to hear these narratives, but I think that the >general body of the church in America, at least, has a real hard time with >folks who aren't white, not that we're racist necessarily, but we haven't >learned to make room in our culture or our literature for these people. > >It has been my contention for a long time that if there were ever a black >member of The Twelve, one-third of the members in Utah, Idaho, and Arizona >would apostasize within a half hour of the announcement. I'm sorry, but as negatively as I have spoken of Happy Valley and its culture, I think you are totally mistaken. I remember members making the comment that they could never go to church with a black person (when I first came to the south in 1970) Some of those folks are happily sustaining black bishops and having black temple workers take them through the veil. There is a bit of racism in everyone but it is really surprising how faith overcomes it. I think the calling of Apostle would wipe the race right out of most minds. Richard B. Johnson Husband, Father, Grandfather, Puppeteer, Playwright, Writer, Director, Actor, Thingmaker, Mormon, Person, Fool I sometimes think that the last persona is the most important http://www2.gasou.edu/commarts/puppet/ Georgia Southern University Puppet Theatre - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Jason Steed" Subject: [AML] Re: Race and Culture in LDS Lit. Date: 09 Jun 2000 14:20:59 PDT Todd wrote: >I'm going to steal a thread from Clark. He posed the following question >and >observation. > > > Consider a suburban Mormon trying to write _Boyz in the Hood_. Probably > > wouldn't come off terribly well. > >Still, there are Mormons from Compton, Watts, DC, Philly, Southside >Chicago, >etc. They have something to say, but regular LDS audiences won't be ready >to hear it for a while. > >A suburban Mormon generally doesn't think about African Americans. I'm >sorry but this is true. You admit you're speaking in sweeping generalizations, and I think this is one of them. I also don't think there's enough truth to it to allow it to pass, even as an admitted "sweeping generalization." Or, perhaps I should say "necessity" rather than "truth." What I mean is this: the way I see it, either "suburban" America IS becoming more aware of different races/cultures within the greater American culture, or it is not. If it is, then we can say suburban America IS thinking (at least more and more) about African Americans (just one of those races/cultures considered to be 'different' from the one we've decided is the 'norm'). And if this is the case, then your generalization is false. Or, if suburban America is NOT becoming more aware of these 'other' groups, then it seems to me unnecessary to single out "Mormon" suburban Americans as particularly guilty of this. The only other possibility is that you want to say Mormon suburbanites are different from non-Mormon suburbanites. (And the assumption seems to be that we're talking about white people here, which is interesting--interesting, I mean, that we assume "a suburban Mormon" is white, when in fact there are many suburban Mormons who are Hispanic, Native American, Asian American, and, yes, even African American...) If this is the case--that Mormon suburbanites are different from non-Mormon suburbanites--I'd be interested to know how so, or why so. The suggestion, of course, is that we're more racist than our non-Mormon counterparts. Is this true? > >Margaret Blair Young is involved with a wonderful group called Genesis (if >I'm not mistaken), which is a group of African American Saints who are >doing >some wonderful work in recovering and preparing texts that address the >issues of these faithful members. > >I think that many would love to hear these narratives, but I think that the >general body of the church in America, at least, has a real hard time with >folks who aren't white, not that we're racist necessarily, but we haven't >learned to make room in our culture or our literature for these people. Isn't that racist? How do we differentiate between "racism" and "not making room in our culture for others of another race"? And again, I'm not sure I agree with the statement--I think either white people in general (including Mormons) are overcoming (slowly, slowly) racist tendencies, or they're not--unless we want to say that Mormons are slower at it than non-Mormons, and then, again, I'd like to hear thoughts on why this may be so. Certainly it's a possibility... Personally, I think one explanation might be that we, as Mormons, have traditionally been a marginalized group (like African Americans, or Native Americans, etc.), and as such we have fought to maintain rigid boundaries that define our sense of identity. Because we also were originally, and perhaps have been traditionally, a predominantly "white" group, those boundaries may have gone up against "other" races/ethnicities as well as against non-Mormons. And perhaps we're slower to deconstruct those boundaries than the larger group of "white" suburbanites, because we still desire a sense of identity that demands boundaries... On the other hand, as people who claim to have the Truth, to know God, and to believe that we are all brothers and sisters, etc., etc., one might think we'd be first in line to embrace those around us, no matter their "differences"... > >It has been my contention for a long time that if there were ever a black >member of The Twelve, one-third of the members in Utah, Idaho, and Arizona >would apostasize within a half hour of the announcement. This is funny, a sort of joke, maybe. But I don't like it. Humor has many functions--I won't even try to mention them. But one of them is to facilitate assimilation. In other words, when we encounter an incongruity, our reaction can be humorous, in which case we are facilitating the assimilation of that incongruity. Or, we may react with hostility, in which case we resist the assimilation of the incongruity. Take Sue, who is in high school. Sue is popular, and one day wears an odd hat to class. Her friends laugh at the hat, thus allowing for Sue's incongruous actions--making room for, or assimilating her odd hat. But Barb is not a part of Sue's crowd, and when she wears the same hat, Sue's friends might laugh, again, but this time it is hostile. Barb and her actions are being alienated from the group, not assimilated. If we compare Sue's and Barb's experiences, only Sue's is humorous; Barb's is tragic (thus, the division of comedy and tragedy). In this way, humor functions as a facilitator of assimilation. The joke about a black apostle, and what would come of it, is also the presentation of an incongruity--but the incongruity is NOT the black man among white men. It is the racism of the members in Utah, Idaho, and Arizona. In other words, we all KNOW we shouldn't be racist, thus the idea that so many WOULD be, or ARE, is incongruous to how we SHOULD be. This is the real source of the joke's humor. The problem with this, as I see it, is that by laughing at this incongruity (the existence of racism), we facilitate its assimilation. By joking about it, we let it slide. We make it, on some level, okay. Now, I'm not suggesting this was your intention--I'm merely making an observation about the joke itself. And, of course, the joke itself is an observation on Mormon culture...which may be what you're referring to when you say "the point is sound": > >Okay, so that's a bit over-dramatic, but I think the point is sound. We're >not over our past relationship with slavery and the priesthood rights of >black members. Twenty-two years is not all that long. > >Of course, I am speaking in sweeping generalities. Broad strokes. > >Todd Robert Petersen True, 22 years isn't a lot; but for many, it's enough. For many, I think issues of "race" were transcended long before then. And for many the opposite is true. In other words, we Mormons are a fairly close-knit group, but we shouldn't be deluded into thinking that "close-knit" means "homogenous." Though Mormonism has its boundaries that firmly establish identity, those boundaries don't include skin color or ethnic background, or the attitudes one holds with regard to differences in these things; so, as always, I'm not sure talking in "sweeping generalities" is a good thing. It's possible to do, sometimes (we can say, for example, that Mormons believe in God)--but even generalities that seem obvious are often dangerous (a good example: we can't really say all "black" people are, in fact, black-skinned; there are many African Americans who consider themselves as such, but who are light-skinned enough to "pass" for "white"). So, for these reasons, I'm hesitant to agree with the truthfulness, or the necessity, of a general claim that Mormons are racist, or that we don't, generally, "think about African Americans." But I would be VERY interested to hear others' responses to these issues. (And wouldn't it be interesting, just out of curiosity, to know the demographics of the Church membership? There are more members, now, outside the U.S. than in--and it might be very enlightening for the categorically "white" members to see just how many of the Saints are categorized as "not white"...the ways these categories are constructed is another issue altogether...) Jason Steed ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Margaret Young Subject: [AML] Re: Race and Culture in LDS Lit. Date: 09 Jun 2000 16:03:28 -0600 VERY quick response. (Todd knows I can't resist this line. And I've tried e-mailing Todd personally, but must be doing something wrong. The messages I've sent have been returned. Todd, could you e-mail me your address?) Todd Robert Petersen wrote: > I'm going to steal a thread from Clark. He posed the following question and > observation. > > > Consider a suburban Mormon trying to write _Boyz in the Hood_. Probably > > wouldn't come off terribly well. You bet it wouldn't. I have been amazed at my own ignorance. It has been absolutely vital to have a black co-author for my currrent project. > > > Still, there are Mormons from Compton, Watts, DC, Philly, Southside Chicago, > etc. They have something to say, but regular LDS audiences won't be ready > to hear it for a while. Absolutely disagree. And I guess we're putting that somewhat to the test with the forthcoming trilogy. Wish I had time to go into detail. > > > A suburban Mormon generally doesn't think about African Americans. I'm > sorry but this is true. But it ought to change. We are perpetuating divisions which are NOT consistent with the scriptural mandate to be "of one heart and one mind." > > > Margaret Blair Young is involved with a wonderful group called Genesis (if > I'm not mistaken), which is a group of African Ameircan Saints who are doing > some wonderful work in recovering and preparing texts that address the > issues of these faithful members. All sorts of good stuff--including recovering slave records and performing temple ordinances for people who were listed as "property" in many censuses. My co-author is planning on doing the temple work not only for his slave ancestors, but for their owners. > > > I think that many would love to hear these narratives, but I think that the > general body of the church in America, at least, has a real hard time with > folks who aren't white, not that we're racist necessarily That sounds like racism to me. > , but we haven't > learned to make room in our culture or our literature for these people. > Who is "we"? Most of "us" in the Church are Spanish speakers by now--with not quite white skin. I think when we have Salt Lake presses, we're likely to produce Salt Lake stories. Now Todd, as editor of the Cimarron Press, has opportunities to publish Native American literature, which I believe he has done. > > It has been my contention for a long time that if there were ever a black > member of The Twelve, one-third of the members in Utah, Idaho, and Arizona > would apostasize within a half hour of the announcement. And that ABSOLUTELY sounds like racism. Sadly, there are Mormons in all of those states who believe a doctrine of white supremacy and find no inconsistency with their Mormonism. I think at least one more question needs to be added to the temple recommend interview: "Do you harbor in your heart any dislike or suspicion of your brothers and sisters of color?" > > > Okay, so that's a bit over-dramatic, but I think the point is sound. We're > not over our past relationship with slavery and the priesthood rights of > black members. Twenty-two years is not all that long. > Most of the readers on this list would probably be appalled to hear some of the things I've been privy to in my Genesis associations. Racism is alive and well. [Margaret Young] - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Christopher Bigelow" Subject: [AML] Movie Ratings (was: Movies in 2000) Date: 09 Jun 2000 11:29:42 -0700 [MOD: Anyone planning to proceed with this thread, please see my note below.] I think 30% of the AML-List archives consist of debate about R-rated = movies. I don't know if we want to subject our new moderator to another = round of that yet (I don't remember how often previous moderator Benson = allowed it--one a year?). Needless to say, this is a very sensitive = cultural subject and I could rant and rave but would probably just be = repeating myself from 1997, 1998, and 1999. Chris Bigelow * * * * * * Interested in novels, stories, poems, plays, and films by, for, or about = Mormons? Check out IRREANTUM magazine at www.xmission.com/~aml/irreantum.ht= m. [MOD: Too late! Counting this one, there were 6 posts in my in-box by end-of-day Friday on this topic. So it seems it's time to have this one again. (I think it's been about a year, and once a year is about right for this topic, I think. You'll notice, though, that I pushed off getting things started until the beginning of the next week...) Rather than taking up an additional slot in today's mail, I'm going to highjack Chris's post here and share a few guidelines/suggestions for how I think we can make this discussion a more cordial and productive one. (I'm saying more in advance on this topic than Ben typically would, but that's partly because I haven't moderated this thread before and I want to try to make life easier for myself.) * First, keep in mind that there is a wide range of intelligent and well-considered opinions on this issue. Be respectful, and listen as well as speaking. * Whatever your views--conservative, liberal, difficult-to-describe--it is appropriate to share your own criteria for choosing and evaluating the movies you watch. We want to hear your views, even--or especially--if they're different from what other people have been saying. * It is also appropriate to talk about broader issues, such as what an LDS esthetic/ethics of movies and movie-viewing ought to be; how Mormon audiences do and should react to various types of movies; and how we can encourage great movie-making by, for, and about Mormons (and how "great" should be defined in this context). * It's not appropriate to discuss the righteousness of others, nor to belittle their views, tastes, and literary judgments--particularly (but not solely) those of other List members. * It is appropriate to cite and discuss statements by General Authorities as they affect Mormon views of movies. However, * It's not appropriate either to defend or to attack the positions of the Church or of Church leaders. That's not what this List is for. * Do your best to compose one post that spells out your views, then post additional messages only as needed to add clarification or make new points that haven't yet been raised in the discussion. "Less is more," you know. * I'd like to encourage all of us to thoughtfully consider what we say as we're writing our posts. Generally speaking, I find it more constructive (and easier to moderate!) if you focus on sharing your own thoughts rather than trying to convince others or refute their arguments. Finally, please don't take any of this as a discouragement from entering into a vigorous discussion. And now (as Max would say), let the wild rumpus start!] - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jacob Proffitt Subject: Re: [AML] Divorce in LDS lit. Date: 09 Jun 2000 12:41:23 -0600 On Thu, 8 Jun 2000 20:36:58 -0600, Gae Lyn Henderson wrote: >What is wrong with my friend? I state loudly and clearly: Nothing. In= my >opinion, she was/is a wonderful woman. I feel confident she will be = blessed >for her righteousness. I suspect that judgment might fall upon those = who >fault her. I agree that divorce was a perfectly legitimate choice for your friend. = She did the right thing to get a divorce. I'm not saying that her choice to divorce was wrong. But the fact of the divorce still says something negative about her. I don't know her and I can't judge her and = furthermore I have no desire or need to arbitrate what happened in her situation. And frankly, your point is good. Adultery is a tough situation. And = it's hard to fault the wronged party. Unlike abuse or addiction, a person can grow into adultery without displaying signs of it during a normal = courtship process. If your friend really thought about it, she might be able to = point out signs that she missed or ignored but that's not necessarily the case.= I would find it easiest to believe that someone was perfectly righteous in = a divorce in the case of the partner's adultery. If someone wants to = present a story where the protagonist is divorced without anything being wrong = with them from beginning to end, this would be the situation I could see it as possible. But a potential romantic partner will see that she is divorced and ask (perhaps not out loud) legitimate questions about the situation. Based = on what you've explained, my first question would be why did she act as a doormat for so long? Adultery, particularly long-term unrepentant = adultery, is unequivocal reason for divorce. Staying in a marriage with a partner = who is *that* determined to stray is wrong. It is wrong to validate that = kind of evil by working so hard to appease it. That's something your friend should be aware of or risk attracting someone who wants a doormat for a mate... And thus repeat the process again. Jacob - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Darvell" Subject: [AML] Movie Ratings Date: 09 Jun 2000 14:16:25 -0600 >I will not even look at one rated R and I think several >times before seeing one rated PG-13. There aren't enough >good ones with acceptable ratings. Any one else agree >with me? >Konnie Enos Many people agree with you. But I have unresolved issues with the rating system. I don't think somebody else has the knowledge or the right to determine what is appropriate for me to view. If I think something is inappropriate for me to watch, I can walk out or turn off the VCR. That's easy enough. At least for me, all rated R movies are not inappropriate for me to watch. Much of our lives is rated R. You really can decide for yourself what is appropriate for to experience. It is unfortunate that some of the best movies are rated R. And frankly, many of the really good rated R shows that I have seen were PG or PG-13 movies, with a few fowl words or inuendos or maybe a scene or two that the director threw into the movie just to get the R rating. Believe it or not, a R rating can increase revunue, particularly with young adult males. With the current rating system, there really is no way to tell the border movies, which are otherwise great movies, from the really foul ones. You just need to come up with a policy for watching movies that makes you comfortable. If that's a "No Rated R" policy for YOU, that's fine. But for some of us, it's not that easy. The same goes for literary works. How far can you go in writing geared toward LDS audiences? There's a big different between "Tennis shoes among the Nephites" and "Backslider." With such a varied audience, why can't you just let the reader (or the movie-watcher) decide what is appropriate for themselves? Darvell Darvell Hunt, Las Vegas, NV _____________________________________________ Free email with personality! Over 200 domains! http://www.MyOwnEmail.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "J. Scott Bronson" Subject: [AML] Movie Ratings Date: 09 Jun 2000 13:14:57 -0600 On Thu, 8 Jun 2000 23:11:09 -0600 "Jerry Enos" writes: > I will not even look at one rated R > and I think several times before seeing one rated PG-13. > I guess that's another reason I haven't seen many movies > in recent years. There aren't enough good ones with > acceptable ratings. Any one else agree with me? Well ... here we go again. Everyone ready? scott - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Thom Duncan Subject: [AML] Movie Ratings Date: 09 Jun 2000 14:38:11 -0600 Jerry Enos wrote: > > Do to finances I don't see many movies and it has been about a year since > the last one but I had to comment. Aren't some of the movies on this list > rated PG-13 or above? Personaly the only one on the list you gave that I > have wished I could see is God's Army. I will not even look at one rated R > and I think several times before seeing one rated PG-13. I guess that's > another reason I haven't seen many movies in recent years. There aren't > enough good ones with acceptable ratings. Any one else agree with me? We've had this discussion on this list before, but I will once again start up the thread. [Ha! Too late to start it, Thom--the thread's already going full steam...] As for me, the only criteria I use to judge whether to see a movie is if it generally gets good reviews. If it gets nominated for an Academy Award, it then becomes a must. The ratings, for me, are irrelevant, as they have very little to do with the artistic quality of a film and more to do with the amount of swear words said the amount of flesh portrayed. Lest you trot out the old saw "the Prophet says," let me tell you that myself and others have done research on what the GAs including the Prophets have said about R-rated movies and, without fail, no living prophet has condemned R-rated films *except* President Benson, and he spoke specifically to young men on their first dates. Since I am married, age 51, I don't consider his advice to teenage boys as relevant to me, nor to any adult, for that matter. My compiled list of everything said in Conference about R-rated films since 1970, is available for the perusal of anyone who may doubt these findings. -- Thom Duncan Read the further adventures of Moroni Smith, the LDS Indiana Jones! The long-awaited second episode in the Moroni Smith LDS adventure series, _Moroni Smith: In Search of the Gold Plates_ is now available as an e-book at the Zion's Fiction web page: http://www.zfiction.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Annette Lyon" Subject: [AML] Divorce in LDS lit Date: 09 Jun 2000 16:47:35 -0600 Somehow this thread has gotten my ire up a bit. (AML connection IS coming, but you'll have to wade through my soap box first). It began with Rob Pannoni's comment about marriages that simply become stagnant, lacking in personal growth, where both parties sadly realize they are at the end of the road. What ever happened to enduring to the end? Covenants don't include a clause that say, when you reach a plateau, feel free to call it off. I've known numerous marriages that have hit many years of "stagnation" (sometimes around retirement, after decades together), but when they've stuck it through, and tried to find out what is wrong (because something IS), they've come out the other end stronger and more united than ever. I totally agree with Jacob Proffit that such a scenario is unlikely to occur if the Spirit is present in the home. I also disagree with Cathy Wiilson's description of young people's judgments. I sensed an implication that an older, wiser, divorced person would have a much happier marriage than someone married young and never divorced. Granted, many young people rush into marriage without really knowing the person--or worse, jump into it on the basis of hormones. But as a woman married at age 20 myself, I can say that not all young people do that. My decision was far from hormonal. At the time, my age scared even me, and I took the decision very seriously. Coincidentally, all four children in my family were married at age 20--so we all have strong, devoted marriages, ranging from 2 1/2 years to 13 years and counting. I have no problem with a divorced hero in real life or in a book, but I wouldn't get past page two if the divorce were based on nothing more than, "it didn't work out." I have no patience with people who don't take covenants seriously. I recently read an LDS novel like that, and I couldn't respect the hero when he decided to end that marriage because his wife was not a nice woman. In my mind, in order for a divorced character to evoke any sort of connection in the reader, the person involved must have a strong regard for covenants, and a covenant must have been broken to end the marriage--and if the character is the offending party, there must be evidence of repentance. Annette Lyon - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Annette Lyon" Subject: [AML] LDS Divorce Stats Date: 09 Jun 2000 16:53:31 -0600 Back in January (Thursday, 1/27 page C2), the Daily Herald ran an article about Daniel K. Judd's new book, "Religion, Mental Health, and the Latter-day Saints." According to the article, after hearing so much hearsay about depressed LDS women and horrid LDS divorce rates, Judd decided to research it himself. The results are in the book. According to Judd, temple marriages have a 6% divorce rate. LDS civil marriages are below the national average, although he says non-temple marriages are five times more likely to end in divorce than temple marriages. There are a lot of other interesting tidbits in the article. I imagine the book is fascinating. Hope this helps. Annette Lyon - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Linda Adams Subject: Re: [AML] Multiple Points of View Date: 09 Jun 2000 17:23:55 -0500 Scott P writes: >I think the rule most of us were pounded with was that switching POV >within the same scene was bad form. Some even suggest staying with a >single POV throughout a single chapter. This seems general wisdom in the >modern writing establishment. Unless you happen to be Stephen King. I just finished _The Stand_ (the long version) (my first try at SK novels) and was annoyed by how often he switched POV without warning. Guess if you sell millions, your editors don't care anymore. It *would* have been stronger writing IMO had he been forced to correct this problem. There were scenes where in one paragraph we were inside one character's mind, then another's in the next paragraph, and once in a while it would even switch over to the dog's POV. Very irritating that they let him get away with this. It's just plain sloppy. But since the publishers knew it would sell ANYWAY... he isn't questioned. I guess I noticed it mostly because I've just been through editing my novel (now being printed! yea!) and Richard (Hopkins) was a stickler on correcting me where my POV tended to ramble (which it does very easily, if I don't watch out). For the record I'm very glad he did. Once or twice I had to lose some favorite phrases or thoughts, but overall the POV-watching made my writing much tighter and easier to follow. I don't know if this is something non-writers pay much attention to at all, or not, but as writers we really should. At least put in some kind of "break" if you're shifting POV within a scene. Rule of thumb, try to keep the chapter from one characters' POV unless there's a real need for the shift. It is my fervent hope, that in the event (unlikely event?) I should ever become a rich-and-famous best-selling author, my editors and publishers don't let me slip into bad form just because it'll sell as long as my name is on the cover. Scott Card and Anne McCaffrey have also fallen into this category as they've become more successful. Success doesn't mean you no longer need an editor. Sorry to beef. Pet peeve, I guess! Linda Adams adamszoo@sprintmail.com http://members.xoom.com/adamszoo http://home.sprintmail.com/~adamszoo - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Barbara@techvoice.com (Barbara R. Hume) Subject: [AML] Movie Ratings Date: 09 Jun 2000 17:17:13 -0700 > I guess that's >another reason I haven't seen many movies in recent years. There aren't >enough good ones with acceptable ratings. Any one else agree with me? I don't particularly notice the ratings, but I do notice that only rarely does a movie appear that I think I might actually enjoy. The last one I saw was Galaxy Quest, and I can't even remember what the last one was before that. Most of them are darkly violent--not my idea of entertainment--or based on immoral or amoral premises. I still don't understand how Eric Snyder can watch all that garbage and remain sane. Well, reasonably sane . barbara hume - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Barbara@techvoice.com (Barbara R. Hume) Subject: Re: [AML] Divorce in LDS lit. Date: 09 Jun 2000 17:24:19 -0700 >Maybe polygamy wasn't such a bad idea after all. > >D. Michael Martindale >From a purely pragmatic point of view, it makes sense. From the viewpoint of those who are in love with their spouses, it makes no sense at all. Being married just to be married is stupid. I have made careless remarks that maybe it wouldn't be so bad to be married to a man who has another wife who likes to cook and keep house, but when you get real human emotions into the mix, I don't see how it could work for the vast majority of people in our culture. I have read some interesting Mormon historical novels that have polygamous characters, and I think those fictional accounts do a good job of highlighting the difficulties. My feminist objection, of course, is to polygyny without polyandry. Sauce for the goose. . . . . barbara hume - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Larry Jackson Subject: [AML] MN God's Army gets National Attention: Excel Entertainment Date: 09 Jun 2000 21:55:59 EDT Release 2Jun00 D3 [From Mormon-News] God's Army gets National Attention Excel Entertainment Press Release 2Jun00 D3 Featured this week in EW SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH -- As God's Army has opened in theaters outside of Utah, the independent film about Mormon missionaries has generated a lot of buzz both in and out of the Mormon community. And for the most part that buzz has been very positive. God's Army is featured this week (June 9) in the national publication Entertainment Weekly. The article on page 51, entitled "The Specialists," profiles true independent films and their marketing techniques and challenges, highlighting God's Army and it's success on the national box office charts. A similar article ran on May 15 in the Hollywood Reporter, a daily entertainment news magazine, comparing the successes of God's Army and The Omega Code. When God's Army opened along the Wasatch Front on March 10, everyone expected the movie to find an audience in Utah, the heart of Mormon country. The film did just that, becoming the top film in Utah by the end of it's first week in theaters. Many questioned, however, the film's appeal outside of the dense Mormon community in Utah. Would it attract Mormons in places like California or Oregon? Would it appeal at all to non-Mormons? Richard Dutcher, the filmmaker, admittedly made God's Army for a Mormon audience, but was confident that non-Mormons could also relate to the human stories of the film. Many non-Mormon reviewers agreed with him. The L.A. Times called God's Army "a sensitive and thoughtful probe into questions of faith." Mel Parkinson of Las Vegas Weekly admitted to attending a screening with some apprehension, but was relieved to report that his fears "were largely unfounded." Parkinson commended the acting and called God's Army a "worthwhile cinematic experience for non-believers." Ron Stringer of LA Weekly not only favorably compared God's Army with films like Glengarry Glenn Ross and The Apostle, but also encouraged someone in the mainstream to distribute the film to a broader audience. TV news stations in Los Angeles, Boise, Las Vegas and Phoenix covered the film's openings in their cities. Stations in Las Vegas, Phoenix and Sacramento interviewed filmmaker Richard Dutcher on the air. Some reviewers felt that God's Army was too exclusive and lacked appeal outside of a Mormon community. A Seattle reviewer accused Dutcher of "preaching to the converted," but a reviewer from the Arizona Daily Star commented, "Whether or not viewers share Mormon beliefs"and Dutcher steers clear of dogmatic debate" "God's Army" earnestly tackles the challenges of living day-to-day with faith." For complete reviews see the following links: Arizona Daily Star http://reeltime.azstarnet.com/reviews/godsarmy_review.htm Beliefnet.com (LDS) http://beliefnet.com/frameset.asp?boardID=1812&pageloc=/story/14/story_1475_1.html Deseret News http://deseretnews.com:80/dn/view/0,1249,155008664,00.html? OR http://www.desnews.com/cgi-bin/libstory_reg?dn00&0003100016 LA Weekly http://www.laweekly.com/film/film_results.php3?showid=1144&searchfor=&searchin=all&Sumbit.x=69&Sumbit.y=14 Las Vegas Weekly http://www.lasvegasweekly.com/departments/04_27_00/movieguysbullets_04_27_00.html Meridian Magazine (LDS) http://www.meridianmagazine.com/arts/000225godsarmy.html Nauvoo.com (LDS) http://www.nauvoo.com/card.html Seattle Times http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/news/entertainment/html98/gods29_20000529.html >From Mormon-News: Mormon News and Events Forwarding is permitted as long as this footer is included Mormon News items may not be posted to the World Wide Web sites without permission. Please link to our pages instead. For more information see http://www.MormonsToday.com/ Send join and remove commands to: majordomo@MormonsToday.com Put appropriate commands in body of the message: To join: subscribe mormon-news To leave: unsubscribe mormon-news To join digest: subscribe mormon-news-digest - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Eric D. Snider" Subject: [AML] Movie Ratings Date: 10 Jun 2000 00:46:29 -0700 Konnie Enos: > I guess that's >another reason I haven't seen many movies in recent years. There aren't >enough good ones with acceptable ratings. Any one else agree with me? If by "acceptable ratings" you mean "G or PG," then yeah, there haven't been a whole lot of good ones (at least not compared to how many good PG-13 and R movies there have been). Simple math dictates this would be true: There are more good R-rated movie than good G-rated movies because there are more R-rated movies PERIOD than G-rated movies. The percentages may be way off; in fact, I'd say that a higher percentage of R-rated movies are stinkers than are G-rated ones. But in terms of sheer numbers, PG-13 is the most common rating, followed closely by R. This List has previously discussed some specific good G and PG movies from the last couple years -- "The Iron Giant," "The Straight Story," the various Disney cartoons, etc. -- but I don't know that we've discussed WHY there are so few G and PG movies. The obvious answer would seem to be that Hollywood puts out whatever people reward them for, and that PG-13 and R-rated films must make more money, so that's why more of them get made. Trouble is, that's not always true. Last year's "Star Wars" film was the highest -grossing film of the year (never mind whether it was good or bad; that subject's been beaten to death), and it was rated PG. Disney's "Tarzan" was also a huge money-maker, and this year's "Dinosaur," "Fantasia 2000" and "The Tigger Movie" have been popular, too. "Pokemon" and "Inspector Gadget," for as dreadful as they were, made huge gobs of money. It's generally acknowledged that if Warner Bros. had done a better job promoting "Iron Giant," it, too, would have been huge. (This can be evidenced by the film's enormous profits once it was released on video --accompanied, finally, by an aggressive ad campaign from Warner Bros.) So when G and PG movies do get made -- and when they're crowd-pleasers and/or well-done -- they're successful. Why doesn't Hollywood make more of them, then? My best theory is target audience. The demographic that goes to the movies most often is teen-agers; movie-makers, therefore, want to make movies that will appeal to them -- draw in a crowd that is already inclined to go to the movies anyway. (No one bothers making movies geared toward senior citizens, because even if it's good, you have to convince them to actually go see it, which is something they don't do much.) A PG-rated movie generally doesn't appeal as much to teens as a PG-13 does. A PG-13 means it's going to be a little more exciting, a little more violent, a little more naughty, than a boring ol' PG. And a G -- that's purely for kids and their parents. You have potential toy sales, but you also have less potential for repeat viewers, because the kids have to convince their parents to take them again, whereas teen-agers can go by themselves. (Remember the 14-year-old girls and "Titanic"?) If you want more G and PG movies to get made, spend money on the GOOD ones (i.e., not "Pokemon") that do get made. If Hollywood ever gets the idea that family films are not popular anymore, they'll quit making them, since they already have so many reasons to avoid them to begin with. My two cents, Eric D. Snider -- *************************************************** Eric D. Snider www.ericdsnider.com "Filling all your Eric D. Snider needs since 1974." - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: aml@xmission.com Subject: [AML] _God's Army_ box office Date: 10 Jun 2000 13:53:51 -0700 (MST) Deseret News, Friday, June 09, 2000, 12:00 AM MDT 'God's Army' forges onward at box office Filmgoers continue flocking to the Little Mormon Movie That Could. According to figures released by the ACNielsen EDI reporting service, "God's Army" was the top-grossing movie in Utah for the first half of the year having earned more than $850,000 since opening locally in March. The film reportedly cost $300,000 to make and has grossed nearly $2 million nationwide so far. On the local level, Richard Dutcher's independently made drama about Mormon missionaries has outperformed such blockbusters as "Gladiator" and "U-571," as well as "Erin Brockovich," which opened around the same time. "No one really expected this to happen, but ('God's Army') has become a major player," said Dave Sharp, booker for Film Services, which books movies for theaters in Utah and the Intermountain West. "We never expect indies to fare nearly as well as Hollywood films," Sharp said. "But it's done as well or better than anything that's played in these markets during that period. In fact, it's done exceedingly well in traditional Disney markets." Since it opened in Utah, "God's Army" has expanded throughout the Intermountain West, into California and along the West Coast, and in Texas and Alaska. Before it ends its initial run, the film will also play on the East Coast. Copyright 2000, Deseret News Publishing Corp. - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: aml@xmission.com Subject: [AML] Beehives Date: 10 Jun 2000 13:54:38 -0700 (MST) Beehive Still Buzzing for LDS, Utah Saturday, June 10, 2000 BY PEGGY FLETCHER STACK THE SALT LAKE TRIBUNE For many Christians, salvation is a personal, often solitary journey. Mormons, however, join a caravan to eternity. Members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints believe spouses, children and their extended families from time past and future are integral parts of their heavenly future. Enter the enduring emblem of a faith and the state of Utah: the beehive. >From the 19th century, when beehives adorned every Mormon business in the Salt Lake Valley, to today's Conference Center, where beehives are carved into the podium, the symbol expresses the Mormon virtue of collective action -- busy creatures working furiously and in concert toward a common goal. Now that notion is being celebrated in an exhibit, "The Beehive Image: Symbol of Industry and Cooperation," on display at the LDS Museum of Church History and Art in Salt Lake City until Nov. 12. The exhibit includes 307 items, everything from business signs, banners, coins, books, medals, jewelry, commemorative spoons and souvenirs to furniture and folk art that spans the church's 170-year history. After his famous 19th-century visit to Utah, Mark Twain wrote in Roughing It that the "Golden Beehive" was a perfect crest for the down-to-earth Mormons: "simple, unostentatious, and it fitted like a glove." In 1915, the church created its "Beehive" program for girls 12 and older; it was consciously modeled after the Boy Scouts. The girls were organized into "swarms" of about 12 and could earn the rank of "Building in the Hive," "Gatherer of Honey" or "Keeper of Bees" by filling certain merit-badge-type requirements. To earn these awards, called cells, the girls could do such things as "exterminate all mosquitoes from an area of a half mile square twice each month during April, May or June," "make two articles of underwear by hand," "cover 25 miles on snowshoes in any six days" or "successfully put a new washer on a faucet." The Beehive girls' program is still in place, but the requirements have eased up significantly. There is, of course, irony in the Mormon use of a hive as the ultimate symbol: Hives are ruled over by a queen bee, while the LDS Church allows only males to its highest leadership. The symbolism of honeybees and beehives is not unique to Mormons, but has been handed down from ancient mythology. To primitive cultures, the bee was "at once a docile provider of sweetness and a stinging enemy," wrote Hal Cannon in the catalog for a 1980 exhibit, "The Grand Beehive," at the Salt Lake Art Center. A version of the exhibit eventually made its way to the Smithsonian Institution in Washington, D.C. Egyptians idolized the honeybee, its life and products (honey and wax) and its harmonious community life. In Greek literature, the god Zeus suggested bees could foretell the future. The Greeks admired the symmetry and efficiency of beehives and believed honey was "not only the most pleasant of food and a potent medicine, but which, when fermented and drunk, freed the soul with some unknown magic," Cannon wrote. Even the philosopher Aristotle concluded that the honeybee -- unlike wasps or hornets -- must be of divine origin. In the Koran, the Prophet Mohammed said God spoke directly to the bee, something he never did with any other animal. And beehives were found on the vestments of ancient Jewish priests. Bees symbolized "the chaste and the wise, the foreteller of the weather, the future, and the fate of armies, and also as the embodiment of the soul of man," Cannon wrote. >From Napoleon's army to the Catholic Church, the hive has been viewed as a perfect social system. It has an absolute ruler -- the queen bee -- who is obeyed by all. There is a perfect division of labor and a well-organized military system with sentries at the hive entrance. "The bee is a genius at architecture. The colony is capable of expansion; new colonies are organized regularly," Cannon wrote. Mormon interest in beehives may have come initially through their leaders' association with Freemasonry, which used the beehive in its ceremonies. But the word "deseret" or "honeybee" is found in the faith's unique scripture, The Book of Mormon. The scripture says that one group, the Jaredites, brought swarms of bees from the Old World to the Americas. Reverence for the beehive became so pronounced in the church's early years that when church founder Joseph Smith and his brother Hyrum were killed in 1844, a bee house was placed over their graves. "One might speculate that not only would hives of bees discourage grave molesters, but perhaps this act also expressed a belief that the bee is a benevolent link between man and the immortal soul," Cannon said. Beyond the perceived supernatural qualities of the individual honeybee, the nature of the hive most appealed to early Mormon leaders, particularly the church's second president, Brigham Young. Young, who led the pioneers across America to establish what they hoped would be Zion, established Mormon cooperative societies called the United Order. Members tried to be economically interdependent, with each family giving all it had and receiving all it needed. Young served as "king" bee of the many-celled system. Like a hive that is self-contained, the early Utah colony called itself "Deseret" and wanted no interaction with the rest of the country. "The Mormons, suffering from what amounted to paranoia, treasured the idea that they were safe from both the outside world and their own new environment, and the beehive was a metaphor for this self-sufficiency," Cannon wrote. Eventually, the U.S. government forced Mormons to give up their attempt at theocracy in order to join the union. Utah became known as the Beehive State, but on its state seal an eagle representing the federal government perches atop the beehive. The eagle-on-beehive symbol still can be seen in public buildings across the state. But as early as the 19th century, the familiar half-sphere beehive itself, known as a "skep," was no longer used by beekeepers. It was replaced by movable frame boxes. Given the emphasis on the traditional skep beehive as a symbol, Cannon wrote, it is tempting to believe that early Utah beekeepers wove skeps, invoked bee charms and idolized their bees. "The truth is that beekeepers in Utah used skeps only very early," he wrote. "They always employed the most scientific methods of beekeeping in order to produce as much as possible." [Note: The Tribune is having an online contest in which participants try to identify the locations of several beehives in public places in Utah. See http://www.sltrib.com/specials/beehive/hivepix.htm ] Copyright 2000 The Salt Lake Tribune - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: CDoug91957@aol.com Subject: [AML] Movie Ratings Date: 11 Jun 2000 10:13:00 EDT In a message dated 00-06-09 13:25:42 EDT, Konnie Enos wrote: << Do to finances I don't see many movies and it has been about a year since the last one but I had to comment. Aren't some of the movies on this list rated PG-13 or above? Personaly the only one on the list you gave that I have wished I could see is God's Army. I will not even look at one rated R and I think several times before seeing one rated PG-13. I guess that's another reason I haven't seen many movies in recent years. There aren't enough good ones with acceptable ratings. Any one else agree with me? >> Yes and no. I take a different approach to the rating problem. Avoiding R movies entirely is a rough-and-ready way to avoid content that is offensive or demoralizing, and for children, teenagers, and others whose judgment is not formed or whose immature personalities are easily overwhelmed by art and its meretricious sisters-- pornography, propaganda, and sentimentality--it is usually good advice, but treating it as an absolute is problematical in its own ways. After all, ultimately, what makes a movie (or any artistic work or pretense) offensive or demoralizing is not its rating, but its content. R movies usually have such content, but, as Konnie observes, so do PG13 movies, and I have to add PG. In other words, it is possible for the rating board to err in rating a movie PG13 or PG; and it is also possible to err in rating it R. The best example of the latter that I know of is "Ordinary People," about a family that is disintegrating in the aftermath of the suicide of one the teenage sons. It's not a great movie, but I think it's certainly worth a two-dollar rental fee and two hours of time. It was rated R for a reference to masturbation and the one-time use of America's favorite dirty word by an angry, confused, sixteen-year-old boy in a session with his psychiatrist, which I found neither offensive nor demoralizing but merely true to its realistic treatment of the theme. Euphemisms in that setting would have been laughable. At the other end, there is a Broadway musical, "The Fantastiks," which has been produced twice that I know of at BYU, the "message" of which is that a fling at fornication and rebellion against the righteous counsel of parents is a necessary step toward maturity. It is pure as the driven snow in terms of the things that merit ratings beyond G, but for that very reason it is morally treacherous and something that I wouldn't want my children to see without firm parental guidance, if they had to see it at all. What it all comes down to is that there are PG and PG13 movies that I find disgusting, and there are R movies that I want to see myself and would like to watch and discuss with my children at the appropriate age. The latter have included "Ordinary People," "Braveheart," "Schindler's List," "Platoon," "Full Metal Jacket," and the current "Gladiators." I cannot bring myself to believe that the General Authorities who have counseled against watching R movies want us to turn our judgment over to a group of anonymous, worldly strangers; that they would not prefer us to develop mature, righteous, and independent judgment. Colin Douglas - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: aml@xmission.com Subject: [AML] EVANS/BESTOR/YEAGER, _The Dance_ Date: 11 Jun 2000 11:03:52 -0700 (MST) Deseret News, Sunday, June 11, 2000, 12:00 AM MDT Making 'The Dance' into dance Utah artists bring Evans' book to the Capitol Theatre By Scott Iwasaki Deseret News staff writer Author Richard Paul Evans was in prison in January. "I was at a speaking engagement at the Utah State Penitentiary," Evans explained during a cellular phone call from somewhere between Salt Lake City and Ogden. "I felt the need to read my book ('The Dance') to the inmates. And I did. "Once I started to read, five inmates jumped up, ran out of the room and returned with rolls of tissues and handed them out to the audience." The same thing happened when he read the story to a group of bankers. "There's something universal about this story that touches people," Evans said. "I took it to a book expo in Los Angeles, and the next thing I knew there were three movie executives crying as they were turning the pages." The book's underlying theme the love shared between a daughter and a father also touched composer Kurt Bestor, who teamed with Evans and created a soundtrack to go with the book. Then, Odyssey Dance Utah artistic director Derryl Yeager got involved. "Kurt called me up and said he had something for me to hear," Yeager said during a break in rehearsals. "It was the beginning of last summer, and I went to his place and he started playing the music. All at once I began seeing images of dances in my mind." Evans, Bestor and Yeager took only a week to put the production together. "It was incredible how things fit together," Yeager said. "We premiered it in August and the response was so great we had to bring it back." Since the story is about the love between a father and daughter, Yeager says it was only natural to do it over Father's Day weekend. "All of us - Kurt, Rich and I - have daughters," Yeager said. "And the story touches everyone, whether or not they have daughters, at different levels." Evans was playing around on his computer one night when he thought of "The Dance." "My fingers just began typing away and the whole story came to me at once," Evans said. "It was more like an epiphany. I had wanted to write a children's book and I was struggling with it. Then, all of a sudden, I had to type as fast as I could to keep up with the thoughts." Yeager has nothing but good things to say about the collaboration. "Working with Kurt and Rich, who are among the best in their fields, was inspiring. And I would love to do it again. But that would have to depend on what the story was." Evans was also happy with how things turned out. "It was more than I expected. I did know it would be good because Kurt and Derryl were involved. But there's a saying that the whole is greater than the sum of its parts, and I do believe that's what we have here." Still, Evans doesn't have any immediate plans to do another huge production based on his other writings. "'The Dance' is unique and has its own life," he said. "I'm not sure this would work again. This was truly a great project that seamlessly came together in a powerful way." ODYSSEY DANCE UTAH AND KURT BESTOR WILL BRING RICHARD PAUL EVANS' "The Dance" to the Capitol Theatre on June 16 and 17. Curtain is 7:30 p.m. Tickets range from $20-$35 and are available at all ArtTix outlets, the Capitol Theatre box office or by calling 355-ARTS (2787) or 1-888-451-ARTS. Proceeds from the ticket sales will benefit the Christmas Box House for abused children. Copyright 2000, Deseret News Publishing Corp. - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Jim and Laurel Brady" Subject: Re: [AML] Race and Culture in LDS Lit. Date: 09 Jun 2000 20:20:28 -0600 > A suburban Mormon generally doesn't think about African Americans. I'm > sorry but this is true. the general body of the church in America, at least, has a real hard time with > folks who aren't white And, from what I've read in journals, etc., has had, for several generations. I have to wonder if this is more pronounced or evident here in Utah, and attributable to the long-standing Priesthood issue. I grew up elsewhere, but now live in Utah. There weren't any AA's in the area I lived in--none in my elementary or junior high schools and exactly one in my 1200+ student body high school. When I moved here, I was surprised to discover prejudice and condescending attitudes, particularly among the generation born in the first third of the century. Now that I have three AA children of my own, I am trying to understand better the world they will grow up in and I am hopeful some of these attitudes will die out and be replaced by a more accepting generation. (A sure way to test a person's prejudice level--inform them they're going to be a grandpa again, and this time, the child will not be white. Yeeeeoooooow!) It is interesting to study journals and pioneer records and see how much prejudice there was among early church members, who were faithful and good people in practically every other regard. I suppose it's because not that much time had passed since slavery and reconstruction and all the difficulties of the time period. Which doesn't excuse it, by any means, but perhaps explains it. Perhaps this IS an area our LDS literature should explore...exploring the little (and big) ways we exhibit our biases, whether they are based on skin color, ethnicity, or even economic class. > It has been my contention for a long time that if there were ever a black > member of The Twelve, one-third of the members in Utah, Idaho, and Arizona > would apostasize within a half hour of the announcement. Hmmm--wouldn't this make an interesting experiment. Or an interesting book.... Laurel S. Brady - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "D. Michael Martindale" Subject: Re: [AML] Race and Culture in LDS Lit. Date: 10 Jun 2000 00:47:18 -0600 Todd Robert Petersen wrote: > It has been my contention for a long time that if there were ever a black > member of The Twelve, one-third of the members in Utah, Idaho, and Arizona > would apostasize within a half hour of the announcement. Would I come across as calloused if I said, would it be such a loss if that happened? As I understand my scriptural history, cycles occur where periods of calm and growth are followed by a period of culling, where only the truly converted withstand trials that arise, and the rest fall away. Such a culling happened, for example, when Christ started preaching that his disciples needed to eat his flesh and drink his blood. "It is an hard saying," said the unconverted. "Who can hear it?" And they "followed him no more." (Quotes are not guaranteed to be accurate--I didn't look them up.) We've had a fairly calm period of growth for some time now, and it will probably last for a while longer. But does anyone doubt that a period of tribulation is ahead for the Church? Weak testimonies and simplistic worldviews are not likely to see a person through such times. For the third time, from a third angle, I'm suggesting that ignoring the subtleties and dark sides of life in our literature is doing a disservice to our audience, and would constitute a "sin" on our part. People grow and strengthen through adversity, and literature can provide a very safe version of adversity by challenging entrenched but questionable mindsets. Much safer than letting people wait to experience the real thing and then falter because they weren't strong enough. -- D. Michael Martindale dmichael@wwno.com ================================== Check out Worldsmiths, the new online LDS writers group, at http://www.wwno.com/worldsmiths Sponsored by Worlds Without Number http://www.wwno.com ================================== - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "D. Michael Martindale" Subject: Re: [AML] Divorce in LDS lit. Date: 10 Jun 2000 01:27:16 -0600 Larry Jackson wrote: > But, since I only had to > handle one of them, how on earth do I write that story > without destroying a few lives? Fictionalize it. Use the people and the circumstances as a starting point, then develop everything into a fictional account which becomes a separate story all its own. -- D. Michael Martindale dmichael@wwno.com ================================== Check out Worldsmiths, the new online LDS writers group, at http://www.wwno.com/worldsmiths Sponsored by Worlds Without Number http://www.wwno.com ================================== - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Steve Perry Subject: Re: [AML] Re: Race and Culture in LDS Lit. Date: 10 Jun 2000 12:43:27 -0600 > From: Margaret Young > Subject: [AML] Re: Race and Culture in LDS Lit. > > I think at least one more question needs to be added to > the temple recommend interview: "Do you harbor in your heart any dislike or > suspicion of your brothers and sisters of color?" "...or without color." :-) s. - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Tracie Laulusa" Subject: [AML] RE: Race and Culture in LDS Lit. Date: 10 Jun 2000 15:47:07 -0400 I have seen racism and "culturalism" in my own ward here in Ohio. People just have a hard time relating to people who are different. Members have a tendency to judge-look at someone's circumstances and make judgements as to their worthiness. Converts who pray differently because of their backgrounds are often subtly ostracized. People who live on one side of the ward and are of different economic background get treated differently. Quite honestly I don't think most of these members see this in themselves. They are not consciously choosing to relate to others in this way. This is racism, culturalism, economicism-what ever ism it is that we use to divide ourselves from one another. Is it worse in or out of the church? I really have no idea. I believe that to those who perceive a problem within the church it may be more glaring. We expect more of members of the church than we do of non-members. I remember teaching a seminary lesson and using a story from our local paper about kids sleeping in the bathtub because of the possibility of a bullet coming through the walls. My students live 20 minutes from the area the article discusses and couldn't relate at all-didn't really believe it was true. During another lesson a girl was expressing how she just couldn't "deal" with people who had this problem or that. I remember trying to explain to her that as people joined the church from all different backgrounds she not only needed to be able to "deal" with it, but to love them and help them find a place amongst us. They need to hear the stories told. I need to hear the stories told. I personally am a fan more of non-fiction than fiction. However, if the fiction can reach us in some way, and help us to see ourselves and the world around us in a different light, I'm all for it. Tracie Laulusa - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Barbara@techvoice.com (Barbara R. Hume) Subject: Re: [AML] Mormon Lit for Women (was: Divorce in LDS lit.) Date: 10 Jun 2000 14:25:28 -0700 > I wonder, >Barbara--do you think this kind of lifestyle is actually over-promoted in >Mormon novels, or does it just feel like it because you dislike it so much? >(I don't read enough of this sort of novel to know.) I think that there are so many of these simply because it's the background of so many people who write Mormon fiction, and therefore it's what they prefer to write about. I also think it's because of the "should's" inherent in the Mormon culture (not in the gospel) about what we ought to want. > >I think I see your ultimate point, though--that a good portion of what is >published as Mormon fiction is geared toward an audience that doesn't >include you, but implies that it *should* include you. Is that an accurate >guess? I'm certainly not saying that it's anyone's responsibility to write the kind of book I want to read. I already know where to find the kind of book that I enjoy. I've recently read several fine novels that dealt with themes of redemption and forgiveness and acceptance, and they were not LDS novels. They dealt with some pretty dark aspects of human nature, but all had what the romance genre calls the "HEA" ending--happily ever after. And it has to be what makes the characters happy according to their natures, not what an organization tells us should make everyone happy. Of course, like many on this list, if I want a certain kind of novel I can jolly well write it myself! et me speculate a little further: in my last ward, I was more or >less responsible for any book reviews we did in homemaking (back when that's >what it was called) and in choosing titles, the majority opinion was that >books were for escapism. In examining what they liked, it was obvious to me >that their favorite books had characters whose general attitudes and beliefs >were congruent with theirs, regardless of the historical period the book was >set in. In other words, they wanted to read about women who had experiences >like theirs, or women who had experiences that *could* be like theirs. . . it suggests to me >that one of the biggest markets for LDS fiction is this kind of woman, who >doesn't much care about things like well-fleshed-out characters because >that's not what they're reading for (and possibly because they're >unconsciously putting themselves in the place of the protagonist). Could be. I read for escapism, too, but that's why I do NOT want the characters and settings to be like the reality around me. I have to be able to approve of the protagonists' worldviews, or at least to accept them, but sometimes if those characters start in a very different place from where I am, I learn something from them. That never hurts. Well, not too much. barbara hume - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Rob Pannoni Subject: Re: [AML] Divorce in LDS lit. Date: 10 Jun 2000 13:38:10 -0700 Todd Robert Petersen wrote: > > I'm not sure that correcting the tendency of LDS writers to look away from > that which is damaged in our culture means to wallow in it. I think of the > great literature of the last few hundred years. Does Dostoyevski wallow? > Steinbeck? Faulkner? To pay serious artistic attention to the problems of > a culture can be one way of helping that culture to heal or restore itself. > This is a point with which I wholeheartedly agree. At the same time, I would have to concede that artistic imperfections can mar good intent. A few months back I saw the movie _The General's Daughter_, which is based on a true story of a female army officer who was brutally gang-raped while in basic training. Her father, a general, was embarassed by the incident and swept it under the rug instead of standing up for his daughter and trying to prosecute the guilty parties. The movie was intended to hold the candle up to a terrible attrocity. But the rape was portrayed so graphically that there was a certain voyeuristic quality about it--it inspired a sort of morbid curiosity instead of just repulsion. So what could have been a strong statment against the evils of a society that tolerates the victimization of women became a muddled, sensationalistic movie mired in the same societal ambivalence that it was supposedly attacking. It's a judgement call, but I would characterize this as a case of "wallowing." I'm not arguing against the technique of realism. I have seen graphic portrayals that bring home their point quite effectively. But in some cases, this approach can go awry. And when it does, I think criticism is justified. -- Rob Pannoni Rapport Systems http://www.rapport-sys.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Clark Goble" Subject: RE: [AML] Divorce in LDS lit. Date: 11 Jun 2000 15:50:16 -0600 ___ Jacob ___ | We are *not* divorced from God. We didn't break a covenant | to come here. ___ Divorced is frequently used relative to our relationship with God - although admittedly more in non-Mormon literature. However each of us covenanted to obey God (Abr 3:25). Each of us have sinned and come short of the glory of God. (Rom 3:23) While we do not fall because of Adam's sin, Adam and Eve are archetypal of the fall of each individual. There is not a person reading this who has not broken their covenants to one degree or an other. Were it not so we'd have no need of Christ. ___ Todd ___ | I'm not sure that correcting the tendency of LDS writers to look | away from that which is damaged in our culture means to wallow | in it. ___ Mormon writing of all sorts tends to a sort of extreme dualism. We are on one side of an issue or the other with little ground in between. This is especially true in non-fiction LDS writing, but is often true in all other sorts as well. Of course there are exceptions, but the expectation all too often is to take a side in a debate. Like you I think we can honestly deal with the difficult aspects of life without wallowing in sin or depression. -- Clark Goble --- d.c.g@att.net ----------------------------------- - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Kent S. Larsen II" Subject: Re: [AML] Prouxl and Turrow Date: 11 Jun 2000 22:49:47 -0400 Chris is right. Its solely on the basis of their work including Mormon characters. At least for the books included in the news, we use quite a broad definition of Mormon Literature, including literature, by, for and about Mormons. Kent >>>> Darlene Young 06/01 5:03 PM >>> >I've been reading back issues of Irreantum and I saw >Scott Turrow and Annie Prouxl mentioned in the "news" >section. Could anyone tell me what connection these >authors have to Mormon letters? Are they LDS? (And >is this Annie Prouxl of "Shipping News"?) > >===== >Darlene Young > Join my Mormon email lists! To join send a message to: majordomo@MormonsToday.com In the body of the message write: subscribe Mormon-news News and links to news about Mormons, Mormonism and the Church. Mormon-humor Jokes and amusing stories about Mormons and Mormonism. Mormon-index Make queries about and find out about Mormon resources. LDSClerks Discussion for LDS Church Ward/Stake Clerks/Exec. Secretaries LDSPrimary Discussion about the Primary Organization. The following list is available through egroups: http://www.egroups.com/ NYArea-LDS-News - News about the LDS Church and Members in the New York City area. - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Kent S. Larsen II" Subject: Re: [AML] Where's our LDS Pulitzer prize winner? Date: 11 Jun 2000 23:00:26 -0400 Mormonism has had at least a couple Pulitzer Prize winners -- but not exactly for literature. In 1972, Jack Anderson won the Pulitzer Prize for National Reporting, In 1991, Laurel Thatcher Ulrich won the Pulitzer Prize for History. There may be others, these are the two I am aware of. Kent Join my Mormon email lists! To join send a message to: majordomo@MormonsToday.com In the body of the message write: subscribe Mormon-news News and links to news about Mormons, Mormonism and the Church. Mormon-humor Jokes and amusing stories about Mormons and Mormonism. Mormon-index Make queries about and find out about Mormon resources. LDSClerks Discussion for LDS Church Ward/Stake Clerks/Exec. Secretaries LDSPrimary Discussion about the Primary Organization. The following list is available through egroups: http://www.egroups.com/ NYArea-LDS-News - News about the LDS Church and Members in the New York City area. - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Christopher Bigelow" Subject: Re: [AML] Movie Ratings Date: 12 Jun 2000 09:26:57 -0700 When I was working at the Ensign, another (very conservative, orthodox) = editor wrote an article about that youth pamphlet (what's it called--For = the Strength of Youth? Especially for Youth?). In the article, she had a = part all about R-rated movies. I went to the pamphlet and searched it for = any specific mention of R-rated movies, and there were none. What it did = say was something like: avoid immoral or objectional movies. But this lady = was so orthodox and conservative that she had the R-rated thing absolutely = hammered into her brain and didn't listen to me, the liberal, worldly = staff member. The brethren are not hitting on the R-rated standard very much anymore, = but more on pornography. To give members such a formula as "no R-rated = movies" implies for many that any PG or PG-13 movie is OK, when many of = those are far less moral than many R-rated movies. Pres. Monson's taste = for PG-13 James Bond movies is less defensible, I think, than another = person's appreciation for R-rated movies that honestly address complex = adult themes with some useful moral bearing (Dead Man Walking, Secrets and = Lies, Wonder Boys, High Fidelity, The Insider, Schindler's List, the list = goes on and on of morally edifying movies that are rated R). Another reason for the backing off from R-rated specifications by the = brethren is that we are an international church and the R rating is = American. In Australia, our mission pres. occasionally let us watch movies = on a P-day (I remember a 9-movie video marathon once on one of those = days). I don't remember exactly what the Aussie rating system was, but = after I got home from my mission I realized I'd seen a lot of movies that = were rated R in America but only the equivalent of PG-13 in Australia. (I = think there was a large "M" for mature category in Australia that took in = most of America's PG-13s and Rs, and the "R" in Australia was more like = NC-17 here.) Many times movies that were rated R in America were viewed on = the buses from Melbourne stake centers to the Sydney temple. Now I have to say, as I always do in this discussion, that it is quite = possible to get burned by seeing R-rated movies indiscriminately. There is = a lot of trash under that rating, and each person has the responsibility = to read reviews and talk to trusted fellow viewers. This is one of those topics that fits the Liahona vs. Iron Rod paradigm of = Church membership. Some people like to have everything spelled out for = them, others like to have guidance but use their own brains to make their = way through life. You can keep your eyes closed and hold to the rod, but = to follow the directions of the Liahona you have to keep your eyes open. Chris Bigelow * * * * * * Interested in novels, stories, poems, plays, and films by, for, or about = Mormons? Check out IRREANTUM magazine at www.xmission.com/~aml/irreantum.ht= m. - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Christopher Bigelow" Subject: Re: [AML] Multiple Points of View Date: 12 Jun 2000 09:56:11 -0700 Question: I have a novel in progress with four main characters. I am a = believer in one-POV-per-chapter. I was going to give three of the = characters one chapter each at the beginning and then give the rest of the = novel to the fourth character, but now I'm thinking I may give each of the = three at least one more chapter each later in the novel. But part of me = wonders if I'm rotating POVs, should I do it consistently and fairly, = rather than still giving the fourth character several chapters in a row = and the other three only 2 chapters or so each throughout the book? What = do y'all think? I'm reading a book right now--"This Is the Place," by Peter Rock--that = seems like a real botch as far as POV. It usually reads like third-person, = except once in a while the narrator comes back on the scene in first = person--yet his narration includes all manner of information that only an = omniscient narrator could know. I'm reserving final judgment until the end = of the novel, in case this narrator turns out to have some kind of psychic = connection with the other characters that gives him omniscience, but I = doubt it will turn out that way. It's a disappointing book, actually. Chris Bigelow * * * * * * Interested in novels, stories, poems, plays, and films by, for, or about = Mormons? Check out IRREANTUM magazine at www.xmission.com/~aml/irreantum.ht= m. - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Rob Pannoni Subject: Re: [AML] Divorce in LDS lit Date: 12 Jun 2000 10:20:36 -0700 Annette Lyon wrote: > > Somehow this thread has gotten my ire up a bit. (AML connection IS coming, > but you'll have to wade through my soap box first). It began with Rob > Pannoni's comment about marriages that simply become stagnant, lacking in > personal growth, where both parties sadly realize they are at the end of the > road. What ever happened to enduring to the end? Covenants don't include a > clause that say, when you reach a plateau, feel free to call it off. I don't want to minimize the value of covenants, but I do feel it is important to acknowledge that covenants are based on one's best knowledge and belief at the time they are made. I dare say if someone made a "covenant" through baptism to be a part of the Baptist faith before encountering the LDS church, you wouldn't suggest they "endure to the end" with their prior covenant. If inspiration can play a role in creating a marriage, then I see no reason to deny God the power to inspire a couple to end a marriage. If we could live our lives simply by following a static set of rules, there would be no need for continuing revelation. As Jung said, the test of one's faith isn't when God tells you to do something everyone agrees is right. It's when God tells you to do something everyone agrees is wrong. The more I think about it, the more I think this would make an interesting story. The story isn't about giving up. It's about having the courage to follow one's inspiration even when human logic and culture don't support your actions. Unfortunately, I don't think I'm skilled enough to write it. But I don't see why it would be inherently unrealistic. The scriptures are full of examples of God asking people to do things that make little sense from a human perspective. -- Rob Rapport Systems http://www.rapport-sys.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Todd Robert Petersen" Subject: Re: [AML] Movie Ratings Date: 12 Jun 2000 12:29:18 -0500 A student of mine once wrote a research paper on the rating system. Once I read it and saw his source material, I decided that the rating system is so seriously flawed that is must in some cases be ignored. A) It is racist. X amount of nudity (pun intended) with white actors often results in a lower rating than the same amount of nudity for actors of color. B) Comic violence is given more slack than historical violence (i.e. Rush Hour versus Schindler's List). C) The makes of the South park picture sumbitted their film and got an NC-17 then added more offensive material, resumitted it one or more times and came out with an R-rating. I must admit that I watch very little these days, not because of content that might be objectionable in the standard way, but because most films insult my intelligence. I do rent John Sayles and Woody Allen films, which are quite good, for the most part. Neil Labute also keeps me engaged. I have liked Slingblade, The Apostle, and other small films that treat me like an adult with a normal testosterone level. Todd Robert Petersen - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: eedh Subject: Re: [AML] Race and Culture in LDS Lit. Date: 12 Jun 2000 10:54:29 -0700 Jim and Laurel Brady wrote: > "And, from what I've read in journals, etc., has had, for several > generations. I have to wonder if this is more pronounced or evident here in > Utah, and attributable to the long-standing Priesthood issue." I think this is a much bigger human issue than a Utah one. I grew up in the midwest and while there weren't many African Americans in my small town, they were just about the only minority group I had any experience with. Then I moved out west to go to Ricks and BYU. I was stunned and appalled at the way the American Indians were perceived. I had grown up thinking of them as a proud, noble people. When I was a child, I had gone to a play and watched how the white people had driven the Indians off their lands. I remember crying, ashamed because I was white. I came out west with this vision of the proud, noble American Indians in my head. The first American Indian I saw was standing on a street corner in Salt Lake City. A girl in my ward was from southern Utah, near a reservation, and she explained to me how American Indians were regarded there. After BYU, I ended up in the northwest. The first city we lived in had a large Asian population. I heard negative comments, then, about Asian people. (I still remember the owner of a fresh fruit market, complaining bitterly that she had to watch the Asian women carefully because they picked through all the cherries and only bought the best ones.) The Amish, Jewish people, the Mormons in Missouri. People with white skin have been victims of discrimination too. What is it in human nature that causes prejudice? Is it fear? Mistrust? We can't identify with someone unlike us? The overweight are discriminated against in our society. Stay-at-home mothers can't understand mothers who work outside the home. We have jokebooks about recognizing "rednecks." I was reading in the living room the other night, and my husband was watching a basketball game on television. The crowd began screaming and I looked up at the screen. I watched the huge, sweaty players loping up and down the court for a couple minutes, then said with disgust, "What is it that people find so attractive about them?" I looked down at the cover of the book I was reading, at the photo of a poet and English professor. Give me a man with a book over a basketball any day, I thought. Now, I know in my head that athletes can be intelligent. My brother teaches high school English and he coaches the basketball team. He's an intelligent, thoughtful man and he's very skilled at basketball. So why did I react with such bitterness against the basketball players on the television? Why is it that deep inside, against all reason, I believe that English professors are infinitely more attractive than athletes? Fear? Mistrust? I don't know where prejudice comes from, but I suspect we all have it in one form or another. Beth Hatch - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Payne Family" Subject: Re: [AML] Movie Ratings Date: 12 Jun 2000 13:43:11 -0600 It would be interesting for me to see some actual figures on ratios of "R"s to "PG"s, etc. I appreciate Thom Duncan's research into one aspect of the whole argument ("what Prophets have said") and I wonder if other aspects could be quantified as well. A few years ago (4?) I caught a short presentation on way late-night T.V. that Michael Medved gave to a group of college film students. I'm not presuming that his figures are authoritative by any means (I suspect he's got an axe to grind) but he said that 60 percent of mainstream cinema is rated R, but that the PG's and G's (excluding PG-13's) collectively outperform R's two-to-one (*not* just proportionately, if I remember right). This certainly doesn't deal with the artistic merit of films in any way (and I might be remembering wrong, and he might be up in the night as far as his figures are concerned), but it'd be interesting to know. Eric Snyder might be able to best get his hands on some actual numbers. As for myself, there's only one recent idea that has provided *me* with any kind of freedom and control in my film-going life, and it's that (though I believe with y'all that art in many forms can and must enhance the life of every person ever born) regardless of ratings, I don't think there's any such thing, really, as a "must-see." That's having been duly affected by "Schindler's List," and duly perplexed by "Pokemon." -Sam Payne ---------- - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Todd Robert Petersen Subject: Re: [AML] Multiple Points of View Date: 12 Jun 2000 14:48:49 -0500 I guess if we're disparage more that one point of view per chapter, then we ought not to read the book of Mosiah. Todd Robert Petersen - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Morgan Adair" Subject: Re: [AML] Where's our LDS Pulitzer prize winner? Date: 12 Jun 2000 14:44:33 -0600 >>> klarsen@panix.com 06/11/00 09:00PM >>> > >Mormonism has had at least a couple Pulitzer Prize winners -- but not=20 >exactly for literature. > >In 1972, Jack Anderson won the Pulitzer Prize for National Reporting, > >In 1991, Laurel Thatcher Ulrich won the Pulitzer Prize for History. > >There may be others, these are the two I am aware of. Bernard DeVoto MBA - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "R.W. Rasband" Subject: Re: [AML] Prouxl and Turrow Date: 12 Jun 2000 15:35:49 PDT There are some comments by an LDS reader on Scott Turow's "Personal Injuries" that can be found in the review archive of AML List. R.W. Rasband Heber City, UT rrasband@hotmail.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Annette Lyon" Subject: [AML] Re: Race and Culture in LDS Lit. Date: 12 Jun 2000 16:05:27 -0600 Todd wrote: not that we're racist necessarily, but we haven't learned to make room in our culture or our literature for these people. Jason replied: Isn't that racist? How do we differentiate between "racism" and "not making room in our culture for others of another race"? Not making room is NOT racism. Why? Simple. If a person hasn't been exposed to other cultures and people, they can hardly be described as racist for not making room for them. By and large, white, suburban Mormons don't have a ton of exposure to other races and cultures. And that's where the challenge lies: broadening our experience and exposure, which in turn will help make room for people of all kinds. A small example to make my point: when my daughter was about a year old, I was pushing her in a stroller near BYU campus. A pleasant, very dark-skinned woman came the other direction. We stopped chatted for a moment. She leaned down to coo at my daughter, but when the baby saw her she burst into tears, crying nearly hysterically--she had never seen anyone that dark, and the sight scared her. Was my daughter a racist baby? Hardly. She simply hadn't been exposed to more then the homogenous white community of Utah Valley. Since then, although she still hasn't seen a large number of "live" black people, we've read lots of books and seen lots of television and videos that do have black people in them. Lo and behold, they don't phase her. In fact, she once commented on how beautiful a black woman was. All she needed was the exposure. However, even if someone has been exposed to other races and cultures and they don't go out of their way to promote them, I have a hard time calling them racist, as Jason's post would imply. I, for one, would love to "make room" in my own writing for other races, but as has been already brought up, a writer can't very well do that without the life experience. And I don't have enough of that to make make such writing believable. As a result, I'll leave that kind of literature for someone else who HAS the experience and can make it real. Annette Lyon - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Benson Parkinson Subject: [AML] Re: Copying a Thesis Date: 12 Jun 2000 18:49:15 -0700 (MST) A while ago someone asked about copying a thesis. I read something in the Chicago Manual of Style today that seems relevant. A library can make single copies of a work if it includes the copyright notice and: "If the copy is made for a patron's use and is limited to an article or small part of a larger work---or the whole of a larger work if a printed copy cannot be obtained at a fair price---and only if the copy is intended for use by the patron in "private study, scholarship, or research" (4.60). Benson Parkinson - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Barbara@techvoice.com (Barbara R. Hume) Subject: Re: [AML] Race and Culture in LDS Lit. Date: 12 Jun 2000 20:44:34 -0700 >> It has been my contention for a long time that if there were ever a black >> member of The Twelve, one-third of the members in Utah, Idaho, and Arizona >> would apostasize within a half hour of the announcement. > >Hmmm--wouldn't this make an interesting experiment. Or an interesting >book.... What happened when black men got the priesthood? Did a lot of people leave? I know a lot of them got upset. A man of my acquaintance at the time told me, "Waaal, I guess it's okay if the Lord gives them guys the priesthood. But what I don't like is them goin' out with white wimmin." "Excuse me?" I said. "They're good enough for the priesthood of God, but not good enough to be around white women?" He looked at me for a minute, then nodded. "Yup," he said. I can only assume he was afraid of the competition. Some people hold the theory that God waited to give blacks the priesthood until whites were mature enough to deal with it, and that maybe he's waiting to give women the priesthood until men are mature enough to accept it. Definitely an interesting story idea. I will refrain from making the obvious remark here. barbara hume - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Kent S. Larsen II" Subject: Re: [AML] Multiple Points of View Date: 12 Jun 2000 20:44:33 -0400 Chris: Maybe I'm not remembering too well, but doesn't the author basically use just one point of view -- 1st person Omniscient? I read "This is the Place" (and I think reviewed it here) soon after it first came out. Its one of those books I found intellectually interesting, but not something that really grabbed me - probably because I had a hard time identifying with the characters again. Overall its a good book, but also not for the mainstream Mormon audience. Its probably in Ben's shockingly appropriate category, if it is appropriate at all. [I don't mean to imply that its immoral exactly, just that it would strike most Mormons as amoral. BTW, my wife and I were discussing the 1st person Omniscient point of view this morning. She says certain authors demonstrate this point of view all the time -- especially when they aren't writing! Kent At 9:56 AM -0700 6/12/00, Christopher Bigelow wrote: > >I'm reading a book right now--"This Is the Place," by Peter >Rock--that seems like a real botch as far as POV. It usually reads >like third-person, except once in a while the narrator comes back on >the scene in first person--yet his narration includes all manner of >information that only an omniscient narrator could know. I'm >reserving final judgment until the end of the novel, in case this >narrator turns out to have some kind of psychic connection with the >other characters that gives him omniscience, but I doubt it will >turn out that way. It's a disappointing book, actually. - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Richard C. Russell" Subject: Re: [AML] Movie Ratings Date: 12 Jun 2000 20:58:26 -0600 1) The movie rating system is not about protecting morals. It is about selling movies and protecting movie makers from outside control. 2) As a guideline it is somewhat helpful for parents to know what is suitable for children of various ages -- in the opinion of a body of adults who may not share our LDS values. Adult films are, after all, for adults. That is what the ratings tell us. Parents are the ones who should enforce them if enforcing them is what they want done. Adults should decide what is suitable for themselves based on quite different criteria than ratings directed at youth. 3) Finally, the rest of the world either does not have a ratings system or even our rating system. That renders the MPAA system useless as some sort of universal criterion. How were the conference talks that Thom referred to translated into foreign languages where the G, PG, PG-13, R and NC system is unknown or not equivalent? ************************************************* Richard C. Russell lderlore@xmission.com SLC UT www.leaderlore.com Ask about Leader Lore, a Leadership Newsletter. "There is never the last word, only the latest." ************************************************* - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Richard C. Russell" Subject: Re: [AML] Movie Ratings Date: 12 Jun 2000 20:37:59 -0600 Thom's CR research is comprehensive, accurate and his conclusion is absolutely correct. I did some of the research for him. FWIW, Thom, I now have an updated searchable Conference report 1965 through 1999 -- as of today. The previous version didn't have 1998 or 1999. ************************************************* Richard C. Russell lderlore@xmission.com SLC UT www.leaderlore.com Ask about Leader Lore, a Leadership Newsletter. "There is never the last word, only the latest." ************************************************* - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "mcnandon" Subject: RE: [AML] Multiple Points of View Date: 04 Jun 2000 19:14:31 -0600 Chris, it seems to me the chapter assignment should depend on the importance of the characters. If all characters are equally important then it would seem they deserve equal chapters. Nan McCulloch - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Melissa Proffitt Subject: Re: [AML] Multiple Points of View Date: 12 Jun 2000 23:26:36 -0600 On Mon, 12 Jun 2000 09:56:11 -0700, Christopher Bigelow wrote: >Question: I have a novel in progress with four main characters. I am a = believer in one-POV-per-chapter. I was going to give three of the = characters one chapter each at the beginning and then give the rest of = the novel to the fourth character, but now I'm thinking I may give each = of the three at least one more chapter each later in the novel. But part = of me wonders if I'm rotating POVs, should I do it consistently and = fairly, rather than still giving the fourth character several chapters in= a row and the other three only 2 chapters or so each throughout the = book? What do y'all think? I don't think you *have* to rotate POV in the interest of fairness, especially if the other characters aren't as important. (The worst book = I read last year did this--with the additional horrible gutwrenching ploy = of REPEATING the same scene from each POV.) On the other hand, I don't like getting heavily invested in the first POV character and then discovering that no, he or she isn't the main character after all--that would be my = main concern about the shifting POVs. I do wonder, though, if the fourth character is so important as to rate almost the entire book, what would be the purpose of giving the others = their own POV chapters. Melissa Proffitt - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "D. Michael Martindale" Subject: Re: [AML] Multiple Points of View Date: 13 Jun 2000 00:17:06 -0600 All great artists must be willing to learn the rules. And all great artists must be willing to break the rules. At least that's what I've heard. There's something very different about breaking a rule out of ignorance and breaking it deliberately for effect. But does the reader always see the difference? Beethoven is considered one of the greatest musical geniuses of all times. His fifth symphony ("Da-da-da-DAAAAAAAH!") is considered one of the greatest symphonies ever written. Yet a prominent colleague of his criticized the ending of the fifth symphony as something like a snake thrashing about endlessly for much too long a time. Was Beethoven in need of editing, or was he being a genius? Unbeknownst to my in-person writers group, as I critique their stories and let them critique mine, I am critiquing _them_. I have an as-of-yet-unsubstantiated theory that a writers group is hypersensitive about rules: if an author is doing something unusual in a story, they automatically get suspicious and comment on the item as if it were a mistake by an inexperienced writer. This is an appropriate response for a writers group, but it requires that the author being critiqued factor that phenomenon in and not just assume that because the writers groups says such and such is a problem, it really is. Maybe you're being a genius. Members of my group are real sticklers on POV, and it sounds like many on AML-List are too. Frankly, I am not as much. I think that may come from the fact that I am very cinematically oriented: I'm an author who's really a frustrated filmmaker. Films violate POV to a much greater degree than literature. A film could be following one character's POV for some time, then unceremoniously jump to another character's POV for one scene, and jump back, without ever returning to that one-scene POV. Film can get away with this better because its ability to represent POV is so limited: it tends to be omniscient with virtually no penetration into a character's mind. So POV jumps don't jolt the viewer as much. But I don't see why such a technique couldn't be used in literature as well, sparingly and intelligently. It reminds me of an early filmmaker who, back when sudden cuts in film was considered disorienting to the audience, wanted to show what one character had in his hand while playing poker. He decided to just cut to a close-up of the cards, and then cut back. In those days, that was considered a breach of cinematic protocol--a breaking of the rules. The audience would be completely disoriented. Well, the audience handled it just fine, thank you, and close-ups of cards have been done (along with all sorts of other POV jumps) ever since. Since Orson Scott Card was brought up as an example of a successful writer who "needs editing" because of his POV shifts, I will say that, since I have made him my involuntary mentor, I have studied up on what he believes are the rules of good writing. For the most part, I agree with those rules, at least for the kind of writing I want to do. And yet, I have seen him break EVERY SINGLE RULE he espouses at some point in his literature. I think I have an inkling of what Card goes through, even today as a successful writer, before publishing a manuscript, because he often describes the process. His work _is_ edited by several sources. I think he knows perfectly well what he's doing, and I would be very reticent about criticizing a successful writer's work because it doesn't fit my mold of good writing. I'd hate to find myself in the same company as those who criticized Beethoven for breaking rules. Learn the rules of POV changes, but when the time comes to write, if you feel like breaking the rules at one point is justified, do it without looking back. I can practically guarantee you that someone will object on the basis of "the rules." Too bad, so sad. That's what genius is all about. -- D. Michael Martindale dmichael@wwno.com ================================== Check out Worldsmiths, the new online LDS writers group, at http://www.wwno.com/worldsmiths Sponsored by Worlds Without Number http://www.wwno.com ================================== - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "D. Michael Martindale" Subject: Re: [AML] Movie Ratings Date: 13 Jun 2000 00:49:09 -0600 I completely ignore ratings. Most the time I couldn't tell you what a film that I've seen was rated. And since we've been encouraged to express our personal feelings about ratings, I'll just come out and say it. I resent the folk wisdom that has developed within the church that says if I see R-rated films, I'm evil. I resent that the issue was ever invented. Before, I resented in secret, because I believed that avoiding R-rated movies was a teaching of church leaders, like most people do. I resented, and lived with great cognitive dissonance, and continued to watch R-rated movies. I continued to watch them because I couldn't bring myself not to. For some odd, incomprehensible reason, it seemed just as wrong to categorically refuse to watch them as it did to watch them. Psychosis, here we come. Fortunately, AML-List saved my sanity. Thom trotted out his much-vaunted list of actual pronouncements by "Prophets" of the church (with a capital P, meaning The Prophet: the President of the Church--all those other prophets, seers, and revelators don't quite count, you see), showing that a categorical restriction on R-rated films was never quite stated. And I have had my head put through the wringer with debates on morality in art, where even the infamous Neil LaBute has been given a pass. To this day, I haven't decided if I have been "enlightened" or deceived with some clever rationalization. And I can't blame it all on AML-List--I was already predisposed to this attitude. But I have come to recognize that there is no such thing as a "one size fits all" art; that we are all at different levels of development in our intelligence, spirituality, strength of character, and aesthetic sensibility; that art doesn't even mean as much to some people as to others; that certain kinds of art mean nothing to people but other kinds mean volumes to them. A blanket, universal restriction simply doesn't make any sense, no matter how I look at it. Now I resent openly. Well, not quite openly. If someone believes in avoiding R-rated films at all costs, I smile and remain silent. I'm not messing with their heads on that issue. But I wish the rating system would just disappear. It's utterly useless anyway. I have much better sense than whatever committee is setting those ratings. Tell me what's in the film, let me decide if I think it's worthwhile to see, and leave it at that. I feel like the R-rating taboo turns otherwise good LDS members into "sinners" the same way the idiotic 55 mph speed limit turned otherwise law-abiding citizens into lawbreakers. Bad laws have a tendency to do that. -- D. Michael Martindale dmichael@wwno.com ================================== Check out Worldsmiths, the new online LDS writers group, at http://www.wwno.com/worldsmiths Sponsored by Worlds Without Number http://www.wwno.com ================================== - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Harlow Clark Subject: Re: [AML] Where's our LDS Bernard Malamud? Date: 13 Jun 2000 03:54:34 -0400 (EDT) On June 1, 2000 4:00:59 PM GMT Jason Steed writes, > And it's impossible to deny that _Huck_ is highly critical of > the South, slavery, piety, and just about everything else it > comes in contact with. then asks, > Is this what's needed for great literature? I don't think so-- > not necessarily, anyway, though it is common in great books. Rephrase your first statement: "It's impossible to deny that the Bible is highly critical of the southern kingdom, slavery, piety, and just about everything else it comes in contact with, indeed, part of Isaiah is structured as a divorce decree, and Jeremiah's name has become synonymous with giving a long impassioned list of everything wrong with a society." We don't feel the Old Testament's sting as much as we feel Twain's because we're not as close to that society. I'm not sure we even see how stinging the New Testament's portrayal of society is. I know I found the Sermon on the Mount quite bracing and challenging when I read the NT in 9th grade seminary. In _Three Gospels_ Reynolds Price says that the Gospels' unsparing portraits of the apostles' doofishness indicates the gospels must have had the apostles' protection. He thinks Mark represents Peter's memories, as told to Mark, and that John really is the author of John. Price says that if the Gospels weren't really written by the apostles the persecuted church wouldn't have preserved documents that made the church hierarchy seem like a bunch of faithless dolts. Ed Kimball made the same point several years ago at the Wasatch Review Writers' Conference. He said that if his father hadn't intervened _Spencer W. Kimball_ might not have been published because there were people who felt it was not an entirely flattering portrait. He said that some of the things in there were fairly painful to his father, such as the oldest son's inactivity, but he convinced his father that it should be in the bio because it was part of his life, and affected how he lived. That is, while great writing may not require being critical of society, writing that tells the truth is likely to make people uncomfortable. Not because people are afraid of the truth, or because the truth is something dark, but because truth is very intimate. When we think about knowing the truth and the truth setting us free, we might remember that _know_ is the most intimate verb in the language. It's the verb Mary uses when she tells the angel, "How can this be, seeing that I know not a man?" > there are many of the greats that lack (or avoid, or > have no use for) satire. Good point. I suggested in my AML Conference paper "Light and Delight" a few years ago that satire and didacticism are the same thing, both aiming to show us a better way to live, and that a satirical literature would have to suffer from many of the problems and oversimplifications of a didactic literature. > One good example might be Bernard Malamud (pick a book--_The > Assistant_, _The Magic Barrel_, etc.). > the conflict in his stories and novels is essentially the same > as that of Twain--the disparity between reality and > ideals/expectations. And Malamud's writing is full of humor, > too--but without the biting satire of Twain. I think the key > is that Malamud's characters are Jewish, but that isn't > central to the conflict. But take a novel like _The Tenants_, which explores the tensions between Jews and blacks. There the Jewishness and the Blackness are quite central. Intense story, BTW, and likely to make people uncomfortable with its rather unflattering portrait of both parties. > They are explicitly Jewish, their Jewishness may be central to > plot, etc.; but the conflicts Malamud explores are those of > the human condition Indeed, and _The Tenants_ both begins and ends with a plea for mercy. The last page and a half is just the word mercy, written over and over. (In my copy the last half page of mercy is mising, the publisher didn't print it. I also borrowed the phrase "hab rachmones" for a scene of love play in my story "A Merry Mepsi." The wife asks her husband what he has just said, and her replies, "How do I know? Do I look like I speak Yiddish to you?") > (Malamud even said, at one point, "all men are Jews, they > just don't know it"--meaning, he saw Jewishness as a metaphor > for the human condition, which is one of exile, alienation, > sorrow and hardship, but also humor and joy). All men and women (and little children, too) are also Mormons, they just don't know it. Of course, if they don't want to accept their baptism they don't have to, but it's available to all, "Ho, everyone that thirsteth, come ye to the waters, and he that hath no money; come ye, buy, and eat; yea, come, buy wine without money and without price" (Isaiah 55:1 love that passage). > I think if we, as Mormons, allow Mormon-ness to be explicit, > even crucial, but focus on conflicts that are universal (use > Mormon-ness metaphorically, as Malamud did with Jewishness), > then we can create a Mormon literature that examines and > explores the human condition, that will reach a wide audience > (as Malamud did, and does), and that will yet avoid unwanted > criticism of the religion or the institution to which it is > tied. I would hope so, but for some people writing about the pains of a culture is a terrible thing because it shows the culture's flaws to its enemies. I love Philip Roth's "Eli, the Fanatic." It gives a very sympathetic portrait of the Jews who emigrated from eastern Europe and the concentration camps after the war, but it hit too much of a nerve for Roth's audience, and there were some who called the stories in _Goodbye Columbus_ anti-Semitic. That's a danger you take when you explore your culture in the depths of its humanity. Giving out that kind of knowledge is very intimate, and the culture may feel itself naked, wanting to pull up the bedsheets, as Lynn Gardner described in the opening of her new novel. She also described the problems that scene caused her. Harlow Soderborg Clark - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Morgan Adair" Subject: Re: [AML] Where's our LDS Pulitzer prize winner? Date: 13 Jun 2000 10:23:03 -0600 >>> MADAIR@novell.com 06/12/00 02:44PM >>> >>>> klarsen@panix.com 06/11/00 09:00PM >>> >> >>Mormonism has had at least a couple Pulitzer Prize winners -- but not=20 >>exactly for literature. >> >>In 1972, Jack Anderson won the Pulitzer Prize for National Reporting, >> >>In 1991, Laurel Thatcher Ulrich won the Pulitzer Prize for History. >> >>There may be others, these are the two I am aware of. > >Bernard DeVoto And if you accept DeVoto as a Mormon Pulitzer winner (Mormon more by=20 heritage than inclination), then you might also consider Wallace = Stegner,=20 who was not Mormon, but lived in Utah and wrote about Mormons (_Mormon=20 Country_,1942; and _The Gathering of Zion_, 1964). MBA - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Todd Robert Petersen" Subject: [AML] Re: Race and Culture in LDS Lit. Date: 13 Jun 2000 11:42:36 -0500 I thank Annete for coming to my defense. The issue is exposure. In fact I believe that racism as bigotry and prejudice with power as part of its fundamental make up. For example, if i just don't like the idea of my daughter dating black men and that's it, then I am bigoted. If I forbid her to or threaten to withhold money, privleges, opportunity, and so forth from her because of my distaste, then I feel I would be practicing racism. At the insitutional level, refusing service is racist. In fact there can not be mere bigotry at an institutional level. Here's where it gets dicey. So with regards to the church, is there some cultural thing (because it is not doctrinal) in operation that keeps black people from being present in Wasatch communities? Is it class? Is it The West? I don't know. But whatever that cultural thing is, I think it is a kind of racism. What individual members do in the privacy of their own minds is what I call bigotry, and is still execrable, even evil, but I like to distinguish it from what churches and states and corporations do. That is what I call racism. Annette said that she: > for one, would love to "make room" in my own writing for other races, but as > has been already brought up, a writer can't very well do that without the life > experience. And I don't have enough of that to make make such writing > believable. As a result, I'll leave that kind of literature for someone else > who HAS the experience and can make it real. Or you could go get some of that experience. One of the things that keep us from making important connections to the worlds beyond ourselves, is that we wait for experience to come to us, which is rarely does. I tell my creative writing students to go out and eavesdrop, got to strange churches, to get to meet peolpe who are outside their standard route. I think that the write you know dictum, which comes so often to those just starting out, ultimately becomes a problem. Sometimes our fear of accuarcy keeps us from reaching out in a spirit of empathy to others who have been forgotten or hidden by the louder voices of the "official culture." Todd Robert Petersen - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Richard R. Hopkins" Subject: Re: [AML] Multiple Points of View Date: 13 Jun 2000 10:55:29 -0600 -----Original Message----- >I guess if we're disparage more that one point of view per chapter, then we >ought not to read the book of Mosiah. > >Todd Robert Petersen The pov rules are a recent development in literature. They result from the realization that has gradually dawned on editors and authors that, the tighter we focus on the pov of a character, the more the reader's mind is drawn into the story. (Yep! That's the way Orson Scott Card does it, folks. He says so in his book on Characters and Viewpoint.) A change of pov is okay at a scene or chapter break, but the new pov should be established quickly and should be equally tight. The modern reader is fast, and pov changes interrupt the minds work, causing confusion. So they are to be avoided except at breaks where the reader's mind stops for a breather anyway. Anything the character couldn't possibly know will disturb the reader's mind as it rationally assimilates the text, and should be avoided as a pov violation. The number of pov's throughout the novel is irrelevant. Too many may be confusing, perhaps, but the story will set the povs. You have to look at each scene and ask which character's pov would be the best, the most interesting or revealing, sometimes the most unique. You may even want to put in a scene specifically for a particular character's pov. Them's the rules. I don't make 'em. I only enforce 'em. :-) Richard Hopkins - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Richard R. Hopkins" Subject: Re: [AML] Movie Ratings Date: 13 Jun 2000 10:58:13 -0600 -----Original Message----- >Michael Medved (snip) said that 60 >percent of mainstream cinema is rated R, but that the PG's and G's >(excluding PG-13's) collectively outperform R's two-to-one (*not* just >proportionately, if I remember right). The figures I've seen indicate that the average G rated film earns eight (8!) times as much as the average R rated film. Richard Hopkins - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Benson Parkinson Subject: Re: [AML] Movie Ratings Date: 13 Jun 2000 13:07:41 -0700 (MST) Thom wrote: >>>>>>> Lest you trot out the old saw "the Prophet says," let me tell you that myself and others have done research on what the GAs including the Prophets have said about R-rated movies and, without fail, no living prophet has condemned R-rated films *except* President Benson, and he spoke specifically to young men on their first dates. Since I am married, age 51, I don't consider his advice to teenage boys as relevant to me, nor to any adult, for that matter. <<<<<<< Thom, you keep saying that, but it seems like a quibble. I'm guessing the prophets don't talk about R-rated movies much in conference because most members live outside the United States and R-ratings are U.S.-specific. Do you really think Elder Benson would say that his advice on R-rated films applies to young men and women only and that adults could go ahead and see all the R-rated shows they want? The implication in your comment is that the Church doesn't say anything about R-rated films for adults, but that's just not the case. There are quite a few General Authority comments on R-rated films, including some by Elder Scott, an Apostle. Here are some from the Ensign and CES firesides. Benson Parkinson -----------> "Why not make some effort to find out something about the next movie that will engage your family's undivided attention for two and a half or three hours and will probably cost you far more than you contributed to the poor and the needy that month. It goes without saying that all X- and R-rated movies are automatically eliminated" ("Robert L. Simpson, Pollution of the Mind, Ensign, January 1973, 113). "It is so important that young people who are unmarried erect barriers against temptation to help them avoid the compromising situations. May I suggest a few barriers. 1. Never go into a house alone with one of the opposite sex. 2. Never, never enter a bedroom alone with one of the opposite sex. 3. Do not neck or pet. Now, admittedly there is no place in the scriptures where the Lord has said, 'Thou shalt not neck or pet.' I know that, but he has said, 'Thou shalt not commit adultery, or fornication, or anything like unto it.' 4. Never park on a lonely road with just the two of you alone. 5. Do not read pornographic literature. 6. Do not attend R- or X-rated movies, and avoid drive-ins. 7. Do not spend time in drinking or gambling establishments." (Hartman Rector, Jr., Live Above the Law to Be Free, Ensign, January 1973, 131). "Now, brethren of the priesthood, there should not be any X- or R-rated movies that we participate in viewing or talking about. There must be no pornographic magazines, pictures, or stories, no re-telling of filthy jokes or crude experiences. Once in a while we should stop and ask ourselves, 'In whose army are we fighting? Whose battle lines are we defending?' Do you have the courage to walk out of an off-color PG-rated movie--or do you watch and listen, and suggest to yourself, 'This soon will pass,' or 'Everyone is doing it; it must be an acceptable type of entertainment'? Have you the courage to keep out of your home some television shows that are filled with suggestive sexual conversation--and even experiences? Have you thought lately how effective these shows are in piercing even the strongest spirits? Brethren, we must not feed ourselves a diet of trash!" (H. Burke Peterson, Purify Our Minds and Spirits, Ensign, Nov. 1980, 38-39). "We counsel you, young men, not to pollute your minds with such degrading matter, for the mind through which this filth passes is never the same afterwards. Don*t see R-rated movies or vulgar videos or participate in any entertainment that is immoral, suggestive, or pornographic. Don*t listen to music that is degrading" (Ezra Taft Benson, To the 'Youth of the Noble Birthright', Ensign, May 1986, 45) "We counsel you, young women, not to pollute your minds with such degrading matter, for the mind through which this filth passes is never the same afterward. Don*t see R-rated movies or vulgar videos or participate in any entertainment that is immoral, suggestive, or pornographic. And don*t accept dates from young men who would take you to such entertainment" (Ezra Taft Benson, To the Young Women of the Church, Ensign, Nov. 1986, 84) "Again I say, leave it alone. Turn it off, walk away from it, burn it, erase it, or destroy it. I know it is hard counsel we give when we say movies that are R-rated, and many with PG-13 ratings, are produced by satanic influences. Our standards should not be dictated by the rating system. I repeat, because of what they really represent, these types of movies, music, and tapes serve the purposes of the author of all darkness" (H. Burke Peterson, 'Touch Not the Evil Gift, nor the Unclean Thing', Ensign, Nov. 1993, 43). "I know that you will find the same response as you consistently choose to obey your principles. You are establishing a reputation. When you make it clear that you will not vary from your standards, you will be led to individuals like yourself and the criticism from others will become less intense. Often those who publicly deride you for your high standards privately do not want you to violate them. They need your good example. Whether it be turning your back on an off-color joke, refusing to see an R-rated movie or videocassette, or walking out of a party that is moving in the wrong direction, make your standards clear to others by quietly making the right choices when the temptation is first presented. A decisive, correct choice made once and consistently kept thereafter will avoid much heartache. You then can use your energy in keeping your resolve rather than repeatedly wrestling with the same challenge. Also, you will greatly reduce the possibility that you will be overcome by temptation" (Richard G. Scott, CES fireside, 3 Mar 1996). "It is a concern that some of our young Latter-day Saints, as well as their parents, regularly watch R-rated and other inappropriate movies and videos. One more reason why the 'devil laugheth, and his angels rejoice' (3 Ne. 9:2). (Joe J. Christensen, "The Savior Is Counting on You," Ensign, Nov. 1996, 40). "In addition to making a resolution that we will read only the best in print, it would be very beneficial if now we resolved not to watch even one "R-" or "X-rated (NC-17)" movie, video or television show--from now on. That may sound extreme to some of you but I assure you that much of our future happiness and success depends on it." (Joe J. Christensen, CES Fireside, 9 Jan 1994). - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Clark Goble" (by way of Jonathan Langford ) Subject: [AML] RE: Divorce in LDS Lit. Date: 13 Jun 2000 21:23:24 -0500 ___ Jacob ___ | I'm not saying that her choice to divorce was wrong. But | the fact of the divorce still says something negative | about her. ___ While some cases of marriage are such that the person getting married ought to have known there would be problems with their future spouse, not all are like that. I think it is na=EFve to assume that every person has the= ability to read a person and know all that person's future acts. It also assumes that people do not have free will - that good people would never choose evil or vice versa. To say that because a person wasn't able to guess the future of their marriage that there is something wrong with them seems unfair. After all none of us have always been correct with our predictions. Of course a lot of Mormons do judge in this manner or similar ones. For example there are plenty of Mormons I know who would never date someone if they knew that person wasn't a virgin. (Whether a convert, divorced person, or simply a screw-up in their past) I think any judgment like these unfair. Of course people who judge like this aren't the sort I'd enjoy dating. So it really doesn't bother me if they wouldn't want to date me because they think *I* am the one with a problem. That's a personal judgment, mind you. However it leads back to Jacob's original point that there is a gap between some groups. If you are writing to the group who does tend to make these judgments you had best be able to explain your character's motivations to them. In that I agree with Jacob. I just don't think talking about 'problems' is the way to explain it. Tying this back to literature and AML, I am coming to think that a story about a single person dealing with these views would actually make a very interesting story. If there is anyone out there who is a gifted writer, I'd like to see you tackle the subject. There is a huge gap between married and unmarried in the church. I sincerely believe that many married people can not even conceive of the issues modern singles face. It is that issue - the inconceivability of single life - that needs addressed. Somehow the situation needs to be communicated or else this gap will grow and grow. It seems a topic that deserves to be tackled. I suspect that the best way to tackle it is to write a fictional story that reaches the mainstream body of the Saints ala _The Work and the Glory_. Of course EVERYONE wants to write a mainstream novel of that sort. Very, very few books manage to achieve it. -- Clark Goble --- d.c.g@att.net ----------------------------------- - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jonathan Langford Subject: [AML] Iron Rod vs. Liahona (was: Movie Ratings) Date: 13 Jun 2000 12:16:59 -0500 Chris wrote: >This is one of those topics that fits the Liahona vs. Iron Rod paradigm of >Church membership. Some people like to have everything spelled out for >them, others like to have guidance but use their own brains to make their >way through life. You can keep your eyes closed and hold to the rod, but >to follow the directions of the Liahona you have to keep your eyes open. To which I reply (going off on a tangent from Chris's main point, which had to do with movie ratings): I've always been a little bit uncomfortable with this comparison, which was developed in Richard Poll's essay in _Dialogue_ back in--what, 1968 or something? I know that a sizeable section of Church members have found this a comforting categorization--one that makes a place for them within the bounds of gospel imagery as faithful Church members, while still accounting for what they see as differences between their way of viewing things and that of some other Church members. And yet I think that (like all analogies) it has some problems, as well--which are appropriate for discussion on this List, inasmuch as this is a scripturally based metaphor that affects how many of us view our own culture and selves. * First, on a literal level: From what we can tell in scriptures, the Liahona was not a device that worked according to the principle of "working it out on your own." Rather, it spelled out instructions in a very specific manner: travel thus many days in thus-and-such a direction, etc. If anything, just as restrictive as holding onto a guard rail. Call me picky, but I tend to distrust metaphors when they rest on misinterpretations at the literal level. * Second, and more seriously: This is a metaphor which, I've noticed, makes people who identify themselves as Liahona-saints feel pretty good about themselves, but which doesn't offer much in terms of validation to Iron Rod saints. To pick on Chris a bit: What are the characteristics of Liahona saints, as identified in the paragraph I quoted? Have guidance but use their own brains; keep their eyes open. What are the characteristics of Iron Rod saints? Have everything spelled out for them, keep their eyes closed. No wonder that those who feel themselves identified as Iron Rod saints tend to become a bit defensive. While apparently providing two equally good, scripturally based images for different ways of interacting with personal inspiration and guidance from leaders, this comparison as commonly used often tends simply to reverse the good guy/bad guy categories rather than eliminating them. * Finally, I find these metaphors too easy and comforting when I apply them to myself. Frankly, there are times when my own brain isn't good enough--when I need more direct guidance. On the other hand, I also believe that it's not simply undesirable but impossible to implement either spiritual guidance or the teachings of leaders without the application of a little personal brain power. I mistrust the "one or the other, either one is all right" implication that's embedded in the comparison. The metaphor I find personally more useful is the law of witnesses, as frequently given in the scriptures: that everything is established in the mouth of two or three witnesses. It occurred to me a few years ago that scriptures, teachings of living Church leaders, and personal inspiration can be considered as "three witnesses" in determining paths in our own lives. It also occurred to me that rather than simply interpreting these as cross-checks for accuracy, it might be more fruitful to see them as coordinates (in a mathematical sense). You can't plot a point in a two-dimensional graph without two numbers: one for the x coordinate, one for the y coordinate. If you're plotting a point in three-dimensional space, you need three numbers. Similarly, it can be argued that we really need not only spiritual guidance, or the scriptures, or the teachings of modern prophets, but all of them together in order to find out where we ought to be. If we use only one source, our approach is--using this metaphor--one-dimensional. My point in this is not to argue about the "proper" balance between different sources of spiritual guidance, which isn't really on-topic for this List. Rather, it's to point out that there are important implications to which metaphors we choose to explain the gospel and other people and ourselves *to* ourselves. Choosing a different metaphor, I've found, can change the entire way I think and act about something. To my way of thinking, that's part of the great value of literary criticism: it provides tools for analyzing such metaphors, evaluating them, and considering what type of thinking and behavior they're likely to lead us to. Jonathan Langford speaking for myself, not the List jlangfor@pressenter.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Cathy Wilson" Subject: Re: [AML] Race and Culture in LDS Lit. Date: 13 Jun 2000 11:39:56 -0600 Barbara writes: Some people hold the theory that God waited to give blacks the priesthood > until whites were mature enough to deal with it, and that maybe he's waiting > to give women the priesthood until men are mature enough to accept it. Some years ago I was visiting a friend who had just switched on her TV, to the news, to hear, " . . . .of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has changed their policy so that the women will now hold the priesthood. . . " She was completely taken aback and had to do a quick tour in her head to see how she'd actually feel about that. She finally took the standard line: whatever the church did would be okay with her. Turned out it was the Reorganized Church, of course. Cathy (Gileadi) Wilson Editing Etc. 15 East 600 North Price UT 84501 - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: debbro@voyager.net Subject: Re: [AML] Movie Ratings Date: 13 Jun 2000 15:33:24 -0400 In the last week I have seen two movies at a real theater. I didn't have to wait for them to come out on video a year from their release date. My life has been so exciting! I too started to ignore movie ratings when I realized that the PG- 13 movies I was renting were a lot worse than most of the R rated movies I had seen. I can only remember two R rated movies I have ever walked off from in my own home and one was a western (about 8 or 9 years ago) with Clint Eastwood in it, and the other was _Falling Down_ that starred Michael Douglas. Two movies to awful to even want to discuss it. Newer movies: right after the Oscars, I rented _American Beauty_ based on the fact that it won a bunch of awards, it starred Annette Benning, and people were saying how good it was. I hated it. I watched it all the way through. I hated the way that I was manipulated to look at the color red as a way to know when something "important" was happening and so on. Last night, my son and I went to a pre-screening of the movie _Shaft_ and I wasn't thrilled about it (hubby bowed out at the last minute) and expected to hate it. Had nothing to look forward to but Samual L. Jackson, and grumbled all the way to the theater. I loved it! Yes it was violent, yes it had the language, but it also had humor in it, and was well written and produced. There was no sex in it or nudity, but they went heavy on the cleavage. Someone mentioned Bond movies. Until a few weeks ago, I had never seen one. I rented _The World is not Enough_ PG-13 or R (can't remember) and while I enjoyed it, as I pointed out to my husband, sure there is no cussing (which a movie without the F word IS refreshing), and there is no real nudity, but the man slept with four women by the end of the movie! Are all Bond movies like this? Maybe for me its like drinking coke or pepsi, until they ask me in a TR interview if I watch R rated movies, I can assume I'm allowed to make up my own mind about what I watch. Debbie Brown - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Darvell" Subject: [AML] re: Movie Ratings Date: 13 Jun 2000 15:6:55 -0600 Thom Duncan (tduncan@zfiction.com) >Lest you trot out the old saw "the Prophet says," let me >tell you that myself and others have done research on what >the GAs including the Prophets have said about R-rated >movies and, without fail, no living prophet has condemned >R-rated films *except* President Benson, and he spoke >specifically to young men on their first dates. >Thom Duncan I am fairly confident that another president of the Church since Benson has warned during General Conference about watching rated-R movies. And I'm pretty sure it was President Hinckley. I wish I could remember the details, but I think it was less than five years ago, which is how long President Hinckley has been president. It was at the Saturday night priesthood session of conference and the prophet spoke last. I'm sorry I can't remember more details about it than that, but I remember that it made a big impact upon me. I do watch some rated-R movies and I don't think that the rating system is adequate. But I'm pretty sure that Hinckley said this in a recent (< 5 years) GC talk. (It seems to me that it was the talk immediately following the 60 minutes interview, but I just can't remember.) Darvell Darvell Hunt, Las Vegas, NV _____________________________________________ Free email with personality! Over 200 domains! http://www.MyOwnEmail.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Richard Johnson Subject: Re: [AML] Race and Culture in LDS Lit. Date: 13 Jun 2000 16:03:16 -0400 At 11:42 AM 6/13/2000 -0500, you wrote: > >So with regards to the church, is there some cultural thing (because it is >not doctrinal) in operation that keeps black people from being present in >Wasatch communities? Is it class? Is it The West? I don't know. But >whatever that cultural thing is, I think it is a kind of racism. What >individual members do in the privacy of their own minds is what I call >bigotry, and is still execrable, even evil, but I like to distinguish it >from what churches and states and corporations do. That is what I call >racism. It always clarifies a discussion when one does as you do above, and define the characteristics of your personal definition. The problem, of course, is that not every one agrees with your definition. My local friends in the political science department equate racism with power and insist that no one who is "out of power" can be racist. (Not my definition at all.) As far as the lack of black people in the Wasatch, that was actually true of most of the mountain west until the nineteen sixties. In nineteen sixty, sixty or seventy percent of all the African Americans in Montana, Wyoming, Idaho, Colorado, Utah, and the western segments of Oregon and Washington were to be found in those cities which were either railroad centers (Pocatello, Ogden, Cheyenne, etc.) or which had a strong need for service jobs in touristry (certain segments of Colorado) The railroad centers needed Porters etc. and imported black people for that purpose. The same was true of the tourist traps. The reasons for the lack of such are hard to define. In 1959 I lived next door to the only black family in Twin Falls, Idaho. Since I taught the daughter of that family in High School I aften had interaction with the members of the family. They did not feel particularly discriminated against, but they were desperately lonely to see other black faces and often considered leaving (I have forgotten what profession the father had which led them to Twin Falls). My mother came to visit me in Georgia not long after we moved here. (1970) She expressed real distress at the number of black people. She had never seen so many. (She was from Pocatello where there _was_ a black population, but it was a small percentage of the population.) I would suspect that, even today, a lot of black people moving to the mountain west would feel that same distress, not a the number, but at the lack of familiar black faces. Richard B. Johnson Husband, Father, Grandfather, Puppeteer, Playwright, Writer, Director, Actor, Thingmaker, Mormon, Person, Fool I sometimes think that the last persona is the most important http://www2.gasou.edu/commarts/puppet/ Georgia Southern University Puppet Theatre - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Linda Adams Subject: Re: [AML] Divorce in LDS lit Date: 13 Jun 2000 15:04:57 -0500 >The more I think about it, the more I think this would make an >interesting story. The story isn't about giving up. It's about having >the courage to follow one's inspiration even when human logic and >culture don't support your actions. Unfortunately, I don't think I'm >skilled enough to write it. But I don't see why it would be inherently >unrealistic. The scriptures are full of examples of God asking people >to do things that make little sense from a human perspective. > >-- Rob I've heard more than one true story where a couple was dating, falling in love, and considering marriage, where the Spirit has directed them to break up. They do so even though they can't really understand it at the time. I haven't heard of the same in temple marriages that have already happened, but I do know many who have "gone through with it" in spite of their misgivings and later regretted that choice/covenant very much, and gone on to divorce (or just plain marital misery). I for one am grateful for the first type of story, because that exact thing actually happened with my husband and the girlfriend he dated before me. :-) Nobody else understood their breakup either--there wasn't any fight or argument between them or anything. Just a feeling they weren't meant to be together. Good thing for me! I think there's plenty of room for these and similar issues to be explored in LDS literature. I explore this theme a little bit in my upcoming novel. (_Prodigal Journey_) One of my characters at one point feels very right about a marriage decision, but later on (yet before the wedding occurs) the spiritual feeling definitely changes. I'll be interested to hear any of your comments about this situation later on, when the book is out. Don't want to say more as yet. (*Should* be ready June 16th or so--we're almost there!) Linda Linda Adams adamszoo@sprintmail.com http://members.xoom.com/adamszoo http://home.sprintmail.com/~adamszoo - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Jason Steed" Subject: Re: [AML] Re: Race and Culture in LDS Lit. Date: 13 Jun 2000 13:27:47 PDT >Todd wrote: >not that we're racist necessarily, but we haven't >learned to make room in our culture or our literature for these people. > >Jason replied: >Isn't that racist? How do we differentiate between "racism" and "not making >room in our culture for others of another race"? > >Not making room is NOT racism. Why? Simple. If a person hasn't been exposed >to other cultures and people, they can hardly be described as racist for >not >making room for them. By and large, white, suburban Mormons don't have a >ton >of exposure to other races and cultures. And that's where the challenge >lies: broadening our experience and exposure, which in turn will help make >room for people of all kinds. I think I understand what you _mean_, but I don't agree with what you say. You _say_ that "not making room" is not racist, because it is just the result (maybe) of lack of exposure. But we've ALL been "exposed" to people who are different from ourselves. A quick side note: Babies may be the exception to this notion that we've all been "exposed" to Other people, and clearly we don't want to say babies are racist if they react a certain way. But I find it VERY interesting that we might assume that a baby bursting into tears at the sight of a black person might be bursting into tears BECAUSE of that person's blackness... Isn't this possibility an imposition on our parts? Couldn't there be a thousand other reasons a baby might burst into tears at that moment? (The person got too close, had bad breath, a scary smile, was too loud, or just wasn't Mommy...) When I say we've all been "exposed," I mean we all know what is meant when we talk about black people, white people, brown people, yellow people, red people, or whatever 'color' we want to use to describe someone's skin pigmentation. So, if we know what we mean when we talk about these people, we can consider ourselves "exposed." We might still be ignorant or unfamiliar in many ways, but we're "exposed." Let me put it this way: Let's say you're sitting at a table, eating. In walks a person who is different from you (could be skin color, could be something else). Refusing to "make room" for that person, based on that difference, IS the same as racism (if the difference is in race)--plain and simple. You are _saying_ that they're not the same, but the notion of "lack of exposure" implies that no one's walked into the room yet, for whom we can "make room." If this were true--if no one has walked into the room, so "not making room" is just the result of "lack of exposure"--then it would be true that "not making room" is not equal to racism. But it would also be true that "not making room" wouldn't make sense, because why would we talk about "making room" if there was no one to "make room" for? Furthermore--and this is where I get to what I think you _mean_--you are trying to say that with a little exposure, we might be willing to "make room." If this is true, then this is NOT racism (when someone walks into the room, and you're willing to scoot over). In this sense, you're right--I think many Mormons are not racist, and when they are faced with a situation that involves people who are different from them, they "make room." But, on the other hand, we all know what we're talking about when we talk about people who are different. We're aware of each other, and of our differences. We've been "exposed"--whether it's from a distance or intimately. In a very real sense, we're all standing in the room together...so, "not making room" for Others, is, in my opinion, equal to prejudice (racism, sexism, etc.). [I snipped the baby example] >However, even if someone has been exposed to other races and cultures and >they don't go out of their way to promote them, I have a hard time calling >them racist, as Jason's post would imply. I didn't mean to imply that we have to "promote" those who are different from us in order to avoid being racist/prejudice. In fact, I agree very much with e.e. cummings on this point: cummings said that "to like a person because he's black is just as bad as to not like him because he isn't white." In other words, "promoting" or favoring someone, based on race (or sex, or whatever), is just as racist (or sexist, or whatever) as "demoting" or disfavoring them... >I, for one, would love to "make >room" in my own writing for other races, but as has been already brought >up, >a writer can't very well do that without the life experience. And I don't >have enough of that to make make such writing believable. As a result, I'll >leave that kind of literature for someone else who HAS the experience and >can make it real. > >Annette Lyon I don't think it's necessary that we do as PBS and other TV stations/programs have done, especially with their children's programs, and try to fill our writing with a cast of characters representing every "racial group" we can think of. This kind of diversity is good, on some levels and in some venues--but certainly I'm not prescribing this as a necessity in your next novel. "Making room" for someone, or for a particular group, doesn't necessitate that that person or group will actually SIT at your table. The important thing is to be WILLING to make that room for them (whether they're white, black, female, male, non-Mormon, Mormon, etc.). The negation of that space--the "NOT making room"--is what I believe amounts to prejudice. Jason ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Mike South Subject: Re: [AML] Multiple Points of View Date: 13 Jun 2000 14:44:54 -0600 Nan McCulloch said... > Chris, it seems to me the chapter assignment should depend on the importance > of the characters. If all characters are equally important then it would > seem they deserve equal chapters. An interesting variation on this idea is the recent film "Timecode". The film presents four points of view via four quadrants on the screen. All points of view are visible at all times -- the director simply turns up the volume in the appropriate quadrant so the viewer understands where to look. However, even while the story is moving along in one quadrant, other characters may be reacting to plot developments in other quadrants. In effect, I think, this film requires the viewer to become an editor because he/she must determine (with the director's help) what's important and what's not. While the quality of the story is another discussion entirely, the method of filmmaking was very interesting. I found that after about 5-10 minutes, I had no problem following along. It was almost as if the viewer, instead of one of the characters, is given the first-person omniscient p.o.v. --Mike South - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Ivan Angus Wolfe Subject: [AML] Iron Rod vs. Liahona (was: Movie Ratings) Date: 13 Jun 2000 19:25:01 -0600 (MDT) > >Chris Bigelow said: > >> > >> This is one of those topics that fits the Liahona vs. Iron Rod paradigm of Church membership. Some people like to have everything spelled out for them, others like to have guidance but use their own brains to make their = > >> way through life. You can keep your eyes closed and hold to the rod, but to follow the directions of the Liahona you have to keep your eyes open. > >> I don't buy this argument. As Orson Scott Card has written elsewhere, the Liahona and the Iron Rod both follow the same path. To follow one is to follow the other. It's a false argument, IMHO. The BoM nowhere indicates that the Liahona is somehow superior to the Iron Rod. Let's put it in a more literary vein. Often literature "such as teh "This is the Place" book Chris has mentioned elsewhere) nds to portray all nearly all Mormons as "bound by the rules." "This is the Place" attempts to strike some balance between the hedonistic gambling of Nevada and the psycho-rules bound Mormons in Utah. (Yes - I admit that's a gross oversimplification of the book, but anyway--). In a sense, Mormons are often portrayed as being "Iron Rodders" as it is sommonly defined. Only those who break from teh mold and actually realize not all rules are to be obeyed seem to be the "real" people. In literature about Mormons, often the "Liahona" types are the ones who leave the church or reamin on it's fringes. But even a literary interpretation of the BoM (ignoring doctrine) shows that the Liahona only worked for those who had held fast to the Iron Rod in Lehi's dream. If we take the two as liteary symbols, they both stand for the same basic concept. (Even Alma referred to following the Liahona as "an undeviating course.") I won't go farther in that direction, since I've been warned to not get to far into the doctrinal issues involved (though the literary ones seem to touch on the scacred ones here). --Ivan Wolfe - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Todd Robert Petersen Subject: Re: [AML] Multiple Points of View Date: 13 Jun 2000 16:35:52 -0500 > The pov rules are a recent development in literature. No, they're not. There are point of view shifts in The Odyssey, in 18th Century epistolary novels, in Vanity Fair, in Tristam Shandy, etc. Fellow LDS critic, Wayne Booth enumerates the development of these things in the Rhetoric of Fiction. More recent developments in narratology which come from the Russian formalists and the French structuralists expand the use of points of view to allow for more fluid shifts, which are increasingly common in contemporary fiction. What Richard seems to be talking about ignores the contributions of writers like Nabakov, Faulkner, James Joyce, Virginia Woolf, Louise Erdrich, William Trevor, etc., etc. Some of these writers are "confusing," I guess, but what they're doing is complex and demands some level of focused attention. Virginia Woolf's MRS. DALLOWAY is a perfect example of a book that does NOT do what Richard suggests when he says, > The modern reader is fast, and pov changes > interrupt the minds work, causing confusion. So they are to be avoided > except at breaks where the reader's mind stops for a breather anyway. Needless to say, there are no rules, as such, in fiction, particularly in the novel, which is a form that denies categorization. Everyone may not like everything but that doesn't mean that there is some violation of rules. One really must violate some of the rules to get anywhere, finally. Todd Robert Petersen - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Eileen Subject: Re: [AML] Movie Ratings Date: 13 Jun 2000 16:33:50 -0600 I am of the opinion that movie viewing according to ratings is and should be a personal choice. I have been so badly misled by the film industry and rating system as it now stands that I rarely view any movies regardless of ratings. The last movie I saw that gave me profound enjoyment was "Babette's Feast." I agree with the statement, my apologies, but I cannot remember who said it, that there really is nothing that is a "must see." I felt so inclined at one point in my life to discuss this issue of movie viewing with my Bishop during my recommend interview. We were also discussing the Word of Wisdom and difference between imbibding cold caffiene and hot caffiene (if one drinks a cold cappaccino will that prohibit temple attendance.etc. etc.) He told me that I should study these things out for myself and basically not to bother him with silliness, but he did give me this profound bit of advice. "A cup of cold coffee may not keep you out of the temple, nor may an "R" rated movie. However, disobediance to the principles and ordinances of the gospel will keep you from exhaltation. You must make the choice, you have been given correct principles a mind, a conscience and the gift of the Holy Ghost. If you your actions are worthy and have merit in bringing you closer to your true goal then let it be between you and the Lord." This I have always tried to apply as my guide in choosing movies, reading materials, and indeed in my writing. I have been give some guidelines in each of these aspects and it is up to me to make the choice. I cannot rely on some committee somewhere whose agenda may not be in my best interests. Am I being obedient, by what I understand, if I view this movie, if I read this book, if I write this story am I being obedient or disobedient, based on what I understand to be the principles of the gospel. Simplistic - perhaps, but it has worked for me. Eileen eileens99@bigplanet.com "When the freedom they wished for most, was freedom from responsibility, then Athens ceased to be free and was never free again" -Edith Hamilton - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "R.W. Rasband" Subject: Re: [AML] Where's our LDS Pulitzer prize winner? Date: 13 Jun 2000 18:13:35 PDT Can we claim Bernard DeVoto as LDS? *He* certainly wouldn't. Which brings me to a larger question: why do we consider some authors LDS and others not? We claim Fawn Brodie even though she was excommunicated. I understand Vardis Fisher came from an LDS family but I'm not sure we count him as "one of us." And how about Betty Eadie of "Embraced by the Light" fame? Just how do you tell who is an "LDS author" and who isn't? R.W. Rasband Heber City, UT rrasband@hotmail.com [MOD: I'm going to add a comment here, inasmuch as it touches on an area that I see as relating to the focus of this List. R.W. raises a good point here. Personally, I've found it useful to consider that "Mormon" and "LDS" are not necessarily synonymous when we're talking about literature. "LDS" seems to me a more narrow term, generally used with regard to membership--and possibly even some degree of activity--in the LDS Church. "Mormon" is a broader term, including "cultural Mormons," RLDS, ex-Mormons, and even (potentially) "dry Mormons." All can be on-topic for this List, although not all are necessarily LDS.] - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Todd Robert Petersen" Subject: Re: [AML] Divorce in LDS Lit. Date: 13 Jun 2000 22:49:24 -0500 Can I plug myself? [MOD: Always appropriate, if the plug is related to Mormon letters!] Clark wrote: > Tying this back to literature and AML, I am coming to think that a story about > a single person dealing with these views would actually make a very > interesting story. > I sincerely believe that many married people can not even conceive of the > issues modern singles face. It is that issue - the inconceivability of single > life - that needs addressed. Somehow the situation needs to be communicated > or else this gap will grow and grow. It seems a topic that deserves to be > tackled. One of my stories that will be appearing sometime in the next year or so in Sunstone (they promise) is about an African man who is newly-baptized. He is called by an American branch president to go out into the countryside in Rwanda and bless the grave of a member who was killed in the genocide because the white American, who is actually in Zimbabwe, is scared to. He agrees to go, and does so by himself. His crisis is that he starts seeing the widow, a young woman his age, as the only other marriageable church woman he has met. He finds himself falling in love with her at the same time he is rehearsing the prayer for the blessing of the grave. One of the issues that concerns faithful saints from all over the world is that they don't always have a great pool of people from which they can draw upon for Temple marriage. I live in Oklahoma, and I'll tell you the number of active LDS women in my stake within six years of my age (30) on either side who are not already married: one. There was another, but she moved to Colorado Springs. The other one will be gone in August, probably to Boise. This is a reality for a lot of people. I'm not whining, just saying. Todd Robert Petersen - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Jim and Laurel Brady" Subject: Re: [AML] Re: Race and Culture in LDS Lit. Date: 13 Jun 2000 22:46:54 -0600 > >I, for one, would love to "make > >room" in my own writing for other races, but as has been already brought > >up, a writer can't very well do that without the life experience. And I don't > >have enough of that to make make such writing believable. Does a writer have to have actual personal experience in order to write about any subject in a believeable manner? I hope not--no one alive has any personal experience with practically ALL of history. Does that mean no one should attempt to write about things that happened hundreds of years ago, in an environment and culture they have no experience with? Not at all. I'm a firm believer that a writer doesn't have to have personal experience to write convincingly. You do have to write what you know, but you can know a subject without experiencing it. If you want to write about this issue, go for it! As a reader and a writer, I believe if there's something you want to see a book written about, you'll never find one that satisfies your vision for the subject matter unless you write it yourself. Laurel Brady - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "D. Michael Martindale" Subject: Re: [AML] Race and Culture in LDS Lit. Date: 13 Jun 2000 22:50:08 -0600 "Barbara R. Hume" wrote: > What happened when black men got the priesthood? Did a lot of people leave? > I know a lot of them got upset. My experience was summed up by a letter to the editor that appeared in Time Magazine. Much too long ago to remember any direct quote, but the gist was that, if Mormons were so racist all this time, why was the main reaction to giving the priesthood to blacks a collective sigh of relief? That was certainly my reaction, and the reaction of everybody around me. And I even lived in Provo at the time. > Some people hold the theory that God waited to give blacks the priesthood > until whites were mature enough to deal with it, and that maybe he's waiting > to give women the priesthood until men are mature enough to accept it. I won't blame Barbara for these statements, because she was just quoting things she's heard. But these statements sound just as racist (or sexist) to me as anything else. We have no idea why God waited or is waiting to give this or that group the priesthood. Saying things like the above only exacerbates the problem. I believe the coined phrase is reverse discrimination. There's a saying that you fight fire with fire, but if you really fought fire with fire, wouldn't you just end up with more fire? The applicable saying is, two wrongs don't make a right. -- D. Michael Martindale dmichael@wwno.com ================================== Check out Worldsmiths, the new online LDS writers group, at http://www.wwno.com/worldsmiths Sponsored by Worlds Without Number http://www.wwno.com ================================== - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Richard C. Russell" Subject: Re: [AML] Movie Ratings Date: 13 Jun 2000 22:54:51 -0600 ----- Original Message ----- Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2000 10:58 AM > The figures I've seen indicate that the average G rated film earns eight > (8!) times as much as the average R rated film. > > Richard Hopkins That would be more a function of the quality of the film that dares to be a G than whether the public really wants a G-rated film per se. Having that rating is not a guarantor of box office success any more than have an R-rating would be. ************************************************* Richard C. Russell lderlore@xmission.com SLC UT www.leaderlore.com Ask about Leader Lore, a Leadership Newsletter. "There is never the last word, only the latest." ************************************************* - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Andrew Hall" Subject: [AML] Introducing: Andrew's Poll Date: 14 Jun 2000 13:59:17 JST Today I'm restarting the AML-List poll, previously run by Absalom, then briefly by Joab, Absalom's executioner. I glanced through the Bible Dictionary, trying to find a cool name for myself, but nothing popped up. Moses did a counting of the Israelites in Numbers, and Caesar polled/taxed his Empire in Luke, but I didn't feel like calling myself either of those. So I'm breaking with the AML-List tradition of poll anonymity and am just going to call it Andrew's Poll. About once a month I'll send out a question to the group (for example, "What Mormon author looks the most like Salvador Dali?") , and ask everyone to send back their answers to the regular AML-List address. You can send back a simple vote/response, which Jonathon will usually not forward on to the whole list, or add some commentary to your answer, which will get it posted. After about a week I'll tabulate the responses, and post the results. The first few polls will ask what you think the best Mormon literature of the 1990s has been, starting with novels, then moving on to short stories, drama, juvenile fiction, and non-fiction. I look forward to everyone's participation. You don't need to write a long treatise to respond, just check your ballot and send it off. See you at the polling station. Andrew Hall Nagareyama, Japan ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Andrew Hall" Subject: [AML] (Andrew's Poll) Best LDS Novel of the 1990s Date: 14 Jun 2000 14:03:14 JST So, here is the first Andrew's Poll. I thought it would be fun to start out by asking the list members to vote on their favorite Mormon literature of the 1990s. Maybe we'll give out awards. Any suggestions for the name of the award? The Amlly? Yikes. Anyway, I'll start out with the novels. What I'll do is start out with a list of nominees, selected by me. It is a pretty comprehensive list, but I may have left something good out, so I'd like for you all to send in any other worthy nominees that you might have over the next few days. Then next week I'll post the full list of nominees, and ask for everyone to send back their vote, with any comments you'd like to make. Don't worry if you haven't read many of the nominated books, few people have. I know I've read less than a third. Just go ahead and vote for what you like. Here is my criteria for nominees. The novel needs to have been published in the years 1990-1999. I think we should just be looking at novels written by Mormons, be they active in the Church or not. They don't have to address Mormon themes directly, although presumably in the better novels the religion and culture of the authors would be reflected somehow in the book. I also think former Mormons, at least those who address Mormon themes in a non-rabidly anti- way, should also be included. I am thinking in particular of Judith Freeman and Walter Kirn, both of whom have received AML fiction awards in the past. Authors who are not and have never been Mormon, however, seems to me to go a bit too far. Scott Turrow is a great writer, and I'm glad he includes a Mormon character in his latest novel, but I'd rather not put that book up for consideration for Best Mormon Novel. Neither, when we get to the drama award, would I like to see Tony Kushner's Angels in America up for consideration. Again, it is a great play, and Mormon themes and characters are key to it, but I would hardly call it a great "Mormon" play, since the Mormon characters feel so, well, wrong. I'm interested in what outsiders have written, but in this case I want to limit the nominees to what insiders (or anyone who has had a good long look at the inside) have to say. That is, unless I get an overwhelmingly violent reaction to my idea. If you are determined to vote for a non-Mormon author, okay. Actually, except for Kushner it probably won't be much of an issue, espeically since Stenger wrote before the 1990s. I am going to keep serial novels together as one piece of fiction, rather than having you vote for one book in the series. This applies to Card's "Homecoming" series, Hughes' "Children of the Promise" series, and Lund's "Work and the Glory" series. Also some authors, in particular Card, have published multiple novels in the 1990s. I'm picking those that seem to have the most merit, but if you think I'm leaving out a key one, please nominate it this week. If an author gets a lot of votes, but gets them split over a number of works, I'll figure out a way to give that author a special award. So, here is my list of nominees. I include all those that have won AML awards, big sellers, and others that have gotten good reviews or have been often mentioned favorably here on the list. Oh, if anyone knows what got the AML novel award in 1997, please tell me. Arnold, Marilyn. "Desert Song" Covenant, 1998. Barber, Phyllis. "And the Desert Shall Blossom" University of Utah, 1991. Barkdull, Larry. "The Mourning Dove" St. Martins. 1997. Brown, Marilyn. "Royal House" Covenant, 1994. -----, "Statehood" Aspen, 1995. Card, Orson Scott. "Xenocide," TOR, 1991 (1991 AML award). -----, "Lost Boys" HarperCollins, 1992. -----, "Homecoming Series (The Memory of Earth, etc.)" TOR,1992-1995. -----, "Pastwatch: The Redemption of Christopher Columbus" TOR, 1995. Evans, Richard Paul, "The Christmas Box" Simon and Schuster, 1995. Evenson, Brian. "Father of Lies" Four Walls Eight Windows, 1998. Fillerup, Michael, "Beyond the River" Signature, 1995. Fisher, Franklin. "Bones" University of Utah, 1990. (1990 AML award). Freeman, Judith, "A Desert of Pure Feeling" Vintage, 1996. (1996 AML award). Gardner, Lynne. "Sapphires and Smugglers" Covenant, 1999. Hedley, Leslie B. "Twelve Sisters" Bookcraft, 1993. (1993 AML award). Hedges, Mack. "The Last Buckaroo" Gibbs Smith, 1995. (1995 AML award). Hughes, Dean. "Children of the Promise Series" Deseret, 1997-1999. (1998 AML award). Jolley, JoAnn "Secrets of the Heart" Covenant, 1998. Kidd, Kathryn. "Paradise Vue" Hatrack, 1990. Kirn, Walter. "Thumbsucker" Broadway, 1999. Lund, Gerald. "The Work and the Glory Series" Bookcraft, 1990-1998. (1991 and 1993 AML awards). Palmer, Susan "The Tabernacle Bar" Signature, 1995. Parkinson, Benson. "The MTC: Set Apart" Aspen, 1995. Peck, Lisa J. "Dangerous Memories" Ceder Fort, 1998. Perry, Anne. "Tathea" Shadow Mountain, 1999. (1999 AML award). -----, "The Sins of the Wolf" Fawcett Columbine, 1994. (1994 AML award). Peterson, Levi. "Aspen Maroney" Signature, 1996. Sillitoe, Linda. "Secrets Keep" Signature, 1995. Smith, Robert Farrell. "The Miracle of Forgetness" Aspen, 1997. Smurthwaite, Donald S. "Fine Old High Priests" Deseret, 1999. Stansfield, Anita. "First Love and Forever" Covenant, 1994. Taylor, Curtis. "The Invisible Saint" Stanley Curtis Publishing, 1990. Van Wagoner, Robert Hodgson. "Dancing Naked" Signature, 1999. Wolverton, Dave. "Serpent Catch" Bantam, 1991. -----, "The Runelords: The Sum of All Men" St. Martins, 1998. (as David Farland). Young, Margaret Blair. "House Without Walls" Deseret, 1991. -----, "Salvador" Aspen, 1992. Andrew Hall ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "D. Michael Martindale" Subject: Re: [AML] Multiple Points of View Date: 13 Jun 2000 23:34:01 -0600 Melissa Proffitt wrote: > (The worst book I > read last year did this--with the additional horrible gutwrenching ploy of > REPEATING the same scene from each POV.) What's wrong with that ploy? It can be very effective if done well. Are you sure it was the ploy that was gut-wrenching, or the writing talents of the author? -- D. Michael Martindale dmichael@wwno.com ================================== Check out Worldsmiths, the new online LDS writers group, at http://www.wwno.com/worldsmiths Sponsored by Worlds Without Number http://www.wwno.com ================================== - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Eric D. Snider" Subject: Re: [AML] Movie Ratings Date: 14 Jun 2000 00:41:42 -0700 Sam Payne: >It would be interesting for me to see some actual figures on ratios of "R"s >to "PG"s, etc. >Michael Medved ... said that 60 >percent of mainstream cinema is rated R, but that the PG's and G's >(excluding PG-13's) collectively outperform R's two-to-one (*not* just >proportionately, if I remember right). >Eric Snyder might be able to best get his hands on some >actual numbers. I don't care how you spell YOUR name, Sam. Mine has no "Y" in it. :-) So I did a little research. Actually, I did a lot of research. Nobody call me at work today, because I'll be grumpy from being up too late. This past weekend, of the Top 10 films in the country, six were PG-13, two were PG and two were R. As a film critic, just going off the top of my head, I'd say that PG-13 is the most common rating -- especially during the summer, when PG-13 is a good, audience-friendly blockbuster sort of rating. And it's clearly the most popular rating in terms of box office, at least right this minute. But since we're not interested in what anyone thinks off the top of their head, I checked further. I went to ScreenIt (www.screenit.com) and noted the ratings of the first 100 movies of 1999, alphabetically. (Didn't feel like counting through the entire list). Of those 100, here were the ratings: G: 6 PG: 4 PG-13: 28 R: 62 This is poor research, of course; for all we know, all the G-rated movies start with the letter "S," which I didn't get to (the first 100 films of 1999 only took me up into the E's). So I went to the Internet Movie Database (www.imdb.com), which lists a total of 540 films released in 1999. Of those 540 films, here were the ratings: G: 34 (6 percent) PG: 44 (8 percent) PG-13: 90 (17 percent) R: 372 films (69 percent) One thing to note, however: These figures include many limited-release and "art-house" films, most of which would NOT have been listed at ScreenIt. Art-house films are almost invariably rated R, or else not rated at all. That's why the R-rated total is so high. Even discounting the art-house films, though, it's still going to be higher than all of the other ratings put together. Also, notice how (relatively) close those percentages are to the 100 films I took from ScreenIt. IMDB has the following totals for ALL 11,783 films that have been rated and that are listed on IMDB (which is just about every film ever made), excluding straight-to-video movies and TV movies that were later released on video: G: 860 (7 percent) PG: 2,788 (24 percent) PG-13: 1,326 (11 percent) R: 6,809 (58 percent) (Keep in mind the low PG-13 number is because that rating has only existed since the mid-80s. Many of the PG films would have been PG-13, had that rating existed when they came out. Also keep in mind that these numbers include many movies that were first released before the ratings system started in 1968, but which were later re-released and received ratings. All of those old Disney films, for example, most of which got G ratings. Contrariwise, very few pre-1968 films have been re-released and gotten R ratings. Films in general were generally G or PG in nature before the '60s, and the ones that weren't didn't get re-released a whole lot. I'm generalizing here, but you get the idea: The number of G movies is inflated because of the old films that were given ratings years after their initial release.) So it's clear from all sources that R is the most common rating, often by a rather wide margin. In 1999, anyway, it was around 65 percent of all films, and PG-13 accounted for around 25 percent more -- leaving only about 10 percent of films that were rated G or PG in 1999. Now let's look at how well these films did. Is it true that while G-rated films are more rare, they generally make more money when they do come around? In the history of film, 207 movies have grossed more than $100 million in the U.S. This includes money earned when films have been re-released (like the "Star Wars" trilogy was a few years ago). This does NOT account for inflation, however -- "Gone With the Wind" would be at around $900 million and #1 on the list if we counted it in current dollars; as it is, it's #30, with $198 million. Of those 207 movies, 21 were released in 1999. They were, in order: #3 - "The Phantom Menace" - $431 million - PG #10 - "The Sixth Sense" - $293 million - PG-13 #16 - "Toy Story 2" - $245 million - G #27 - "Austin Powers: The Spy Who Shagged Me" - $205 million - PG-13 #50 - "The Matrix" - $171 million - R #51 - "Tarzan" - $171 million - G #55 - "Big Daddy" - $163 million - PG-13 #64 - "The Mummy" - $155 million - PG-13 #69 - "Runaway Bride" - $152 million - PG #86 - "The Blair Witch Project" - $140 million - R #89 - "Stuart Little" - $140 million - PG #93 - "The Green Mile" - $137 million - R #106 - "American Beauty" - $130 million - R #113 - "The World Is Not Enough" - $127 million - PG-13 #140 - "Double Jeopardy" - $117 million - R #141 - "Notting Hill" - $116 million - PG-13 #147 - "Wild Wild West" - $113 million - PG-13 #166 - "Analyze This" - $107 million - R #184 - "The General's Daughter" - $103 million - R #188 - "American Pie" - $102 million - R #195 - "Sleepy Hollow" - $101 million - R The breakdown: G: 2 ($416 million total) PG: 3 ($723 million total) PG-13: 7 ($1,172 million total) R: 9 ($1,108 million total) Not only are R-rated films most plentiful in general, but more of them break $100 million, too. However, look at just the Top 10 from 1999 (through #86, "The Blair Witch Project"): G: 2 PG: 2 PG-13: 4 R: 2 Note that among G and PG films, all but one of them made the Top 10 for the year, while the PG-13s and especially the R's were in the Top 21, but in the bottom half of it. There were more R-rated films in the Top 21, but the G-rated ones made more money. Also: We should look at the percentages. According to these numbers, of the 34 G-rated films released in 1999, two of them broke $100 million -- 6 percent, in other words. Meanwhile, of the 372 R-rated movies in 1999, only nine of them broke $100 million -- a mere 2 percent. Here's the breakdown: G: 2 (6 percent) PG: 3 (7 percent) PG-13: 7 (8 percent) R: 9 (2 percent) One would expect there to be a lot of R-rated movies on the list, simply because there are so many R-rated movie, period. Odds are, some of them are bound to make a lot of money. But on the overall list of all-time money makers, the first rated-R film doesn't appear until #20 ("Beverly Hills Cop"). The ones above it aren't all old Disney cartoons like "Snow White," either -- they're all from the '80s and '90s (except for #13, "Jaws," from 1975). Remember that this list only includes films that made more than $100 million. I can't find a comprehensive list anywhere of films that made less than that. So back to our original questions: * Are there really more R-rated films than any other kind? Yes, by a wide margin. * Are R-rated films more popular than films with other ratings? No. PG-13, while not the most plentiful, makes the most money. PG-13-rated films stand a better chance, percentage-wise, of breaking $100 million, followed closely by PG and G films. However, in terms of total amount of money made, the PG-13-rated films in the 1999 Top 21 made more money combined than did the other ratings, followed very closely by the R-rated movies combined. I hope this information is useful, or at least interesting, to the masses. Someday I'll examine other years (1999 was kind of strange, what with "Phantom Menace" and all) and see how they compare. But not today. Eric D. Snider -- *************************************************** Eric D. Snider www.ericdsnider.com "Filling all your Eric D. Snider needs since 1974." - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Neal William Kramer Subject: Re: [AML] Where's our LDS Pulitzer prize winner? Date: 14 Jun 2000 01:02:26 -0600 (MDT) Merlo J. Pusey is another Latter-day Saint who won the Pulitzer Prize--but for history, I believe. I'm pretty sure his biography of Charles Evan Hughes, former Chief Justice of the United States won the prize in the forties. LDS literary figures who won prestigious literary prizes--though not pulitzers--include Vardis Fisher, Maurine Whipple, and Virginia Sorensen. More recent award winners have already been mentioned on the list--including Terry Tempest Williams and Judith Freeman. But we do have our very own AML awards, which continue to carry some cachet in this community. Who could forget _The Earthkeepers_ from so long :) ago? Neal Kramer - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: harlowclark@juno.com Subject: Re: [AML] Divorce Date: 14 Jun 2000 00:24:08 -0700 On Wed, 31 May 2000 07:42:23 Konnie Enos writes: > What I'd like to see is a good depiction of the effects of divorce > without the assumtion that the parents are the only ones affected > by it. Like death, the intire family is affected, all the loved ones are. > Is there a story out there that shows this? Try my unwritten novel _Fibonacci Numbers_. It's an offshoot from an unwritten novel about a missionary who is realizing that his mother set out, with great deliberation, to ruin his relationship to his father, telling him all sorts of lies. He's teaching the Fibonacci family (ages 1, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21, 34, and 55), and one night Bro. Fibonacci says to him, for no reason at all, "The truth will make you free, elder, but first it will make you hurt. When I first met the missionaries I refused to listen to them because my ex-wife had joined the Mormons. I could not imagine God loving her, allowing it, after all she had done to me." By the end of the story he's able to think about a painful and puzzling memory of being in the prayer circle at his endowment and his stepfather motioning for his father and stepmother to join them. He felt angry at that gesture, and remember the anger with great guilt. I became so intrigued by the Fibonacci family that I want to write a second novel, _Fibonacci Numbers_ from the POV of Andrea Fibonacci, the 13-year-old. The second may get written before the first. As far as written stuff, I have a story called "Animal Daddy" (I'm not sure I like that title), from the POV of a 5-year-old boy who keeps wondering what kind of animal Daddy turns into at night. He's not sure he wants to go visit his daddy for the weekend because he knows some animals can make you sick or bite you, or aren't allowed in the house, and what if daddy turns into that kind of animal and has to stay outside and can't help him in the middle of the night if he needs it. As you can guess, he has overheard his mother tell someone (he thinks it's grandma) that his father is an animal in bed. Someone in the UW writing workshop where I developed the story pointed out that calling someone an animal in bed is a compliment. I replied that the couple's divorce obviously didn't come from a lack of sexual passion, then. Harlow Soderborg Clark ________________________________________________________________ YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET! Juno now offers FREE Internet Access! Try it today - there's no risk! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj. - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Todd Robert Petersen" Subject: [AML] Race and Culture in LDS Lit. Date: 14 Jun 2000 10:39:19 -0500 In his last post, Jason used the terms "racism" and "prejudice" interchangably, as in the following: > I didn't mean to imply that we have to "promote" those who are different from > us in order to avoid being racist/prejudice. And by the end of the last post, he relys primarily on the term prejudice. I'm making a crucial distinction between these terms for a very important reason, one that Annette latched onto. But first, some definitions: Prejudice--a preconcieved judgment made without knowledge, thought, or reason. Racism--a belief that human races have distinctive qualities that determine their respective cultures, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to rule others. Also a policy of enforcing that asserted right. So, racism points back to some kind of action of domination of one kind or another. Prejudice is simply a judgment that may or may not result in some kind of action. To be upset, nervous, or to feel strange that black people or Chinese people or Navajos or whoever have moved into your neighborhood isn't racism, unless you take some steps to have them removed or to diminish them in some capacity. I grant that these distinctions are only useful to a point, but I think they help describe what happens among good LDS people a little better than simply casting the racism finger. Some distinction needs to be drawn between people who don't really know what to do when faced with ethnic situations and so they behave without much grace, and the Grand Wizards who think that black people are no better than apes. People of both stripes belong to the church. The n-word has been said in General Conference, though not in a while. How this relates to our literature is this: I think there needs to be more work of the type that Margaret Blair Young has been doing. She says that a novel along these lines will be out this August. I'm first in line. Because LDS people along the Wasatch don't have much experience with African Americans, doesn't exempt us from looking to the ethnic groups who are endemic to Utah (or should I say, from whom we stole their land?), namely Native American and Hispanic populations. Michael Fillerup's story "The Last Code Talker" is a fine example of this. It is an excellent story that looks at Mormon relations with the Navajo people. I think it's in a recent issue of Dialogue. In any case, my main complaint about Signature's IN OUR LOVELY DESERET, which I reviewed in Sunstone a couple of years ago, was that there was almost no mention of anyone of color. Mormons should be a very cosmopolitan group of people because of our missions and ability to speak most of the planet's languages. It is odd that this is not widely reflected in our attitudes, tastes, and desires. And by "we" and "our" I mean cracker, middle-class, literate Mormons like myself. Todd Robert Petersen - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: harlowclark@juno.com Subject: Re: [AML] Divorce in LDS lit. Date: 14 Jun 2000 00:47:13 -0700 Jacob Proffitt has written some things recently that show he's read my unwritten story, "Marginalia," including his Mon, 05 Jun 2000 comment, > A divorce says something about a man. If he is at fault for the > divorce then he has some serious repenting to do for breaking > such an important covenant. But even if he *isn't* at fault for > the divorce, you have to know that his judgement is suspect. He > made a major mistake with one of the most important decisions you > can make. We don't have arranged marriages any more. He chose > the woman he married (and correspondingly, she chose him) and the > failure reflects on him. A great deal of what I write is about divorce, specifically the grief of fathers sundered from their children. Several of my Seattle stories are about a man struggling to stay sane after the whelming emotional losses of a divorce, especially the repeated question "What's wrong with me? What's happening to me? It grieveth me to lose this vineyard. What more could I have done for my vineyard? (Single Adult dances have a lot to do with keeping that sanity, BTW.) "Marginalia" is a portrait of his wife at the time she decides to divorce him, and destroy him emotionally. The story is a deep tragedy, a humane intelligent woman deciding to destroy her husband as a surrogate for her father. As the title suggests, things are breaking in from the margins of her life, and she can't hold them back. Her parents are urging her to divorce him and let them support her, but of course they won't. They've struggled heroically just to have the emotional resources to support themselves. The title refers to this woman looking at some of the marginalia in her husband's school books, including an analysis of a complicated passage in the Book of Mormon with the comment that the antecedents to the pronouns would be very difficult for a non-native speaker of English to pick out. (English allows the same pronoun in the same sentence to have several antecedents. "He kissed her, then she kissed him." How many people do the four pronouns refer to? 2? 3? 4?) She chooses to interpret that as an attack on the Book of Mormon, and it foreshadows a passage where she starts thinking about her father (him) and her husband (him) where the antecedents to the pronouns become deeply mixed up. Her attitudes are also deeply mixed. She has great respect for the priesthood, but says at one point to her husband, "I'm damaged goods. How many of theses patriarchal Mormon men are going to want to marry a woman with two children?" "I would," he replies. When her husband starts exploring what it would mean to ordain women she decides he doesn't honor his priesthood (because he wants to give it to someone like her?), has apostatized. She doesn't understand that for him ideas are for exploring, people for embracing, not the other way around. Because he's an intellectual she thinks he likes to explore people as if they were characters in a novel, and embrace ideas. She also doesn't understand the depth of her anger at the priesthood. There's a very sad passage towards the end where she says to herself, "Women couldn't hold the priesthood, it was true. And if she couldn't hold the priesthood she could d--n well not hold it without him." Ironically, Jacob's quote of Thu, 08 Jun 2000 reflects her attitudes: "A divorce says something negative about you whether you are a man or a woman. Even if that someone was not at fault in the divorce. If you are divorced, it is clear that something likely *was* wrong with you. You made an eternal choice and were unable to keep it eternal." It weighs horribly on her that she's breaking up a temple marriage, that she can't keep her covenant with her husband, so she looks for a way to blame him, casting everything he does as a fault. There must be something wrong with him that she can't keep the covenant they made. I see her as a tragic heroine, not as a villain. I went on a three week data entry assignment at a homeopathic medicine company several years ago that turned into a six-month secretarial stint. One day I was filing some stuff from one of their trade magazines and came across an article about a woman who had found breastfeeding her baby mildly erotic. She was frightened by that and called the state's family services people to ask them about it, and of course they opened a sexual abuse investigation against her. The woman writing the article noted that she should have called La Leche League instead, indicating that such a reaction to breastfeeding is quite common. I realized recently that this erotic reaction to breastfeeding has to be part of "Marginalia." She's terrified by her reaction because she was abused by her father and is widely, deeply read enough to know the conventional wisdom that abuse victims cycle the abuse onto their children. She also knows she's said enough that her husband can figure out she was abused, and she's afraid he'll use that to try and take her children away. She doesn't want to cycle the abuse onto her children but someone has to be punished for the abuse her parents are heaping upon her as they pressure her. She chooses her husband. Should make a good story. Problem is, I love the characters I create. I hate to put them through hell. Harlow Soderborg Clark ________________________________________________________________ YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET! Juno now offers FREE Internet Access! Try it today - there's no risk! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj. - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: harlowclark@juno.com Subject: Re: [AML] Jesus on CBS Date: 14 Jun 2000 01:06:08 -0700 On Sun, 21 May 2000 16:13:18 Allison Blackham writes that, according to her tour guide, who bills himself as "an Israeli, a Mormon and a Jew," Jesus threatened the religious leaders' "authority. So they charged him with blasphemy and tortured him, but took him to Pilate because they didn't have power to execute." Quite so. Which is one of the things that makes the story of the woman taken in adultery so intriguing. When they brought the woman to Jesus they knew they didn't have the right to stone her, so they were laying out a dilemma for Jesus. If he said she should be stoned they could accuse him of sedition (as they were trying to do when they asked if he paid taxes), but if he said she shouldn't they could accuse him of speaking against the law of Moses. They were using this terrified woman as a pawn in their power game in the same way Pilate would later use Jesus as a pawn in his power game. The difference between Jesus and Pilate is that Jesus refused to play the game. Instead of debating the woman's guilt, innocence and fate he told the men to examine their own guilt innocence and fate. (Alejandro Casona, I think, wrote a play called "The Words in the Sand" which has Jesus writing the sins of each man in the sand. The last word he writes is 'murderer,' at the feet of a jealous man, who goes home and proves the words right.) > Pilate, according to this reading of the events, > used this as an opportunity to exert his power and > authority over the Priests. The priests wanted > Jesus executed. They had no legal authority to > kill him. Pilate taunted them with Jesus > blamelessness, that Jesus was their King, until > they finally shouted out that Caesar was their > king. Pilate was not concerned about Jesus, his > innocence or guilt, but used his case to solidify > his power over the leaders of the people in the > country he was sent to occupy. Consider the inscription on Jesus's cross, "Jesus of Nazareth The King of the Jews." The inscription describes the person's crime, which is why "the chief priests of the Jews [said] to Pilate, Write not The King of the Jews, but that he said, I am King of the Jews. Pilate answered, What I have written I have written" (John 19:21-22). I.E., the crime is to be the King of the Jews, not to claim to be the king. This is what we do to uppity Jews. Christian tradition has tended to excuse Pilate as a man pressured into doing something he really didn't want to, and condemn Jews for crucifying their Savior, but he was executed under Roman capital law. I rather like Dick Gregory's comment that if Jesus had come today we'd all be wearing little electric chairs around our necks. Harlow Soderborg Clark ________________________________________________________________ YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET! Juno now offers FREE Internet Access! Try it today - there's no risk! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj. - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Richard C. Russell" Subject: Re: [AML] Iron Rod vs. Liahona (was: Movie Ratings) Date: 14 Jun 2000 01:38:22 -0600 ----- Original Message ----- Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2000 11:16 AM > And yet I think that (like all analogies) it has some problems, as > well--which are appropriate for discussion on this List, inasmuch as this > is a scripturally based metaphor that affects how many of us view our own > culture and selves. > > * First, on a literal level: From what we can tell in scriptures, the > Liahona was not a device that worked according to the principle of "working > it out on your own." Not a claim that Poll made. His point was that directions appeared from time to time and were not constant in the same way that the iron rod was not intermittent. > Rather, it spelled out instructions in a very > specific manner: travel thus many days in thus-and-such a direction, etc. > If anything, just as restrictive as holding onto a guard rail. Poll never made the point that the instructions were open ended or not specific, just that they were not always there. Once Lehi's family got the instructions, they followed them, of course. The distinction from Poll was that the details of getting from place to place according to the instructions was left to them to work out. > Call me > picky, but I tend to distrust metaphors when they rest on > misinterpretations at the literal level. I would, too. However, you minsterpret Poll. > * Second, and more seriously: This is a metaphor which, I've noticed, > makes people who identify themselves as Liahona-saints feel pretty good > about themselves, but which doesn't offer much in terms of validation to > Iron Rod saints. When was the last time you read Poll? He never intended for metaphor to do what you say it does. It seems to me, if anything, it empowers each world view to have equal validity -- particularly in the eyes of the other. > To pick on Chris a bit: What are the characteristics of > Liahona saints, as identified in the paragraph I quoted? Have guidance but > use their own brains; keep their eyes open. What are the characteristics > of Iron Rod saints? Have everything spelled out for them, keep their eyes > closed. No wonder that those who feel themselves identified as Iron Rod > saints tend to become a bit defensive. While apparently providing two > equally good, scripturally based images for different ways of interacting > with personal inspiration and guidance from leaders, this comparison as > commonly used often tends simply to reverse the good guy/bad guy categories > rather than eliminating them. I hear that is your view. > * Finally, I find these metaphors too easy and comforting when I apply them > to myself. Frankly, there are times when my own brain isn't good > enough--when I need more direct guidance. On the other hand, I also > believe that it's not simply undesirable but impossible to implement either > spiritual guidance or the teachings of leaders without the application of a > little personal brain power. I mistrust the "one or the other, either one > is all right" implication that's embedded in the comparison. I believe that Poll also points this out, though I am not as sure on that point as the others above. However, he doesn't speficially rule out that both phenomenon would be experienced in the life of one individiual. > The metaphor I find personally more useful is the law of witnesses, as > frequently given in the scriptures: that everything is established in the > mouth of two or three witnesses. It occurred to me a few years ago that > scriptures, teachings of living Church leaders, and personal inspiration > can be considered as "three witnesses" in determining paths in our own > lives. It also occurred to me that rather than simply interpreting these > as cross-checks for accuracy, it might be more fruitful to see them as > coordinates (in a mathematical sense). You can't plot a point in a > two-dimensional graph without two numbers: one for the x coordinate, one > for the y coordinate. If you're plotting a point in three-dimensional > space, you need three numbers. Similarly, it can be argued that we really > need not only spiritual guidance, or the scriptures, or the teachings of > modern prophets, but all of them together in order to find out where we > ought to be. If we use only one source, our approach is--using this > metaphor--one-dimensional. I like what you say here. In my view it is incomplete, doesn't go far enough. You have left out some other equally useful and no less reliable coordinates. Reason and logic, tradition, experience. Room and time don't allow an expansion on what I mean by those. These, however, ought to have some consideration and they are addressed in the scriptures as well. The three you mention seem to this observer to be very much alike in that they all claim to have God as their source. Section 58 allows for ourselves to be a source. I like what you say below as well, as long as the new metaphor accounts for sufficient points to account for what we observe. ************************************************* Richard C. Russell lderlore@xmission.com SLC UT www.leaderlore.com Ask about Leader Lore, a Leadership Newsletter. "There is never the last word, only the latest." ************************************************* > My point in this is not to argue about the "proper" balance between > different sources of spiritual guidance, which isn't really on-topic for > this List. Rather, it's to point out that there are important implications > to which metaphors we choose to explain the gospel and other people and > ourselves *to* ourselves. Choosing a different metaphor, I've found, can > change the entire way I think and act about something. To my way of > thinking, that's part of the great value of literary criticism: it > provides tools for analyzing such metaphors, evaluating them, and > considering what type of thinking and behavior they're likely to lead us to. > > Jonathan Langford > speaking for myself, not the List > > jlangfor@pressenter.com > > > > > > > - > AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature > http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm > > - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Richard C. Russell" Subject: Re: [AML] Iron Rod vs. Liahona (was: Movie Ratings) Date: 14 Jun 2000 01:55:03 -0600 ----- Original Message ----- Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2000 7:25 PM > > >Chris Bigelow said: > > >> > > >> This is one of those topics that fits the Liahona vs. Iron Rod paradigm of Church membership. Some people like to have everything spelled out for them, others like to have guidance but use their own brains to make their = > > >> way through life. You can keep your eyes closed and hold to the rod, but to follow the directions of the Liahona you have to keep your eyes open. > > >> > I don't buy this argument. As Orson Scott Card has written elsewhere, the > Liahona and the Iron Rod both follow the same path. And I don't buy Card's argument. In the dream, the people were striving to attain the love of God by figuratively grabbing onto an item that does not exist except in metaphor for it doesn't exist in real life. In Lehi's real life, they had to get to a real earthly destination and needed help from time to time to make the journey. It was more like the similar journey made by the Jaredites who appear to have been left to their own devices to work out some of the details on their own. > To follow one is to follow > the other. It's a false argument, IMHO. The BoM nowhere indicates that the > Liahona is somehow superior to the Iron Rod. And neither does Poll's methaphor. Both are equally valid and work for each with equal effectiveness. People in both persuasions are believing, loyal, dedicated, committed, hard working, diligent participants in the Mormon experience. He never intended to place a value, in fact, if anything, he was pleading that no one place the value of one over another. Rather, he was trying for understanding. > Let's put it in a more literary vein. Often literature "such as teh "This is > the Place" book Chris has mentioned elsewhere) nds to portray all nearly all > Mormons as "bound by the rules." "This is the Place" attempts to strike some > balance between the hedonistic gambling of Nevada and the psycho-rules bound > Mormons in Utah. (Yes - I admit that's a gross oversimplification of the book, > but anyway--). In a sense, Mormons are often portrayed as being "Iron Rodders" > as it is sommonly defined. Only those who break from teh mold and actually > realize not all rules are to be obeyed seem to be the "real" people. In > literature about Mormons, often the "Liahona" types are the ones who leave the > church or reamin on it's fringes. I can't speak to the complete metaphor but I challenge the conclusion of your paragraph. Strict literalists, and ultraconservative folks also find themselves at the fringe and often leave to start their own churches. The ones you mention just don't start their own movements. > But even a literary interpretation of the BoM (ignoring doctrine) shows that the > Liahona only worked for those who had held fast to the Iron Rod in Lehi's dream. Not the same in my view. Holding to the rod was following the word of God. The Liahona worked only according to the heed and diligence (and faith) which they gave it. IOW it still worked even when they didn't give "as much" heed and diligence one time as at another as long as they continued to abide it. The Iron Rod appears to this observer to have less of that character -- less flexible, being iron. > If we take the two as liteary symbols, they both stand for the same basic > concept. (Even Alma referred to following the Liahona as "an undeviating > course.") I won't go farther in that direction, since I've been warned to not > get to far into the doctrinal issues involved (though the literary ones seem to > touch on the scacred ones here). That they stand for the same basic concept is also Poll's contention. His view, however, is that the method to attain the goals might be different. But they each work for the ones who choose to proceed with them. ************************************************* Richard C. Russell lderlore@xmission.com SLC UT www.leaderlore.com Ask about Leader Lore, a Leadership Newsletter. "There is never the last word, only the latest." ************************************************* - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Ivan Angus Wolfe Subject: Re: [AML] re: Movie Ratings Date: 14 Jun 2000 04:38:59 -0600 (MDT) Darvell Hunt: > > no living prophet has condemned > >R-rated films *except* President Benson, and he spoke > >specifically to young men on their first dates. > > >Thom Duncan > > I am fairly confident that another president of the Church since Benson has > warned during General Conference about watching rated-R movies. And I'm > pretty sure it was President Hinckley. Actually - I know President KImball (and it was said while he was president/prophet) once said the same things that Benson said. But it was at a BYU devotional, so despite the fact 1.) It was said by a living prophet and, 2.) it was said to adults above the age of 18, it was given at BYU, so most people just brush it off with a "I don't attend BYU." (I can give the exact date adn all that if nee be, I just don't havce it next to the computer right now). --Ivan Wolfe - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Margaret Young Subject: Re: [AML] Re: Race and Culture in LDS Lit. Date: 14 Jun 2000 09:58:41 -0600 Jim and Laurel Brady wrote: > > >I, for one, would love to "make > > >room" in my own writing for other races, but as has been already brought > > >up, a writer can't very well do that without the life experience. And I > don't > > >have enough of that to make make such writing believable. > > Does a writer have to have actual personal experience in order to write > about any subject in a believeable manner? Actually, it helps. You know the cliche: "Write about what you know." Bela Petsco once said that in a class of Darrell Spenser's. Darrell said the next day, "What a stupid thing to say. You CAN'T NOT write about what you know." Our experiences invest even our imaginations with issues we ourselves struggle with. > I hope not--no one alive has any > personal experience with practically ALL of history. Does that mean no one > should attempt to write about things that happened hundreds of years ago, in > an environment and culture they have no experience with? Not at all. But we've all seen writing wherein "Lehi" or "Nephi" say things like, "Father, thou seest that this path is fatal. The ague might await us around the next bend." We have a sense of how people "back then" saw the world or spoke about it, and far too often, the writing becomes a pseudo-style much more based in our memories of fairy tales and scriptural language than true-to-life characterizations. Obviously, good writing will not participate in that kind of flaw, but there's plenty of bad writing to demonstrate the temptation. [Margaret Young] - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Christopher Bigelow" Subject: Re: [AML] Iron Rod vs. Liahona Date: 14 Jun 2000 10:08:17 -0700 The Iron Rod virtually dictates where every footstep falls and offers no = latitude for exploring, say, an interesting rock five feet away, because = the implication is that if you let go for even a moment, you could be = caught up in the mists of darkness and lost. The Liahona offers all kinds of latitude (probably not miles, but = certainly yards and yards) as to where one places their footsteps and how = one interacts with the terrain one is passing through. Yes, the end goal = is the same, but the passage is much less prescriptive. I'm not convinced that these aren't excellent metaphors for styles of = Church membership. And I do personally have less respect for the Iron Rod = mindset, just as I've encountered numerous people who have less respect = for the Liahona approach. For me the Iron Rod approach is to cleave so = close to the line that you happily wear the GA uniform of dark suit and = tie, maintain a missionary haircut, listen to and read mainly Church-produc= ed material, keep your social contacts and interactions within safe Mormon = circles, avoid people and cultural influences that challenge, and = otherwise hold on so tight that there is little room for error or outside = influence. And such people have their reward, if that's what makes them = happy or secure or safe or whatever. Others prefer the broader view suggested by the Liahona, with a destination= in clear sight and many instructions and much guidance to be heeded, yet = with opportunity to choose whether one goes right or left around the rock = outcropping, whether one skirts the grove of trees or goes straight = through, whether one takes a moment to skinny dip in yonder river, etc. It = opens up the richness of the world more, which an Iron Rodder might label = "worldly" as he or she hunkers down in the safety of Work and the Glory, = Afterglow, and a white shirt and tie or floral print dress. If one is in = tune and seeking guidance, the Liahona will warn if a rattlesnake awaits = on the right side of the rock outcropping, but otherwise not prescribe so = specifically. That's my vision of it, anyway.=20 Actually, most people are probably Iron Rodders sometimes and in some = areas and Liahoners other times. Both mindsets are subject to abuse. = Culturally I'm personally very much a Liahona person (what I read, eat, = write, wear, listen to, how and with whom I socialize, etc.), but = doctrinally I tend to hold more to the Iron Rod, deferring to GAs and = inwardly feeling conservative about pressure for doctrinal change and = skeptical of people who go Liahona in this area. (I have a character in my = current novel project who served a mission in Taiwan and can't leave = reincarnation alone in her mind, always looking for ways to blend it into = Mormon doctrine--while it's fascinating, it would make me personally = uncomfortable to presume to do that for real in my own doctrinal life). As = far as Church programs and history, I'm a middle roader, not completely = comfortable with either Liahona or Iron Rod approaches. On something like = the Word of Wisdom, for me being Liahona is drinking Coke, nonalcoholic = malt beverages, coffee-flavored ice cream; others might wander further = afield--drinking coffee after it cools, drinking Utah beer because it is = so weak--and still call themselves following the Liahona, but who is to = say at exactly what point the wilderness might overtake the compass. Other ways to state the Liahona vs. Iron Rod approach would be liberal vs. = conservative and discipline vs. creativity. I would personally much rather = join a hippy commune than the army.=20 Chris Bigelow * * * * * * Interested in novels, stories, poems, plays, and films by, for, or about = Mormons? Check out IRREANTUM magazine at www.xmission.com/~aml/irreantum.ht= m. - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Hamilton Fred Subject: Re: [AML] (Andrew's Poll) Best LDS Novel of the 1990s Date: 14 Jun 2000 10:41:25 -0600 (MDT) If we restrict novels to only those written by Mormons, active or inactive, we have redefined the list's concept of Mormon Literature. I have copied the following literally and directly from the WWW AML LIST PAGE. "AML-List: An Internet mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature. Mormon literature includes, but is not limited to, fiction, poetry, drama, essay, biography, family history, and children's literature, by, for, or about Mormons, and also the literary dimensions of scripture." I am probably more concerned about this than most. But, working in academia, I continually see the difficulties which occur when discussions become too exclusive in what they include or discard. They are, thus, eliminating an essential element of knowledge which the world "will" include. Groups which disregard such elements diminish the legitimacy of their own discussion. I wish my voice to be on record as one who would not like our group to do so. Would not our list's discussions of "Mormon Novels of the 1990's" be richer if we used the list's definition of "Mormon Literature"? And, what does this say about "Mormon Literature" if a consensus develops in our discussion that the better work is being accomplished by individuals who are not or have never been LDS? Please remember, this is only my fallible perspective. Respectfully, Skip Hamilton - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: aml@xmission.com Subject: [AML] List Down Date: 15 Jun 2000 12:43:19 -0700 (MST) AML-List Subscribers, Jonathan relayed a message to me indicating his phone line was cut in a construction mishap. He says the list should be back up later today or tomorrow. Benson Parkinson Listowner, AML-List - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jonathan Langford Subject: [AML] Back on Line Date: 19 Jun 2000 16:57:24 -0500 List Members, As Ben informed you, I've been out of telephone touch with the world since late Wednesday afternoon (the result of a mishap in road construction in front of my house). Well, I'm finally back on line again, as of this afternoon. There's somewhere between 40 and 50 messages waiting in the in-box, so it'll be a couple of days before I've completely dug out from under the backlog. In the meantime, feel free to send in new messages, but realize that it will be a while before they go out. (Today will be a full 30-post day if I can manage it, not counting this message.) Jonathan Langford AML-List Moderator - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Ivan Angus Wolfe Subject: Re: [AML] (Andrew's Poll) Best LDS Novel of the 1990s Date: 14 Jun 2000 10:20:15 -0600 (MDT) David Farland's "The Runelords: the sum of all men" and it's sequel "The Brotherhood of the Wolf." Far and above anything (even non-LDS) I have read in recent years. --Ivan Wolfe - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Marilyn Brown Subject: [AML] BROWN, _I Cannot Tell a Life_ (was: Jerry JOHNSTON, "Waiting for a great Mormon novelist") Date: 14 Jun 2000 11:27:38 I have been going through the posts rapidly because I'm on a deadline project, (my 600 p. WINE-DARK SEA OF GRASS about the Mountain Meadows Massacre) but I'm so glad I didn't miss Harlow's mention of I CANNOT TELL A LIFE. This was SO interesting, Harlow. I have been waiting to get your reactions, and I can see you're getting as big a kick out of it as I have. Really, as you continue, you are going to find some very amazing "scenes." Too bad I have only five copies left and can't print more because I'll be sued. Look at all the FUN readers are missing! Thanks for wading through it! Marilyn Brown At 02:49 PM 6/8/00 -0700, you wrote: >Just after reading this I was reading Florence Child Brown's _I Cannot >Tell a Life_ and came across this passage about a church meeting in >Mexico: >"When it came time for the speaker, she started to interpret. I told her >thanks but it was coming to me in English. So she interpreted it to Linda >instead. It was a marvelous experience. I had always heard about the gift >of tongues and the gift of interpretation. Now I had a testimony of it >for myself. The message of the talk really hit home. It was about keeping >faith even in times of adversity" (288). > >So not only is she hearing the gospel in her own language, she's hearing >a message she needs to hear, especially at a moment when she's watching >her husband fall in love with her daughter-in-law. BTW, that chapter ends >with one of the best scenes I've seen recently: > >>>>>> >When we pulled into the parking lot where Bill Jr.'s car was, he said, "I >can't wait to get home and file for a divorce, naming my dad as >correspondent." > >I spoke up, "Why would you do a fool thing like that?" > >"Because they are in love," he said. > >"Well, you ought to be glad that they love each other. Most in-laws don't >get along as well as they do," I responded. > >Bill Sr. and Linda didn't say anything. ><<<<< > >Anyone who can come up with that line about filing for divorce ought to >be a playwright. Maybe he could even get together with someone like >Marilyn McMeen and start a theatre. And the dramatic timing is >impeccable, said not simply to his mother, but his father and wife as >well. - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Melissa Proffitt Subject: Re: [AML] Multiple Points of View Date: 14 Jun 2000 11:27:19 -0600 On Tue, 13 Jun 2000 23:34:01 -0600, D. Michael Martindale wrote: >Melissa Proffitt wrote: > >> (The worst book I >> read last year did this--with the additional horrible gutwrenching = ploy of >> REPEATING the same scene from each POV.) > >What's wrong with that ploy? It can be very effective if done well. Are >you sure it was the ploy that was gut-wrenching, or the writing talents >of the author? It was both, unfortunately. I said "repeating" because that's what it was--the exact same scene, without any variation based on the individuals involved. But, just to clarify, I'm not talking about a Kurosawa-like method of storytelling here. There were five characters; each underwent = the same "initiation" period individually. That is, they weren't all in the same place having different reactions to one event. It was like, "Person= A is waiting for his ride, and something bad happens which he has to stop" = and then "Person B is waiting for HIS ride in a completely different city, = and the exact same bad thing happens to him which he has to stop", lather, rinse, repeat.... In short, this author apparently thought she was being clever and = original in this method of introducing her five characters, but she was wrong. I could go on and on about the flaws in this series, but I'd have to = perform a prefrontal lobotomy on myself first or risk insanity. Don't ask why I bothered to persevere through the whole thing. Melissa Proffitt - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Dave Subject: Re: [AML] Movie Ratings Date: 14 Jun 2000 11:30:22 -0600 Eileen wrote: > I agree with the statement, my apologies, but I cannot remember who said it, > that there really is nothing that is a "must see." I hope the list won't mind the intrusion of a lurker on this issue (though my friends will tell you that I can't remain a lurker for long!). [MOD: No one has a "permanent lurker" label on his/her forehead. Feel free to break into the conversation anytime!] I believe that there are "must see" movies. If you apply this to literature, as I suppose we should (tic), are there any "must reads?" Outside the scriptures (or maybe including the scriptures!) are there books that you see as essential to your ideas of religion, God, or the world? In my life, I know that there is some literature, and some movies that have affected me so profoundly that it changed my behavior for the better. In that sense, I don't think "art" or "literature" is non-essential. So, I guess the implication that I'm quibbling with - is that if no movie is a "must see" then movies or literature or art is really not essential. My experience tells me differently. Dave Hansen - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Richard R. Hopkins" Subject: Re: [AML] Multiple Points of View Date: 14 Jun 2000 12:23:07 -0600 -----Original Message----- > >What Richard seems to be talking about ignores the contributions of writers >like Nabakov, Faulkner, James Joyce, Virginia Woolf, Louise Erdrich, William >Trevor, etc., etc. Some of these writers are "confusing," I guess, but what >they're doing is complex and demands some level of focused attention. >Virginia Woolf's MRS. DALLOWAY is a perfect example of a book that does NOT >do what Richard suggests when he says, > >> The modern reader is fast, and pov changes >> interrupt the minds work, causing confusion. So they are to be avoided >> except at breaks where the reader's mind stops for a breather anyway. I think Todd makes my case for me with this argument. I'm not suggesting that there is no value in using different writing techniques. What I'm saying is that when you switch povs as in the examples above, it is confusing, it breaks the deep mental contact with the character that modern readers enjoy, and it requires a very different level of attention. If you're interested in writing fiction that will appeal to the modern reader (in other words, fiction we can actually publish and sell), them's the rules. That's all I'm saying. >Needless to say, there are no rules, as such, in fiction, particularly in >the novel, which is a form that denies categorization. Everyone may not >like everything but that doesn't mean that there is some violation of rules. >One really must violate some of the rules to get anywhere, finally. > >Todd Robert Petersen Here I would disagree to a certain extent. I believe there are always rules for achieving intentional goals. If we wish to play with those rules, we reap the consequences, which may be exactly what we want, but the rules have no changed, nor can it be said that there are no rules. Some times an artist will specifically choose to reap unusual consequences. Someone pointed out Beethoven and his music as an example in another post. He was intimately acquainted with the rules for the various forms of music he wrote and would specifically tweak his audience by not following those rules at key moments in the music. He would lead the audience to a specific form, then change it. For example, he'd do a restatement of the theme, but change the key, stuff like that to fake out his audience. He loved it and his music was very special for it. But he knew exactly what he was doing and followed very specific rules to achieve what he wanted. To do the same with pov in a modern novel would take a level of skill not unlike that of Beethoven. I haven't seen it done that well yet, but I imagine it could . . . though not without a very complete and thorough understanding of the rules and how any variation from them will affect the reader. There are rules because there are natural consequences that follow from what we do and say. All art is based on rules, rules that achieve the various results the artist seeks. If we simply justify our inability to follow the rules or if we ignorantly fail to follow the rules, the result is artless. (I'm not saying that's bad either. Some artists intentionally try to achieve a kind of artless beauty in their work.) I believe we have to know what we're doing and what we want to achieve in order to create excellence. That usually takes a really good grasp of the rules . . . and a willingness to be objective about our work, which isn't easy most of the time. Richard Hopkins - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Terry L Jeffress" Subject: Re: [AML] Movie Ratings Date: 14 Jun 2000 14:38:58 -0600 > I went to ScreenIt (www.screenit.com) and noted the ratings of the > first 100 movies of 1999, alphabetically. (Didn't feel like counting > through the entire list). Of those 100, here were the ratings: > > G: 6 > PG: 4 > PG-13: 28 > R: 62 I wrote a quick Perl script to get the totals for all movie reviews at ScreenIt. It produced these results, to which I added similar data from the IMDB: ScreenIt IMDB (1999) IMDB (1990-99) ============ ============= ============== G: 36 ( 4.3%) 34 ( 6.2%) 183 ( 3.4%) PG: 127 (15.1%) 44 ( 8.0%) 639 (11.8%) PG-13: 224 (26.7%) 90 (16.4%) 864 (16.0%) R: 443 (52.7%) 372 (67.6%) 3485 (64.6%) NC-17/X: 2 ( 0.2%) 2 ( 0.4%) 69 ( 1.3%) None: 8 ( 1.0%) 8 ( 1.5%) 154 ( 2.9%) Total: 840 550 5394 My IMDB total differs from Eric's because I included NC-17 and those movies that IMDB lists with USA:Unrated for the rating. The data indicate that the ratios of movie ratings in 1999 reflect similar ratios for the decade. -- Terry Jeffress - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Jason Steed" Subject: Re: [AML] Race and Culture in LDS Lit. Date: 14 Jun 2000 14:07:52 PDT [MOD: I'm close to cutting off this topic of discussion, unless some more explicit connections to literature are made. Consideration of the attitudes prevalent within Mormon culture and how they ought to be shown/addressed in Mormon literature are on-topic. However, I think we've strayed too far into a debate over what is and what isn't racism, in a way that doesn't further the conversation about literature. I'm allowing Jason his response here--but any further discussion on this point will have to take a more literary tack.] >In his last post, Jason used the terms "racism" and "prejudice" >interchangably, as in the following: > > > I didn't mean to imply that we have to "promote" those who are different >from > > us in order to avoid being racist/prejudice. > >And by the end of the last post, he relys primarily on the term prejudice. >I'm making a crucial distinction between these terms for a very important >reason, one that Annette latched onto. > >But first, some definitions: > >Prejudice--a preconcieved judgment made without knowledge, thought, or >reason. > >Racism--a belief that human races have distinctive qualities that determine >their respective cultures, usually involving the idea that one's own race >is >superior and has the right to rule others. Also a policy of enforcing that >asserted right. > >So, racism points back to some kind of action of domination of one kind or >another. Prejudice is simply a judgment that may or may not result in some >kind of action. These are good definitions, and if they are known and understood in a given context, then I accept and agree with them. However, I do not think that _generally_ (meaning in the general public, in a general context) these distinctions are known and understood. I think, generally, people think of racism as a particular form of prejudice, prejudice being possible against the tall, the short, the fat, the thin, the female, the male, the English, the French, the black, the white, etc. Racism would just be referring to the prejudices that are racially motivated. Yes, many people might acknowledge "racism" as having a certain 'strength' to it that "prejudice" lacks (the latter sounds milder than the former)--but I strongly believe that my definitions are more _generally_ accepted and used than yours. My reasons for believing this are largely grounded in my years as a student and a teacher, talking about identity (including race, gender, etc.) in the classroom with young college students (once my peers, now my students). > >To be upset, nervous, or to feel strange that black people or Chinese >people >or Navajos or whoever have moved into your neighborhood isn't racism, >unless >you take some steps to have them removed or to diminish them in some >capacity. I disagree with this. Are you nervous or do you feel strange when the new white family moves in? In other words, if your reaction is motivated by prejudice, and that prejudice has to do with race, then it is racism. According to your definitions, maybe, it isn't... >I grant that these distinctions are only useful to a point, but I think >they >help describe what happens among good LDS people a little better than >simply >casting the racism finger. Some distinction needs to be drawn between >people who don't really know what to do when faced with ethnic situations >and so they behave without much grace, and the Grand Wizards who think that >black people are no better than apes. I agree with you. There are distinctions between discomfort and burning crosses. There are 'degrees' of racism/prejudice (when I use the terms interchangedly, it is because I see prejudice as not merely race-related, and I want to include the many other forms and modes of prejudice). I think your attempt to delineate between racism and prejudice is an attempt to make these distinctions (you say as much), but I think the problem with this is that it sugar coats things too much. I don't mean to "cast the racism finger"--honestly, I don't. I have too many of my own faults and problems to be worrying about who else might have prejudices. I'm only trying to raise questions, to make observations, and often these are directed at myself as much as at anyone else. The problem with your definitions, IMO, is: 1) they really aren't functional in the "real world" (whatever that is), because most people don't know and use them. If a white woman gets on an elevator with a black man, and that black man makes a sudden move, and the white woman screams because she thinks she's being mugged, when really the man was moving to push the elevator button, the fact is that most people will see this and define it as "racism"--not mere "prejudice," as you attempt to do. 2) By refusing to acknowledge that "prejudice against race" is the same as "racism," we refuse to lend as much weight or authority or import to the problem that the problem deserves. That's what I mean by sugar coating it. A lot of people probably think I'm being very opinionated and aggressive in my posts, because I'm tossing around this term and practically accusing everyone of being "racist." Part of this is my lack of tact; part of it is intentional. Racism is a STRONG word. It gets our attention. I contend that if we own up to our _racism_, we'll realize its gravity, its seriousness, and by being more conscientious of it in this way, we can better combat it. We're all prejudiced (in oh, so many ways), and I would venture to say that these prejudices include racism, in ALL of us, in some form or to some degree. I say, Let's call a beam a beam and try to remove it... >People of both stripes belong to the church. The n-word has been said in >General Conference, though not in a while. > >How this relates to our literature is this: I think there needs to be more >work of the type that Margaret Blair Young has been doing. She says that a >novel along these lines will be out this August. I'm first in line. > >Because LDS people along the Wasatch don't have much experience with >African >Americans, doesn't exempt us from looking to the ethnic groups who are >endemic to Utah (or should I say, from whom we stole their land?), namely >Native American and Hispanic populations. > >Michael Fillerup's story "The Last Code Talker" is a fine example of this. >It is an excellent story that looks at Mormon relations with the Navajo >people. I think it's in a recent issue of Dialogue. > >In any case, my main complaint about Signature's IN OUR LOVELY DESERET, >which I reviewed in Sunstone a couple of years ago, was that there was >almost no mention of anyone of color. > >Mormons should be a very cosmopolitan group of people because of our >missions and ability to speak most of the planet's languages. It is odd >that this is not widely reflected in our attitudes, tastes, and desires. You name some good examples, and there are many more. And to be honest (one last word about all this), I really think that, if we're going to talk about Mormons in general, and about 'degrees' of racism, it is possible to say that we (as Mormons, of any color or sex or background) are in many ways racist/prejudiced to a much lesser degree than many other groups, including Americans in general. I say this because, as Annette intimated, we are most often WILLING to "make room" for others--we WANT to make room. We know what's right, and we want and try to do it. We have a doctrine that explicitly equalizes us as brothers and sisters (and that's A LOT more than what so many other people have to work with)--and that's all a good thing. Nevertheless, we can't take too much comfort in this. To whom much is given, much is required, right? While we aren't out burning crosses, there is still a great deal of discomfort (this is clear from what's been said so far in this discussion)--and that's still racism. And of all people, we should be most concerned about naming it for what it is and wiping it out... Jason Steed ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Todd Robert Petersen Subject: Re: [AML] Iron Rod vs. Liahona Date: 14 Jun 2000 16:49:25 -0500 This line of discussion fascinates me for a number of reasons. First off, they are metaphors, which means we have to know how far to trust them (did Robert Frost say that?). The spirit of the idea, that Chris brought up is the most important. The Iron Rod principle has always struck me as only marginally useful in my life, though it has been a great service to others. It goes along with less doctrinal Mormon "culturology," like the staying away from the edge pseudo-doctrine. The Lord wants us to be free-thinkers, to ask questions, and to experiment with the world. To ponder doctrine is not to simply absorb truth like a plant absorbs light. We have to wrestle with great spiritual truths, to work out our salvation with fear and trembling. The iron rod mentality might keep us from letting go of the rod long enough to walk a few steps and rescue a lost comrade. Chris mentioned that > the Iron Rod approach is to cleave so close to the line that you happily wear the GA uniform of dark suit and tie, > maintain a missionary haircut, listen to and read mainly Church-produced material, keep your social contacts > and interactions within safe Mormon circles, avoid people and cultural influences that challenge, and otherwise > hold on so tight that there is little room for error or outside influence. The problem is that this is not what Christ did. Was he righteous? Of course. Did he hang out with hookers, lawyers, and bums? Yes. If we only keep to our own, we eliminate one third of the church's mission from our lives. Again to bring up the spirit of things. A few years ago in a fireside, President Hinckley told the youth of the church that his did not want us to be "prudes." Well, a lot of us are. So why don't we listen to the Prophet in this?Because we take comfort in our culturology, maybe as much as in our theology, maybe more. Here's where this gets important. Sometimes people judge others by the trappings of faith, rather than their actual faith. It's all about values, I guess. And here is where this gets back to our literature. When we speak of a literature that supports our values, what do we really mean? Whose values? A friend of mine who taught Veterinary Medicine in Africa told me that Africans don't perceive General Conference, the Apostles, or the pioneers the same way that we do. Conference isn't "live" for them. They don't have occasion to see the 12 directly very much, and they don't know what snow is, or winter really, and they walk most places anyway, so what's the big deal about the pioneers. What I mean to say, I guess, is that the Iron Rod is probably not what we think it is. Perhaps there are even some things we have plugged into which it never was nor was it intended to be. Todd Robert Petersen - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Tracie Laulusa" Subject: RE: [AML] Iron Rod vs. Liahona Date: 14 Jun 2000 18:42:59 -0400 Having not read Poll I am in no way commenting on his metaphor. It is interesting how metaphor in the scriptures and in other literature can mean such vastly different things to different people. I have never thought of the Iron Rod as being inflexible or easy to hold on to. In the vision most people did not manage to hold on and reach their final destination. They had to exercise great faith in order to be able to grasp and hold on through the perils that make the way difficult. To me the Iron Rod has always symbolized the strength found in the word of God to find our way through life. And, nowhere in the scriptures have I found everything spelled out for me. I have to find the way to implement the direction in my life just as those following the Liahona did. It is also not my experience in life that most people, even in the church, are diligently searching the word of God for direction in their life. I don't think the church at large is much different than here in OH where Gen. Conf. week-end is spelled v-a-c-a-t-i-o-n. The Liahona was provided by the Lord to provide His word to His people in a specific situation. When they were not righteous they didn't receive direction. How much direction do people receive from the word of God when they are not actively seeking? The Liahona was for the Nephites an actual object, but for us today it becomes a metaphor. So what does a truly great metaphor do-allow a reader to see from their own perspective what they will see, or, open the eyes of a reader to something in a way they otherwise would not have viewed it, or both, or neither? Tracie Laulusa - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Andrew Hall" Subject: [AML] Re: (Andrew's Poll) Best LDS Novel of the 1990s Date: 15 Jun 2000 11:35:51 JST Yeah, Skip has a point. I don't want to be exclusionary. So if anyone can think of a great Mormon novel written by a non-member, go ahead and nominate it. I just thought of another play by a non-member that I'll nominate when we get to that genre, Julie Jensen's "Two Headed". I really can't think of any other novels from the 1990s, though. I would think if the author was not LDS, then Mormonism would need to be pretty central to the story for us to nominate it. Just having a Mormon charachter wouldn't be enough. Has anyone read Scott Turrow's book? Is Mormonism an important part of it? >From before the 1990s, of course, there was Wallace Stenger and Halldor Laxness. I noticed I have another non-member on the list I posted, Susan Palmer, who wrote "The Tabernacle Bar". She certainly knows the culture very well. Or how about Ann Chamberlin? I don't know what her connection with Mormonism is, but she gets mentioned here every once and a while, so there must be something. Someone said "Leaving Eden" (Tor, 1999) was a feminist reimaging of the Garden of Eden. Has anyone read it, and think it should be nominated? Thanks for the reminder, Skip. Andrew Hall ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Payne Family" Subject: Re: [AML] Movie Ratings Date: 14 Jun 2000 09:32:34 -0600 Richard Hopkins' comment was in response to my citing of some thumbnail numbers regarding how differently rated movies stack up at the box office. While how much money a film makes is certainly not necessarily an indicator of its artistic value, it was interesting to me merely because I've never been able to fully "amen" the notion that movie-makers are making so many "R"s because that's what the public wants. [Sam Payne] - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Kent S. Larsen II" Subject: Re: [AML] Where's our LDS Pulitzer prize winner? Date: 14 Jun 2000 21:44:58 -0400 At 1:02 AM -0600 6/14/00, Neal William Kramer wrote: >Merlo J. Pusey is another Latter-day Saint who won the Pulitzer Prize--but for >history, I believe. I'm pretty sure his biography of Charles Evan Hughes, >former Chief Justice of the United States won the prize in the forties. > My Almanac says that DeVoto won in History in 1948 for "Accross the Wide Missouri" Join my Mormon email lists! To join send a message to: majordomo@MormonsToday.com In the body of the message write: subscribe Mormon-news News and links to news about Mormons, Mormonism and the Church. Mormon-humor Jokes and amusing stories about Mormons and Mormonism. Mormon-index Make queries about and find out about Mormon resources. LDSClerks Discussion for LDS Church Ward/Stake Clerks/Exec. Secretaries LDSPrimary Discussion about the Primary Organization. The following list is available through egroups: http://www.egroups.com/ NYArea-LDS-News - News about the LDS Church and Members in the New York City area. - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Kent S. Larsen II" Subject: Re: [AML] (Andrew's Poll) Best LDS Novel of the 1990s Date: 14 Jun 2000 21:58:10 -0400 Fred, you are correct. However, I think Andrew's restrictions to a subset of Mormon Literature are a reasonable accommodation to make it easier to define the list of titles and make the list short enough and accessible enough for everyone. OTOH, the biggest problem with the poll is, IMO, that most of us (I assume) will be lucky to have read more than a handful of the works on the list. I, for one, will be going mainly on reputation, if I know anything about the book at all. Its kind of like last year's Modern Library list of the 100 best works of the 20th Century - on one list that I am on (composed of VERY well-read people), virtually everyone on the list hadn't heard of half the books! The same is true of the list Andrew provided - I've never heard of nearly half the books and not familiar -- even by reputation -- with 75%. I literally don't know how I could vote. But give me a day or so, and I'll put in a vote, as unreliable as it may be! Kent At 10:41 AM -0600 6/14/00, Hamilton Fred wrote: >If we restrict novels to only those written by Mormons, active or >inactive, we have redefined the list's concept of Mormon Literature. I >have copied the following literally and directly from the WWW AML LIST >PAGE. > >"AML-List: An Internet mailing list for the discussion of Mormon >literature. Mormon literature includes, but is not limited to, fiction, >poetry, drama, essay, biography, family history, and children's >literature, by, for, or about Mormons, and also the literary dimensions of >scripture." > >I am probably more concerned about this than most. But, working in >academia, I continually see the difficulties which occur when discussions >become too exclusive in what they include or discard. They are, thus, >eliminating an essential element of knowledge which the world "will" >include. Groups which disregard such elements diminish the legitimacy of >their own discussion. I wish my voice to be on record as one who would >not like our group to do so. Would not our list's discussions of "Mormon >Novels of the 1990's" be richer if we used the list's definition of >"Mormon Literature"? And, what does this say about "Mormon Literature" if >a consensus develops in our discussion that the better work is being >accomplished by individuals who are not or have never been LDS? > > >Please remember, this is only my fallible perspective. > >Respectfully, > >Skip Hamilton > - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "D. Michael Martindale" Subject: Re: [AML] Where's our LDS Pulitzer prize winner? Date: 15 Jun 2000 00:30:09 -0600 "R.W. Rasband" wrote: > why do we consider some authors LDS and others > not? We claim Fawn Brodie even though she was excommunicated. I understand > Vardis Fisher came from an LDS family but I'm not sure we count him as "one > of us." And how about Betty Eadie of "Embraced by the Light" fame? Just > how do you tell who is an "LDS author" and who isn't? For me, when it comes to talking about an LDS Pulitzer prize winner, or discussing whether an LDS literature does or can exist, I would prefer a restricted definition. There is nothing interesting to me about literature from a non-member, ex-member, or cultural member--even when that literature deals with LDS people or topics--when it comes to these questions. Those types of writers are free to write anything they want in any way they want, because they have no conscientious allegiance to LDS beliefs. This says to me they are no different than any other author in literature, and therefore what they write has no relevance to discussing an LDS literature distinct from mainstream. What interests me is an author who personally accepts LDS beliefs. Can such an individual write great literature? Did that type of person win a Pulitzer? That's when something substantial in LDS literature has occurred. Therefore I would not consider Fawn Brodie to be relevant to LDS literature. Nor would I consider relevant any Pulitzer prize winner who wrote about LDS topics, but is not LDS. I would even question the inclusion of people who remain within the culture, even within the church, but who publicly do not believe in the theological claims of the religion. These are people writing from the world's standpoint, who happen to write about LDS things. What they write may be interesting, but what significance it has to a unique LDS literature is dubious. -- D. Michael Martindale dmichael@wwno.com ================================== Check out Worldsmiths, the new online LDS writers group, at http://www.wwno.com/worldsmiths Sponsored by Worlds Without Number http://www.wwno.com ================================== - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "D. Michael Martindale" Subject: Re: [AML] Iron Rod vs. Liahona Date: 15 Jun 2000 01:23:28 -0600 Christopher Bigelow wrote: > I'm not convinced that these aren't excellent metaphors for styles of Church membership. And I do personally have less respect for the Iron Rod mindset, just as I've encountered numerous people who have less respect for the Liahona approach. I think arguing one way or the other is a waste of time, because I think both mindsets are needed, and I can't help wonder if the endless friction between the two is of divine intent: like the Lamanites always being around to plague the Nephites when they get out of hand. As Chris said, both philosophies can be abused, and either side keeps the other honest. [MOD: Ha! But which of us are the Lamanites? (Yes, I'm smiling as I write that.)] -- D. Michael Martindale dmichael@wwno.com ================================== Check out Worldsmiths, the new online LDS writers group, at http://www.wwno.com/worldsmiths Sponsored by Worlds Without Number http://www.wwno.com ================================== - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Payne Family" Subject: Re: [AML] Movie Ratings Date: 14 Jun 2000 21:31:36 -0600 Thanks Eryc Snider, and sorry you had to work so hard. The question I had didn't warrant all the trouble (shoot, even *I* know where screenit.com is). It's just that I've never been able to quite completely "amen" the notion that filmmakers are only making mass R's because it's what the public most wants to see. Filmmakers have been throwing that back in *our* laps (the moviegoers) for a long time, it seems. I wondered what the numbers suggested, and unless I'm reading it wrong, it looks like they suggest that we're at least as prone to see other stuff as R's. Maybe not an important piece in the whole "R" argument, but interesting nonetheless. -Sam Paine ---------- > I don't care how you spell YOUR name, Sam. Mine has no "Y" in it. :-) > > So I did a little research. Actually, I did a lot of research. Nobody > call me at work today, because I'll be grumpy from being up too late. - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "D. Michael Martindale" Subject: Re: [AML] Re: Race and Culture in LDS Lit. Date: 15 Jun 2000 02:06:17 -0600 Jim and Laurel Brady wrote: > Does a writer have to have actual personal experience in order to write > about any subject in a believeable manner? The anecdote I heard was, when someone suggested to Steven Spielberg that he make a film of _Color Purple_, he reacted that he didn't think he could do something on the black experience, because he didn't know anything about it. The person responded, "When you made _Close Encounters_, did you know anything about the Martian experience?" It certainly is easier to write about an experience you've lived, but that doesn't mean you are barred from writing about it if you haven't. Science fiction writers would sure be in a pickle if that were true. It just means you've got a lot of work and consulting ahead of you to _vicariously_ experience what you want to write about. This politically correct notion that whites can't say anything meaningful about the black experience is certainly not to be indulged. No one seems to worry about that philosophy when non-Mormons write about the Mormon experience. -- D. Michael Martindale dmichael@wwno.com ================================== Check out Worldsmiths, the new online LDS writers group, at http://www.wwno.com/worldsmiths Sponsored by Worlds Without Number http://www.wwno.com ================================== - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Richard C. Russell" Subject: Re: [AML] Movie Ratings Date: 15 Jun 2000 06:00:57 -0600 ----- Original Message ----- Cc: Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2000 2:07 PM > "Why not make some effort to find out something about the next movie > that will engage your family's undivided attention for two and a half > or three hours and will probably cost you far more than you > contributed to the poor and the needy that month. It goes without > saying that all X- and R-rated movies are automatically eliminated" > ("Robert L. Simpson, Pollution of the Mind, Ensign, January 1973, > 113). You are quite right that this counsel from Elder Simpson came from outside the General Conference environment. OTOH, Thom's point is that it is specifically addressed to "families" not generally to adults alone. IMO it is excellent advice for that purpose. I myself follow it with regard to family viewing fare. > "It is so important that young people who are unmarried erect > barriers against temptation to help them avoid the compromising > situations. May I suggest a few barriers. > 1. Never go into a house alone with one of the opposite sex. > 2. Never, never enter a bedroom alone with one of the opposite sex. > 3. Do not neck or pet. Now, admittedly there is no place in the > scriptures where the Lord has said, 'Thou shalt not neck or pet.' I > know that, but he has said, 'Thou shalt not commit adultery, or > fornication, or anything like unto it.' > 4. Never park on a lonely road with just the two of you alone. > 5. Do not read pornographic literature. > 6. Do not attend R- or X-rated movies, and avoid drive-ins. > 7. Do not spend time in drinking or gambling establishments." > (Hartman Rector, Jr., Live Above the Law to Be Free, Ensign, January > 1973, 131). While this advice is nearly three decades old it still holds IMO for young single people. Thom's point OTOH was that it doesn't mention adults who are married. I would continue to use it to counsel young men and young women as a wise standard to consider. > "Now, brethren of the priesthood, there should not be any X- or > R-rated movies that we participate in viewing or talking about. There > must be no pornographic magazines, pictures, or stories, no re-telling > of filthy jokes or crude experiences. Once in a while we should stop > and ask ourselves, 'In whose army are we fighting? Whose battle lines > are we defending?' Do you have the courage to walk out of an off-color > PG-rated movie--or do you watch and listen, and suggest to yourself, > 'This soon will pass,' or 'Everyone is doing it; it must be an > acceptable type of entertainment'? Have you the courage to keep out of > your home some television shows that are filled with suggestive sexual > conversation--and even experiences? Have you thought lately how > effective these shows are in piercing even the strongest spirits? > Brethren, we must not feed ourselves a diet of trash!" (H. Burke > Peterson, Purify Our Minds and Spirits, Ensign, Nov. 1980, 38-39). This is fairly unequivocal. He makes no distinction as to the age of the people he is advising. In that you have found a good example. ISTM that Thom's point, however (and with which I agree), is that Elder Peterson -- not being sustained as a prophet, seer and revelator and certainly not THE prophet, seer and revelator -- gives counsel that is less binding than if an apostle or the senior apostle gave it. I believe that all advice from the Brethren is valuable. > "We counsel you, young men, not to pollute your minds with such > degrading matter, for the mind through which this filth passes is > never the same afterwards. Don*t see R-rated movies or vulgar videos > or participate in any entertainment that is immoral, suggestive, or > pornographic. Don*t listen to music that is degrading" (Ezra Taft > Benson, To the 'Youth of the Noble Birthright', Ensign, May 1986, 45) This is the statement from THE prophet that is clearly directed to young men, not adults. It was given during the priesthood session. I believe it is important counsel to teenagers. > "We counsel you, young women, not to pollute your minds with such > degrading matter, for the mind through which this filth passes is > never the same afterward. Don*t see R-rated movies or vulgar videos > or participate in any entertainment that is immoral, suggestive, or > pornographic. And don*t accept dates from young men who would take > you to such entertainment" (Ezra Taft Benson, To the Young Women of > the Church, Ensign, Nov. 1986, 84) This is basically the same message he gave the young men in priesthood meeting. I am glad that he gave the same admonition to young single females. Thom's interesting point is that it was specifically directed toward the young, not the adult membership. [snip a statement from Elder Peterson that merely reiterates his thoughts.] > "I know that you will find the same response as you consistently > choose to obey your principles. You are establishing a reputation. > When you make it clear that you will not vary from your standards, you > will be led to individuals like yourself and the criticism from others > will become less intense. Often those who publicly deride you for your > high standards privately do not want you to violate them. They need > your good example. Whether it be turning your back on an off-color > joke, refusing to see an R-rated movie or videocassette, or walking > out of a party that is moving in the wrong direction, make your > standards clear to others by quietly making the right choices when the > temptation is first presented. A decisive, correct choice made once > and consistently kept thereafter will avoid much heartache. You then > can use your energy in keeping your resolve rather than repeatedly > wrestling with the same challenge. Also, you will greatly reduce the > possibility that you will be overcome by temptation" (Richard G. > Scott, CES fireside, 3 Mar 1996). ISTM that this quote from Elder Scott doesn't actually refute Thom's argument. CES firesides are specifically directed toward young single adults, not the entire adult population of the Church. I include it with prudent direction for the young from a wise counselor. > "It is a concern that some of our young Latter-day Saints, as well as > their parents, regularly watch R-rated and other inappropriate movies > and videos. One more reason why the 'devil laugheth, and his angels > rejoice' (3 Ne. 9:2). (Joe J. Christensen, "The Savior Is Counting on > You," Ensign, Nov. 1996, 40). This is indeed an example where married adults are included in the audience. I think that the key words are "concern," "regularly" and "inappropriate." It is my view that these three belong together. IOW, the concern is not *that* parents watch R-rated fare but that they watch *inappropriate* fare *regularly.* *Concern* seems to imply that this is a caution rather than an outright ban. It appears that Elder Christensen allows for a little wiggle room in his guideline. FWIW, Thom was pointing out that this is an example of a source who is not an apostle. I think the distinction is important. If it were not, we would likely sustain all general authorities in the leading quorums as prophets, seers and revelators. [snip a repeat of Elder Christensen and to a CES fireside audience.] ************************************************* Richard C. Russell lderlore@xmission.com SLC UT www.leaderlore.com Ask about Leader Lore, a Leadership Newsletter. "There is never the last word, only the latest." ************************************************* - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Steve Perry Subject: [AML] PEARL Awards tickets on sale Friday PR Date: 15 Jun 2000 11:04:30 -0600 >> June 14, 2000 >> FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE >> Faith Centered Music Association Press Release >> >> >> Salt Lake City, UT* In spite of an unavoidable postponement, the 2000 >> PEARL Awards will still be a star-studded event, with performances and >> appearances by some of the finest musicians, performers and entertainers >> in the mountain west. >> >> Rescheduled for Thursday, July 27 at the McKay Center at UVSC in Orem, the >> 2000 PEARL Awards will feature performances by Michael McLean, Ryan Shupe >> & the Rubberband, and Julie de Azevedo. Also performing are nominees >> Hilary Weeks, Brett Raymond, Cherie Call and Lex de Azevedo & the >> Millenium Choir. >> >> Peter Breinholt, Kurt Bestor, Thurl Bailey and Richard Dutcher (of God*s >> Army) will make special appearances. Kenneth Cope, Jenny Oaks Baker and >> Enoch Train, who each won multiple honors last year, will be present to >> give awards. Also making appearances will be famed artist Liz Lemon >> Swindle, former Mormon Tabernacle Choir conductor Gerald Ottley and >> popular columnist Robert Kirby. >> >> Tickets for the 2000 PEARL Awards will go on sale to the public on Friday, >> June 16. Tickets are available through through all Smith Tix outlets >> (1-800-888-TIXX) or through the McKay Center box office (764-SHOW or >> 1-888-844-SHOW). General admission tickets are $12; student tickets are >> $8. Service charges will be applied to tickets purchased over the phone >> or through Smith Tix. >> >> The 2000 PEARL Awards will be broadcast live on July 27 over the Internet >> on LDSWorld.com. The program will also be taped for television broadcast >> on KJZZ-TV in Salt Lake City (KJZZ is available on the DISH network to >> many markets outside Utah). >> >> Originally scheduled for June 8 at the Grand Theater in Salt Lake City, >> the 2000 PEARL Awards were postponed when management at the Grand >> discovered some damage in the theater and temporarily closed it for repairs. >> >> The PEARL Awards recognize excellence and achievement in faith centered >> music, and are presented annually by the Faith Centered Music >> Association. A non-profit organization governed by a board of directors, >> the FCMA strives to encourage artists by presenting the PEARL Awards each >> year and by conducting educational outreach programs. >> >> >> For more information on tickets or publicity, please contact: >> Mary Jane Jones / 801.355.1771 / mjjones@xelent.com >> > > - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: eedh Subject: Re: [AML] Race and Culture in LDS Lit. Date: 15 Jun 2000 10:26:31 -0700 "Fear? Mistrust? I don't know where prejudice comes from, but I suspect we all have it in one form or another." I've been worrying that this might have sounded like I meant prejudice is acceptable since we all have it in one form or another. I didn't mean that at all. What I meant to say (and wish I would have added) is that, as a writer, if I can delve down into my own heart and somehow figure out where my own individual prejudice comes from (whatever it may be), then I can use that understanding in my writing to help my readers understand where theirs come from. -Beth Hatch - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Annette Lyon" Subject: [AML] Andrew's Poll Date: 15 Jun 2000 13:04:11 -0600 I'd like to make a nomination for best Mormon novel--frankly I was shocked to see lesser authors included, when this one was left out: Rachel Ann Nunes for her *Ariana: The Making of a Queen* (and the following series), published in 1996. Considering she's one of the top-selling LDS fiction authors, I'm amazed she wasn't included. (Yes, yes, I realize that sales don't equate skill, but she *is* talented, and I think it sad she was overlooked.) Annette Lyon ________________________________________________________ 1stUp.com - Free the Web Get your free Internet access at http://www.1stUp.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: harlowclark@juno.com Subject: Re: [AML] Jobs for writers Date: 15 Jun 2000 13:56:24 -0700 This thread reminds me of something I was thinking about back in the Family and Art thread, where several women said they couldn't write full time because it would take too much time away from their families. They didn't want someone else to raise their children. I have memories of being wonderfully distracted by Matthew around age 1 1/2 wanting me to play. After we moved in here we got a subscription to the paper but I found it very difficult to read because any time Daddy was sitting on the floor he had a very inviting back to climb on. (Now the cat simply comes and spreads herself out on the newspaper.) I also remember my oldest son interrupting my writing with great charm. It was the day Hugh Nibley delivered his commencement address "From Leadership to Management: the Fatal Shift" (The one he began by saying, "Twenty years ago I prayed at this commencement address and said 'We are gathered here in the black robes of the false priesthood.' Over the years many people have asked me if I actually said that, but noone has asked what I meant, partly because many knew, and partly because this is the BYU and we don't ask questions here.") I was listening to it on the radio and madly typing away on the kitchen table, trying to get some overdue paper done. Mason was in the apartment livingroom, which I had blocked off with his playpen. Pretty soon he came and climbed up in my lap. I was astonished. I put him back in the living room so I could watch how he climbed over the playpen. I don't have such memories with Andrew, my middle son. He left when he was only 6 months old--but that's a whole bunch of other stories. So I understand the reluctance to miss the wondrous behavior of children. I wonder, though, do you ever go out with your husband and leave the children with a sitter? If so, would it be possible to call in a sitter for an hour a day, or five hours a week? The thing about writing as a job is that there are a lot of writing tasks that can be done in about an hour a day. Last spring Bela Petsco called me one day and suggested I start writing for the newspaper. He gave me the name of a friend of his who writes regularly for the Utah County Journal (the paper Eric Samuelsen said makes a good birdcage liner). I tried to get ahold of her and she wasn't home, but last June (possibly on the 21) I somehow found myself over in American Fork, walking into the NewUtah! offices and asking the editor about writing for his paper. (That took a lot of nerve.) Very shortly after that, maybe the same day, I was walking home from helping a friend with his oral history, and came upon a dump truck accident. I ran home and got a camera, took some pix, interviewed the bystanders, wrote the following, and e-mailed it off: >>>> Around 11:30 a.m. Monday June 21, 1999 a dump truck from Garner Construction and Excavation tipped over while dumping a load of gravel near the Smith's supermarket in Pleasant Grove. The bed was fully raised when the truck tipped, crushing the back half of a utility trailer from Hubble Engineering. There were no injuries, though the truck leaked oil, hydraulic fluid and gas and the Pleasant Grove Fire Department sent a pump truck, an EMT unit and a Heavy Rescue Assistance unit. Workers at the site spent almost two hours detaching the dump bed and pulling the tractor upright. A caterpillar operator attached a chain to his bucket, wrapping it around the tractor's rollbar and lifting until the tractor was upright. Other workers set about draining the hydraulic fluid from the dump arm and collapsinging it. Despite removing the drain bolt slowly and putting a five-gallon bucket under the hole, when the bolt came out the driver got sprayed badly. Some observers at the site said the ground was not level enough for dumping. >>>> I got back a surprising reply to the effect that it's nice to come across a writer who can write. A lot of people want to write for a newspaper but don't have much skill. He ended up not publishing the piece, but the next week I submitted a 750 word profile of the friend whose oral history I was doing, along with some pix. Slow news week, so my debut in the paper was on the front page. (Took me a long time to get paid, though. I didn't know I was supposed to bill the paper, and I was too embarrassed to ask.) Now I'm on the front page almost every week (usually without pix) as I cover the Lindon City council for the Lindon edition of the PG Review. And I'm only spending about 5 or 6 or 8 hours a week on this, plus 3-5 hours every 1st and 3rd Tuesday night. Doesn't pay too well. I had a very good string in May with several pix ($5, $6 if I use my own film), and some long city council meetings ($5/hour), and I estimate I probably earned about $4/hour, but I'm doing something I've wanted to do for a long time, publish every week. The paper doesn't have enough room for me to make a living writing stories, but I do most of my writing on Mondays and if I could string one day a week for several papers, or self-syndicate a column for 20 or 30 papers I could probably make a living. And, indeed, just today my editor called and said they'd like to start having front page profiles of people in the community in each issue, and she'd like to use an article I wrote as a newsstory, but the pix didn't come out too well. "She hates being photographed," I said. "I'll call her and see if I can get another one. I may just have to work her dislike of cameras into the story." So if you have a little time to write you can do a lot. There are a lot of small newspapers around. Indeed I'm not the only person who covers the Lindon city council. The Orem-Geneva Times reporter is always there, and on Thursday, May 18 the Provo Daily Herald's lead article was on the council meeting two nights before. Find yourself a small paper, talk to the editor, and next time you're browsing Writer's Market and see "query with published clips" you'll think, "Hey, I can do that." Harlow Soderborg Clark ________________________________________________________________ YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET! Juno now offers FREE Internet Access! Try it today - there's no risk! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj. - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Scott and Marny Parkin Subject: Re: [AML] (Andrew's Poll) Best LDS Novel of the 1990s Date: 15 Jun 2000 14:03:09 -0600 >Wolverton, Dave. "Serpent Catch" Bantam, 1991. You may want to include the sequel to the above book, "Path of the Hero" (Bantam, 1993), since it is arguably better, but both are worth including. Marny Parkin - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Larry Jackson Subject: [AML] MN Journalism Awards Recognize Importance of Mormon Stories: Date: 15 Jun 2000 20:22:12 EDT Spokane WA Spokesman-Review 10Jun00 B6 [From Mormon-News] Journalism Awards Recognize Importance of Mormon Stories (Winners announced for regional newspaper contest) Spokane WA Spokesman-Review 10Jun00 B6 http://www.spokane.net:80/news-story-body.asp?Date=061000&ID=s813477&cat= SPOKANE, WASHINGTON -- The awards given recently by two different professional journalism associations highlight the importance of Mormon News items in the region and point to which news items gained the most notoriety during 1999. The Utah-Idaho-Spokane Associated Press Association and the Society of Professional Journalists' Utah chapter both recently recognized reporters for their efforts in reporting during the past year. One of the more prestigious awards given was the William H. Cowles 3rd Memorial Award. In the area of investigative or hard edge reporting, Salt Lake Tribune reporter Christopher Smith was recognized for his series of articles "Mountain Meadows Massacre." The judges wrote that the articles were "fine-tuned and well-researched reporting on a history chapter that needed to be pulled together in a comprehensive, insightful and balanced manner." Other awards recognized both the Salt Lake Tribune and Deseret News for their coverage of the tornado that hit Salt Lake City last summer and for the coverage of the shooting rampage at the LDS Family History Library. In addition, Tribune reporters Peggy Fletcher Stack and Sheila McCann were recognized for specialized reporting for their report on sexual abuse inside religions. The Tribune's Humor columnist Robert Kirby was also honored for his column "Mormon Baptisms, Pistol Test, Chocolate for Cats." And Provo Daily Herald Reviewer Eric Snider received an award for his review of "Star Child.' The Tribune's Bob Mims was recognized by the Society of Professional Journalists for his article on how inactive LDS Church members view the Church, garnering him the chapter's award for the best religion article of the year. Other articles recognized news stories about Polygamy and the Olympic scandal. >From Mormon-News: Mormon News and Events Forwarding is permitted as long as this footer is included Mormon News items may not be posted to the World Wide Web sites without permission. Please link to our pages instead. For more information see http://www.MormonsToday.com/ Send join and remove commands to: majordomo@MormonsToday.com Put appropriate commands in body of the message: To join: subscribe mormon-news To leave: unsubscribe mormon-news To join digest: subscribe mormon-news-digest - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Christopher Bigelow" Subject: [AML] Wanted: Children's Book Illustrator Date: 16 Jun 2000 11:20:18 -0700 Lavina Fielding Anderson asked me to pass along the following to AML-List: Yo, Illustrators! My brother, Lynn Fielding, in the Tri-Cities, Washington, is looking for a = knowledgeable commercial children's book illustrator who will be willing = to work as a graphics editor/consultant with a local artist at a straight = hourly rate. The project is not specifically Mormon but is related to a very successful = literacy project that the board of education (Lynn is former president of = the board and is currently a member) is managing. It has a prize-winning = preschool component encouraging parents to read to their children from = birth 20 minutes a day. Please contact Lynn Fielding directly at: w/ (509) 783-2137 h/ (509) 783-3456 Fax: (509) 783-7001 114 Vista Way Kennewick, WA 99336 Thanks! Lavina * * * * * * Interested in novels, stories, poems, plays, and films by, for, or about = Mormons? Check out IRREANTUM magazine at www.xmission.com/~aml/irreantum.ht= m. - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Jerry Enos" Subject: Re: [AML] Race and Culture in LDS Lit. Date: 16 Jun 2000 06:54:27 -0600 When did your Mom live in Pocatello? I grew up in Pocky over 20 years ago and I had a number of black friends. Maybe it's just me, but I didn't notice that there were less of them then of white people. But then again when I was serving my mission in Tennesse I didn't notice the oposite was true. Am I just different then most people? Konnie Enos > At 11:42 AM 6/13/2000 -0500, Richard Johnson wrote: > > My mother came to visit me in Georgia not long after we moved here. (1970) > She expressed real distress at the number of black people. She had never > seen so many. (She was from Pocatello where there _was_ a black population, > but it was a small percentage of the population.) I would suspect that, > even today, a lot of black people moving to the mountain west would feel > that same distress, not a the number, but at the lack of familiar black faces. - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Hamilton Fred Subject: [AML] Fallible Creativity Date: 16 Jun 2000 12:35:04 -0600 (MDT) The deep enchantment of literature is to see possibilities where others do not, or to find allusions which the artists may not have intended. The wonder of the human mind is it cannot be restricted. Insights come. The fortunate may have the chance to remember them and to explore them. On reading a review of Edward Mendelson's "Later Auden", I came across these lines from Auden"s poetry. "Lay your sleeping head, my love, Human on my faithless arm." And, then from his "The Cave of Making" (July, 1964) comes these lines. "God may reduce you on Judgement Day to tears of shame, reciting by heart the poems you would have written, had your life been good. The juxtaposition of these two excerpts crystallized some thoughts which my mind has been struggling to bring into focus. My perspectives have been troubled by the variety in our literary discussions the last two months on divorce, the Mormon Pulitzer Prize, stages of faith, sexuality, race and culture, multiple points of view, etc. These discussions, and their attendant concerns about characterization, culture, real-life settings frequently contained an unstated undercurrent of thought. Generally stated that undercurrent seems to suggest, "What we offering in our literature and our comments on literature is "Truth" either because we partake of membership in "the only true church" or because we, through our confirmation and faithfulness, now have our literary writings or critical comments blessed by the spirit." Paul words in Corinthian's "But now we see through a glass darkly" suggests we might need to be cautious even in our claims of creativity. Reading Auden's first lines, quoted above, reminded me that the created sleeping head we ask to reside with us is always "human", and as such it partakes of all of the frailties of that designation. The poet requests that it rest on a "faithless" arm, perhaps the arm which wields the brush or the pen. The tenderness and beauty with which that line is written pleads for an understanding love in perceiving that tendency of "faithlessness". Perhaps it is attempting a promise to be faithful, but never can the writer give the absolute assurance that such a promise will be kept. After all, the creation and the perceiver are human. And so, the writer's words of beauty carries with them a sense of ennobling humility. The second set of lines posits an idea that there might have been unrealized perfections in our creations. Could their be shame in realizing that in our creativity one could have done better? Shouldn't the joyful reality of actually achieving be tempered with an awareness of what might have been? Such a tempering should also be found in our criticism. Criticism is also the offering of a human perception. Even with all of our knowledge, that human perception can be just as faithless and could be improved. Not being totally cynical, one might also seriously ask, "Can the writings of a literary critic be blessed by the Holy Ghost?" And what of those who receive the literary creation? I was in Eastern Canada on my mission during 1966 - 1968. During my time in Montreal, I had several interesting discussions with natives from India. One such gentleman, after introducing himself as a Sikh, asked what was the membership of our church. In general, we discovered our faith had as many adherents at that time as did his faith. His question then was how could my statements about faith and its consequences for life be more valid than his? Except for those who are willing to come to our literary efforts exercising the Spirit of the Holy Ghost, can we expect all other readers to accept our literary efforts as any more valid than their experiences? Because there are over 2 billion real life experiences in our world, a literary expression can, at best, be only one "faithless" imitation. Should not our awareness of that fact plead with us to be a little more humble before the real? Is it not possible that our commentary should partake of that humility as well, even though through such commentary we are striving to discover the good? The above is a continuing reason why I always state my awareness of my own fallibility in such discussions. Yet, I knowingly participate in the irony of such comments by still commenting. Thus, my thanks to you for still considering them. Skip Hamilton - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Thom Duncan Subject: Re: [AML] Movie Ratings (was: Movies in 2000) Date: 17 Jun 2000 22:09:19 -0600 Our Distinguished Moderator suggests: > * It is also appropriate to talk about broader issues, such as what an LDS > esthetic/ethics of movies and movie-viewing ought to be; To me, this is very simple. Article 13 of the Articles of Faith, which I interpret with the following emphasis: "... If there is *anything* virtuous, lovely, or of good report or praiseworthy, we seek after these things." Applied to literature and films, I see this breaking down as follows: Anything virtuous would include all G-rated films. Lovely would include films which evoke a sense of beauty in nature, or humanity (e.g., _Life is Beautiful_). "Of good report" includes films (regardless of rating) for which the reviews have generally been good. Films having won Golden Globes or Oscars fit into this category. "Praiseworthy" is closely aligned to "of good report" -- a film having garnered praise by people who know their stuff, should be "sought after." "We seek after these things" I tend to view as a commandment (or a must-see) if you will. I see it as saying that any film fitting the above definition is a "must-see." -- Thom Duncan Read the further adventures of Moroni Smith, the LDS Indiana Jones! The long-awaited second episode in the Moroni Smith LDS adventure series, _Moroni Smith: In Search of the Gold Plates_ is now available as an e-book at the Zion's Fiction web page: http://www.zfiction.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: aml@xmission.com Subject: [AML] BLUTH/GOLDMAN, _Titan A.E._ Date: 16 Jun 2000 21:48:56 -0700 (MST) Thursday, June 15, 2000 'Titan' Takes Directors in a New Direction, Sci-fi adventure is a long way from pair's 'An American Tail' BY DEBBIE HUMMEL THE SALT LAKE TRIBUNE Animation directors Don Bluth and Gary Goldman are trying to make new friends while keeping the old with Fox Animation Studio's release, "Titan A.E." The duo left Disney Studios in the late '70s, forming their own animation studio -- based for 8 years in Ireland -- then signing on with Fox. "You are always at the mercy of a distributor. We decided after 15 years as an independent company we needed a partner and we were excited to join with the group at Fox," Goldman said in a phone interview. With the change in company came a change in focus for Bluth and Goldman, whose previous efforts include "Anastasia," "An American Tail" and "The Land Before Time." Bluth, a Utah native who grew up in Payson and attended Brigham Young University in Provo (his parents still live in Mapleton), is excited the studio wants to market animation to an older audience. "For years and years animation has been the thing that when it comes out everyone will say, 'Oh, that's a children's film,' " Bluth said via phone from his studios in Phoenix. When it went into business with Fox, the company was eager to distance itself from the sea of Disney wannabes, as Bluth puts it, and decided to target a teen-age audience. "Titan A.E.," opening this week, is the first in that attempt. It is a science-fiction movie following the story of Cale (voice by Matt Damon), a lone human in a world of aliens trying to find his way after the destruction of plant Earth and the loss of his father. The combination of voice talent by Damon, Drew Barrymore, Janeane Garofalo and John Leguizamo and an original soundtrack featuring Lit, Powerman 5000 and Luscious Jackson, among others, should help with marketing, which Bluth sees as the biggest obstacle in reaching the teen and adult audience. "The psychology with teens is they equate animation with being a baby," Bluth said. "You have to do something that is pretty edgy and pretty cool. We immediately went for sci-fi." The music, actors and a story line chronicling a teen who feels lost in his world, abandoned and disconnected, will resonate with an older audience, said Bluth. "We tried to be sure we didn't push children, moms and dads out of the theaters, though," he said. The film was screened for families; violence is minimal and there is no rough language. The other challenge for the filmmakers is the continually changing technology of computer animation. "We've advanced so much with the use of computers," said Goldman. "You buy a license [for a program] for a year and at the end of that time it's obsolete." Bluth and Goldman anticipate continuing with projects that appeal to a more adult crowd. Upcoming, according to Goldman, is a film featuring characters from "Dragon Slayer," the popular video game he and Bluth animated years ago. ------ [From a separate Tribune review by Sean P. Means, also covering Fantasia 2000] For those who truly love innovation in movies, animation was the way to go in 1999 -- from the beauty of "Princess Mononoke," the fluid motion of "Tarzan," the wit and warmth of "Toy Story 2," the anti-war message of "The Iron Giant" and the shut-your-cakehole satire of "South Park: Bigger, Longer and Uncut." So far in 2000, the focus of animation has been on the technical end, specifically what computers can do to bring alive images (like the realistic prehistoric creatures of "Dinosaur") previously impossible to see onscreen. Today, two movies -- Fox's science-fiction adventure "Titan A.E." and Disney's classical-music anthology "Fantasia/2000" -- give a view of where animation is going, while showing the legacy and the pitfalls of animation's past. "Titan A.E." starts off with a real bang: the destruction of Planet Earth. Seems some evil race of energy beings, called the Drej, think the human race is a nuisance and possibly a threat to the universe in the year 3028. Before Earth goes boom, Professor Sam Tucker puts his 5-year-old son Cale on an evacuation ship -- then takes off himself in a super-secret space vessel called Titan. Flash-forward 15 years, and Cale (voice of Matt Damon) is a space-salvage worker cynical of his father's dream to save humanity. Enter Korso (Bill Pullman), a Han Solo-type ship captain with a curvaceous pilot, Akima (Drew Barrymore), and a motley crew of aliens -- the sarcastic Preed (Nathan Lane), the volatile Stith (Janeane Garofalo) and the geeky Gune (John Leguizamo). Korso shows Cale his destiny in the form of a star chart, genetically implanted in Cale's hand, that will lead them to the Titan -- if the Drej don't get there first. Co-directors Don Bluth (a Brigham Young University alum) and Gary Goldman, who broke from Disney in 1979 to make such films as "The Secret of N.I.M.H." and "An American Tail," assemble some eye-popping science-fiction visuals. But, as with their last film, "Anastasia," Bluth and Goldman cannot connect the cel animation to the computer graphics -- for example, a computerized chase through a water-covered planet can move with fluid speed in three dimensions, while a simple pan around Cale's bed looks jerky. The story is a jumble of sci-fi plot cliches, underdeveloped characters and visual passages built to accommodate the light-metal soundtrack. "Titan A.E." shows the future of computer animation is moving steadily forward, but Bluth and Goldman haven't stopped to let their cheaply produced cel animation catch up. Copyright 2000 The Salt Lake Tribune - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: aml@xmission.com Subject: [AML] EVANS/BESTOR/YEAGER, _The Dance_ Date: 17 Jun 2000 20:53:38 -0700 (MST) Deseret News, Saturday, June 17, 2000, 12:00 AM MDT Tears flow as trio celebrates Father's Day By Scott Iwasaki Deseret News dance editor ODYSSEY DANCE UTAH WITH KURT BESTOR AND RICHARD PAUL EVANS, "The Dance," at the Capitol Theatre, June 16, 7:30 p.m. Additional performance June 17, 7:30 p.m. Tickets available through ArtTix at 355-ARTS (2787) or 1-888-451-ARTS. It was one for all and all for one when three Utah artists put their minds together and created a nice tear-jerking Father's Day celebration. Odyssey Dance Utah - directed by Derryl Yeager - musician Kurt Bestor and author Richard Paul Evans have found their calling with "The Dance." Bestor's typical Utah contemporary instrumental music highlighted the movements, choreographed by Yeager. The production was tied with a nice bow thanks to Evans' narration of his original story. Evans' own daughter, Jenna, stole the show with her ballet variation in the "Pavanne" segment. As narrator, Evans' couldn't help but shed a few tears as he told about the last moments a father shared with his dancing daughter. The choreography flowed with innocent spirit as the performance documented the daughter's growth into womanhood, as the father lovingly watched. The children's dance, called "Sundancing," was another highlight as young Afton DelGrosso and her friends dance-stepped on blocks, shaded themselves with yellow umbrellas and spun for the joy of spinning. The evening wound to a close with the reminiscent "Reverie" and the heart-breaking "Adagio," before Nathan Balsar, who performed as the younger version of the father, sang the Bestor composition "Dance for Me" as the Odyssey Dance Utah company reemerged for a fitting finale. While the production went on without a hitch, it would have been more effective if Bestor's orchestra and Evans had switched places. Evans narrated the show from a stool in the orchestra pit, while Bestor and his 10 musicians were stationed on the stage. It should have been the other way around. The shiny and intricate musical instruments got in the way, visually, with the dancing. The dancers should have had a full stage with a little corner set aside for the narrator. Opening the evening was Janalyn Memmott's "Dances In the Garden of Eden." The dancers were able to let loose during this work's six segments that touched on the various issues of life. With both of these works put together for an evening-long production, Odyssey Dance Utah has shown remarkable growth in style and sentiment. Copyright 2000, Deseret News Publishing Corp. - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: aml@xmission.com Subject: [AML] YOUNG, _I Am Jane_ Date: 17 Jun 2000 20:55:04 -0700 (MST) Deseret News, Saturday, June 17, 2000, 12:00 AM MDT 'I Am Jane' tells story of pioneer Black LDS woman is topic of poignant play By Carrie A. Moore Deseret News religion editor "I realize my race and color and can't expect my endowments as others who are white. . . And God promised Abraham that in his seed all the nations of the earth should be blessed. As this is the fullness of all dispensations - is there no blessing for me?" - Letter from Jane Elizabeth Manning James to LDS Church President John Taylor >From her baptism until her death in 1908, the first free black woman to join the LDS Church petitioned its leaders to allow her to access to one of the faith's temples so - like her fellow white church members - she could perform sacred ordinances LDS Church members believe will secure them to their loved ones and God forever. Though her petitions were consistently denied, Jane Elizabeth Manning James maintained her loyalty to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints to her grave. Now her example of devotion and faith will come alive as an example to contemporary Mormons in a new play based on her life. "I Am Jane," written by Margaret Blair Young, chronicles the life one of Utah's first black pioneers. During a March 5 debut for members of the local Genesis group, composed of black Latter-day Saints and organized by the church, the production drew a standing-room only crowd. James is widely considered to be the matriarch of the LDS black community almost a century after her death, Young said, because her faith kept her anchored to a belief that God is just, even if social conditions are not. Her story inspires people of all religions and races, Young said, but particularly resonates with black Latter-day Saints who wonder about the continuing impact of racism in a church that did not grant sacred temple and priesthood privileges to blacks until 1978. Young, who teaches creative writing at Brigham Young University, is white but has been involved with the Genesis organization for several years. Genesis President Darius Gray said her involvement with the group had divine origins. "I think she's with us for a reason." Part of that involves telling the story of black Latter-day Saint pioneers, he said. "I think so often in the past it has been forgotten that there were black pioneers and black members of the church from the early 1830s on, but blacks have been members, contributed and been a part from its very beginnings." The new production, which includes authentic dialogue taken from letters, journals and the transcript of an interview done with James shortly before her death, shows "that blacks were there, that they were involved and interacted with their white, Hispanic, Asian and European brothers and sisters." As it now stands, the vast majority of the well-researched early history of the LDS Church involves white church members who either joined the church in the East, or immigrated from European nations. In fact, Gray said, many LDS Church members are surprised to learn that there were black pioneers at all. Once the play finishes its public debut in Springville June 30, July 1, 3, 7,8, and 10 at the Villa Theater, Young said the cast will travel to Chicago, where they have been invited to perform for many with questions about the LDS Church's history regarding blacks. "Many people have heard about Jane's trip to Nauvoo, but the story gets much more inspiring as you follow her life West. She was relentless in her pursuit of temple blessings, and wrote at least five letters (to LDS Church leaders) where she is begging to enter the temple," Young said. James walked to Utah from Illinois as a member of one of the first Mormon pioneer companies to enter the Salt Lake Valley in 1847. The journey came shortly after she and several family members were taken in and cared for by LDS Church founder Joseph Smith and his wife, Emma, in Nauvoo, Ill., following their 800-mile barefoot trek from Connecticut to join the Latter-day Saints. She was employed in the Smith home as a housekeeper until Joseph Smith's martyrdom in 1844. Following his death, she lived in Brigham Young's household before the Mormons were driven from Nauvoo beginning in 1846. During this time she met and married another free black Mormon, Isaac James. She gave birth to their son, Silas, at Winter Quarters, Neb., in 1846, then became part of the lead company heading west. She wrote of her sufferings with cold and hunger during her first years in the Salt Lake Valley. "The keenest of all was to hear my little ones crying for bread, and I had none to give them." What little she had, she shared. Through hard work and thrift, the family established a home and farm, and six more children were born between 1848 and 1860. But in 1869, Issac James left his wife, only to return years later. His funeral was held in her home in 1891. Jane James was a devoted member of the LDS Relief Society and helped with special fund-raising projects. She donated to help build the St. George, Logan and Manti LDS temples. While she never realized her dream to enter a temple during her lifetime, her request was finally granted posthumously in 1979, shortly after the landmark revelation to LDS Church President Spencer W. Kimball in 1978 allowing temple privileges and priesthood ordination to worthy members of all races. Last summer, members of Genesis dedicated a stone marker - depicting James giving some of her scant food supply to a white friend - at ceremonies in the Salt Lake City Cemetery to honor her memory. Shortly before her death, she said that her "faith in the gospel of Jesus Christ, as taught by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, is as strong today, nay, it is if possible stronger than it was the day I was first baptized . . . I try in my feeble way to set a good example to all." Copyright 2000, Deseret News Publishing Corp. - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Larry Jackson Subject: [AML] MN BYU receives endowed scholarship from Deseret News: BYU Date: 18 Jun 2000 00:06:54 EDT Release 14Jun00 D3 [From Mormon-News] BYU receives endowed scholarship from Deseret News BYU Press Release 14Jun00 D3 PROVO, UTAH -- Brigham Young University has been selected by the Deseret News as one of four schools to receive an endowed scholarship for print journalism students. "The scholarship strengthens the relationship that BYU already has with the Deseret News," said Laurie Wilson, chair of the BYU Communications Department. The total endowed scholarship of $150,000 will be divided among Brigham Young University, the University of Utah, Utah State University and Weber State University, with each institution receiving $37,500. The scholarship has been established in recognition of the 150th anniversary of the Deseret News. Recipients will be exceptional print journalism students with at least one more year of school. The students will be given full-time summer employment and a $500 cash award in addition to the scholarship money that will be applied to their tuition. The scholarship will be a permanent endowment, with five percent of the amount awarded given annually to the recipients. The students will be known as Deseret News Scholars, and a plaque will be placed in the Deseret News headquarters to record their names. The first recipients will be named in the spring of 2001 by Deseret News editors who will choose from students recommended by the faculties of the four universities. - ### - >From Mormon-News: Mormon News and Events Forwarding is permitted as long as this footer is included Mormon News items may not be posted to the World Wide Web sites without permission. Please link to our pages instead. For more information see http://www.MormonsToday.com/ Send join and remove commands to: majordomo@MormonsToday.com Put appropriate commands in body of the message: To join: subscribe mormon-news To leave: unsubscribe mormon-news To join digest: subscribe mormon-news-digest - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Thom Duncan Subject: Re: [AML] Movie Ratings Date: 19 Jun 2000 16:41:27 -0600 Payne Family wrote: > > Thanks Eryc Snider, and sorry you had to work so hard. The question I had > didn't warrant all the trouble (shoot, even *I* know where screenit.com is). > It's just that I've never been able to quite completely "amen" the notion > that filmmakers are only making mass R's because it's what the public most > wants > to see. The idea that a filmmaker should be able to make a film that *he/she* wants to make, thinking the public can benefit by it must come into play here. I don't think all of Hollywood is pre-occupied only with money. There is still the idea that the "artist" presents his or her view of the world because it "must" be done. How else do you explain "Being John Malkovich?" -- Thom Duncan Read the further adventures of Moroni Smith, the LDS Indiana Jones! The long-awaited second episode in the Moroni Smith LDS adventure series, _Moroni Smith: In Search of the Gold Plates_ is now available as an e-book at the Zion's Fiction web page: http://www.zfiction.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Terry L Jeffress" Subject: Re: [AML] Where's our LDS Pulitzer prize winner? Date: 19 Jun 2000 16:59:02 -0600 As those interested in Mormon literature, why do we continue to seek the validation of the non-Mormon for our literature? Do we feel so alienated that we still try to fit in? Unfortunately, Mormon literature suffers from the same problem as most other niche markets. Those with the talent to write to a national audience usually do: Woverton, Card, Williams, Eadie/Taylor. I theorize that most writers of high quality material know that they write well and thus submit their work to the national markets. Those who get published in the niche markets, although the best in their field, usually do not write with the same quality (or genius) as those at the national level. To me this explains why most niche markets, including Mormon literature, don't get the attention of national/international award committees. But why do we want a worldly committee to judge our literature, anyway? Our own AML awards exist to establish the best in our own field. Even so, reader tastes vary so much that one persons Hemmingway is another person's Heimerdinger. To paraphrase a supreme court justice, I know good Mormon literature when I read it, and after reading slush at Covenant, I have seen the full range of quality in Mormon literature. Personally, if given a choice between a book from Bantam-Doubleday-Dell and Deseret Book, I'll take the one from BDD. -- Terry Jeffress - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Thom Duncan Subject: Re: [AML] (Andrew's Poll) Best LDS Novel of the 1990s Date: 19 Jun 2000 17:04:01 -0600 Scott and Marny Parkin wrote: > > >Wolverton, Dave. "Serpent Catch" Bantam, 1991. > > You may want to include the sequel to the above book, "Path of the > Hero" (Bantam, 1993), since it is arguably better, but both are worth > including. > > Marny Parkin > > - > AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature > http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm Personally, I think Wolverton's _Golden Queen_ series is the best thing he's ever written. I had begun to lose interest in SF (much of it so into characterization that the Sense of Wonder had been leached out) until I read this marvelous series. It contains everything I started reading SF for: other worlds, aliens, bug-eyed monsters, gorgeous women in peril, brave heroes, amazing weapons, interesting technology, action, and adventure. Coupled with a solid underpinning of spirituality from a distinctive LDS POV, these three delightful paperbacks are a near-perfect example of the genre. -- Thom Duncan Read the further adventures of Moroni Smith, the LDS Indiana Jones! The long-awaited second episode in the Moroni Smith LDS adventure series, _Moroni Smith: In Search of the Gold Plates_ is now available as an e-book at the Zion's Fiction web page: http://www.zfiction.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Darlene Young Subject: [AML] BRADY, _Great Gardens_ Date: 19 Jun 2000 16:18:51 -0700 (PDT) I just had to put in a plug for "Great Gardens!," now playing at the Little London Dinner Theater in Pleasant Grove. I heard about the play here, and read it in the BYU Inscape Magazine. I loved it in print, and was a little afraid that it wouldn't be as good in production. Great surprise! It was fantastic! Especially good were the performances of the actress playing Neilene and the one playing Ilene (forgive me for not remembering their names right here). I recommend it to everyone. My only regret is that you must pay for a dinner in order to see it (not that the dinner wasn't good, but just that now I can't afford to go again). ===== Darlene Young __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send instant messages with Yahoo! Messenger. http://im.yahoo.com/ - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Tracie Laulusa" Subject: RE: [AML] Race and Culture in LDS Lit. Date: 19 Jun 2000 19:35:04 -0400 Isn't there a bit of a difference between a "Black" experience and a "Martian" one? Obviously no one has lived the total Sci-fi experience. I'm not a Sci-fi buff, but it seems from what I've read that there are two parts to good science fiction-believable science and location stuff, and always the underlying story of what happens. It is in the underlying story that the writer draws from the familiar. Usually there are recognizable human dilemmas in the conflict even if all the characters aren't human. And actually, now that I think of it, even the setting is often something familiar or historical with some kind of twist that makes it reasonable in another time and place. But, when you say "Black" experience you are talking about a group of people who are living, not a fantasy. I don't really think there is just one "black" culture. Yet, certainly the experiences of most people of color will have been very different from that of the majority of those who are not. I think it would be very difficult to do justice to that difference. It's not that an author couldn't write about it, or in the case of Spielberg-work on the project, but to do so from the "insider" position when you are no such thing would probably come off as the height of conceit. I think maybe historical fiction tries to do just that. They place fictional characters, people, places and events that really happened. They can't know for sure if they are getting the experience "right" even with the best of research and intentions. There isn't anyone alive to tell them or to be offended if they fall short (though I'm sure there are many living people willing to be offended on their behalf.) Tracie Laulusa - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Todd Robert Petersen" Subject: Re: [AML] Multiple POV (Linking back into LDS Pulitzer) Date: 19 Jun 2000 18:51:23 -0500 > Here I would disagree to a certain extent. I believe there are always rules > for achieving intentional goals. If we wish to play with those rules, we > reap the consequences, which may be exactly what we want, but the rules have > no changed, nor can it be said that there are no rules. Richard, do you mean to indicate that is one set of rules for each effect? Or can certain effects be reached by violation of certain rules? In literary history, as soon as someone said the novel is "x," it changed. What Defoe and Swift and Rabelais wrote is different than what Crane, Dickens, and Melville wrote. One of the thing that stifles LDS literature is its insistance upon being realistic literature. Most of the LDS writing I have read pretends that the 20th century hasn't even taken place. Three exceptions are Terry Tempest Williams, Brian Evenson, and Darrell Spencer. When artists place marketability as their primary goal, mediocrity genrally ensues. MOBY DICK was nearly forgotten, and it didn't sell. It is a masterpiece, but the crowds of contemporary readers didn't cotton to it. They were busy with other things, perhaps until the time was right, I don't know. CITIZEN KANE is another example of a work that fizzled at first, then took off beyond anyone's wildest imaginations. It is on nearly every critics top ten. LDS literature is waiting for a combination of the rights work and the right publisher and the right audience, who are all willing to take a risk in order to get some place new. It is going to involve a reformation of our current institutions to get there. > I believe we have to know what we're doing and what we want to achieve in > order to create excellence. That usually takes a really good grasp of the > rules . . . and a willingness to be objective about our work, which isn't > easy most of the time. Richard is right on the money here; moreover, objectivity is nearly impossible. Todd Robert Petersen - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Todd Robert Petersen" Subject: Re: [AML] Race and Culture in LDS Lit. Date: 19 Jun 2000 18:52:46 -0500 Jason Steed wrote: > You name some good examples [of Mormon fiction that deals well with race and > culture], and there are many more. I named only one, Fillerup's "The Last Code Talker." Could you give some examples of the LDS work you're thinking about, Jason? Todd Robert Petersen - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: CDoug91957@aol.com Subject: Re: [AML] Iron Rod vs. Liahona Date: 19 Jun 2000 20:37:09 EDT In a message dated 00-06-13 23:05:15 EDT, Ivan Wolfe writes: << But even a literary interpretation of the BoM (ignoring doctrine) shows that the Liahona only worked for those who had held fast to the Iron Rod in Lehi's dream. If we take the two as liteary symbols, they both stand for the same basic concept. (Even Alma referred to following the Liahona as "an undeviating course.") I won't go farther in that direction, since I've been warned to not get to far into the doctrinal issues involved (though the literary ones seem to touch on the scacred ones here). >> Ivan is right that the literary issues touch on the sacred ones here; in fact, they overlap so far as in the present discussion to be almost inseparable. This thread began as a discussion about how to choose what movies to see, and of course whatever principles apply to choosing movies will apply by extension to any kind of artistic (I use the word broadly) production, including literature. Helping us choose what to see and read is a function of criticism; as Ezra Pound said, literary criticism finally boils down to answering the question, "What the deuce shall I read?" LDS who believe that the apostles of the Church really are prophets, seers, and revelators must take seriously what the wearers of that mantle say in that capacity about what to see and read, as about anything. The issue of how to interpret, evaluate, and apply what some of them say about seeing R-rated movies cannot be treated in isolation from that of how to interpret, evaluate, and apply what they say about anything else. It has widest possible ramifications, bringing us right to the question of the very nature of Christian, specifically LDS, discipleship, of which, for the believer, criticism is unavoidably one aspect. I don't see how to come at the literary issue without making a loop through doctrine, so I will make the loop and hope I can come back far enough along the way toward literary criticism to meet the criteria of the List. I think that Ivan is correct in saying that the symbols of the Liahona and the Iron Rod stand for the same thing, and I think that "same thing" is discipleship, and that it is a mistake to use them as representing two different approaches to discipleship. I don't have Richard Poll's original essay before me or conveniently available, but the issue here is not what Poll meant, but how present List contributors are using the two symbols. In this usage, "the word of God" seems to be taken as meaning the scriptures and the statements of living apostles, "Iron Rod" representing people who treat "the word," so defined, literalistically, harmonistically, and legalistically, as laying out step for step the way we should go; and "Liahona" as representing people who treat "the word," defined in the same way, as indicating a direction, leaving to us much of the task of working out the steps. I think that both understandings of the nature of discipleship miss the point of Book of Mormon doctrine and the real truth. As I read the scriptures (and as I believe), we obtain justification through faith in Christ, which is excercised through obedience--which, first and last, though there is much in between, is to Christ himself. There is a direct, personal relationship between Master and disciple that is prior to the disciple's relationship to anything below Christ, including law and priesthood authority. This principle is implied in Matthew 8:21-22: "And another of his disciples said unto him, Lord, suffer me first to go an bury my father. But Jesus said unto him, Follow me; and let the dead bury their dead." The law of his time required the man to bury his father within twenty-four hours, but Jesus is saying, "Forget the law for a moment, and follow _me_; I will be your law." Ideally (and I think this is what Paul is getting at in some of his writings), the disciple needs no further guidance than what comes to him from the Master, usually through the Holy Ghost. The Master, however, recognizing our weakness, mercifully turns us back to the written law and the structure of priesthood authority. When the man whose father had died put himself directly under the authority of the Master, the Master might very well have told him to go back and bury his father and to obey the rest of the law as well, and the man's behavior would have looked on the outside like that of any other follower of the law, but because he was obeying the law _because the Master had directed him to_, internally he would have been living in a different spiritual universe. A corollary of this principle is that the Master always retains a veto power over the law for any individual in any given situation. When Nephi killed Laban, contrary to the law and in obedience to the Master, who spoke to him through the Spirit, he ceased being a Jew and became a Christian. Law and official policy and program can never be enough to guide the disciple in all he should do. Dangerous doctrine, I know, but, I think, ineluctable. So, when Nephi killed Laban, what was he, a Liahona or and Iron Rod? In Ivan's terms, which I think are correct, he was both. The iron rod and the Liahona both represent the word of God, which ultimately is the Word; the disciple's "law" is the person Christ. The disciple is called to follow "an undeviating course" in obeying the Master, whether the Master is represented by a Liahona or by the Iron Rod. Sometimes the Master tells us to work the steps out for ourselves, and sometimes he tells us in great detail what steps to take. In any case, the disciple is required always to test the word of anyone else against the word of the Master as it comes to him directly or through heavenly messengers or the Spirit. Turning our lives wholly and unquestioningly over to anyone below heaven is precluded, whether the question is working mothers, what happens in the conjugal bed, or what movies we should watch or books we should read. This means that what Jonathan Langford wrote in a recent post is correct: "It occurred to me a few years ago that scriptures, teachings of living Church leaders, and personal inspiration can be considered as 'three witnesses' in determining paths in our own lives." To those three, I would add reason. When I put those four things together on the issue of R-rated movies, I don't find myself argued into an absolute prohibition, for reasons already presented by me and others in this thread; and, for what I think are good reasons, I've also taken a pass through the works of William Burroughs, Henry Miller, Isadore Ducasse, Baudelaire, and the Marquis de Sade. My allegiance to the Master has led me to judge those works in a certain way, and it certainly leads me to avoid recommending them to many people, but it hasn't led me altogether to avoid reading them myself, and I haven't seen a convincing argument that it should. Incidentally, the complete works of William Burroughs were on special display at the BYU Bookstore a few years ago. That BYU students should be encouraged to read those and prevented from seeing an unexpurgated Schindler's List at the campus theater is just too absurd for words. Colin Douglas cdoug91957@aol.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "mcnandon" Subject: RE: [AML] Where's our LDS Pulitzer prize winner? Date: 05 Jun 2000 02:11:40 -0600 I thought our mandate was anything by, for or about LDS. That includes anything written about Mormons even if the author is in some way disaffected. Nan P. McCulloch [MOD: Nan and others (on this thread and the Andrew's Poll thread) have correctly stated that the subject matter of the List includes literature "by, for, and about Mormons." I simply want to add that this doesn't prevent us from applying more narrow criteria to specific topics as appropriate to the conversation. It may be fruitful to talk about non-Mormon, ex-Mormon, etc., authors in a discussion of LDS Pulitzer prize winners--but there's nothing in the List rules that requires us to do so.] -----Original Message----- For me, when it comes to talking about an LDS Pulitzer prize winner, or discussing whether an LDS literature does or can exist, I would prefer a restricted definition. There is nothing interesting to me about literature from a non-member, ex-member, or cultural member--even when that literature deals with LDS people or topics--when it comes to these questions. [snip] -- D. Michael Martindale dmichael@wwno.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Payne Family" Subject: [AML] Essential Art (was: Movie Ratings) Date: 19 Jun 2000 23:43:02 -0600 I'm the guy who said I didn't think there was really any such thing as a "must-see." Don't misunderstand me. Art is essential. Literature is essential. I stand squarely in the camp of people who's lives have been changed by cinema (and literature, and music, etc.). *Of course* there is art that contains images that have become central to my ideas about God and the world. People must see films; I just don't think there's any one film (or any one painting, or any one symphony, etc.) that all people must see. I experience something listening to "Sweeney Todd" that everyone ought to experience, but they might see that show and not experience it there. They might find it elsewhere, in places where I wouldn't. I hear something in Tom Waits' "Grapefruit Moon" that everyone ought to hear, but they might not hear it from Waits. -Sam Payne - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Neal William Kramer Subject: Re: [AML] Re: (Andrew's Poll) Best LDS Novel of the 1990s Date: 20 Jun 2000 00:14:42 -0600 (MDT) I'd like to comment just briefly on Andrew's poll. Twenty years ago, such a poll would have included very few works, almost all of which would have been published by authors themselves or by very marginal presses. By the year 2000 we are seeing the beginnings of a level of maturity in LDS fiction we had no business even suspecting two decades ago. We owe that to many writers whose work represents a very broad spectrum of literary taste. And we owe it to an ever growing market from Latter-day Saint readers for fiction as an alternative form of entertainment to other popular media. Deseret Book and Bookcraft took many risks during the early years, but they discovered that there really is an audience out there. I think our entire culture, however we define the term, should be very grateful that we have witnessed this emerging phenomenon. I personally have spent many entertaining hours reading LDS fiction by many talented writers who are willing to work very hard to try to reach me. Levi Peterson, Doug Thayer, Benson Parkinson, Rachel Ann Nunes, Marilyn Brown, Margaret Young, Orson Scott Card, Don Marshall, the Yorgasons, Shirley Sealy, Jack Weyland, Brian Evenson, Jerry Lund, Dean Hughes, and many more have brought me many profitable hours and even a little edification. When Orson F. Whitney foresaw a day when we would begin to have fine Mormon writers, he must have seen at least a portion of our day--and I've said nothing about playwrights or poets! Are we lucky or what!? Neal Kramer - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jeff Needle Subject: [AML] TARR, _The Gathering Storm_ (Review) Date: 20 Jun 2000 01:32:26 -0700 Review ====== Kenneth R. Tarr, “The Last Days - Volume 1 - The Gathering Storm” (c) 1999, Cedar Fort Incorporated Paperback, 202 pages, $11.99 Reviewed by Jeff Needle A casual journey into any evangelical Christian bookstore will demonstrate the popularity of books and tapes, fiction and non-fiction, dealing with the rather esoteric subject of eschatology -- the study of last things. As the so-called new millennium approached, the markets were flooded with all sorts of prognostications of how the earth would end, how society would come crashing down on our heads, and how God would somehow rescue the faithful and utterly demolish the wicked. On May 17 2000, I found a book at a local Barnes and Noble store explaining, with startling clarity and accuracy, how the world would come to and end on May 5, 2000, when the planets would be in alignment. I wondered if the world HAD ended and no one bothered to tell me. There have been surprisingly few works of fiction in the LDS market promoting such a sensationalistic view of eschatology. While there are several good volumes discussing the Second Coming of Christ, the LDS fiction market seems to be more focused on looking back than on looking forward. Frankly, I think this is a good idea. And now Kenneth R. Tarr brings us “The Last Days - Volume 1 - The Gathering Storm.” I purchased the book mainly to see how a fiction writer would pull together the disparate ideas and writings of LDS leaders and scholars. How would Tarr bring the whole thing together? The story takes place sometime in the future. It’s not clear exactly when, but technology has moved nicely along, allowing for such things as widely-used picture-phones and alternative-energy vehicles. The protagonist of this book is Steven Christopher, a translator by trade. (Tarr, by the way, holds degrees on both Spanish and French.) His wife, Selena, abandoned their family when she joined a polygamist cult in Arizona. Steven’s brother, John, has long been preaching that the end is near, that Church members ought to be getting ready, but most view him as a fanatic and an alarmist. Their younger brother, Paul, has just returned from his mission and is ready to get on with his life. Soon into the story, natural disasters begin to wreak havoc on the residents of Utah -- earthquakes, floods, etc. The Provo area is nearly destroyed. A giant earthquake nearly destroys Japan. Soon a pair of asteroids are spotted heading toward earth. One lands in Canada, another in the Atlantic Ocean, the latter causing a tsunami effect, wiping out much of the East Coast. Through all this, a violent anti-Semite neo-Nazi lunatic is gathering his forces to bring about the destruction of the United States. His minions maneuver the Russians to launch nuclear bombs on Detroit and Chicago, causing extraordinary destruction. And a deadly disease, first thought to be a new strain of the Ebola virus, is running rampant, killing millions. And a plot to kill more than 50 of the top leaders of the United States, including the President, the Vice President, and the entire Cabinet, comes off without a hitch. The nation is in chaos. Militias have taken over the country, commandeering federal facilities and closing roads. I think you get the picture. I wasn’t at all sure how all these factors worked together. It was a challenge keeping all the disasters straight. One thread that ran through the whole story was Steven’s budding love affair with a young woman in his ward. They both follow the rules of propriety, and thus never quite reveal, until the end, their affection for one another. Problems With The Book =================== As mentioned, it took a great deal of concentration to keep track of all the disasters. I tried to picture the globe turned upside-down by the intensity, and close proximity, of these dreaded events. But more, I tried to zero in on where LDS scripture, or the teachings of the Prophets, gives us such a dire view. Yes, there are warnings, and word-pictures of a coming judgment, but the intensity of the concurrent events in this book seemed a bit over the top to me. It became, not a picture, but a caricature, of the very serious subject of end-time events. I thought there was also a problem with continuity. Perhaps a few examples will illustrate. The first hundred pages of the book are populated with good, loyal LDS folks discussing the crises at great length. We even get to travel to the polyg settlement in Arizona where Steven and his friends rescue Steven’s daughter, who had been kidnapped by her mother. We then switch to Washington D.C. where the President is meeting with his advisors. The Pres. advises that all American citizens should be implanted with a microchip, so that their whereabouts can be monitored continually. When the V.P. objects on the basis that the American people would never go along with such a plan, the Pres. informs him that tens of millions of Americans were already implanted, something the V.P knows nothing about. Now, given that this program has already implanted tens of millions, how likely is it that the V.P. knew nothing about it? And even more puzzling, with all the extended discussions of government scheming to deprive the people of their rights, why is this the first time we’ve heard of these implants? The Mormons seem to know nothing of the program. It just didn’t wash. During this same meeting, the Pres. announces that all privately-owned firearms would be confiscated. Several chapters later, a guard comes across Steven holding a shotgun. He asks, “Do you have a permit for that? I don’t know why the government issues permits to you Mormons.” But how could Steven have a permit for a firearm if they’ve all been confiscated? Yes, he could have hidden one, but when the guard discovered it, why on earth would he ask if Steven had a permit to own something that had been outlawed? Puzzling indeed. Merits of the Book ============== In its favor, the book raises some interesting questions about how seriously Mormons take the words of warning of their leaders. It is clear that Mr. Tarr is raising “a witness and a warning” to his readers. Interesting questions are raised about food storage, knowledge of natural remedies, and the dependence we all have on electricity and modern conveniences. Could we survive if a disaster really did hit? Or do we panic when we can’t watch the evening news because the electricity is off for an hour? Steven makes several personal journeys in this volume. One of them is his acknowledgment that he really didn’t have a clue about how to survive. His “fanatic” brother John knew just what to do -- how to build a generator, how to make an outhouse, etc. -- and Steven soon learns to appreciate his brother’s “fanaticism.” He also finds himself in a difficult situation when his ex-wife leaves the polyg colony and attempts a reunion with Steven and their children. These story lines were quite interesting. Summary ======= I thought “The Last Days - Volume 1 - The Gathering Storm” was a little like a stew with too many ingredients. While the component parts of the story aren’t entirely beyond belief, the concurrence of the events transformed the overall impact from a helpful warning to a comic-like presentation of coming events. It simply wasn’t believable. And when it comes to books presenting an end-time scenario, they must be, at the very least, believable. There are more volumes in the series. I hope Mr. Tarr brings the story back into the arena of credible discourse. The subject of the end times is a serious one, and deserves some study. --------------- Jeff Needle jeff.needle@general.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Marilyn Brown Subject: [AML] E-mail Lingo Date: 20 Jun 2000 09:19:34 Dear moderator: I missed something somewhere. For those of us who are not in on the computer language (maybe only me), is it all right if you might give us a running list of translations? I would appreciate it so much, as I have been running (limping) past these terms and creating the most amazing phrases of my own that do not fit: IMO OTOH and ISTM. Thank you so much. Marilyn Brown [MOD: Time really forbids me from giving a running translation of these terms as they appear in posts--besides the fact that I try to do minimal editing of posts without checking back with the author (basically, I just add names when they're left out and trim the amount that is snipped from other posts when it seems to run long). However, this is a good reminder to all of us who post on the List that we should try to avoid expressions that may be confusing to others. We want the List to be a friendly place for everyone, including those who may not be experienced with e-mail conventions. By the way (BTW), the terms Marilyn lists above interpret (I believe) as In My Opinion (IMO), On The Other Hand (OTOH), and It Seems To Me (ISTM). I'd love to hear Marilyn's amazing alternatives, though...] - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Clark Goble" Subject: RE: [AML] Race and Culture in LDS Lit. Date: 19 Jun 2000 18:15:06 -0600 ___ Michael ___ | The anecdote I heard was, when someone suggested to Steven | Spielberg that he make a film of _Color Purple_, he reacted | that he didn't think he could do something on the black | experience, because he didn't know anything about it. The | person responded, "When you made _Close Encounters_, did | you know anything about the Martian experience?" ___ But of course Spielberg didn't *write* _The Color Purple_, a black author did. And Spielberg utilized black actors and consultants. Directing a film and writing a novel or even screenplay are quite different. Even there I think that how Spielberg was able to capture the black experience in _The Color Purple_ was quite different than how he was able to capture the Jewish experience in _Schindler's List_. I'd add that _Close Encounters of the Third Kind_ wasn't about aliens. They were very minor peripheral characters. The movie was about suburban Americans dealing with the notion of aliens. Spielberg took many aspects of this film (along with many of his early ones) directly from his own experiences growing up in suburban America. I'm also not about to say that no-one can write about experiences outside of their range of knowledge. It does take someone very skillful to do so, however. And even then they need quite a bit of consultation. Spielberg is a poor example because he is one of the top people in his craft at the moment. ___ Michael ___ | It certainly is easier to write about an experience you've lived, | but that doesn't mean you are barred from writing about it if you | haven't. Science fiction writers would sure be in a pickle if | that were true. ___ The 'otherly' that most science fiction writers deal with is a creation of their own mind. Thus they are the ones *most* experienced with it. No one is going to come up to an author and say that they didn't get the alien culture right. Of course I'd further add that most science fiction does do a poor job of writing about the experiences they purport to write about - mainly due to a lack of education in science, sociology and so forth. It's just that most science fiction fans don't particularly care. A parallel situation might be reading fiction written by non-Mormons about Mormons. We usually are quite squeamish and say that they misrepresent us. Yet I suspect most non-Mormons reading Zane Grey novels couldn't have cared less. Probably forty years ago no one would have cared if the culture of African Americans was misrepresented in a novel either. Today they do. So I suppose you are correct in what you say, Michael. However I'd say that it is acceptable only if people don't care how accurate you are in what you write. For example few outside of classic departments are going to complain about the errors in _Gladiator_. ___ Michael ___ | This politically correct notion that whites can't say anything | meaningful about the black experience is certainly not to be | indulged. ___ I don't think I'm saying that. I am saying that a white author will have a difficult time representing the black experience. Having a book that doesn't focus on the black experience but which might touch on one or two aspects in passing certainly is possible. In these stories though the film really doesn't delve into the black experience. It isn't a major theme. In a film like _Boyz in the Hood_ the black experience is a major feature. I honestly think that a white author couldn't have written it. ___ Michael ___ | No one seems to worry about that philosophy when non-Mormons write | about the Mormon experience. ___ What works purport to represent the Mormon experience written by non-Mormons. Most works I'm familiar with in that genre tend to be very poorly written and frequently are complained about by Mormons. -- Clark Goble --- d.c.g@att.net ----------------------------------- - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "mcnandon" Subject: RE: [AML] (Andrew's Poll) Best LDS Novel of the 1990s Date: 05 Jun 2000 02:11:37 -0600 Wasn't Julie Jensen, the author of _Two Headed_ raised a Mormon? I remember reading that on the playbill. Nan McCulloch - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Jason Steed" Subject: [AML] Writing What You Know (was Race and Culture in LDS lit) Date: 19 Jun 2000 21:29:19 PDT Quite a few people have written posts concerning the issue of writing what you know. Here's my two cents: On the one hand, I agree with whoever said that "you can't NOT write about what you know." This seems to me, at least in one sense, to be a profound truth. But, on the other hand, I also think one must NECESSARILY write what one doesn't know. If we say a white writer can't write about black characters, then we must logically say that a young writer can't write about old characters, or that a male can't write about females, or that an American can't write about Europeans--and eventually, if you follow the logic out far enough, we have to say that a writer can write about NO ONE but him/herself. And so the two hands come together, as, in the end, that just might be what we do...because, after all, that is what we know. Jason Steed ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "J. Scott Bronson" Subject: Re: [AML] Where's our LDS Pulitzer prize winner? Date: 20 Jun 2000 12:56:04 -0600 > Unfortunately, Mormon literature suffers from the same problem as > most other > niche markets. Those with the talent to write to a national > audience > usually do: Woverton, Card, Williams, Eadie/Taylor. I theorize that > most > writers of high quality material know that they write well and thus > submit > their work to the national markets. Those who get published in the > niche > markets, although the best in their field, usually do not write with > the > same quality (or genius) as those at the national level. To me this > explains why most niche markets, including Mormon literature, don't > get the > attention of national/international award committees. National attention certainly doesn't equate with talent or superior skills as a writer. It simply means those writers have struck a chord. I would not call Betty Eadie or Richard Paul Evans great writers, not the stuff I read anyway, yet they're nationally popular. Also in the national spotlight you've got writers like Nicholas Sparks or John Grisham (who is getting better, though) who are rather pedestrian writers who have also struck a chord. But Margaret Young, Levi Peterson and David Gagon are superior writers in my opinion. From what I can tell, the kind of success you're talking about has more to do with subject matter and niche matter than with skill matter. J. Scott Bronson--The Scotted Line "World peace begins in my home" We are not the acolytes of an abstruse god. We are here to entertain--Keith Lockhart - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Morgan Adair" Subject: Re: [AML] Iron Rod vs. Liahona Date: 20 Jun 2000 14:27:14 -0600 >>> CDoug91957@aol.com 06/19/00 06:37PM >>> > > I don't have Richard Poll's original=20 >essay before me or conveniently available,=20 Voila: http://home.att.net/~jredelfs/people.html=20 MBA - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Thom Duncan Subject: Re: [AML] (Andrew's Poll) Best LDS Novel of the 1990s Date: 20 Jun 2000 13:19:36 -0600 Neal William Kramer wrote: > > I'd like to comment just briefly on Andrew's poll. Twenty years ago, such a > poll would have included very few works, almost all of which would have been > published by authors themselves or by very marginal presses. > > By the year 2000 we are seeing the beginnings of a level of maturity in LDS > fiction we had no business even suspecting two decades ago. I remember hearing the following from the lips of the then head of Deseret Book: "We don't publish novels because Mormons don't read fiction." As a person who had always wanted to write fiction about and for my chosen faith, I was greatly disappointed. How glad I am now that that attitude has changed. -- Thom Duncan Read the further adventures of Moroni Smith, the LDS Indiana Jones! The long-awaited second episode in the Moroni Smith LDS adventure series, _Moroni Smith: In Search of the Gold Plates_ is now available as an e-book at the Zion's Fiction web page: http://www.zfiction.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Jason Steed" Subject: Re: [AML] Race and Culture in LDS Lit. Date: 20 Jun 2000 13:40:58 PDT >Jason Steed wrote: > > > You name some good examples [of Mormon fiction that deals well with race >and > > culture], and there are many more. > >I named only one, Fillerup's "The Last Code Talker." Could you give some >examples of the LDS work you're thinking about, Jason? > >Todd Robert Petersen To be honest (and I'm responding to you on the spot, without going to bookshelves or looking anything up), I can think only of a short story by Brady Udall that has a Native American protagonist--I think it's called "Midnight Raid"--and that's about it, off the top of my head. That's kind of depressing... But I'm far less knowledgeable of Mormon literature, I'm sure, than many other people on the list... Though it hardly counts, I can say that many of my own short stories (which I'm still working on, and trying to publish, though I have little _time_ to work on them, considering the millions of other projects I have going right now) are set in a fictionalized version of my home town, and include Mexican, Mormon, and Jewish characters. But the real reason I'm responding to you on the spot, and NOT taking the time to look up more examples, is because I want to point out something that I've just realized is happening here. When we talk about literature that "deals with race and culture," somehow we automatically assume that that means all things NOT WHITE. I'm guilty of this myself, in the statement you quote, and in my initial response (trying to come up with examples). Originally, I WAS going to go to my books, to try to come up with more "evidence"--but then it hit me: the fact is, Mormon literature is ENTIRELY about race and culture--those of us who are white just fail to recognize ourselves as a "race." Because we're the "dominant" group, the "majority," we fail to see ourselves as "raced" or "racialized," and we reserve that distinction for those who are different from us. This is in part a cause, in part a symptom, of racism, I think (the perception of race as something other than white). So, to answer your question (and to revise my initial statement)--I think that ALL of Mormon literature is full of race and culture--much of that culture being "Mormon culture," and much (almost all?) of that race being "white." I would be very interested, though, if others on the list can come up with works that deal with races other than white--and I'm going right now to search my bookshelves... Jason ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Todd Robert Petersen Subject: [AML] _The Real World_ Date: 20 Jun 2000 15:15:51 -0500 We have talked a little about how Mormons are protrayed in non-LDS literature and so forth. We've got the Turrow book, the film ORGASMO, RIDERS OF THE PURPLE SAGE, Stegner's two histories, two moments of "Mormonism" in Cormac McCarthy, a line in a Cherry Poppin' Daddies song, Kushner's ANGELS IN AMERICA, etc. I want to throw out some level of discussion on these portrayals with the following bit of information. A twenty-year old BYU co-ed from Wisconsin will be on MTV's THE REAL WORLD this coming season. She is outspoken in her Mormonism, to the extent that she responded to questions of homosexuality be saying that it disgusts her. She is young and impresssionable The MTV website blurbs her like this: >Julie hasn't been too lucky with boyfriends recently - she develops crushes easily, focusing her attention on >younger guys, but nothing ever seems to last. She's currently a student at Brigham Young University in Provo, >Utah. This is the farthest she's been from her observant Mormon family in Wisconsin. Although wide-eyed and >curious about the world, she's seen very little. When she came out to California for the semi-final casting round, >that was only her second time on an airplane. Although Julie has lived a remarkably sheltered life, she's fiercely >independent. On first observation, it would be easy to mistake her for a nave, even close-minded person. In fact, >she is a courageous and passionate woman on the verge of discovering her own authority. She remains a >committed Mormon and plans to attend church every Sunday. On the casting show, the producers seemed to indicate that she'd be interesting because of the natural conflict that they sensed would arise given the hedonism of the other seasons. One can just imagine the Mardi Gras show that will be inevitable given that the show is set in New Orleans. It sounds to me like they're going to try to break her. In any case, this might well be the first major exposure of a Mormon in a non-ecclesiatical role. THE REAL WORLD HAS has phenomenal ratings. Does anyone out there have any thoughts in this MTV thing or on other portrayals of LDS people? I suppose that it's just as important for us AML types to consider how we appear in addition to how we present ourselves. Todd Robert Petersen - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: harlowclark@juno.com Subject: Re: [AML] Jobs for writers Date: 20 Jun 2000 16:23:05 -0700 On Thu, 15 Jun 2000 that semi-lurker harlowclark@juno.com writes: > If so, would it be possible to call in a sitter for an hour a day, or > five hours a week? The thing about writing as a job is that there are > a lot of writing tasks that can be done in about an hour a day. This reminds me of a story Richard Cracroft told at the AML meeting, the year he replied to Bruce Jorgenson's presidential address with his presidential address about Mantic vs. Sophic writing, I think. He said that when he was Carol Lynn Pearson's stake president he called her as (stake?) relief society president, partly because he felt she was spending too much time writing. He went over one day and some of the older women in the stake were watching sister Pearson's children. It was their calling. She had called several women to watch her children for a few hours each day so she could write. They were serving not only the Church, but Mormon letters. Write on, mothers! Harlow Soderborg Clark ________________________________________________________________ YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET! Juno now offers FREE Internet Access! Try it today - there's no risk! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj. - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Terry L Jeffress" Subject: Re: [AML] Where's our LDS Pulitzer prize winner? Date: 20 Jun 2000 17:00:42 -0600 > National attention certainly doesn't equate with talent or superior > skills as a writer. It simply means those writers have struck a chord. > I would not call Betty Eadie or Richard Paul Evans great writers, not the > stuff I read anyway, yet they're nationally popular. Also in the > national spotlight you've got writers like Nicholas Sparks or John > Grisham (who is getting better, though) who are rather pedestrian writers > who have also struck a chord. But Margaret Young, Levi Peterson and > David Gagon are superior writers in my opinion. From what I can tell, > the kind of success you're talking about has more to do with subject > matter and niche matter than with skill matter. Perhaps I did blend the concepts of popular ("best-selling") with award-winning, but I contend that achieving popularity does require some skill. You must at least recognize and create a story that will appeal to a large audience -- no small task. Some writers execute that story with greater skill than others. Now do you consider "national attention" to mean only popular works? Or, does that also include the various national awards? Coming back to "where's our LDS Pulitzer Prize winner." I think that so many saints still have that stigma of "outsider" that they continually search for validation with those outside their subculture. I think asking for national recognition of Mormon literature stems from this desire for sameness and acceptance. But the precepts of our religion make us different. We should look within for the validation of our literature, not without. Other stigmas interfere with generating widely-accepted literature. You can still find many saints that frown on any reading expect for scripture and church sponsored materials. Even if you don't hold that view, you have to deal with those who do. And that presents another limit to producing good works. -- Terry Jeffress - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Eileen Subject: [AML] Essential Art (was: Movie Ratings) Date: 20 Jun 2000 17:23:47 -0600 > Eileen wrote: > > > I agree with the statement, my apologies, but I cannot remember who said it, > > that there really is nothing that is a "must see." > Dave wrote: > I believe that there are "must see" movies. If you apply this to literature, as > I suppose we should (tic), are there any "must reads?" Outside the scriptures > (or maybe including the scriptures!) are there books that you see as essential > to your ideas of religion, God, or the world? In my life, I know that there is > some literature, and some movies that have affected me so profoundly that it > changed my behavior for the better. In that sense, I don't think "art" or > "literature" is non-essential. > > So, I guess the implication that I'm quibbling with - is that if no movie is a > "must see" then movies or literature or art is really not essential. My > experience tells me differently. My implication really had nothing to do with literature and I see your point. My implication, if you will, is plainly, I do not like to be told by entities who I feel has no idea of my tastes or inclinations that I "must see" this. I like suggestions, enlightening reviews, informed opinions, etc. to give me an idea of "essentials." I freely admit that I have a problem from time to time with "authority" and balk at anyone (read: ratings board) making generalized statements about what I must see. As for reading, I go for the underdog as oppossed to the Bestsellers screaming "Pick Me, Pick Me" when I walk in Barnes & Noble. In my opinion, the "must see", "pick me" attitude is a corporate one and who are they to say what I should read, see, listen to, learn from and enjoy. Art, movies, music, literature non-essential - never was that my implication. Pardon my clumsiness if that is what I lead you to believe. Little wonder that you would quibble with that idea. Not what I meant in the least. Eileen eileens99@bigplanet.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Larry Jackson Subject: [AML] LDS Church Magazines Are Going Online Date: 21 Jun 2000 01:24:05 EDT In a letter to LDS Church leaders, including stake presidents and bishops, Elder Boyd K. Packer of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles announced that Church magazines will be posted on the Church internet site (www.lds.org) 90 days after they are printed, beginning with the September 2000 issues. The letter, dated June 1, 2000 was actually sent to announce that some curriculum support materials will be published only in the magazines, and to encourage leaders and teachers to have access to them. Larry Jackson ________________________________________________________________ YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET! Juno now offers FREE Internet Access! Try it today - there's no risk! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj. - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Larry Jackson Subject: [AML] MN Manti Mormon Miracle Pagean Opens, Called 'Flowery': BYU NewsNet Date: 21 Jun 2000 01:24:05 EDT NewsNet 19Jun00 A3 [From Mormon-News] Manti Mormon Miracle Pagean Opens, Called 'Flowery' (Miracle Pageant is just too flowery) BYU NewsNet 19Jun00 A3 http://newsnet.byu.edu/show_story.cfm?number=10022&year=current By Marilyn Lau: NewsNet Staff Writer MANTI, UTAH -- The Mormon Miracle Pageant, held each year on the grounds of the LDS Temple in Manti, Utah, opens today, running through June 24th. But BYU Newsnet's Marilyn Lau says the while Manti itself is fun, the pageant is too "flowery." The pageant presents the history of the Restoration, telling how Joseph Smith received the First Vision and was given the golden plates, from which he translated the Book of Mormon. It also depicts the westward movement of the Mormons till they arrive in Utah. But Lau calls the script, "over-dramatic," and says it "shadows the sweet and simple story of the Restoration." "Verbose and flowery language describes the action of the play, using phrases like "spiritual ecstasy," "ideal utopia" and "malarial infestation." Lau continues, "This type of dramatic dialogue takes away from the aesthetic experience the audience is supposed to enjoy. The audience is jarred from their suspension of disbelief to laugh at the awkwardness of the language." Lau also takes issue with the "artistic liberty" taken in the script, such as the virgin sacrifice that the pageant depicts and the Indian chief that helps Brigham Young decide to provide men for the Mormon Battalion. She is also bothered by the choice of music for the pageant, saying that in many scenes it "barely correlates with the action." "Eerie, Twilight-Zone-like music plays in the background of such scenes as the reunion of pioneers Robert and Mary Kenshaw in the Spirit World." Lau concludes, "The Joseph Smith story is true. However, the presentation leaves little room for the Spirit to abide. The truths of the gospel need to be uncovered from the theatrics of the pageant." >From Mormon-News: Mormon News and Events Forwarding is permitted as long as this footer is included Mormon News items may not be posted to the World Wide Web sites without permission. Please link to our pages instead. For more information see http://www.MormonsToday.com/ Send join and remove commands to: majordomo@MormonsToday.com Put appropriate commands in body of the message: To join: subscribe mormon-news To leave: unsubscribe mormon-news To join digest: subscribe mormon-news-digest - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "D. Michael Martindale" Subject: Re: [AML] BLUTH/GOLDMAN, _Titan A.E._ Date: 20 Jun 2000 23:44:09 -0600 Don Bluth: > "The psychology with teens is they equate animation with being a > baby," Bluth said. "You have to do something that is pretty edgy > and pretty cool. We immediately went for sci-fi." Guess he's never heard of Japanese anime. This film struck me as an American answer to anime. > "We tried to be sure we didn't push children, moms and dads out > of the theaters, though," he said. "The film was screened for > families; violence is minimal and there is no rough language." Apparently they forgot to screen it for nudity. The male character has full rear nudity in one scene. The female character _could_ have had full nudity in another scene, but they discreetly avoided it. This is an interesting phenomenon to me. Why is male nudity often considered humorous--and semi-harmless--while female nudity is generally considered scandalous? Sean P. Means: > But, as with their last > film, "Anastasia," Bluth and Goldman cannot connect the cel > animation to the computer graphics -- for example, a computerized > chase through a water-covered planet can move with fluid speed in > three dimensions, while a simple pan around Cale's bed looks > jerky. I suppose that's true, but it never once bothered me. > The story is a jumble of sci-fi plot cliches, underdeveloped > characters and visual passages built to accommodate the > light-metal soundtrack. The only sci-fi plot cliche that jumps out at you was the rehash of the Star Trek "Genesis Project" ending. But that's not a cliche yet--it hasn't been done all that much. I thought the ending worked well and was even a little moving, considering the level of sophistication this film went for. The characterization was about as deep as an action film needs. Except for the music, which I detested, I enjoyed this film very much. Occasionally the plot became obscure, but the action scenes were great, the images were striking, and the bad guys even managed to hit and wound the protagonists a few times when they shot at them, unlike most other action films. That alone wins brownie points in my book. -- D. Michael Martindale dmichael@wwno.com ================================== Check out Worldsmiths, the new online LDS writers group, at http://www.wwno.com/worldsmiths Sponsored by Worlds Without Number http://www.wwno.com ================================== - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "D. Michael Martindale" Subject: Re: [AML] Iron Rod vs. Liahona Date: 21 Jun 2000 01:18:13 -0600 Todd Robert Petersen wrote: > What I mean to say, I guess, is that the Iron Rod is probably not what we > think it is. Perhaps there are even some things we have plugged into which > it never was nor was it intended to be. I would certainly say so! I think this whole debate is based on a misintertrepation of the meaning of the iron rod. We are told to hold fast to the iron rod, but what is the iron rod? Sing along with me: "The iron rod is the word of God." Never have I heard sung in church: "the iron rod is traditional Utah culture's interpretation of how to apply Gospel principles." If I am studying and searching and meditating in an effort to find the truth, and I am including the word of God in this process, why does that mean I am stepping away from the iron rod--for even a few minutes--just because my explorations don't jive with traditional Utah cultural pseudo-truths? To me, letting go of the iron rod in our explorations would be _rejecting_ the word of God and replacing it with other, less reliable sources of truth. I think the more we explore and open our minds to encompass all possible sources of truth, the more urgently we need to hang onto the iron rod so we don't totally lose our way. It has nothing to do with whether we are prudish or intolerant. -- D. Michael Martindale dmichael@wwno.com ================================== Check out Worldsmiths, the new online LDS writers group, at http://www.wwno.com/worldsmiths Sponsored by Worlds Without Number http://www.wwno.com ================================== - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Larry Jackson Subject: [AML] MN American Prophet Wins IPPY Award: Shadow Mountain News Release Date: 21 Jun 2000 01:33:40 EDT Release 20Jun00 A3 [From Mormon-News] American Prophet Wins IPPY Award Shadow Mountain News Release 20Jun00 A3 CHICAGO, ILLINOIS -- "American Prophet: The Story of Joseph Smith," by Heidi S. Swinton, won an IPPY from the 2000 Independent Publisher Book Awards at BookExpo America in Chicago recently. Swinton's book, which was a companion volume to the PBS documentary by the same title, won in the Biography category. Parables, written by Robert L. Millet and illustrated by James C. Christensen, received recognition as a finalist in the Religion category. Both books are published under the Shadow Mountain imprint, a general trade imprint of Deseret Book Company. This is the fourth year for the Independent Publisher Book Awards. The 2000 IPPY Awards attracted entries from 550 independent publishers throughout North America. Each category featured a winner and two finalists. "From cover design and illustration to concept and writing style, this year's entrants exhibited the highest publishing standards imaginable," an award committee spokesman said. The complete 2000 results appear in Independent Publisher's online magazine-independentpublisher.com. The awards list is distributed to bookstores, libraries, the Frankfurt Book Fair, and literary festivals throughout North America this summer. # # # >From Mormon-News: Mormon News and Events Forwarding is permitted as long as this footer is included Mormon News items may not be posted to the World Wide Web sites without permission. Please link to our pages instead. For more information see http://www.MormonsToday.com/ Send join and remove commands to: majordomo@MormonsToday.com Put appropriate commands in body of the message: To join: subscribe mormon-news To leave: unsubscribe mormon-news To join digest: subscribe mormon-news-digest - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Jerry Enos" Subject: Re: [AML] (Andrew's Poll) Best LDS Novel of the 1990s Date: 21 Jun 2000 09:13:58 -0600 Mostly I just have a question. You list several LDS writers and the poll lists several books by some of the same people, but no where do I see the name of Joyce Lindstrom. I've met her and know that she is LDS and she had a book out last year. I don't remember the name and I have not had the opertunity to read it so I was just wondering has anyone read her work? Do you know the title? And is it any good? - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Christopher Bigelow" Subject: Re: [AML] _The Real World_ Date: 21 Jun 2000 09:23:07 -0700 I personally find _The Real World_ contrived and obnoxious and won't make = a point to watch (I saw the first episode and that was enough of a taste = for me), but I see this as a significant bellwether that can only increase = national interest in reasonably sympathetic literature about Mormons. I'm = still hoping national publishers will start picking up novels BECAUSE they = contain Mormon characters in challenging, interesting circumstances. And I = know it sounds crass, but the focus on Utah during the 2002 Olympics will = also help pique interest in the Mormon culture and mind-set. I'm certainly = going to try to exploit these trends in my own novel marketing efforts (if = I meet my goal to finish a decent novel by the end of this year). I = strongly feel that Mormonism could become a flavor of the decade in = national publishing, just like Jewish, Catholic, Asian, Southern, and = other ethnic/cultural groups have been.=20 Chris Bigelow * * * * * * Interested in novels, stories, poems, plays, and films by, for, or about = Mormons? Check out IRREANTUM magazine at www.xmission.com/~aml/irreantum.ht= m. - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Dean FH Macy Subject: Re:[AML] Movie Ratings Date: 14 Jun 2000 14:05:38 -0400 [MOD: Apologies to Dean for the delay in getting this out.] "Eric D. Snider" wrote:This past weekend, of the Top 10 films in the country, six were > PG-13, two were PG and two were R. As a film critic, just going off the top of > my head, I'd say that PG-13 is the most common rating -- especially during the > summer, when PG-13 is a good, audience-friendly blockbuster sort of rating. Eric, Nice piece of research. However one point reagrding PG & PG13 films is not covered and I believe it should be mentioned. Any motion picture in the Science Fiction or Fantasy genre which would have been rated G is always rated PG by the industry. PG because it contains scientific material which could possibly be true, but is probably not. Likewise, a Sci-Fi or Fantasy film which includes mild violence will be rated PG13 instead of PG just because it is Sci-Fi or Fantasy. Lately, many religious films are getting PG ratings due to their closeness to Fantasy genres. So, the bottom line is, when the viewer looks up a movie in the Sci-Fi or Fantasy genre and sees a PG rating, it's really G (General Audience) rated. Kind of changes all your painstaking classification figures. One more little tidbit: A violent film that would have been rated PG13, which contains one or more "F---" words, is immediately reclassified as "R." I, as a former member of the MPAA Ratings board that sets the ratings for movies in the U.S., believed our rating system should be changed to reflect the contents of the film. For instance, how about "G" for Good clean films suitable for children, "VG" for Violent "G" films, such as cartoons, "NG" for films which expose some male or female Nudity which is not sexually related, like in "Never Cry Wolf" or cartoons which show some animated skin, "SG" for the good, clean Sci-Fi/Fantasy flicks, and so on (you get the picture). We could apply this system to the one already in use as "VPG" or "NPG" adding "LPG" for Language and "VLPG" for Violence & Language. The "R" rating can remain the same except I'd like to see why a film is rated "R" in the letters; for instance, "XR" for seXually oriented content or "VR" for extreme Violence. This would eliminate the "PG13" genre since all films not rated "G" should be under parental discretion anyway. I realize that using a rating system like this could cause the rating letters to be longer than the film or video title, for instance "XVLNSR" for the SciFi channel's 'LEXX' series, but all plans have some drawbacks. At least if a show was rated "XVLNSR" I'd know to hunt for the game and play 'Seek' instead of watching. That's my 2 cents. -- Dean FH Macy, Lit.D./Mus.D. "Specializing in Management of exceptionally talented youth in Music" EPI Records - NetWork Films "Making children do something they don't want to do is the job of the parents. If that doesn't work, there are always juvenile detention centers." - Mike R. - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Sharlee Glenn" Subject: Re: [AML] Race and Culture in LDS Lit. Date: 21 Jun 2000 09:10:35 -0600 Jason Steed wrote: > I would be very interested, though, if others on the list can come up with > works that deal with races other than white--and I'm going right now to > search my bookshelves... Marilyn Brown's marvelous _Earthkeepers_ deals, at length, with the Native American culture. And my YA novel, _Circle Dance_, is set on the Uintah-Ouray Indian Reservation. Sharlee Glenn glennsj@inet-1.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Todd Robert Petersen Subject: Re: [AML] (Andrew's Poll) Best LDS Novel of the 1990s Date: 21 Jun 2000 11:17:10 -0500 Thom Duncan wrote: > I remember hearing the following from the lips of the then head of > Deseret Book: "We don't publish novels because Mormons don't read > fiction." > As a person who had always wanted to write fiction about and for my > chosen faith, I was greatly disappointed. > How glad I am now that that attitude has changed. I'm sorry to sound disparaging or disheartening, but they're still saying, for the most part, that they "don't publish novels because Mormons don't read fiction." Actually in conversations I had last summer with editors at Deseret and Signature, the point came across that "Mormons who read fiction don't generally like to read MORMON fiction." Also, Signature said that they're putting a moratorium on fiction for a while because fiction always loses money. The people on this list are the exception which does not support the rule. When I talk to LDS people who read stuff, it comes out that they read biographies of the brethren, the Ensign, Orson Scott Card. Occasionally they'll admit to reading Victor Hugo, which means, LES MISERABLES because they liked the "play." There are some people, few and far between, who admit to reading anything contemporary or of classical worth (i.e. Hemingway, Faulkner, Austen, etc.) Some are even proud of the fact that they don't read at all (especially not that worldly garbage, they add). Lest this sound like I'm picking on LDS people for being peculiarly ignorant in this regard, but the general population is much the same in their own way. Todd Robert Petersen - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Thom Duncan Subject: Re: [AML] _The Real World_ Date: 21 Jun 2000 11:06:39 -0600 Christopher Bigelow wrote: > > I personally find _The Real World_ contrived and obnoxious and won't make a point to watch (I saw the first episode and that was enough of a taste for me), but I see this as a significant bellwether that can only increase national interest in reasonably sympathetic literature about Mormons. I'm still hoping national publishers will start picking up novels BECAUSE they contain Mormon characters in challenging, interesting circumstances. And I know it sounds crass, but the focus on Utah during the 2002 Olympics will also help pique interest in the Mormon culture and mind-set. I'm certainly going to try to exploit these trends in my own novel marketing efforts (if I meet my goal to finish a decent novel by the end of this year). I strongly feel that Mormonism could become a flavor of the decade in national publishing, just like Jewish, Catholic, Asian, Southern, and other ethnic/cultural groups have been. As long as we can continue to veer away from the idea that plagued early Mormon novels: "We are better than you." In all the genres you mentioned, the books that come out of those that speak to the world are those with the message, "Even though I am Jewish, Catholic, Asian, or Southern, I am just like you." -- Thom Duncan Read the further adventures of Moroni Smith, the LDS Indiana Jones! The long-awaited second episode in the Moroni Smith LDS adventure series, _Moroni Smith: In Search of the Gold Plates_ is now available as an e-book at the Zion's Fiction web page: http://www.zfiction.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Linda Adams Subject: Re: [AML] BLUTH/GOLDMAN, _Titan A.E._ Date: 21 Jun 2000 13:10:10 -0500 At 12:44 AM 6/21/00, you wrote: >Apparently they forgot to screen it for nudity. The male character has >full rear nudity in one scene. The female character _could_ have had >full nudity in another scene, but they discreetly avoided it. This is an >interesting phenomenon to me. Why is male nudity often considered >humorous--and semi-harmless--while female nudity is generally considered >scandalous? I disagree. Full frontal *male* nudity is a huge film rating no-no (I believe it warrants NC-17? if there's any camera time spent on it at all? and few commercial films really want that rating.) But full frontal female nudity only merits an "R" rating. There is a definite double standard in the industry. Apparently rear nudity for either sex rates a PG-13 (or is it even PG now? I think I've seen such on TV). But fully bare female breasts also only rate PG-13. And as long as you cover certain things up just a little bit, for either sex (re: Austin Powers), especially if it's supposed to be *funny,* that's only PG-13 too. Not that I want to see films with full frontal nudity anyway, of either sex. I'm just making a point that the rating system, again, is unfair and seems traditionally more biased toward exploiting women's bodies, not the other way around. (Then again, I didn't see "The Full Monty"--anyone know if I'm wrong in my assessment here? Was it rated R or NC-17? Did it really contain frontal male nudity? Anyone know the actual rating standards they go by when rating nudity?) Or does it have to do with the situation presented at all? I.E., a man "mooning" someone or skinny dipping or something rates a lower rating than a similarly clad (unclad?) woman in a sexual situation? In Titan A.E., was the nudity related to sexual circumstances at all for either character? Maybe women don't have as much of a reputation for "mooning" in general as men do. Maybe that's why male nudity can be perceived as more "humorous?" Linda Adams adamszoo@sprintmail.com http://members.xoom.com/adamszoo http://home.sprintmail.com/~adamszoo - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Kent Larsen Subject: Re: [AML] LDS Church Magazines Are Going Online (fwd) Date: 21 Jun 2000 12:42:18 -0400 I'm not sure exactly where Larry got his version of my article to Mormon News (its been passed around without the required footers giving attribution), but I think it gives a slightly wrong impression. The problem is that Elder Packer's announcement in the letter is somewhat ambiguous, and might be read to mean that only the curriculum support materials will be on line. My news item was also based on confirmations I've received over the past several months from several people that were involved in the process. But until I got a copy of this letter, I was unable to get a strong enough confirmation to run it. Kent Here is the full article from Mormon News: From Mormon-News: See footer for instructions on joining and leaving this list. Do you have an opinion on this news item? Send it to letters.to.editor@MormonsToday.com SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH -- According a letter to local leaders from Elder Boyd K. Packer of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, the LDS Church's magazines will be available on-line on the Church's Internet site www.lds.org starting in September. Elder Packer's letter indicated that the content of the magazines will be available online 90 days following publication. The letter confirms reports received by Mormon News that the Church was preparing to put the magazines on-line. Some reports indicated that the Church was preparing the text of the magazines for publication in a CD-ROM, but more recent reports said that the magazines would be put on line. The letter from Elder Packer talks about the Church's curriculum support materials, which will be published only in the Church magazines starting in September. He encourages leaders to make sure that teachers have access to the Church magazines so that these materials are available to them. >From Mormon-News: Mormon News and Events Forwarding is permitted as long as this footer is included Mormon News items may not be posted to the World Wide Web sites without permission. Please link to our pages instead. For more information see http://www.MormonsToday.com/ Send join and remove commands to: majordomo@MormonsToday.com Put appropriate commands in body of the message: To join: subscribe mormon-news To leave: unsubscribe mormon-news To join digest: subscribe mormon-news-digest - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Bill Willson" Subject: Re: [AML] Race and Culture in LDS Lit. Date: 21 Jun 2000 12:10:37 -0600 Hi All I responded to this thread once and my post was rejected, because it didn't relate to literature. I was planing to continue to lurk and not comment but this post by Jason roused my interest. Jason wrote: > I've just realized is happening here. When we talk about literature >that "deals with race and culture," somehow we automatically >assume that that means all things NOT WHITE. I'm guilty of this >myself, in the statement you quote, and in my initial response (trying >to come up with examples). Originally, I WAS going to go to my >books, to try to come up with more "evidence"--but then it hit me: the >fact is, Mormon literature is ENTIRELY about race and culture--those >of us who are white just fail to recognize ourselves as a "race." >Because we're the "dominant" group, the "majority," we fail to see >ourselves as "raced" or "racialized," and we reserve that distinction >for those who are different from us. This is in part a cause, in part a >symptom, of racism, >I think (the perception of race as something >other than white). I think the problem with this statement: >Because we're the "dominant" group, the "majority," we fail to see >ourselves as "raced" or "racialized," lies in the fact that a lot of Mormon writers never get out of the cocoon called Utah and see the real world. I was born and raised in the "Mission Field." I worked for a number of years in San Francisco. While I was working there I rode on public transit. during this time there was a lot of affirmative action going on in the work place which I resented. I have never considered myself a racist, but one day as I was being jostled about by the crowd of stressed out commuters, trying to get to work on time, I looked around me an d thought it would be interesting to write an article or a story about "The White Anglo Saxon Mormon Male Minority in the Work Place." As I looked at all the ethnicity and diversity around me; bikers, dikers, gay, feminists, Asian, black, middle eastern, jew, gentile, protestant, catholic, etc. etc.; I realized I was in the minority. First of all white men were in a sub group minority, then there were Mormon men, we definitely were about the scarcest group there. I only knew of two or three others in my particular company, and they were spread out all over the state. Our culture was definitely not represented in the world I worked in. Here in Utah white people may be the dominant culture, and the LDS culture may be the dominant culture, but this is true only in this very small part of the world. As a whole, in the world we live in, whites are a minority, and Christians are a minority, and Protestants are a minority, and of the Christians, Mormons are definitely a minority, if they are even considered by other Christians as Christian. This is what we need to focus our writing on. We need to hold this error up to the light and let the world see where we have been and where we are and where we are going. But most important of all we need to let the world know and understand that we know all humanity is cut from one bolt of cloth, and sewn together by one tailor. Regards, Bill Willson Keep your hand moving and your muse alive. bwillson@mtwest.net - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Clark Goble" Subject: RE: [AML] Race and Culture in LDS Lit. Date: 21 Jun 2000 12:02:29 -0600 ___ Jason ___ | When we talk about literature that "deals with race and culture," | somehow we automatically assume that that means all things NOT | WHITE. ___ I don't necessarily think that is true. Even within white culture there is a lot of extreme variety. And the culture of a black American is closer to white America than it is to blacks living in Africa. Within white culture (oh how I hate these inevitable references to color) we have poor whites living in trailer homes in the rural south, rich whites living in $10,000 a month apartments in New York City, and so forth. There is a lot of variety. I think I probably could write about the life of either of those types of whites about as well as I could a black American growing up in suburbia. There have been some interesting novels dealing with culture in Mormonism. My favorite is Card's _Folk of the Fringe_. Of course the genre (SF) makes that task much easier. Still he does an interesting job of portraying the culture clash between Mormons and non-Mormons, albeit in an unrealistic setting. He addresses black LDS culture in that collection as well, albeit in passing with minor characters. His suggestion is that there was a large gap. I'm not sure that is fair, based upon my mission in the south. But it was an interesting play off the racist issue as blacks started significantly joining the church in the late 80's. Anyway, I think the culture and race issue really is just saying, "it's hard to write what you don't understand." Race is one of those things I think ought to be assigned to the waste heap myself. Race has become too complex as intermarriages increase. Likewise race is usually reduced to a stereotype about culture - a stereotype that is usually wrong. Still it is often an easy shorthand for culture, even if it is often misleading. (Most stereotypes make nice short hands - witness the insistence of some on the liahona / iron rod stereotype) -- Clark Goble --- d.c.g@att.net ----------------------------------- - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Richard R. Hopkins" Subject: Re: [AML] Multiple POV (Linking back into LDS Pulitzer) Date: 21 Jun 2000 12:35:47 -0600 -----Original Message----- >In literary history, as soon as someone said the novel is "x," it changed. >What Defoe and Swift and Rabelais wrote is different than what Crane, >Dickens, and Melville wrote. > >One of the thing that stifles LDS literature is its insistance upon being >realistic literature. Most of the LDS writing I have read pretends that the >20th century hasn't even taken place. I believe I see what Todd is getting at here, and I need to clarify what I said in my earlier post. I was speaking of technical rules by which we exercise our craft. I think Todd is speaking of rules that relate or impact in some way on our creativity. I agree with him that we must be very cautious about letting societal or other rules impact on our creativity. I think we still need to look objectively at our creation afterward and ask if it is what we wanted. For example, I remember Lukas Foss at UCLA telling us about a composition student of his who came in with a piece for him to look at. The whole thing was discordant and last chord was one of those ghastly modernist off-key things. Lukas looked carefully at the music and made an awful noise on the piano, then asked the student if that was really the way he wanted to end the piece. The student said, "Yes, absolutely." To which Lukas replied, "Well, you'd better fix it then, because I didn't play the chord at all like you wrote it." Richard Hopkins - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Richard R. Hopkins" Subject: Re: [AML] BLUTH/GOLDMAN, _Titan A.E._ Date: 21 Jun 2000 13:07:20 -0600 I was curious to read in this article of the Utah origin and raising of Don Bluth. I'm curious if there is a different Don Bluth in the animation business than the one I grew up with in Santa Monica Stake, California. Don and Fred Bluth were great entertainers in our Stake and formed the Bluth Bros. Theater there, in which my wife, the then Cherry (short for Cherilyn) Baker, and her cousin, the then Tamara Fowler, participated extensively. Don, who then did all the sets, went on to animation at Disney, I thought, and is the Don Bluth of current animation fame, but as far as I know, he was raised in So Cal, not Utah. Does anybody know what the deal is? Richard Hopkins - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Tony Markham Subject: Re: [AML] _The Real World_ Date: 21 Jun 2000 14:51:23 -0400 > A twenty-year old BYU co-ed from Wisconsin will be on MTV's THE REAL WORLD > this coming season. She is outspoken in her Mormonism, to the extent that > she responded to questions of homosexuality be saying that it disgusts her. A good time for me to come out of lurkdom. Introduction: One of the few people who can claim to have collaborated with both Barbara Hume and Neil LaBute. Ah, BYU in the early 80s! I now teach in a small, upstate New York college and bang away at a keyboard, er, write. My contribution to Mormon literature was a novel The Jaxon Files (Amazon and Borders.com) which did not win a Pulitzer. Because I teach film, the most recent discussion on R ratings very nearly drew me out, but you all said everything so well. Why offer redundancies? One of the attractions to film and MTV for a working writer is to discover the kinds of images that exert a draw on the public's mind's eye. I'm enough of a Jungian to call them archetypal images for our current crop of audience, and enough of an LDS to believe these powerful, recurrent images are memories of the pre-existence trying to break through and find meaning. The Mormon girl on the Real World is a focus for both the editors and the rest of her housemates. She exerts a magnetism, a fascination for them. That in itself is fascinating. My favorite moment from the opening episode is actually a preview from a forthcoming episode. She has called her parents in show #1 and freaked them out by claiming to have a roommate named Matt. Ha-ha, big joke. But the preview reveals every bad joke to have its consequences. She is tearfully confronting her papa who has flown down from Milwaukee in order to drag her out of this den of iniquity. He (probably) unintentionally quotes Darth Vader during this hegemonic power play: Pop: I am you father! Princess: But it's MY Life! Reality programming, who can dream up this stuff? Tony Markham - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Thom Duncan Subject: Re: [AML] BLUTH/GOLDMAN, _Titan A.E._ Date: 21 Jun 2000 13:43:42 -0600 Linda Adams wrote: > > At 12:44 AM 6/21/00, you wrote: > >Apparently they forgot to screen it for nudity. The male character has > >full rear nudity in one scene. The female character _could_ have had > >full nudity in another scene, but they discreetly avoided it. This is an > >interesting phenomenon to me. Why is male nudity often considered > >humorous--and semi-harmless--while female nudity is generally considered > >scandalous? > > I disagree. Full frontal *male* nudity is a huge film rating no-no (I > believe it warrants NC-17? > if there's any camera time spent on it at all? No. R. > Not that I want to see films with full frontal nudity anyway, of either > sex. I'm just making a point that the rating system, again, is unfair and > seems traditionally more biased toward exploiting women's bodies, not the > other way around. (Then again, I didn't see "The Full Monty"--anyone know > if I'm wrong in my assessment here? Was it rated R or NC-17? Did it really > contain frontal male nudity? Anyone know the actual rating standards they > go by when rating nudity?) No frontal nudity in "Monty." I forget the rating, but it was definitely not NC-17. NC-17 is reserved for films of explicit sexual scenes, not just nudity per se. -- Thom Duncan Read the further adventures of Moroni Smith, the LDS Indiana Jones! The long-awaited second episode in the Moroni Smith LDS adventure series, _Moroni Smith: In Search of the Gold Plates_ is now available as an e-book at the Zion's Fiction web page: http://www.zfiction.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Marilyn Brown Subject: Re: [AML] TARR, _The Gathering Storm_ (Review) Date: 21 Jun 2000 14:08:25 I appreciated Jeff Needle's careful review of THE GATHERING STORM. Just a question which seems related--has anyone in our group taken up the LEFT BEHIND series whose #7 book is now first on the New York Times bestseller list? It's supposed to be about prophecy. Maybe we've discussed it alread= y when I wasn't here? Anyway, if you do know about it, could you encapsuliz= e it and give your opinion for me? Jerry Jenkins and LaHey (sp?) are the authors. Thanks, if anybody knows. Marilyn Brown - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Jason Steed" Subject: Re: [AML] _The Real World_ Date: 21 Jun 2000 13:14:03 PDT I admit I find this distressing. Of course a Mormon would draw ratings and viewers, for the reasons you mention (natural conflicts, etc). I am most distressed by what I think will be the almost inevitable attempts to "break her," as you say--I can only hope and pray she's strong enough to withstand it all. What is secondarily distressing is the way she will undoubtedly be portrayed (as evidenced by the brief description of her). They're already setting her up as someone who, largely due to her Mormonism, doesn't know much (hasn't experienced much of the world), and is about to learn. As for how we present ourselves, and how we appear... In this girl's case, it really won't matter HOW she presents herself. TV, like all forms of media (including novels, plays, movies, magazines, etc.), is a strictly _mediated_ mode of communication. They'll make her look the way they want her to look, not the way she presents herself. This is the problem not just with non-Mormon accounts of Mormons/Mormonism, but also Mormon accounts as well. We can't escape the mediating nature of what we do. This is why we're so strongly encouraged in the scriptures to "find out for ourselves"--it is very difficult to rely on what is conveyed by someone else, whether Mormon or non-Mormon. My concern, then, about the way this girl will be portrayed on _The Real World_ is that many of the "readers" of the show (like many of the readers of Kushner, Orgasmo, etc.) will take the portrayal for what it claims to be: namely, "The Real World." Jason ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Eric D. Snider" Subject: Re:[AML] Movie Ratings Date: 21 Jun 2000 13:16:54 PDT >Nice piece of research. However one point reagrding PG & PG13 films is not >covered and I believe it should be mentioned. > >Any motion picture in the Science Fiction or Fantasy genre which would have >been >rated G is always rated PG by the industry. PG because it contains >scientific >material which could possibly be true, but is probably not. Likewise, a >Sci-Fi >or Fantasy film which includes mild violence will be rated PG13 instead of >PG >just because it is Sci-Fi or Fantasy. Example of that not being true: "Star Wars: Episode I -- The Phantom Menace" was a sci-fi/fantasy film that included mild violence that was rated PG. >One more little tidbit: A violent film that would have been rated PG13, >which >contains one or more "F---" words, is immediately reclassified as "R." > I guess it depends on your definition of "violent," but "Titanic" certainly had violence and death, had two F-words, and remained PG-13. You would know better than I would, since you were on the MPAA board at one point (how recently, out of curiosity?), but from an outsider's perspective, it seems like there are very few hard-and-fast rules that they follow. I'd be interested to know what, if any, set-in-stone rules they had when you served on the board, because I'd like to see if they always followed them. I suspect that whatever rigid guidelines they have, they disregard them fairly often, depending on the movie. Eric D. Snider ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: debbro@voyager.net Subject: Re: [AML] LDS Church Magazines Are Going Online (fwd) Date: 21 Jun 2000 15:54:36 -0400 What kind of curriculum support materials are they talking about? Is it going to cut down on the interesting material that is there now for the members who don't teach a class? I have a hard time reading the Ensign now all the way through. Debbie Brown - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Neal Kramer Subject: Re: [AML] (Andrew's Poll) Best LDS Novel of the 1990s Date: 21 Jun 2000 14:24:07 -0600 Todd Petersen wrote: >I'm sorry to sound disparaging or disheartening, but they're still saying, >for the most part, that they "don't publish novels because Mormons don't >read fiction." Of course, _The Work and the Glory_ and _The Children of the Promise_ belie such statements. Those books have mad Deseret and Bookcraft a nice chunk of change. > >Actually in conversations I had last summer with editors at Deseret and >Signature, the point came across that "Mormons who read fiction don't >generally like to read MORMON fiction." Also, Signature said that they're >putting a moratorium on fiction for a while because fiction always loses >money. > These people don't read exclusively Mormon fiction, but every Relief Society reading group out there reads one LDS book per year. The waiting lists at local libraries (in Utah) are sometimes hugely long. Signature faces a peculiarly difficult challenge. With the Utah stigma that they are an "anti" press, most LDS readers think what they publish will at least disparage their faith or might include distasteful sexuality, or something not up to their standards. >The people on this list are the exception which does not support the rule. The Yorgason brothers alone, who each publish at least one novel with Deseret every year, have published between them more twenty LDS novels. And no one on this list reads their books! :) Every holiday, Deseret Book advertises novels as gifts. They have a burgeoning fiction business. I could go into Deseret Book today and find thirty Mormon novels on the shelf. I'd find more mainstream American fiction. But that doesn't mean that Mormons don't like to read Mormon fiction. They just don't read it exclusively. Maybe all the gentiles are buying the Mormon fiction :) Neal Kramer - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Eric D. Snider" Subject: Re: [AML] BLUTH/GOLDMAN, _Titan A.E._ Date: 21 Jun 2000 13:23:34 PDT >>Apparently they forgot to screen it for nudity. The male character has >>full rear nudity in one scene. The female character _could_ have had >>full nudity in another scene, but they discreetly avoided it. This is an >>interesting phenomenon to me. Why is male nudity often considered >>humorous--and semi-harmless--while female nudity is generally considered >>scandalous? > >I disagree. Full frontal *male* nudity is a huge film rating no-no (I >believe it warrants NC-17? if there's any camera time spent on it at all? >and few commercial films really want that rating.) Not true. Several R-rated films have contained frontal male nudity, even dwelled on it for a few seconds, and remained R. Some examples include "Any Given Sunday," "Wilde," "Monty Python's Life of Brian," "The Crying Game." >Apparently rear nudity for either sex rates a PG-13 (or is it >even PG now? I think I've seen such on TV). Hide it in shadows, and keep it fleeting, and make it non-sexual, and you can get away with a PG, generally. At least that seems to be the way things generally go. It definitely seems to be the case that if the nudity is non-sexual, that helps it avoid the R rating. The nudity in "Titan A.E." is intended to be humorous and is definitely non-sexual (plus, it's just a cartoon, and not real). This makes sense to me: Most people are not as offended when the characters are just naked, as opposed to when they're naked because they're having sex. Note the extended rear male nudity scenes in "Waking Ned Divine" -- a PG-rated movie, even though you saw those old men's naked butts for a looooong time. Why? Not sexual, not titillating, and played for laughs. Eric D. Snider ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Margaret Young Subject: Re: [AML] Race and Culture in LDS Lit. Date: 21 Jun 2000 14:41:36 -0600 If we're limited to fiction, then the list gets smaller than if it could include biographies and autobiographies. Pretty much everything Bishop Michael Fillerup writes deals--beautifully--with Native Americans (Navajos). Marilyn Brown's _Earthkeepers_ was mentioned. Virginia Sorensen had a story about a black man who everyone assumed (falsely) was costumed as a ghost at a Halloween party--but I forget the title. A bunch of my stories deal with African Americans and Mayan Indians. There is, clearly, quite a LACK of diversity in our fiction though, isn't there. Michael Fillerup and I once chatted about doing a collection of stories (various authors) from many cultures--but I suspect he's as busy as I am, so we haven't pursued that at all. Maybe someone else should catch that ball and run with it. - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "J. Scott Bronson" Subject: Re: [AML] BLUTH/GOLDMAN, _Titan A.E._ Date: 21 Jun 2000 16:42:19 -0600 Someone said: > > Why is male nudity often considered humorous--and > > semi-harmless--while female nudity is generally > > considered scandalous? To which Linda Adams replied: > I disagree. Full frontal *male* nudity is a huge film rating no-no > (I believe it warrants NC-17? if there's any camera time spent on > it at all? And now I have something to say: It all depends. Despite any statements by some that this particular image or that particular word garners an automatic G, or PG or PG13 or so on, it just ain't true. A friend of mine was on the MPAA ratings board before she moved to Texas and the theory behind the process is that every film is judged independantly of every other film. From what I can tell in watching movies, this idea bears out for the most part. How else do you explain the fact that "Basic Instinct" and "Last of the Mohicans" both have an R rating? "Basic Instinct" begins with a graphic sex scene; a nude woman rather aggressively engaged with a man who remains unseen. After a few minutes of this the woman begins stabbing the man with an ice pick and blood splashes onto her naked breasts. And that's just the beginning. This movie has several sex scenes that pretty much all give one the idea that sex is a violent act. Lots of swearing and killing and drinking and drug use going on throughout. On the other hand, "Last of the Mohicans" has no swearing, no sex (one kiss), no nudity at all, no drug abuse including drinking, but it does have violence. "Basic Instinct" has not one single positive image regarding family or religion, while "Last of the Mohicans" has several. Here's where we get into the sticky nature of this whole issue. The ratings are largely a product of the times. Currently, the ratings are hard on violence and easy on sex. And context has a lot to do with it too. My wife and I watched "The Legend of Sleepy Hollow" the other night. Rated R for violence. Again, a movie with no, or very little sex, no nudity, no swearing, but plenty of violence; almost cartoonish in nature, but in keeping with the hysterical nature of a horror story. I told my wife that I saw just the same sort of things in GP rated movies (that tells you how old I am) like "Lawman" and "House of Dark Shadows" and "Night of the Living Dead" and so on back in the early seventies. "THX 1138" had a few occasions of female frontal nudity. There was some in "Valdez is Coming" and other movies as well. All rated GP. Nothing is "automatic." Speaking of context, I won't let my kids watch the "Home Alone" movies because the violence is mishandled in my opinion. This came home dramatically when I was explaining to my home teacher why I would let my ten-year-old watch "Last of the Mohicans" but not "Home Alone." I asked my son what happens when someone gets shot with an arrow, or beaten with an ax. Almost reverently he said, "They die." And what happens when someone gets a bucket of bricks dumped on his head? He giggled and said, "I don't know, but it's funny." He had seen "Home Alone" at a neighbor's house. What about male nudity? Again, it depends on the context. "A Room With a View" has a scene with three men cavorting nude in and around a pond which includes full frontal nudity. Rated PG-13. Yes, but that wasn't in a sexual context. Correct. Showing a nude man in a sexual context would probably require seeing him in a state of arousal and that's an automatic X or NC-17 ... unless it's in sillouette ("Broadcast News") or disembodied (The glow-in-the-dark profilactic fight scene in that silly John Ritter film that I can't remember the title of) and it must be funny. Laughing at sex can bring the rating down in some cases it seems. I get the feeling, too, that subject matter -- regardless of how intelligently or gently it is dealt with -- can hike the rating in some cases. Just some things kids shouldn't talk about apparently. Intensity of storytelling can be a factor as well; "Conspiracy Theory" is a good example of that. No "F" words at all, not much swearing besides, no sex, no nudity, some violence. In particlar, there is a torture scene that's pretty intense though almost completely bloodless. Getting back to the positive images of family or religion. That simply is not a factor in rating a film. It all seems to be based on content in certain contexts. The message of the movie is not a consideration. If it were, "The Little Mermaid" should be rated R. J. Scott Bronson--The Scotted Line "World peace begins in my home" We are not the acolytes of an abstruse god. We are here to entertain--Keith Lockhart - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Thom Duncan" Subject: RE: [AML] BLUTH/GOLDMAN, _Titan A.E._ Date: 21 Jun 2000 16:47:21 -0600 > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-aml-list@lists.xmission.com > [mailto:owner-aml-list@lists.xmission.com]On Behalf Of Richard R. > Hopkins > Sent: Wednesday, June 21, 2000 1:07 PM > To: aml-list@lists.xmission.com > Subject: Re: [AML] BLUTH/GOLDMAN, _Titan A.E._ > > > I was curious to read in this article of the Utah origin and > raising of Don > Bluth. I'm curious if there is a different Don Bluth in the animation > business than the one I grew up with in Santa Monica Stake, > California. Don > and Fred Bluth were great entertainers in our Stake and formed the Bluth > Bros. Theater there, in which my wife, the then Cherry (short for > Cherilyn) > Baker, and her cousin, the then Tamara Fowler, participated extensively. > Don, who then did all the sets, went on to animation at Disney, I thought, > and is the Don Bluth of current animation fame, but as far as I > know, he was > raised in So Cal, not Utah. Does anybody know what the deal is? > > Richard Hopkins It's the same guy. I knew of him while living in So. Cal in the 60's and 70's. I was in the Torrance Stake, BTW, and we always thought the dances at the Santa Monica Stake were better than ours. Thom - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jacob Proffitt Subject: Re: [AML] BLUTH/GOLDMAN, _Titan A.E._ Date: 21 Jun 2000 16:52:53 -0600 On Wed, 21 Jun 2000 13:43:42 -0600, Thom Duncan wrote: >> I disagree. Full frontal *male* nudity is a huge film rating no-no (I >> believe it warrants NC-17?=20 >> if there's any camera time spent on it at all? > >No. R.=20 > >> Not that I want to see films with full frontal nudity anyway, of = either >> sex. I'm just making a point that the rating system, again, is unfair = and >> seems traditionally more biased toward exploiting women's bodies, not = the >> other way around. (Then again, I didn't see "The Full Monty"--anyone = know >> if I'm wrong in my assessment here? Was it rated R or NC-17? Did it = really >> contain frontal male nudity? Anyone know the actual rating standards = they >> go by when rating nudity?) > >No frontal nudity in "Monty." I forget the rating, but it was >definitely not NC-17. > >NC-17 is reserved for films of explicit sexual scenes, not just nudity >per se. ANY frontal male nudity is an automatic NC-17. This became a huge issue when Bruce Willis wanted to do a scene in a recent movie (I wish I could remember which one) where he has a brief frontal shot. His point was = that his female costar had a full frontal nudity scene that *was* sexual in nature, but he had a brief flash that wasn't even sexual, yet they had to cut *his* scene in order to get the R. They may make exceptions for = artsy stuff (Didn't "A Room with a View" have an R rating and show a skinny dipping scene?) but the issue with Bruce was recent and hit Entertainment Weekly. Count on Bruce Willis to make a scene about it (pun intended, = with apologies). Jacob [Proffitt] - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Thom Duncan" Subject: RE: [AML] Editing Ethics Date: 21 Jun 2000 16:56:09 -0600 > Ok, true. Most writers accept suggestions and then take credit > for them. But > I think the spirit of this relationship (between the suggestion giver and > the suggestion taker) is such that this is ok--the suggestions > are _meant_ > to be taken (or not taken), and usually the giver doesn't expect > credit--though often there is some acknowledement made to those who help > with a piece (especially if it's a book, where there is space for an > acknowledgements page). > > What you're suggesting, though, Thom, is very disturbing to me. You're > flaunting a sense of dishonesty (which I'm not sure is intended--I don't > know you well enough). You don't seem to give any nod to the > notion that one > must give credit where credit is due; if the credit is good, you > want it In the context of producing a play or screenplay, collaboration with others is always a part of it. Often suggestions are made to change a line here or there. It is not required under those circumstances to give everyone who made a suggestion credit. On the other hand, my composer, Mark Gelter, while writing the music, made some changes to lyrics. So much so that I give him credit by saying Book and Lyrics by Thom Duncan, Music and Additional Lyrics by Mark Steven Gelter. The one entire scene he wrote was not enough, we agreed, to warrant giving him co-book credits. > --if > not, you don't (in fact you'll fight against it). What kind of > priciple are > you promoting? When the show was first produced, back at BYU, my director didn't like the way the show ended with the abrupt death of Joseph Smith, no finale, nothing. So, without consulting me, he forced the issue of having Joseph dress in white, and come out in a reprise, as if everything was hunky-dory. I protested this, but he was the director and the implicit agreement between writer and director was that he had the final word, so my protestations fell on deaf ears. When I staged the show again, I removed that ending. > How would you feel about Isaiah taking credit for what he wrote, > because it > was good, without acknowledging God? Well, I personally believe that Isaiah was written by two different individuals generations apart, both known as Isaish, so I guess I don't a problem with that. In fact, it was quite common in biblical times for authors of books to pretend to be someone else to lend their book credence. For example, there is some indications that Moses didn't actually write the books attributed to him. Thom - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Richard R. Hopkins" Subject: Re: [AML] _The Real World_ Date: 21 Jun 2000 16:48:48 -0600 -----Original Message----- >I admit I find this distressing. Of course a Mormon would draw ratings and >viewers, for the reasons you mention (natural conflicts, etc). I am most >distressed by what I think will be the almost inevitable attempts to "break >her," as you say--I can only hope and pray she's strong enough to withstand >it all. Not to fear Jason. From what I've read, the living period is over and has been fully filmed and the girl has stated unequivocally that she was faithful to her LDS beliefs throughout that time. Richard Hopkins - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Edgar Snow (by way of Jonathan Langford ) Subject: [AML] (Curiouser & Curiouser) How I Became a Mormon Humor Apologist Date: 22 Jun 2000 13:24:26 -0500 [MOD: Herewith we welcome back to AML-Mag Ed Snow's Mormon humor column, which he informs me will be coming out on a roughly every-two-weeks basis. Selections from Ed's earlier column, Of Curious Workmanship, have been published in a volume from Signature Books. It is to laugh--quite heartily, I might add.] Ed CURIOUSER & CURIOUSER: MORMON MUSINGS "How I Became a Mormon Humor Apologist" by Edgar C. Snow, Jr. Six months into my mission I knew what I wanted to be when I grew up. Hugh Nibley. He knew everything, wrote with style, and through it all, bore a fervent testimony. I had learned that Brother Nibley read nearly every book in the Berkeley library, so upon returning to BYU after my mission, in order to imitate my hero, I decided to do the same, except on a more modest scale. I went to the "Mormon Studies" section of the BYU library and lifted every book on the shelves, took a couple of notes, and started writing. By the time I finished my junior year, I submitted what I thought to be a groundbreaking paper to F.A.R.M.S. favorably comparing Meroitic Egyptian hieroglyphs to the Anthon transcript (recently discovered by Mark Hoffmann). In those halcyon days, every morning as I rolled out of bed I repeated to myself, "Happy is the man who finds his life's work," a quote I had memorized from Nietsche I think, or Proust, or Plato, or maybe Elvis, I can't remember now, but I was happy indeed. Happy, that is, until F.A.R.M.S. rejected my paper. I was stunned. When I complained to my roommate about my misfortune, he patted me on the shoulder and, to consol me said, "Ed, let's face it. You know a mere smattering of ancient history, even less about ancient languages, and you're not too smart. You're an English major, for crying out loud! No one is ever going to take you seriously. Get over it and go to law school." So I took his advice. During law school at the University of Tennessee, I managed to hang on to my dream to defend the faith by magnifying my church callings. I taught the 12-13 year old lessons during Sunday school, an experience in self-defense at any rate, and the elder's quorum lessons, a position akin to that of referee. And thanks to a kindly Institute Director, Bob Cloward, I was allowed, in spite of my sophomoric antics and outbursts, to teach at the LDS Institute on campus. But the urge to write something profound like Nibley and make an enduring contribution, not just to teach, itched inside. And the more I scratched, the more it itched. I decided to change genres after discovering a poetic vein in my wrists, attributable no doubt to my relation to Eliza R. Snow (our lines cross a generation before Adam). I let some blood flow into some very bad, moody Mormon poetry. After law school, I continued to write poetry as a young practicing attorney, finding that the "WHEREAS" clauses I wrote in contracts for bank clients actually helped my style for a while, made it more precise, more classical, or at least more Latinate. With my brow knotted as I brooded in verse at wee hours of the night, I felt very ... significant, until I read one day that more people actually write poetry than read it. For a time my cheeks burned with betrayal as I suffered like Job. My testimony was shaken. Why would an all powerful, all loving God make me suffer by instilling in me an overwhelming desire to write something that no one will ever read, not even my mother willingly? So then I turned to write short stories. I discovered I could write about people who, incidentally, were poets and apologists, combining my previous interests, and that way I could still write the poetry and theology I had struggled to write earlier, just under the pseudonym of one of my characters. And since the short story market was bigger than the poetry market, this seemed like the ideal vehicle. I was soon practicing law in Baltimore, married, and teaching gospel doctrine. I had even sent some stories, poetry, and stories with poetry in them, to independent Mormon journals, but preparing myself for those inevitable rejection letters that writing books warn you about, you know, with titles like: Write and Publish Your Own Novel in 10 Days, Or Your Money Back; Drawing On the Author Inside You and Plagarizing His Work; Using Verbs and Nouns to Make Your Writing Live; and Write Romance Novels While You Sleep. If I could only publish a few stories, I thought, it might justify the issuance of a short story collection and, before I knew it, I'd be on my way toward a best-selling novel in the yet to be recognized genre of Mormon apologist/poet action/mystery/thriller. Thankful that a stupor of thought was better than no thought at all, I continued writing away. At the same time, I began writing a personal essay column many of you will remember called "Of Curious Workmanship" for AML-List, thinking of my writing some non-fiction as a kind of cross-training exercise. My column consisted of ruminations over "outakes" from my gospel doctrine class at church. It just so happened that as I was researching faith-promoting materials for my class on the Doctrine and Covenants I'd consistently dig up some really curious materials that were hard to fit into my lessons, but which begged for publication and commentary. Here's an example of what I found, an item I included in my essay "The Gift of Tongues," which also features an anecdote about a newly-baptized sister on my mission serving me, appropriately, beef tongue, for dinner. I came across this odd item embedded in a conference report in the Times and Seasons (vol. 4, p. 70), while searching for materials for my upcoming New Testament class on the Pentecost portion of Acts: "Elder Snow then addressed the meeting, and stated the method they had adopted in the London conference of raising funds for the temple, which was by holding tea meetings, at which times anyone wishing to appropriate anything to this purpose had the opportunity. Elder S[now] concluded his address by singing beautifully in tongues." Fascinating, isn't it? When was the last time you watched a General Conference speaker, his gaze shifting between the teleprompters, sing in tongues after he promoted tea parties as fundraisers? Just as Jack Welch himself at F.A.R.M.S. had found undiscovered chiastic Hebrew poetry hidden in the pages of the Book of Mormon, I felt I had found undiscovered veins of humor hidden in the pages of Mormon history, scripture and practice. I soon fancied myself a kind of Mormon humor archaeologist. My columns became defenses--as the Greeks called them "apologies"--for the existence of Mormon humor. I was now taking seriously the fact that no one took me seriously. I was turning my weakness into my strength! Following in the footsteps of earlier Mormon humor pioneers, I had finally found my life's work--to convince an unbelieving world that there was indeed something funny about Mormonism. I forgot about poetry, short stories or novels, and finally convinced Signature Books to gamble on a collection of my essays entitled Of Curious Workmanship: Musings on Things Mormon. My goal is to sell enough copies of my book to cover my tithing expenses. Don't laugh; it's entirely possible, if I can just get my income down to about $5,000 a year. And now, as if in confirmation of my new-found calling of Mormon Humor Apologist, Elder Faust up and writes a First Presidency Message titled "The Need for Balance in Our Lives," a message mainly about humor (Ensign, March 2000). Now you have to promise not to tell anyone, but I have heard from my secret source in Salt Lake City this article was written in order to prepare the church for two confidential forthcoming developments: (i) the establishment of the Strengthening the Members' Sense of Humor Committee, and (ii) the publication of a Mormon Humor Resource Manual. The Strengthening the Members' Sense of Humor Committee, among other things, will be responsible for keeping files on members without a sense of humor and reporting them to their Stake Presidents. One of the many blessings to be derived from the establishment of this Church Humor Committee is supposed to be the production of a manual for members that clearly sets forth the LDS doctrine of humor, a Mormon Humor Manual. The Humor Committee is entertaining the idea that a true sense of humor is perhaps nearly a gift of the Spirit, with some possessing the gift of laughter, others, the gift to make people laugh, although I fully expect the Humor Committee to reject the doctrines associated with the recent so-called "Toronto Blessing." The "Toronto Blessing" made the news a couple of years ago as a Christian "sacred laughter" movement. People would go to church--just for laughs, literally. In 1994, the Toronto Airport Vineyard Fellowship--I'm not making that name up--held some very unusual meetings in which the congregation was moved to laugh uncontrollably, as well as shake, rattle, roll, tremble, wail, cry, run in place, jump up and down, bark and buy Amway and other products from pyramid marketing companies. This was interpreted as a special dispensation of the Spirit, and is reminiscent of similar manifestations experienced by Mormons in the early Kirtland period and denounced by Joseph Smith. Now it's clear we're not supposed to act like that, but what I trust the Humor Committee will clarify for me is whether I'm allowed, morally speaking, to laugh at people who participate in these activities. The Humor Committee will also produce a video of wacky out-takes from church commercials, a kind of "Mormon Bloops, Bleeps and Blunders," that could be ordered, of course, from the Salt Lake distribution center. The Humor Committee might will also sponsor a "Mormonism's Funniest Family Home Evening Videos" on cable TV. The Humor Committee, through the issuance of the Mormon Humor Manual, will be promoting a lost doctrine previously taught by Brigham Young, and no doubt believed by President Hinckley, our own Prophet, Seer, Revelator, and (frequent) Humorist: "I sometimes think God must enjoy humor, and that he won't be strict in reckoning with a humorist" (The Essential Brigham Young, 241). Amen Brother Brigham, amen. And like Moses, I trust the Humor Committee will promote the following motto: "Would God that all the LORD's people were humorists, and that the LORD would put His sense of Humor in them." ===== My collection of humorous essays entitled _Of Curious Workmanship: Musings on Things Mormon_ has just been released and can be ordered from Signature Books at 1-800-356-5687, or from their website at http://www.signaturebooksinc.com/curious.htm or from Barnes & Noble at http://shop.barnesandnoble.com/booksearch/isbnInquiry.asp?userid=5SLFMY1TYD&mscssid=HJW5QQU1SUS12HE1001PQJ9XJ7F17G3C&srefer=&isbn=1560851368 __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send instant messages with Yahoo! Messenger. http://im.yahoo.com/ - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Clark Goble" Subject: RE: [AML] _The Real World_ Date: 21 Jun 2000 16:54:38 -0600 I loved reading Tony's thoughts on the recent _Real World_. I'm glad it drew you out of lurkerdom Tony. Let me off a few of my own thoughts - even though I've not watched the full half hour of the last episode. 1. She is annoying. I hated in the cast show how she jumped off the plane jumping up and down about how she got to meet Donny Osmond. 2. She *does* fit the BYU stereotypes pretty well. If that was what MTV was aiming for they succeeded remarkably well. 3. She probably will do the church good. She appears like someone who really follows her standards but is also very open, curious and 'real.' I think people will find that tolerance need not mean accepting all lifestyles and actions. Her encounter with the homosexual guy the last episode was a great example of that. He asks her what she thinks about him being gay and she basically says that her views of morality can't accept that. Then, after clearly feeling awkward, she says, 'but I love you.' But unlike most "love the sinner hate the sin" types of things it is obvious that she really means it. One more thing that a few might be interested in is the current _Road Rules_ also on MTV. _Road Rules_ is basically _Real World_ only with the people on a giant scavenger hunt. The current cast spends their first week or so around Provo. We actually met them at a club up in Park City around Sundance. Some of the cast hooked up with some girls from BYU they met at Gold's Gym. I don't know if that will make it into the show or not. But that should be interesting. My impression from talking with them was that they were all pretty nice people - much more normal than they come off on TV. I suspect it won't make it onto the show, but both my roommates were hitting on the cute girls on the show. We nearly all got invited to some party up there, but one of my roommates came on a tad too strong. But if they show them dancing up at Harry-O's in Park City you may see me in the background somewhere! Anyway MTV appeared to have been so interested in Mormons that both their reality shows this year feature Mormons in some way. I should add that from talking to them most of the _Road Rules_ cast *hated* Provo. So I'm not sure it'll be favorable. Of course I'm not too big a fan myself, so who am I to talk? -- Clark Goble --- d.c.g@att.net ----------------------------------- - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Thom Duncan Subject: Re: [AML] _The Real World_ Date: 21 Jun 2000 17:03:38 -0600 Jason Steed wrote: = > My concern, then, about the way this girl will be portrayed on _The Rea= l > World_ is that many of the "readers" of the show (like many of the read= ers > of Kushner, Orgasmo, etc.) will take the portrayal for what it claims t= o be: > namely, "The Real World." But it is the Real World, Jason. The standards by which Mormons live are about as different as they can be from the majority of the rest of the world. We are only five million in America, and maybe two million who actually attend every Sunday. We don't get to dictate what the world's standards are -- we just aren't that large yet. To what do you attribute this girl's naivet=E9 BUT Mormonism? This is no= t necessarily something we need be ashamed of by the way. Naivet=E9 is its= own reward. -- = Thom Duncan Read the further adventures of Moroni Smith, the LDS Indiana Jones! The long-awaited second episode in the Moroni Smith LDS adventure series, _Moroni Smith: In Search of the Gold Plates_ is now available as an e-book at the Zion's Fiction web page: = http://www.zfiction.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Thom Duncan Subject: Re: [AML] Movie Ratings Date: 21 Jun 2000 17:07:12 -0600 "Eric D. Snider" wrote: > > " certainly > had violence and death, had two F-words, and remained PG-13. > > You would know better than I would, since you were on the MPAA board at one > point (how recently, out of curiosity?), but from an outsider's perspective, > it seems like there are very few hard-and-fast rules that they follow. I'd > be interested to know what, if any, set-in-stone rules they had when you > served on the board, because I'd like to see if they always followed them. I > suspect that whatever rigid guidelines they have, they disregard them fairly > often, depending on the movie. The MPAA board changes every two years as I recall. I've also been told that the only requirements for membership is that one be a parent. No one hands out a list of acceptable terms, scenes, etc. A bunch of parents sit around in a room and decide among themselves what to rate a movie. Two years late, with another group in place, the ratings may differ. Not having ever been a member, I may be wrong, but this is what I seem to recall Jack Valenti (MPAA chairman) saying in an interview. -- Thom Duncan Read the further adventures of Moroni Smith, the LDS Indiana Jones! The long-awaited second episode in the Moroni Smith LDS adventure series, _Moroni Smith: In Search of the Gold Plates_ is now available as an e-book at the Zion's Fiction web page: http://www.zfiction.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Barbara@techvoice.com (Barbara R. Hume) Subject: [AML] _Left Behind_ series (was: TARR, _The Gathering Storm_) Date: 21 Jun 2000 17:23:28 -0700 >I appreciated Jeff Needle's careful review of THE GATHERING STORM. Just a >question which seems related--has anyone in our group taken up the LEFT >BEHIND series whose #7 book is now first on the New York Times bestseller >list? It's supposed to be about prophecy. Maybe we've discussed it already >when I wasn't here? Anyway, if you do know about it, could you encapsulize >it and give your opinion for me? I read the first book in that series, and I liked it a lot. It dealt with what happens after the good people are taken up into Heaven and the not-so-hot ones are left behind. I had sort of assumed that would happen right before the end--maybe the good guys would float up out of the way just as the defecatory matter strikes the rotating ventilation device--but these writers set up a more interesting scenario. Suddenly, certain people simply vanish. Their clothes, eyeglasses, or whatever are still there, but their physical beings are gone. Eventually the ones still around figure out that it's the good ones who are gone, and they tie it in to the Rapture, as the Protestant lingo has it. One of the main characters is an airline pilot who finds that people have vanished from his plane in mid-flight. When he lands, he learns that this has happened all over the world. His church-going, lovely wife and his sweet son are gone, but his worldly, cynical daughter who has followed his unbelieving path is still there. A group of people form whose mission is to figure out what to do next, and to find out if there's any way they can still clean up their act and be with their loved ones again. One is an assistant minister who says he was left behind because he was just going through the motions--not really helping anybody or loving anyone besides himself. I've been kind of looking for book two in the libraries, but haven't found it. The third one, I think, is about the rise of the anti-Christ. It's really interesting, although it feels funny not to have the center of religious activity take place in Salt Lake City! Why, they act as though the Mormons are just some splinter group! The noive of those guys! barbara hume - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Marianne Hales Harding" Subject: Re: [AML] BLUTH/GOLDMAN, _Titan A.E._ Date: 21 Jun 2000 18:53:48 MDT >I was curious to read in this article of the Utah origin and raising of Don >Bluth. I'm curious if there is a different Don Bluth in the animation >business than the one I grew up with in Santa Monica Stake, California. > Does anybody know what the deal is? Richard-- Don Bluth did indeed grow up in Utah. In Mapleton, to be exact. His mother still lives just up the street from my father's boyhood home. He and my father grew up together. I don't know anything of the Don Bluth from California, but the Don Bluth of _The Rats of Nym_(spelling?) fame is a Utah boy. Marianne Hales Harding ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Andrew Hall" Subject: [AML] (Andrew's Poll) Best Mormon Novel of the 90s Date: 22 Jun 2000 10:12:53 JST Okay, I think it is time to vote for the Best Mormon Novel of the 1990s (fanfare). Thanks for your nominations, I've added books by Rachael Nunes, David Gagon, Brent Yorgason, and a couple by Dave Wolverton that you have demanded. I agreed to open the nomination to books by never-have-been-members, but none were nominated. Remember that for convenience sake I am keeping serial novels together as one piece of fiction, rather than having you vote for one book in the series. This applies to Card's "Homecoming" series, Wolverton/Farland's "Runelords" and "Golden Queen" series, Hughes' "Children of the Promise" series, Nunes' "Ariana" series and Lund's "Work and the Glory" series. I am saving juvenile novels for a separate category later. Don't worry that you haven't read many of these, just vote for what you like. That makes it kind of a People's Choice award, a combination of mass popularity and literary skill. Also, feel free to comment on why you made the choice you did, and why you didn't choose others. One thing I like about the AML-list is that it gives me a chance to hear what books other people recommend. This is your chance to give a quick and dirty letter grade or whatever to what books you read over the decade. Or just send in a simple vote if you want. I'd love for everyone to participate. I already have recieved a couple of votes. Nominated books: Arnold, Marilyn. "Desert Song" Covenant, 1998. Barber, Phyllis. "And the Desert Shall Blossom" University of Utah, 1991. Barkdull, Larry. "The Mourning Dove" St. Martins. 1997. Brown, Marilyn. "Royal House" Covenant, 1994. -----, "Statehood" Aspen, 1995. Card, Orson Scott. "Xenocide," TOR, 1991. -----, "Lost Boys" HarperCollins, 1992. -----, "Homecoming Series (The Memory of Earth, etc.)" TOR,1992-1995. -----, "Pastwatch: The Redemption of Christopher Columbus" TOR, 1995. Evans, Richard Paul, "The Christmas Box" Simon and Schuster, 1995. Evenson, Brian. "Father of Lies" Four Walls Eight Windows, 1998. Fillerup, Michael. "Beyond the River" Signature, 1995. Fisher, Franklin. "Bones" University of Utah, 1990. Freeman, Judith, "A Desert of Pure Feeling" Vintage, 1996. Gagon, David. "Honorable Release" Signature, 1992. Gardner, Lynne. "Sapphires and Smugglers" Covenant, 1999. Hedley, Leslie B. "Twelve Sisters" Bookcraft, 1993. Hedges, Mack. "The Last Buckaroo" Gibbs Smith, 1995. Hughes, Dean. "Children of the Promise" series, Deseret, 1997-1999. Jolley, JoAnn "Secrets of the Heart" Covenant, 1998. Kidd, Kathryn. "Paradise Vue" Hatrack, 1990. Kirn, Walter. "Thumbsucker" Broadway, 1999. Lund, Gerald. "The Work and the Glory" series, Bookcraft, 1990-1998. Nunes, Rachel Ann. "Ariana" series. Covenant, 1996-1999. Palmer, Susan. "The Tabernacle Bar" Signature, 1995. Parkinson, Benson. "The MTC: Set Apart" Aspen, 1995. Peck, Lisa J. "Dangerous Memories" Ceder Fort, 1998. Perry, Anne. "Tathea" Shadow Mountain, 1999. -----, "The Sins of the Wolf" Fawcett Columbine, 1994. Peterson, Levi. "Aspen Maroney" Signature, 1996. Sillitoe, Linda. "Secrets Keep" Signature, 1995. Smith, Robert Farrell. "The Miracle of Forgetness" Aspen, 1997. Smurthwaite, Donald S. "Fine Old High Priests" Deseret, 1999. Stansfield, Anita. "First Love and Forever" Covenant, 1994. Taylor, Curtis. "The Invisible Saint" Stanley Curtis Publishing, 1990. Van Wagoner, Robert Hodgson. "Dancing Naked" Signature, 1999. Wolverton, Dave. "Serpent Catch" Bantam, 1991. -----, "Path of the Hero" Bantam, 1993. -----, "The Golden Queen" trilogy, TOR, 1994-1996. -----, (As David Farland) "The Runelords" series, St. Martins, 1998-1999. Yorgason, Brenton G. "Paradise Creek" Lighthouse Publishing, 1998. Young, Margaret Blair. "House Without Walls" Deseret, 1991. -----, "Salvador" Aspen, 1992. Andrew Hall ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Linda Adams Subject: Re: [AML] BLUTH/GOLDMAN, _Titan A.E._ Date: 21 Jun 2000 20:21:59 -0500 > >Full frontal *male* nudity is a huge film rating no-no (I > > believe it warrants NC-17? > > if there's any camera time spent on it at all? > >No. R. Okay, Thom, thanks for the clarification. So. If it is "only R," can anyone explain why there is so much less full male than female nudity on average, in films containing full nudity? Now I don't see a ton of these for myself. Someone else who does could enlighten me further. But of those I remember seeing (back in the days when I cared less what I watched), I remember seeing plenty of nude women here and there but never a fully nude man. (Hm, *maybe,* a split-second shot in _Romeo & Juliet?_) Therefore my argument remains: the industry is biased. Either they are exploiting women more than men or they are protecting men's privates with greater concern than women's. Maybe it's because fully nude male shots just won't sell to any audience... That's just plain not marketable, period? Linda Adams adamszoo@sprintmail.com http://members.xoom.com/adamszoo http://home.sprintmail.com/~adamszoo - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Jason Steed" Subject: Re: [AML] Race and Culture in LDS Lit. Date: 21 Jun 2000 20:02:23 PDT Bill Willson wrote: >I think the problem with this statement: > >Because we're the "dominant" group, the "majority," we fail to see > >ourselves as "raced" or "racialized," >lies in the fact that a lot of Mormon writers never get out of the cocoon >called Utah and see the real world. [large snip] According to the U.S. Census Bureau (and I freely admit that this cannot be trusted as wholly accurate), "whites"--or at least those who define themselves as such by checking the little boxes on the form--still make up around 80% of this country's population. I know this figure is surprising to a lot of people (because I've discussed the statistics with many people, and I've seen their reactions), but anyone can go to the cesus website to check it out. I think it's surprising because in most big cities (like San Fran, and Las Vegas, where I live currently), which tend to get media attention and to which the media caters, "whites" are not so 'dominant.' At any rate, these figures are what motivated me to use those words (dominant and majority)...I wasn't just referring to Utah... Jason ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Rob Pannoni Subject: Re: [AML] _The Real World_ Date: 21 Jun 2000 20:40:03 -0700 Jason Steed wrote: > > What is secondarily distressing is the way she will undoubtedly be portrayed > (as evidenced by the brief description of her). They're already setting her > up as someone who, largely due to her Mormonism, doesn't know much (hasn't > experienced much of the world), and is about to learn. As for how we present > ourselves, and how we appear... In this girl's case, it really won't matter > HOW she presents herself. TV, like all forms of media (including novels, > plays, movies, magazines, etc.), is a strictly _mediated_ mode of > communication. They'll make her look the way they want her to look, not the > way she presents herself. All media have a subjective point of view, but I think "reality programming" is somewhat less subject to misleading representations than other forms. The editors can only work with real events as they are captured on camera. I suppose if they had a vendetta, they could edit things in such a way to present a seriously skewed perspective, but I can't see why they would bother to do this. More likely, they will edit for human drama wherever it occurs naturally in the events they capture. In the half dozen or so past Real World episodes I've watched, the natural character and personality of the roomates seem to come through pretty strongly. I certainly had no sense that the editors were playing fast and loose with the depictions. There's no need to. Life is stranger and more interesting than fiction. But I find the concern about the show interesting for what it says about the mormon perspective on media. Public relations runs deep in our veins. We are concerned that MTV might reinforce the stereotype that mormon youth are naive and inexperienced. But for the most part, they are relatively naive and inexperienced. In a sense, that's the effect the church is designed to have on them. I have no reason to disbelieve MTV's description of the character. That description would fit a good proportion of the LDS youth I know. So unless you believe the description is atypical, the concerns about the show become "they might show what we're really like." Or at least what some of us are really like. Reality seems to be quite terrifying to us as a culture because we are so accustomed to carefully calculating and crafting our image. I know our hearts are in the right place and all. But sometimes our obsession with image can reach the absurd. My favorite example from my BYU days was "Roach-Gate," where a couple of BYU cafeteria workers revealed to the Daily Universe that the cafeteria had a roach problem that they had been unable to get their superiors to address. The result of the disclosure? The roaches stayed but the whistle blowers were sent packing. When you think about the number of mormons in America and the political clout and wealth of the church, it's amazing how infrequently mormons are depicted in the media. I think Bill Wilson was right to point out that we are a minority (although because of our affluence and political power, minority status doesn't effect us quite the same way as "traditional" minorities). I can't help but think having a real mormon on TV is much better for us than having fictional depictions, which are much more subject to being skewed. Even if the Real World character is not representative of the church membership as a whole, it will bring mormonism out of the cultural shadows. That seems like a good thing to me. -- Rob Pannoni Rapport Systems http://www.rapport-sys.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Jim and Laurel Brady" Subject: Re: [AML] Race and Culture in LDS Lit. Date: 21 Jun 2000 22:43:57 -0600 > Jason Steed wrote: > > > I would be very interested, though, if others on the list can come up with > > works that deal with races other than white--and I'm going right now to > > search my bookshelves... > > Marilyn Brown's marvelous _Earthkeepers_ deals, at length, with the Native > American culture. And my YA novel, _Circle Dance_, is set on the > Uintah-Ouray Indian Reservation. > > Sharlee Glenn My turn for a shameless plug--my first national novel (childrens middle grade) "Say You Are My Sister" deals with racial (African American) issues in 1944 Georgia. Laurel Brady - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Gae Lyn Henderson" Subject: RE: [AML] Iron Rod vs. Liahona Date: 21 Jun 2000 23:44:46 -0600 D. Michael Martindate wrote: "Never have I heard sung in church: "the iron rod is traditional Utah culture's interpretation of how to apply Gospel principles."]" Kind of has a nice ring to it though. Maybe you could moonlight as a lyricist. "If I am studying and searching and meditating in an effort to find the truth, and I am including the word of God in this process, why does that mean I am stepping away from the iron rod--for even a few minutes--just because my explorations don't jive with traditional Utah cultural pseudo-truths?" I think I agree. But help me out here. Define what you mean by "traditional Utah cultural pseudo-truths?" If we had a manual listing these deceptive teachings which have ingratiated theselves into our conciousness, maybe we could be an guard against them. How about that for a Mormon-lit writing project? The Utah Manual of Pseudo-Truth. Gae Lyn Henderson - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Larry Jackson Subject: [AML] LDS Church Magazines Are Going Online Date: 21 Jun 2000 23:42:20 EDT Kent Larsen: I'm not sure exactly where Larry got his version of my article to Mormon News (its been passed around without the required footers giving attribution), but I think it gives a slightly wrong impression. The problem is that Elder Packer's announcement in the letter is somewhat ambiguous, and might be read to mean that only the curriculum support materials will be on line. _______________ This one I didn't get from Mormon-News. I wrote my post based on reading the letter, of which I have a copy. I also sent the same post to another list with added information concerning the specific curriculum support materials that would be included in the magazines. (I didn't believe this list would be interested, but I have it, if anyone is.) As Listers are aware, I have been asked to forward Mormon- News posts that might be of interest to the AML list. Our moderator makes the actual determination as to whether they are posted. This is done giving full credit to MN and Kent's excellent work. In this case, I received the letter earlier, wrote the post, and sent it before I saw Kent's article. (I have since seen Kent's exact wording posted to other lists without credit and, I agree with Kent, inappropriately.) The letter itself is only four sentences long. It was interesting to see Kent's writeup. He, of course, had access to other information, whereas I only had the letter to read. Will the entire magazine be posted? I will let each of you determine if Elder Packer was ambiguous or not. My vote is that the whole magazine will be there. Following is an exact quote of the fourth and last sentence in the June 1st letter, capitalization, punctuation, internet address warts and all. In addition, the content of the magazines will be posted on the Church Internet site (LDS.ORG) ninety days after they are printed. Larry Jackson [MOD: Thanks to both Larry and Kent for keeping us in the loop on this. We're indebted to both of them for much of the Mormon arts-related information we're able to publish on AML-List.] - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Gae Lyn Henderson" Subject: RE: [AML] _The Real World_ Date: 22 Jun 2000 00:36:03 -0600 Todd Robert Petersen wrote: -she is a courageous and passionate woman on the verge of discovering her own authority. I like this description of a Mormon woman. Such is the obscured identity of my sisters that few even glimpse. Those outside of the culture who envision the persona of passive, obedient, bare-footed, pregnant, mindless, soul-starved women would be surprised. Not that I cast aspersions on the pregnant, nor associate that state with weakness. [I'm very proud of jogging several blocks (to the church and back) after I went into labor with my fifth child.] Mormon women, I suspect, have generally little conception of the impact that our voices could and should have on people outside our culture. For example, there is much to be learned from the intimacy, the bonding, between mother and infant. And Mormon women practice that relationship more than many other people do! That learning could teach those in "The Real World," some things about respect, sharing of space, mutuality. At one writer's workshop on ethnography, taught by Linda Brodky, I shared a short piece I had written about a childhood conflict between my desire to while away the summer days reading and my mother's imperative that her daughters work in the garden, picking peas, beans, raspberries, and then spend the remainder of the day canning and preserving those foods. To me it was the most ordinary of topics. Linda Brodky commented, though, on the possibilities such writing has to discuss traditional women's work, to figure out what value it has, to help women (and men) reconfigure roles. And so I suddenly saw my Utah upbringing as the richest of mines to explore. Moreover, I argue it is vital that we (LDS women) cultural-insiders also notice and value our precipitous discovery of authority. How easy it is to lapse into temporary weakness, to forget our strength. If many of us have been told we don't fit into the preconceived image that people hold of women in our culture, then remember: those images must be enriched, complicated, deepened. We can do it. Gae Lyn Henderson - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "D. Michael Martindale" Subject: Re: [AML] Movie Ratings Date: 22 Jun 2000 01:26:20 -0600 Dean FH Macy wrote: > For instance, how about "G" for Good clean > films suitable for children, > "VG" for Violent "G" films, such as cartoons, "NG" for films which expose some > male or female Nudity which is not sexually related, like in "Never Cry > Wolf" or > cartoons which show some animated skin, "SG" for the good, clean Sci-Fi/Fantasy > flicks, and so on (you get the picture). We could apply this system to the one > already in use as "VPG" or "NPG" adding "LPG" for Language and "VLPG" for > Violence & Language. The "R" rating can remain the same except I'd like to see > why a film is rated "R" in the letters; for instance, "XR" for seXually > oriented > content or "VR" for extreme Violence. This would eliminate the "PG13" genre > since all films not rated "G" should be under parental discretion anyway. Almost any other system would be better than the meaningless one we have today. This suggested one does seem a little overly complicated. I would just like an assessment of what's in the film, without any judgment on the part of the committee to tell me if I need to practice parental guidance. Seems to me I should be doing that for _every_ film anyway. What do people usually consider objectionable? Sex, nudity (not necessarily the same), violence, language. These are easily quantifiable categories. Other more subjective ones are adult themes: sexual mores, sexual orientation, issues of honesty, anti-religious messages, etc. These would be difficult to quantify, and an effort to codify them shouldn't be attempted. To learn about these, we should just find out about the film. This is easily done by coughing up the cost of a newspaper and reading the movie reviews. Especially in Utah, reviewers seem conscientious about reporting possibly objectionable material, even if they disagree with the judgment. I would like to see a rating system that simply states what quantifiable elements exist that are likely to be objectionable: S for sex, N for nudity, V for violence, L for language, with a 0-3 severity assessment. Perhaps an A for adult themes just to warn us that some subjective elements are present. This doesn't necessarily cut down on the size of the rating from Dean's suggestion, but it does cut down on the difficulty of translation for human beings, and leaves the actual judgment of appropriateness to individuals or their parents. When we see something like "Never Cry Wolf" rated S0 N1, we know that some nudity appears, but it's nonsexual. When we see S1 N1 for "Braveheart," we know that some nudity exists in a sexual context, but that it's mild (brief shot of breasts on a married couple's wedding night). When we see S3 N3 for "9 1/2 Weeks," the alarm bells will go off. The V and L (and possibly A) ratings would work comparably. This fulfills completely Joseph Smith's policy of educating people and letting them govern themselves. -- D. Michael Martindale dmichael@wwno.com ================================== Check out Worldsmiths, the new online LDS writers group, at http://www.wwno.com/worldsmiths Sponsored by Worlds Without Number http://www.wwno.com ================================== - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "D. Michael Martindale" Subject: Re: [AML] Where's our LDS Pulitzer prize winner? Date: 22 Jun 2000 01:38:28 -0600 Terry L Jeffress wrote: > Other stigmas interfere with generating widely-accepted literature. You can > still find many saints that frown on any reading expect for scripture and > church sponsored materials. Even if you don't hold that view, you have to > deal with those who do. And that presents another limit to producing good > works. I don't understand what you mean. I see no reason to deal with such an extreme opinion except to ignore it. How will these people affect LDS literature, other than just not being part of the market? -- D. Michael Martindale dmichael@wwno.com ================================== Check out Worldsmiths, the new online LDS writers group, at http://www.wwno.com/worldsmiths Sponsored by Worlds Without Number http://www.wwno.com ================================== - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "D. Michael Martindale" Subject: Re: [AML] Race and Culture in LDS Lit. Date: 22 Jun 2000 02:34:53 -0600 Jason Steed wrote: > A lot of people probably think I'm being very opinionated and aggressive in my > posts, because I'm tossing around this term and practically accusing > everyone of being "racist." Part of this is my lack of tact; part of it is > intentional. Racism is a STRONG word. It gets our attention. I contend that > if we own up to our _racism_, we'll realize its gravity, its seriousness, > and by being more conscientious of it in this way, we can better combat it. Swerving back into a literary connection... I disagree. "Tossing around" a strong term and applying it in a universal way only dilutes it into meaningless. Rather than getting our attention, we tune it out, because it has become noise. Also, using a strong term for mild or moderate behavior will cause no one to own up to the problem--it will cause them to see no connection between the strong term and what they are doing, and thereby concluding that they have no problem. I see this progression happening for racism, Nazism, sexual harrassment, and a number of other terms which are favorites of the political correctness movement. Among people for whom words are a vital part of their occupation and/or interest, the dilution and corruption of words ought to be of serious concern. -- D. Michael Martindale dmichael@wwno.com ================================== Check out Worldsmiths, the new online LDS writers group, at http://www.wwno.com/worldsmiths Sponsored by Worlds Without Number http://www.wwno.com ================================== - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jeff Needle Subject: [AML] _Left Behind_ series (was: TARR, _The Gathering Storm_) Date: 21 Jun 2000 20:43:18 -0700 I've actually read the first two books. I know some will disagree with me here, but the writing, I thought, was actually pretty good. The plot is pretty simple. The rapture occurs (true Christians are caught away and suddenly disappear. A pastor who is "Left Behind" figures out he needs to do something to get himself back on track and, together with several others, he forms a "Tribulation Force" (the name of the second book), where they're hot on the trail of the anti-Christ. If you view it all as imaginative fiction, it isn't bad. I can't agree with the theology. The immese popularity of the series has been a publishing phenomenon. I've given some thought to why this has sold so well, and I think it's because it represents a theological soap opera of the highest order. The story doesn't demand much of the reader, and there are enough interesting characters to keep the reader's attention. I'll look forward to other responses in this thread. - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Andrew Hall" Subject: [AML] (Andrew's Poll) Vote Date: 22 Jun 2000 20:17:11 JST My pick for Best Mormon Novel of the 90s is Margaret Blair Young's "House Without Walls" (Deseret, 1991). It was a tough choice, with another four books close on its tail. House Without Walls is about everything I could hope for in a novel. It has deep, interesting characters, an engrossing story, and a spirit of hope rising above unspeakable tragedy. Young doesn't give us easy answers or conclusions. She takes on big, big themes, but still is able to write a book that would not, I think, scare off the average Mormon reader. And I just plain old felt great (albeit sad) after reading it. It is a deeply religious book, and it has a great spirit about it. Harlow wrote a column last year about some of the symbolism in the book. I didn't catch most of it at the time, but now I'm even more impressed. While I might be reluctant to recommend some of the other great Mormon novels to certain people for one reason or another, I wouldn't be reluctant to recommend this book to anyone. Good for Deseret Book for publishing it. I'd like to see them do some more of this quality. Here are the four books that came close to winning my vote. I recommend them all heartily. 1. Margaret Young's "Salvador" (Aspen, 1992). It is really just as good, although its appeal is a bit narrower, since it contains several very quirky Mormon characters doing strange things. But, wow, what a great book. Also, the fact that both of Young's books are set largely in foreign cultures (Germany in HWW, El Salvador in Salvador) wins points with me. 2. I am a huge Orson Scott Card fan. The quantity and quality of material the man puts out is amazing. He has published about three novels every two years throughout the decade, and I've devoured them all. He can combine discussion of deep, difficult topics with exciting plot and fun dialogue as well as anyone I've read. "Pastwatch: The Redemption of Christopher Columbus" (TOR, 1995) was my favorite, with "Xenocide," (1991) and "Lost Boys" (1992) right behind. And most of the rest, too. Only "Treasure Box", "Homebody" and "Children of the Mind" were clunkers, and even they were good reads. They just didn't stay with me at all after I read them. 3. Kidd, Kathryn. "Paradise Vue" Hatrack, 1990. A hilarious book, and more. I wish she'd stop writing non-fiction, as she has done the last five years or so, and get back to writing fiction. 4. Fillerup, Michael. "Beyond the River" Signature, 1995. Complex writing, complex characters, interesting stuff. Things bog down a little in the middle, and I'm tired of reading books about writers who are having trouble writing. Still, a great book. Other books from the list I recommend: Parkinson, Benson. "The MTC: Set Apart" Aspen, 1995. B+ Great characters and characterization. The book structure forced the plot to go a little slow, but that will probably get better in the next book, since they are going "Into the Field". Palmer, Susan. "The Tabernacle Bar" Signature, 1995. B The reader starts out thinking that the book is going to be quite anti-Mormon, since the main protagonist is an ex-member who is sick of the Cache Valley environment in which she grew up. Some interesting characters show up, though, and it becomes more complex. A pretty good book. Barber, Phyllis. "And the Desert Shall Blossom" University of Utah, 1991. B- Very interesting book about a dirt poor Mormon family in the depression going to work on the Hoover Dam. In fell apart for me in the last quarter at about the same time the family fell apart. Smith, Robert Farrell. "The Miracle of Forgetness" Aspen, 1997. B- Funny, funny stuff. The prose and lack of depth keeps it a notch below Kidd. But it is a fun read. The same can be said about his other books. I also read Pam Blackwell's "Ephriam's Seed" and "Jacob's Cauldron" (1996, 1998), the first two in a moderately interesting series set in the Last Days. It is less didactic then the handful of other "last days" books I've looked at (but haven't bothered to read) by Mormon authors, and the alliance of Tibetan Buddhists and the Mormons was fun. But the characters aren't much more than cardboard, and the prose isn't too hot--it actually gave me a headache through parts of the first book. C Novel from the 1990s I plan on reading someday: Kirn, Walter. "Thumbsucker" Broadway, 1999. Brown, Marilyn. "Royal House" Covenant, 1994. (or something by her) Taylor, Curtis. "The Invisible Saint" Stanley Curtis Publishing, 1990. Van Wagoner, Robert Hodgson. "Dancing Naked" Signature, 1999. Wolverton, Dave. "Serpent Catch" Bantam, 1991. -----, (As David Farland) "The Runelords" series, St. Martins, 1998-1999. Peterson, Levi. "Aspen Maroney" Signature, 1996. Hughes, Dean. "Children of the Promise" series, Deseret, 1997-1999. Excuse my ramblings, Andrew Hall Nagareyama, Japan ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Todd Robert Petersen" Subject: Re: [AML] Movie Ratings Date: 22 Jun 2000 08:25:18 -0500 Eric Snider wrote: > I guess it depends on your definition of "violent," but "Titanic" certainly > had violence and death, had two F-words, and remained PG-13. And nudity . . . The problem with using the rating system as part of our LDS standard is that it is not a divine standard. The ratings board does not work by the Spirit. Certain ratings can be bought with power and infulence. The studio wanted teens to have access to TITANIC, so it got it's lower rating. The more I learn, the more I realize that the rating system is only a standard in the most vague and abstract way. With all of our concern with not adhering to the world's standards, one wonders why LDS people are so hung up on the R-rating or the rating system in general. The Pulitzer thread has had a number of people asking why we'd even care if outsiders judge our work. On the same note, why would we let outsiders dictate our standards? Is it possible that, as a group, we're too lazy to do the work of finding out if our material is "of good report" or worthy of our attention and want to be told what to do so we won't have to think for ourselves? Todd Robert Petersen - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Todd Robert Petersen" Subject: Re: [AML] _The Real World_ Date: 22 Jun 2000 08:35:00 -0500 > What is secondarily distressing is the way she will undoubtedly be portrayed > (as evidenced by the brief description of her). They're already setting her > up as someone who, largely due to her Mormonism, doesn't know much (hasn't > experienced much of the world), and is about to learn. As for how we present > ourselves, and how we appear... In this girl's case, it really won't matter > HOW she presents herself. TV, like all forms of media (including novels, > plays, movies, magazines, etc.), is a strictly _mediated_ mode of > communication. They'll make her look the way they want her to look, not the > way she presents herself. Out of fascination I went on the MTV message boards, and was pleasantly surprised. 80% of the chatter on these things showed a great deal of support for this girl. So there is at least some recognition that MTV and some viewier are trying to make her out as the bad gal. Moreover, they tend to think she's courageous for taking a stand. My interest in this follows Chris Bigelow's observation that this could fare well for all of us who want America to show some sort of interest in Mormonism so that we can write and get our work published on a national level. I've had enough of Mormons being the rubes and villains of other people's literatures (ORGAZMO, RIDERS OF THE PURPLE SAGE). In many cases it might take something like the work of feminists and African Americans who were tired of the same in the 60s and 70s. Todd Robert Petersen - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jonathan Langford Subject: [AML] Nudity (was: Movie Ratings) (compilation) Date: 22 Jun 2000 17:54:36 -0500 Folks, I'm going to try something Ben did from time to time, and compile several posts into one to cut down on list volume while letting everyone have his/her say. All of these are responses to Jacob Proffitt's comment regarding whether nudity earns a particular rating automatically. Jonathan Langford AML-List Moderator Jacob Proffitt wrote: > > ANY frontal male nudity is an automatic NC-17. Not true. _At Play in the Fields of the Lord_ has Tom Berringer cavorting naked. Rated R. The most recent _Lolita_ has Frank Langella showing his stuff. Rated R. -- Thom Duncan Read the further adventures of Moroni Smith, the LDS Indiana Jones! The long-awaited second episode in the Moroni Smith LDS adventure This is so not true. The classic example is one from the 70's in _Life of Brian_ when Brian opens the shutters on his window to see the mob outside. He isn't wearing anything and you see everything. Bruce Willis has very brief bit of nudity in _Pulp Fiction_. I never saw it but I believe he had frontal nudity in _The Color of Night_ as well. Kevin Bacon had frontal nudity in that pseudo-noir movie with Matt Dillon, Bill Murray and Neve Campbell. (Forget the name - kind of a forgettable movie) Once again I never saw it, but I believe _American Gigolo_ had Richard Gere with full frontal nudity, causing quite a stir at the time. The best example is the rather large closeup of the male anatomy in _Fight Club_, although it was done very quickly. I'm sure others can supply further examples. Generally though the genitalia can't be focused in on too much, unlike female breasts. It's just that the male anatomy is a little easier to see than the female equivalent. And I suspect that there is the ever present bias of attracting male viewers through sexual means. That means attractive women in various seductive poses. Hollywood has learned that such things are a cheap and easy way to attract viewers. (Despite the G, PG, R ratios people have mentioned - and of course even PG movies utilize a lot of sexuality) -- Clark Goble --- d.c.g@att.net ----------------------------------- Wrong, wrong, wrong. Give me a couple days, I can come up with a list of quite a few R-rated movies with frontal male nudity. Off the top of my head: "Any Given Sunday," "Life of Brian," "Room with a View," "Wild Things," "Boogie Nights" (yeah, it's fake, but it's supposed to be real), "The Piano," etc. Of those, only "Room" and "Piano" could be considered "artsy"; the others were quite mainstream. Nudity authority, Eric D. Snider ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com I'm afraid that this may be drifting away from how this topic relates to LDS literature, but the above is simply not true. I have seen very few NC-17 movies, but I have seen plenty of male frontal nudity. (Just what exactly does FULL frontal nudity with regard to males? I don't get that. Oh well.) Darvell [Hunt] - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Kristi Bell Subject: Re: [AML] Race and Culture in LDS Lit. Date: 22 Jun 2000 10:25:07 -0600 The Virginia Sorenson story is called "The Ghost" and actually the man is dressed as a member of the Klan. It is an interesting story that explores the themes of prejudice and marginalization through the eyes of a young girl. ----- Original Message ----- Sent: Wednesday, June 21, 2000 2:41 PM > Virginia Sorensen had a story about a black man > who everyone assumed (falsely) was costumed as a ghost at a Halloween party--but > I forget the title. - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Clark Goble" Subject: [AML] re: Movie Ratings Date: 22 Jun 2000 10:49:22 -0600 [MOD: Part snipped for the compilation post.] ___ Scott ___ | Currently, the ratings are hard on violence and easy on sex. ___ While I think Hollywood has become much more liberal with sexuality and has started to feel uncomfortable with violence, I really don't think the above is true. To see the difference just compare American ratings with European ratings. Most R rated movies have quite a bit of violence and the sexuality usually is still fairly restrained, with a few exceptions. Once again an example of this is the recent _American Psycho_ which was edited for sexuality, not violence, despite some rather atrocious acts in it. (Once again a film I've not seen and do not desire to see) As I said, I think the balance is changing somewhat, but overall I think Hollywood has been liberalizing both aspects. Recent films such as _American Pie_ or _Something About Mary_ have pushed the envelop for some previously taboo topics. But then _Starship Troopers_ glorified dismemberment in a rather graphic form that really pushed the edge of violence. (As the director's _Robocop_ had done before) The sad fact is that many filmmakers feel that to be cutting edge or to push the edge they must bring to light what was unspeakable in previous years. This means more and more things are presented graphically that were once at worst alluded to. An other fact is that Hollywood really doesn't judge based upon violence or sexuality. Movies that are controversial for their violence often have little real violence. (i.e. _Fight Club_ which technically was far less violent than _Star Wars_) It's just that in one the violence is realistic while in the other it isn't. (It's OK if you die politely and without a mess I guess) The same is true of sexuality. So long as the sex is alluded to and not explicitly shown, it's fine and can often get a PG rating. -- Clark Goble --- d.c.g@att.net ----------------------------------- - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Terry L Jeffress" Subject: [AML] JENKINS & LAHAYE, _Left Behind_ (was TARR, _The Gathering Storm_ ) Date: 22 Jun 2000 11:00:07 -0600 I have read the first of the Left Behind series. The story speculates what the world would be like if Christ raptures the saints, leaving the unconverted behind. (Personally, I've always had a problem with using _rapture_ as a verb, but the authors do it all the time in _Left Behind._) Lahaye and Jenkins do a good job turning a conversion story into a suspense novel. The novel does bog down in the middle as all the characters waiver in their faith and determination, but the last third rolls along at a fast pace. Although the authors freely admit that they hope to get the reader to make a commitment to Jesus, the text of Left Behind doesn't come off very preachy. I have the second book, _Tribulation Force,_ but haven't read it yet. You can read my full review of _Left Behind_ at http://www.xmission.com/~jeffress/reports/b/B200008.html -- Terry Jeffress - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Travis Manning" Subject: Re: [AML] Sexuality in LDS Lit Date: 22 Jun 2000 12:05:48 MDT >From: "Rex Goode" > >In this discussion, I've heard several times a qualifier about people >thinking that writing about sexuality is OK if the characters are married >and the scene affirms our beliefs in that way. > >What about scenes not between married people that affirms our beliefs by >showing the tragedy of promiscuity? It's been months since I've paid attention to this list, but I'm cleaning out my stuffed mailbox before Hotmail cleans it out for me! I'm in a small book club with friends and last month was my month to choose, and I chose Levi Peterson's _The Backslider_. Several readers in our book club chose not to read the entire book, in fact, they only read a few pages. One person read the first two pages and chose not to read _Backslider_; another person communicated with this person, read the back cover, and then chose not to read it; and yet another person, opened _Backslider_ to some place in the middle of the book, and based on the recommendations of her highly regarded friends chose not to read it. I was, in very question, asked to reconsider my selection-of-the-month and to perhaps choose something that they could all read, actually get through . . . . I was stymied and befuddled. I felt censored. But I said no, that we needed to get through this book, that based on various opinions of Peterson's _Backslider_ I've obtained from AML there was/is value to this book. At that time of "censorship" I hadn't yet read it, and to be honest with you all, haven't yet finished it because I'm getting married in two and one-half weeks and haven't made time to. At any rate, we at least got to discuss the issue of censorship, of self-censoring, and various types of censoring that goes on around us. I made the point that it is important and invaluable to rely on our own gut instincts when we begin to read something. For several members of our book club they decided that Peterson's discussions on sexual frustration and immorality were not for them. So be it, self-censoring is vital to our individual spiritual well-being. On the other hand, one member of our book club found Peterson's novel fascinating, that she connected especially with one of the characters -- which she would not name, because she said it dealt with her past. Question: does Peterson's _Backslider_ have merit and validity even though he discusses things like masturbation, though not titillatingly or explicitly, rather frankly and openly? Referring back to what Rex Good says above about showing promiscuity of a couple in or out of wedlock, can a great Mormon novel reach every Mormon audience? Is What is spiritually motivating for one necessarily spiritually motivating for another? Does Mormon lit necessarily need to be spiritually motivating? I'm interested in your responses, either on or off list. Travis K. Manning "Men and women die; philosophers falter in wisdom, and Christians in goodness: if any one you know has suffered and erred, let him look higher than his equals for strength to amend, and solace to heal." (Jane Eyre) ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Darvell" Subject: [AML] re: Movie Ratings Date: 22 Jun 2000 13:45:50 -0500 [MOD: Snip from this post included in compilation post on nudity.] Rating of films nowadays is so arbitrary. Film like _Orgazmo_, which had almost no nudity (VERY quick topless female in the distance and a few short shots of males from behind), yet it got an NC-17 rating. And I really don't think it's for the sexual content, either. I imagine it's probably because of mockery of religion, but again, somebody simply made that decision and wouldn't budge on the rating, despite Trey Parkers pleas to get it reduced to R. And I, too, was quite alarmed at the violence in _Home Alone_. At first, the violence was funny, but it went on and on and on. And this is a kids' movie? I guess that's what "Parental Guidance" means. Darvell _____________________________________________ Free email with personality! Over 200 domains! http://www.MyOwnEmail.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Darvell" Subject: [AML] Nudity (was: BLUTH/GOLDMAN, _Titan A.E._) Date: 22 Jun 2000 14:03:35 -0500 Linda Adams (adamszoo@sprintmail.com) wrote: >So. If it is "only R," can anyone explain why there is so much less full >male than female nudity on average, in films containing full nudity? >But of those I remember seeing (back in the days when I cared less >what I watched), I remember seeing plenty of nude women here >and there but never a fully nude man. (Hm, *maybe,* a split-second >shot in _Romeo & Juliet?_) Therefore my argument remains: the >industry is biased. Either they are exploiting women more than men >or they are protecting men's privates with greater concern than >women's. >Linda Adams I hesitate to continue this thread, but if the moderator will allow... If you think about it, it really does make sense. (But keep in mind that I'm seeing this from a man's point of view.) More men control the industry. More men are directing films. One good reason. Women's bodies, frankly, are more pleasing artistically than men's. Men really kind of look funny, if you think about it. And women have more to show. You can show a topless women without really getting crude. Generally showing frontally below the waiste is considered more crude. I'd bet the numbers are much closer when you don't consider above-the-waiste nudity. And lastly, statistically, men are more interested in seeing women than women are interested in seeing men. With all these things considered, it shouldn't surprise us in the least that women are exploited more in movies than men are. Darvell _____________________________________________ Free email with personality! Over 200 domains! http://www.MyOwnEmail.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Dean FH Macy Subject: [AML] (Andrew's Poll) Best Mormon Novel of the 90s Date: 22 Jun 2000 14:58:15 -0400 Andrew Hall wrote: > Okay, I think it is time to vote for the Best Mormon Novel of the 1990s This is it, according to my wife. AAA+ based on literary writing, plot, characters, enjoyment. *** Nunes, Rachel Ann. "Ariana" series. Covenant, 1996-1999 *** -- Dean FH Macy, Lit.D./Mus.D. "Specializing in Management of exceptionally talented youth in Music" EPI Records - NetWork Films "Making children do something they don't want to do is the job of the parents. If that doesn't work, there are always juvenile detention centers." - Mike R. - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Eileen Subject: Re: [AML] _The Real World_ Date: 22 Jun 2000 14:37:58 -0600 Our real world character is facing another real world dilemna. Will BYU let her register for fall semester. She has not followed the Honor Code and cohabited with the male gender. I wonder if MTV will follow-up with that? Eileen eileens99@bigplanet.com "When the freedom they wished for most, was freedom from responsibility then Athens ceased to be free and was never free again." - Edith Hamilton - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Christopher Bigelow" Subject: Re: [AML] (Andrew's Poll) Best Mormon Novel of the 90s Date: 22 Jun 2000 14:40:15 -0700 I have read the following books from your list, and I have attempted to = rank them in my order of personal enjoyment and appreciation (if you want = only one book vote from me, take #1): 1. Parkinson, Benson. "The MTC: Set Apart" Aspen, 1995. This one is overall the most satisfying on the list to me, = closest to striking the balance between realism and faith that I think is = most true to LDS life. It's also got great characterization and captures = well an experience I've gone through myself. 2. Van Wagoner, Robert Hodgson. "Dancing Naked" Signature, 1999. I'm actually in the middle of this one currently. The writing = is overall quite good, and I like the honest, deep approach. Although = faith in Mormonism is lacking, I find myself trusting the author's = sincerity and feeling deep interest in the characters. 3. Orson Scott Card, "Lost Boys" HarperCollins, 1992. This is just plain good storytelling, with a lot of remarkably = direct Mormon characterization and settings for a national book. This = remains, I'm sad to say, the only OSC fiction I've yet read. 4. Smurthwaite, Donald S. "Fine Old High Priests" Deseret, 1999. This is from one of the Church propaganda presses I don't = trust, but I found myself charmed by it despite its obvious message-oriente= d motive. 5. Young, Margaret Blair. "Salvador" Aspen, 1992. Frankly, I read this one during the same semester as "Lost = Boys," but I remember it far less well. It kind of slipped through my = fingers, perhaps. I can't even tell you the plot. I've heard enough good = about it since, however, that I stick it here. 6. Evenson, Brian. "Father of Lies" Four Walls Eight Windows, 1998. Fascinating in the same way that watching a snake or = alligator is fascinating, but I related to it about as well as I do to = reptiles. On the one hand simple and smooth to read, but on the other hand = quite slippery when the unreliable main character is narrating.=20 7. Fisher, Franklin. "Bones" University of Utah, 1990. Densely written but fairly interesting, about a backslider = who goes on a mission. Not outright anti-Mormon, but obviously not = sympathetic to Mormonism. 8. Gagon, David. "Honorable Release" Signature, 1992. Another mission story. I don't remember it well, except for = not liking it much. Kind of a pot boiler in some ways, but with literary = pretensions. 9. Kidd, Kathryn. "Paradise Vue" Hatrack, 1990. Generally I don't like books with comedy as their #1 = purpose. (However, I do like books with comedy as their #2 or #3 purpose.) 10. Nunes, Rachel Ann. "Ariana" series. Covenant, 1996-1999. (1 vol. only) A romance for the mainstream LDS audience. The writing is = mostly pedestrian and unconvincing for me, and it's obviously moving = toward a happy ending. Books from your list I already own, ranked in order of my anticipation of = reading them: 1. Kirn, Walter. "Thumbsucker" Broadway, 1999. 2. Palmer, Susan. "The Tabernacle Bar" Signature, 1995. 3. Card, Orson Scott. "Homecoming" Series (vol. 1 only) TOR,1992. 4. Peterson, Levi. "Aspen Maroney" Signature, 1996. 5. Sillitoe, Linda. "Secrets Keep" Signature, 1995. 6. Wolverton, Dave (As David Farland) "The Runelords" series (v. 1), St. = Martins, 1998. 7. Freeman, Judith, "A Desert of Pure Feeling" Vintage, 1996. 8. Barber, Phyllis. "And the Desert Shall Blossom" University of Utah, = 1991. 9. Hughes, Dean. "Children of the Promise" series (vol. 1 and 2), = Deseret, 1997-1999. 10. Lund, Gerald. "The Work and the Glory" series (vol. 1 only), = Bookcraft, 1990-1998. (Both lists happened to come to exactly 10 apiece.) Chris Bigelow * * * * * * Interested in novels, stories, poems, plays, and films by, for, or about = Mormons? Check out IRREANTUM magazine at www.xmission.com/~aml/irreantum.ht= m. - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Thom Duncan" Subject: Re: [AML] BLUTH/GOLDMAN, _Titan A.E._ Date: 22 Jun 2000 14:43:01 -0600 -----Original Message----- >Okay, Thom, thanks for the clarification. So. If it is "only R," can anyone >explain why there is so much less full male than female nudity on average, >in films containing full nudity? Simple. Men have most of the power in Hollywood. A male actor can say, "no frontal nudity" and he'll work again. Few female actors can take that stance unless they are on the "A" list: Meg Ryan, Meryl Streep, etc. >Now I don't see a ton of these for myself. Someone else who does could >enlighten me further. But of those I remember seeing (back in the days when >I cared less what I watched), I remember seeing plenty of nude women here >and there but never a fully nude man. (Hm, *maybe,* a split-second shot in >_Romeo & Juliet?_) Therefore my argument remains: the industry is biased. >Either they are exploiting women more than men or they are protecting men's >privates with greater concern than women's. I think you are correct. Thom - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Thom Duncan" Subject: Re: [AML] Movie Ratings Date: 22 Jun 2000 15:00:45 -0600 >I would like to see a rating system that simply states what quantifiable >elements exist that are likely to be objectionable: S for sex, N for >nudity, V for violence, L for language, with a 0-3 severity assessment. You already get this from reviews. For instance, I was not at all surprised about the sexual content of "Basic Instinct." Every review I read talked about the famous leg-crossing scene of Sharon Stone. And I knew "Showgirls" was soft porn before I ever went to see it (both films written by the same guy, as a matter of fact), but wanted to see what a 3 million dollar screenplay looked like (I was disappointed). How do you calculate the severity assessment. Cleavage only gets a N1? I prefer to make my decisions based on what those who like movies say about them, rather than some nameless group of whose credentials I know nothing. Thom - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Jason Steed" Subject: Re: [AML] _The Real World_ Date: 22 Jun 2000 14:08:52 PDT >Jason Steed wrote: > > > My concern, then, about the way this girl will be portrayed on _The Real > > World_ is that many of the "readers" of the show (like many of the=20 >readers > > of Kushner, Orgasmo, etc.) will take the portrayal for what it claims to= =20 >be: > > namely, "The Real World." > >But it is the Real World, Jason. The standards by which Mormons live >are about as different as they can be from the majority of the rest of >the world. We are only five million in America, and maybe two million >who actually attend every Sunday. We don't get to dictate what the >world's standards are -- we just aren't that large yet. I have not seen the show (I avoid MTV, partly because I think it's utterly= =20 void of worth, and partly because I can't afford cable). But my post was=20 expressing concern that this girl would be portrayed as a country (read:=20 Mormon) bumpkin who is ignorant and naive--and I was afraid that 'they'=20 would break her, essentially illustrating the need for Mormons to be=20 'broken' (read: educated, awakened, etc.). This was the "real world" (read:= =20 a definition of and attitude toward Mormons) that I was afraid would be=20 perpetuated. >To what do you attribute this girl's naivet=E9 BUT Mormonism? This is not >necessarily something we need be ashamed of by the way. Naivet=E9 is its >own reward. While I admit that Mormonism CAN contribute to naivete, I don't see how=20 naivete is a NECESSARY result of it. Are you suggesting that this girl's=20 naivete can only be the result of her Mormonism? (You seem to be saying=20 this.) Can't growing up in a small town produce naivete? Aren't there just= =20 some people (non-Mormons in big cities, even) who are just naive? If I am=20 black, I won't like it that blacks are often portrayed as uneducated...=20 Likewise, if I am Mormon, I don't like it that Mormons are often portrayed= =20 as naive. That is NOT the 'real world'--that's a stereotype (and a damaging= =20 one). Apparently, though, everything turned out okay with the show...But largely,= =20 it seems, because the girl's character was rounded out--she wasn't merely=20 the naive Mormon, she became a 'real' person--an individual who _may or may= =20 not_ be representative of a larger group. I'm okay with that, because that= =20 IS much closer to 'reality.' Jason ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Bill Willson" Subject: Re: [AML] Race and Culture in LDS Lit. Date: 22 Jun 2000 15:10:44 -0600 Jason wrote: > According to the U.S. Census Bureau (and I freely admit that this >cannot be trusted as wholly accurate), "whites"--or at least those >who define themselves as such by checking the little boxes on the >form--still make up around 80% of this country's population. I wasn't referring to just this country when I made my statements about the white minority, even though my particular reality call took place in San Francisco. I was referring to the entire human race. However the fact remains, those who live in Utah and have never been anywhere else for any length of real time, IMHO, live in a racial cocoon. No matter what, in the Christian world, Mormons are definitely a minority, if they are even considered by other Christians as Christian. We still need to focus our writing on and hold this error up to the light and let the world see where we have been and where we are and where we are going. But most important of all we need to let the world know and understand that we know all humanity is cut from one bolt of cloth, and sewn together by one tailor. Regards, Bill Willson Keep your hand moving and your muse alive. bwillson@mtwest.net - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Jason Steed" Subject: [AML] Definition of Terms (was: Race and Culture in LDS Lit.) Date: 22 Jun 2000 14:36:51 PDT >Jason Steed wrote: > > > A lot of people probably think I'm being very opinionated and aggressive >in my > > posts, because I'm tossing around this term and practically accusing > > everyone of being "racist." Part of this is my lack of tact; part of it >is > > intentional. Racism is a STRONG word. It gets our attention. I contend >that > > if we own up to our _racism_, we'll realize its gravity, its >seriousness, > > and by being more conscientious of it in this way, we can better combat >it. > >Swerving back into a literary connection... > >I disagree. "Tossing around" a strong term and applying it in a >universal way only dilutes it into meaningless. Rather than getting our >attention, we tune it out, because it has become noise. First, I used the phrase "tossing around" somewhat ironically. I think my posts make clear my belief that I think "racism" refers to something in particular and concrete--though perhaps not so particular as that to which some others felt it refers. > >Also, using a strong term for mild or moderate behavior will cause no >one to own up to the problem--it will cause them to see no connection >between the strong term and what they are doing, and thereby concluding >that they have no problem. This seems a rash generalization to me. The scriptures say that lusting in our hearts is adultery. Most of us would say that the former is milder than the latter. Yet, if we define the former as equivalent to the latter, it gets our attention. Perhaps there ARE those who will disassociate the two, refusing to see the connection. But I'm not sure it's accurate to say this is simply what happens when a strong word is used with reference to something mild. >I see this progression happening for racism, Nazism, sexual harrassment, >and a number of other terms which are favorites of the political >correctness movement. Among people for whom words are a vital part of >their occupation and/or interest, the dilution and corruption of words >ought to be of serious concern. I don't think we can stop the changing nature of language. Yes, words become "diluted" over time and with use; a word doesn't carry as much weight or power (or it carries more); things aren't the way they used to be. But not only do I think this can't be prevented--I'm not sure it ought to be. That's what makes language so rich, is the ability to use a word that wouldn't normally be associated with a certain image or idea, bringing two seemingly disparate things together. How would we ever use metaphors, for example, if we were worried about the "corruption" of words? The notion that words can be "diluted" or "corrupted" suggests that there is some inherent meaning in them, some locatable, definable thing that can then be "diluted" or "corrupted." But I think (and most contemporary literary theory seems to lean this way) that language is a constructed system: IOW, words mean only what "we" decide they will mean. Thus, they are flexible, changeable, as signifiers. I'm concerned about how words are used--as we all should be. Deeply, irrevocably, biologically concerned. That's why I used the word I used. I believe it signifies a certain meaning that I wish to convey. I don't think I'm "diluting" the meaning of the word--on the contrary, I was trying to point out that by not calling certain actions racist, we are "diluting" the meaning we assign to them... Jason ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Terry L Jeffress" Subject: [AML] Marion SMITH, _Riptide_ (review) Date: 22 Jun 2000 16:13:10 -0600 Smith, Marion. _Riptide._ Salt Lake City: Signature Books, 1999. Trade paperback: xii, 191 pp. ISBN: 1-56085-131-7. Suggested retail: $14.95. Laurel Greer learns that her son-in-law Clint has sexually abused her grandchildren, the neighborhood kids, and her own youngest children. No one discovered the abuse for years until Clint's daughter Elizabeth (then seven years old) finally told Laurel. Clint's wife, Katherine, decides that her three children will not testify against their father, and the other parents follow her example. Without the children's testimony, the prosecutor won't file charges and the police call off their investigation. The Greers bristle as Clint escapes responsibility for his actions, but almost worse, the Mormon church doesn't take any disciplinary action. _Riptide_ starts several years later. After Clint loses his job for sexually harassment, Laurel decides to take matters into her own hands and kills Clint. The story then follows Laurel's stream of consciousness as she drives from the crime scene in Parley's Canyon, Utah, to her carefully crafted alibi in Palms Springs, California. As Laurel remembers, we get a picture of her life, filled with efforts to craft a perfect Mormon family and shattered by the actions of one man. In retrospect, she thinks she recognizes warning signs that she should have acted on earlier to prevent or limit Clint's damage. Between the self-blame and guilt, Laurel seems barely coherent. At one point Laurel compares Clint to a rock thrown into a pool. Laurel can clearly see how Clint's actions have a ripple effect and changed the lives of many people, but she doesn't see that by killing Clint she has thrown her own rock into the pool. Laurel does try to minimize her family's association with the murder, but she never extends this sentiment to Clint's children by his second marriage or to the rigors of a murder trial. With such a dismal story line, _Riptide_ has some other agenda than pure entertainment. In her "Author's Note," Smith states: This story is fiction. There are, however, many cases of abuse similar to that described in this book. Often these cases are reported to both police and ecclesiastical leaders, yet no action is taken. While details of individual stories differ, the effects of child abuse and reactions to it seem remarkable similar. (vii) Smith wants to demonstrate the wide scope of damage caused by child sexual abuse, with a secondary message to criminal prosecutors and ecclesiastical leaders to take greater action toward sexual abuse cases. For me personally, true stories (such as Pelzer's _A Child Called "It"_) more effectively demonstrate the horrors of child abuse and the needs for child protective services. And when an author wants to make me aware of a problem, I also want to see some possible solutions. Smith provides a counter-solution. She shows us what doesn't work. Perhaps she believes in prevention as the only solution. Smith also takes an anti-Mormon tone, repeatedly mentioning how the church failed the Greers. Laurel feels betrayed by the church because even though her daughter married a returned missionary in the temple, he still turned into an abuser. Of course, just for extra jabs at the church, Clint didn't act alone. The daughter of an unnamed Mormon apostle participated in Clint's abuse factory. Laurel believes that the close association to an apostle's daughter caused the investigators and prosecutors to avoid Clint's case. Laurel concludes that if she could live her life again, that she wouldn't raise her kids in the church: I've never told Duncan [her husband] that if I had my life to do over, I wouldn't raise my children in the church. It's too punishing and can make their parents treat their children in ways that are destructive. Even with all the good it can do, I wouldn't do it again. It seems too cruel to tell Duncan what I sometimes wonder -- that the abuse might not have happened, or we might have been able to see it sooner, if we hadn't been Mormon. (153-4) In spite of Smith's assertion that abuse cases seem "remarkably similar" to this fiction, I had a hard time relating to the Greer family. Duncan works as an investment broker, and Laurel works in all the auxiliary branches of the church. The Greers took vacations in England, South Africa, Hawaii, and the Mediterranean. They fly to New York City just to buy a wedding dress. They fly to Mexico, to bring their daughter on a student exchange news of the abuse. They fly to India to make sure one of their daughters gets safely to a volunteer position in a leper colony. I know too many real families that live in near poverty resulting from putting one child through therapy or a recovery program, that the Greer's suffering feels hollow. Smith drops enough literary references to keep a humanities student busy for a semester. She mentions _Crime and Punishment_, _Hamlet_, the works of Homer, _The Brothers Karamazov_, _Wuthering Heights_, _King Lear_, _The Plague_, _The Adventures of Don Quxiote_, and others. That list includes only literary references; Smith gives about equal time given to philosophy, film, music, TV, and religious references. While the humanities students work out the literary references, psychology students can practice dream interpretation. Laurel relates both her own and her daughters' dreams, rife with Freudian content: I one of my dreams, Clint was a monster-size black crab with huge pincers reaching everywhere for all of us. We were tiny, miniature people burrowing in the sand as he slowly crawled toward us. There was always a child I'd forgotten to hide, and as his claws picked up that child, I would wake up. (159-60) A well written dream can say a lot about a character's emotional state. One or two related dreams would sufficiently characterize Laurel and her daughters. Instead, Smith includes at least 10 dreams, most of which demonize Clint and do nothing to further expand Laurel's character. She creates vivid scenes filled with emotional power, but her scenes repeat the same character and plot development without moving into new territory. You can also see Smith's agenda driving the characters' dialog into contrived paths that never get around to answering the real question: What should we do with a heightened awareness of abuse? -- Terry L Jeffress - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Terry L Jeffress" Subject: Re: [AML] Where's our LDS Pulitzer prize winner? Date: 22 Jun 2000 16:39:45 -0600 > Terry L Jeffress wrote: > > > Other stigmas interfere with generating widely-accepted literature. You can > > still find many saints that frown on any reading expect for scripture and > > church sponsored materials. Even if you don't hold that view, you have to > > deal with those who do. And that presents another limit to producing good > > works. > > I don't understand what you mean. I see no reason to deal with such an > extreme opinion except to ignore it. How will these people affect LDS > literature, other than just not being part of the market? But these people do have an affect on the market. In my ward, the young women's president told the youth (both boys and girls) that reading fiction is a sin because they should be reading the scriptures, and that writing fiction attempts to take over God's role as a creator. I still have to deal with my kids telling me how sinful I am for reading fiction. -- Terry Jeffress - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Christopher Bigelow" Subject: [AML] Adoption Stories Date: 22 Jun 2000 16:52:06 -0700 May I make a networking overture on AML-List? I have accepted a freelance writing job from LDS Family Services to write some articles about adoption for placement in newspapers and Church publications. I am writing to see if anyone has adopted through LDSFS or knows someone who has who might have an interesting story that would allow readers to better understand and appreciate the adoption process. The first batch of stories is planned for release in Nat'l Adoption Month this fall. Yes, it's propaganda (I'm looking for stories with HAPPY endings that give good PR for LDSFS and adoption). And for this project, the adoption needs to have taken place through LDSFS. I've had good luck in the past asking for leads on AML-List. Several quotes from people I've found hereon have appeared and will yet appear in Ensign articles. Because adoption in of itself is not on topic for AML-List, why don't you contact me at my personal e-mail if you have any leads for me to consider. And if you know of any other appropriate e-mail lists (especially those related to adoption), I'd like info on those as well. Thanks in advance, Chris Bigelow chrisb@enrich.com * * * * * * Interested in novels, stories, poems, plays, and films by, for, or about Mormons? Check out IRREANTUM magazine at www.xmission.com/~aml/irreantum.htm. - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Christopher Bigelow" Subject: [AML] Adoption Stories (addition) Date: 22 Jun 2000 17:13:12 -0700 One thing I should add to my earlier post is that we could look at adoption from several standpoints: * A couple who adopted * A birth mother and/or father who made the choice to place * A child who has been adopted Or other possible viewpoints. Thanks, Chris Bigelow * * * * * * Interested in novels, stories, poems, plays, and films by, for, or about Mormons? Check out IRREANTUM magazine at www.xmission.com/~aml/irreantum.htm. - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Kent S. Larsen II" Subject: Re: [AML] LDS Church Magazines Are Going Online Date: 23 Jun 2000 07:54:21 -0400 My apologies, Larry. I shouldn't have assumed so much. Kent At 11:42 PM -0400 6/21/00, Larry Jackson wrote: >_______________ > >This one I didn't get from Mormon-News. I wrote my post >based on reading the letter, of which I have a copy. I also >sent the same post to another list with added information >concerning the specific curriculum support materials that >would be included in the magazines. (I didn't believe this >list would be interested, but I have it, if anyone is.) > >As Listers are aware, I have been asked to forward Mormon- >News posts that might be of interest to the AML list. Our >moderator makes the actual determination as to whether >they are posted. This is done giving full credit to MN and >Kent's excellent work. > Join my Mormon email lists! To join send a message to: majordomo@MormonsToday.com In the body of the message write: subscribe Mormon-news News and links to news about Mormons, Mormonism and the Church. Mormon-humor Jokes and amusing stories about Mormons and Mormonism. Mormon-index Make queries about and find out about Mormon resources. LDSClerks Discussion for LDS Church Ward/Stake Clerks/Exec. Secretaries LDSPrimary Discussion about the Primary Organization. The following list is available through egroups: http://www.egroups.com/ NYArea-LDS-News - News about the LDS Church and Members in the New York City area. - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Thom Duncan Subject: Re: [AML] Movie Ratings Date: 22 Jun 2000 16:41:47 -0600 Todd Robert Petersen wrote: > > Eric Snider wrote: > > > I guess it depends on your definition of "violent," but "Titanic" certainly > > had violence and death, had two F-words, and remained PG-13. > > And nudity . . . > > The problem with using the rating system as part of our LDS standard is that > it is not a divine standard. The ratings board does not work by the Spirit. > > Certain ratings can be bought with power and infulence. The studio wanted > teens to have access to TITANIC, so it got it's lower rating. It's not quite the easy. No rating is ever "bought," though it can be changed. A producer can take his film back a second time to get a lower rating but he'll have to remove or snip the part the ratings board considered offensive. The ratings board really is autonomous and producers have to comply with their wishes if they want to get a certain rating. > The more I > learn, the more I realize that the rating system is only a standard in the > most vague and abstract way. The ratings board exists so that the government won't rate films. They had threatened to but Hollywood came up with a counter-offer of self rating. Congress bought this and the rest is history. (And we should all be glad the guv didn't involved in rating films. Can you imagine?) -- Thom Duncan Read the further adventures of Moroni Smith, the LDS Indiana Jones! The long-awaited second episode in the Moroni Smith LDS adventure series, _Moroni Smith: In Search of the Gold Plates_ is now available as an e-book at the Zion's Fiction web page: http://www.zfiction.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Tracie Laulusa" Subject: RE: [AML] Movie Ratings Date: 22 Jun 2000 19:02:31 -0400 And how about busy. There are so many movies, and books, and cds, and, and.... I just don't have time to investigate everything myself. Even when I do, there is so much conflicting opinion. This one is "must see". This one isn't worth your time. One reviewer will slam a movie for the very things that another praises. One friend of mine came home from UT saying she would never see "God's Army" because the group of friends she was with bad mouthed it so much. I told her I was surprised because 99% of what I've heard about it has been positive. But the story of so-and-so walking out of the theatre offended will cause many not to see it. Tracie Laulusa -----Original Message----- Is it possible that, as a group, we're too lazy to do the work of finding out if our material is "of good report" or worthy of our attention and want to be told what to do so we won't have to think for ourselves? Todd Robert Petersen - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jeff Needle Subject: Re: [AML] (Andrew's Poll) Vote Date: 22 Jun 2000 16:25:54 -0700 And I, too, found it difficult to choose between Margaret's two outstanding books. In the end, I came down on "Salvador" as my top choice. "House Without Walls" was a tremendously moving book. As a Jew, I was astounded at how accurate the characterizations were. But "Salvador" presented a view of human conflict that opened my mind and made me think long and hard. Thus, "Salvador" is my vote for best Mormon novel of the 90's. At 08:17 PM 6/22/00 JST, you wrote: >My pick for Best Mormon Novel of the 90s is Margaret Blair Young's "House >Without Walls" (Deseret, 1991). It was a tough choice, with another four >books close on its tail. --------------- Jeff Needle jeff.needle@general.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jacob Proffitt Subject: Re: [AML] Nudity (was: Movie Ratings) (compilation) Date: 22 Jun 2000 19:25:16 -0600 Actually, now that I think about it, "The Fisher King" with Robin = Williams (excellent film) has a male frontal nudity shot and it wasn't NC 17. I guess that what Bruce Willis had trouble with was the double standard = with no true definition. It seems to me that the whole thing is rather = random... Jacob Proffitt - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Jason Steed" Subject: Re: [AML] Race and Culture in LDS Lit. Date: 22 Jun 2000 18:59:21 PDT >Michael Fillerup and I once chatted about doing a collection of >stories (various authors) from many cultures--but I suspect he's as busy as >I >am, so we haven't pursued that at all. Maybe someone else should catch >that >ball and run with it. If someone else is interested, I would like VERY MUCH to co-edit a volume like this... Anyone??? Jason ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Hamilton Fred (by way of Jonathan Langford ) Subject: [AML] Writing About Religion Date: 23 Jun 2000 16:24:28 -0500 [MOD: This is a message by Kristen Randle--former AML-List member and LDS author--to a private e-mail list, forwarded with Kristen's permission by Skip Hamilton. What she says here ties in interesting ways to our ongoing discussions on what Mormon literature ought to mean.] Ginna and Guy and I have read Kingsolver's Poisonwood Bible. It was an interesting book, well written, well researched. I'm not sure Barbara K and I would be easy friends. On the MLA, people like to talk about "Mormon Literature," something, I guess, they aspire to. Something like Black Literature. I'm not sure there is such a thing as Jewish Literature, because I suspect the folks who are Jewish have been what they are for so long, and in so many different ways, they just write what they write, and leave it for other people to slap labels on the result. It's not that we don't have our own brand of angst and hard history. We have had our holocausts, our trails of tears. We have wept and suffered and died. In the process of our striving, we, individuals, have twisted the truth, lived the right principles the wrong way. Nothing has been simple. But as a people, we are piebald. I am not the descendant of the driven pioneers; I share in their trials only through imagination and symbol. They are forefathers of some, but more of us are newcomers and must feel some dislocation because of it, claiming heritage where there is only intent and faith, not blood. We are not a homogenous people. We don't all speak the same language. In a time when people who would sacrifice something for their belief in God are considered cultists, extremists, at the least, mystics and fanatics, how do we explain our mild, dogged normalcy to a cynical, myopic world? I think it is never easy to write about religion. And I'm not sure people should. I know they should not write about it at all if their motivation outstrips the spontaneity of their story, because the inevitable result of such an imbalance is didacticism, or worse, putting words into the mouth of God. Religion is such a delicate thing. I can only stand the word when it means that tenuous, ephemeral relationship between a person and God. I don't like it when it means organizations and sermons and condemnation. This is not to say that I don't believe in organized religion, because I do believe that organization is necessary, thanks to our Natural Man, our tendency to put ourselves first. And I believe very strongly in what my own religion teaches; I am LDS - even if dyed in the wool admits flaws in weave and inconsistency of color. My acceptance of the reality of God, of the structure and purpose of earth life, stains everything. I can't write without it. But I am better when I do not try to write to it. I suspect that the strongest writing we will ever get that can be said to be "about" religion will be either expository or, if fiction, bitter. It is easier to write about God with clarity when you are writing about disappointment and estrangement, because you can feel those things so strongly, so vividly, and put words to them with such passion. How do you explain faith? How do you explain the spun glass moment of a prayer answered, a heart comforted? And should you? Should you talk about those things when they happen to you? Or isn't the discussion tantamount to close examination of a snowflake - get close enough, and your breath melts it away. Plaster words over spun sugar, and they disappear under the weight. The Lord himself says that the attention a proud prayer gets for his piousness will be his reward - a temporal reward for a temporal act. But that real prayer takes place in closets, in private joy, in personal sorrow. So, how are you going to write about such things if they are true? And how dare you write about them if they are not? What good, pray tell, does it do to trump up a bunch of fictional miracles for the sake of a story, or a story for the sake of a bunch of fictional miracles? Is that supposed to do anybody any good? My sister's friend, Greg Beck, when he was a little boy - I don't know how old, five maybe? - was diagnosed as having a serious and progressive hearing problem. It was serious enough that his parents were deeply alarmed, and they asked our whole ward to fast and pray about the matter. We were fairly new to the church in those days, unused to people actually asking physical favors from God, as fatherly as we were taught that he was supposed to be. So we fasted for a day, not at all easy for any of us, and we prayed about it, and so did the other people in that ward. The next time Greg went to the doctor, the problem had disappeared. It was very simple. I suppose it could have been a mis-diagnosis in the first place. The doctor didn't think so. If not, there were no bells and whistles, no shouting, no passion, no fervor - just a couple of hundred simple people (I say that - I mean simple of spirit; the people were doctors and lawyers and janitors and teachers and mothers and all kinds of folk) asking and a favor evidently granted. I've seen this a couple of times. No angels. No trumpets. No crowds. No drama. Just things falling into place, or things stopping, or a small, sudden epiphany. I would not choose to write about these things. They were too specific, too subtle, too personal. They could not be generalized, because the answers to prayer cannot be anticipated. A story that demands the number of coincidences and sudden breaks that allowed our studio to become a reality for us, for example, would make a story that would seem too facile. Kingsolver writes many things about God without knowing that she has; it is in the backwash of her contempt for evangelist-types, her disgust with western religion which seems to have more polyester to it than ancient, and therefore more credible, mysticism. She is more likely to respect the romanticized (she would resent the word the way I am using it) cultures of the third world - innocent, tolerant, wise - than the raw edges of Christianity, with its imposed restrictions on human behavior. She finds her religion in nature, in the way things should be; it is there - she just does not credit God with it. She is eloquent when she sets up a straw man in her white, middle class, dominating male American Protestant missionary, and she makes a fool of him at every turn. He may be a metaphor for American diplomatic policies, but his male flaws are too specific and too painfully accurate (too many like him) to be mistaken as simply symbolic. She lets him flail the air with Christian values and shows them hollow, overbearing, unnatural and ultimately embarrassing at the least, destructive at worst. It is clear that she has no use for God, for anything he might have to say, for his promises, for his flipping mysterious ways, for his abandonment of the suffering. In her book, God is as much of a straw man as the man who presumes to represent him. I don't recognize her concept of God as anything close to mine. As I read her, I wondered if I could write my own God as passionately, as concretely as she writes her own bitterness and disappointment. I don't think I can. I'm not sure I should. People who hate the LDS church write and speak about it, making their accusations plainly. The church does not answer. Or answers quietly, without engaging in debate. It does not defend itself by revealing the slightest detail about the accuser. I suppose that the church actually believes that, as Christ said, "By their works, ye shall know them." And so I wonder if the business of writing has less to do with writing about religion, about God, about miracles or salvation or any such thing, than it does with writing out of those understandings, with storytelling from the standpoint of belief? Then again, there's always Elizabeth Gouge - who managed to do both with grace, art and power. I wish I could sit down and have a conversation with Kingsolver. I don't know how it would go - her disappointment disarms me. Doubtless, it would be interesting. [Kristen Randle] - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "mcnandon" Subject: [AML] Revealing Ourselves in Writing Date: 05 Jun 2000 06:44:13 -0600 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0003_01BFCEB9.76703540 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In the June 12, 2000 issue of Saturday Review, Martin Levin writes that he inadvertently discovered that years ago he had edited Theodore J. Kaczynski's satirical piece "The Wave of the Future." He said that it would have been helpful to have found a clue to criminality in the Unabomber's writings, because sometimes a writers bad vibrations are packaged with the product. Then he stated that criminal tendencies don't always surface in an author's work and that you can't tell from the historical novels of Anne Perry (a Mormon) that she was an accomplice to a murder. MY QUESTION FOR THE LIST IS THIS: In what ways do we as LDS writers reveal ourselves in our writing? And when does our desire to *convert* and our level of sophistication come into play? [MOD: Nan's question is a good one, but I want to jump in and say for the record that I think Levin's comparison of Kaczynski to Anne Perry (at least as described here) is thoroughly unfair. The incident in Anne Perry's life to which he refers was something that happened as, I believe, a fairly young teenager. I know of no evidence to suggest that her life since then--I believe including her conversion to the Church and life as an adult and an author--features "criminal tendencies." Not the same type of case as the Unabomber at all.] Nan Parkinson McCulloch ------=_NextPart_000_0003_01BFCEB9.76703540 Content-Type: application/ms-tnef; name="winmail.dat" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="winmail.dat" eJ8+Ig0MAQaQCAAEAAAAAAABAAEAAQeQBgAIAAAA5AQAAAAAAADoAAEIgAcAGAAAAElQTS5NaWNy b3NvZnQgTWFpbC5Ob3RlADEIAQ2ABAACAAAAAgACAAEGgAMADgAAANAHBgAFAAYALAAAAAEAFQEB A5AGAIwHAAAnAAAACwACAAEAAAALACMAAAAAAAMAJgAAAAAACwApAAAAAAADADYAAAAAAB4AcAAB AAAAGAAAAEhlIGVkaXRlZCB0aGUgVW5hYm9tYmVyAAIBcQABAAAAFgAAAAG/zuptpdn1ZmI6mhHU sZpERVNUAAAAAAIBHQwBAAAAHAAAAFNNVFA6TUNOQU5ET05ARU1BSUwuTVNOLkNPTQALAAEOAAAA AEAABg4AKKO4686/AQIBCg4BAAAAGAAAAAAAAAAL4PNvYMS9EbTO0uS0AYUiwoAAAAsAHw4BAAAA AwAGEGnsep8DAAcQfgIAAB4ACBABAAAAZQAAAElOVEhFSlVORTEyLDIwMDBJU1NVRU9GU0FUVVJE QVlSRVZJRVcsTUFSVElOTEVWSU5XUklURVNUSEFUSEVJTkFEVkVSVEVOVExZRElTQ09WRVJFRFRI QVRZRUFSU0FHT0hFSEEAAAAAAgEJEAEAAAAIAwAABAMAAJoDAABMWkZ1QWdNRgMACgByY3BnMTI1 FjIA+Atgbg4QMDMznQH3IAKkA+MCAGNoCsBgc2V0MCAHEwKAfRkKgXVjAFALA3VsbiUCIGULpiBJ A6B0aFBlIEp1EwAgDiAsdiAB0BTAIAQBClADMGkoIG9mBgF0CHBkYdJ5B/BldgiQdxSQDECVEWBN CsB0C4AgTBZhdQOgdwUQdAeRE+AV0CDjE/ELgGFkdgSQGBACMPpsFjBkBAAFoBkRCYAYRIR5ZRER IGFnbxiS3xEAGkAJgBgBGkBUE/AEcCMFsBQBLiBLANB6eVEAgGtpJwQgcxXQaaUFEGMHQCBwCJBj FADiIhwxIFdhGRAVghPiBEZ1FeFlLiIgIPZIFAAdsGkaRRgAF9AIYG5sGkARAB8hYgnhGJFs/HBm EsAT0BsxHxICEBQwcRpAYSBjCkEi0gUBbb0Y0WwYABYwF1ET4lUY4D8G4AbQBJAdgRfiC4Bnc/cU kCIQHhB1ETAdoANwEUBvB3MjwBfjGuFiG5EWcGI+ch3BAiAa8RyRCrBja18bEBoxA/AT4BPTcANg ZP0SMHQc0BwiIkIdoAGQG/KfGFMkZhPQCfABAG5jCJCzBCAccG4nBUAHQHcWIPsdkQhwZgDQGLIb AC+BH9DuaAWwJiIFsGsvkRpGCGDvI9AAcC5RGBBsAyADUhPTvmgEACLgHfQS4BkQbAQgqRWRQW4U QVAEkHIWMJooI8BNBbAEYG4pGERecxPxLqAa8S+BYwWgbe8LUA3gJBMjwG0V8QSQK3EATVkgUVVF U1RISU9OH7BPUhwgSPpFF3BJOGAToAXwOQA5UPY6IEATsXcYYi6jHHAX0PMUADYRTEQF8Cg2CXAZ EPceIQhhETBsGRAEIBdRCGH9JkY/IEA0ECpRK7IccAeRXz2SAQAAkByRIuEqBaBu7RkSKjCjPZJs PGE8oRWg/SdwcDLCHgEpQiPQJ4EYwXMi4QtReT8KogqECoBOPQORUArAHWAAgEKhTWO+QxLACQAQ 8EPEEfEARpADABAQAAAAAAMAERAAAAAACwABgAggBgAAAAAAwAAAAAAAAEYAAAAAA4UAAAAAAAAD AAOACCAGAAAAAADAAAAAAAAARgAAAAAQhQAAAAAAAAMAB4AIIAYAAAAAAMAAAAAAAABGAAAAAFKF AADwEwAAHgAIgAggBgAAAAAAwAAAAAAAAEYAAAAAVIUAAAEAAAAEAAAAOC41AAsADIAIIAYAAAAA AMAAAAAAAABGAAAAAAaFAAAAAAAAAwANgAggBgAAAAAAwAAAAAAAAEYAAAAAAYUAAAAAAAALABaA CCAGAAAAAADAAAAAAAAARgAAAAAOhQAAAAAAAAMAF4AIIAYAAAAAAMAAAAAAAABGAAAAABGFAAAA AAAAAwAZgAggBgAAAAAAwAAAAAAAAEYAAAAAGIUAAAAAAAAeACiACCAGAAAAAADAAAAAAAAARgAA AAA2hQAAAQAAAAEAAAAAAAAAHgApgAggBgAAAAAAwAAAAAAAAEYAAAAAN4UAAAEAAAABAAAAAAAA AB4AKoAIIAYAAAAAAMAAAAAAAABGAAAAADiFAAABAAAAAQAAAAAAAAALADKACCAGAAAAAADAAAAA AAAARgAAAACChQAAAQAAAAsANIALIAYAAAAAAMAAAAAAAABGAAAAAACIAAAAAAAACwA2gAsgBgAA AAAAwAAAAAAAAEYAAAAABYgAAAAAAAACAfgPAQAAABAAAAAL4PNvYMS9EbTO0uS0AYUiAgH6DwEA AAAQAAAAC+Dzb2DEvRG0ztLktAGFIgIB+w8BAAAAcQAAAAAAAAA4obsQBeUQGqG7CAArKlbCAABQ U1RQUlguRExMAAAAAAAAAABOSVRB+b+4AQCqADfZbgAAAEQ6XFdJTjk4XEFwcGxpY2F0aW9uIERh dGFcTWljcm9zb2Z0XE91dGxvb2tcb3V0bG9vay5wc3QAAAAAAwD+DwUAAAADAA00/TcAAAIBfwAB AAAAMQAAADAwMDAwMDAwMEJFMEYzNkY2MEM0QkQxMUI0Q0VEMkU0QjQwMTg1MjI2NEU1MjYwMAAA AADbpg== ------=_NextPart_000_0003_01BFCEB9.76703540-- - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "D. Michael Martindale" Subject: Re: [AML] (Andrew's Poll) Best LDS Novel of the 1990s Date: 23 Jun 2000 01:03:41 -0600 Todd Petersen wrote: >I'm sorry to sound disparaging or disheartening, but they're still saying, >for the most part, that they "don't publish novels because Mormons don't >read fiction." Neal Kramer wrote: > Of course, _The Work and the Glory_ and _The Children of the Promise_ > belie such statements. Those books have made Deseret and Bookcraft a nice > chunk of change. > Maybe all the gentiles are buying the Mormon fiction :) It wouldn't surprise me to learn that the attitude Todd quoted is a smokescreen. Maybe Deseret Book editors just dread the minefield LDS fiction can be--trying to make it true and honest, but also trying to avoid offending members, thanks to the image Deseret Book needs to uphold. Of course, I have no idea if this is true--it's just a nice rumor I'm starting up. So ignore what I just said. -- D. Michael Martindale dmichael@wwno.com ================================== Check out Worldsmiths, the new online LDS writers group, at http://www.wwno.com/worldsmiths Sponsored by Worlds Without Number http://www.wwno.com ================================== - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Ivan Angus Wolfe Subject: Re: [AML] _The Real World_ Date: 23 Jun 2000 04:42:33 -0600 (MDT) Public relations runs deep in our > veins. We are concerned that MTV might reinforce the stereotype that > mormon youth are naive and inexperienced. But for the most part, they > are relatively naive and inexperienced. In a sense, that's the effect > the church is designed to have on them. > > -- Rob Pannoni > I take a bit of exception of that - I think many of the "young adults" in our church are less naieve then we (or MTV) would liketo believe. i.e., many of us have spent one and a half to two years abroad in foreign locales, or in the ghetto, or in big cities, or worked with non-english speakers in the USA - it's that thing called a mission. I've spent more time in Chicago's south side than many of MTV's "real world" players, so I feel I could say I've seen more of the "real world" than many of the people on MTV's show (though not all - some have seen more than I have, but way too many pretend they know more than they really do). I think a returned missionary who had served in a foreign country (male or female) would have made an interesting addition and wouldn't have seemed so naieve and sheltered - but since the national sterotype is that all Mormons live in sheltered communities, MTV seems to be reinforcing it rather than exploring how Mormons can be unique individuals. That said, I'm sure the LDS lady on the Real world does a fine enough job. I just have no real desire to watch MTV anymore (where have all the videos gone?) I used to watch the "real world" but lost interest about 3 years ago. --Ivan Wolfe - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Neal Kramer Subject: Re: [AML] Race and Culture in LDS Lit. Date: 23 Jun 2000 10:19:26 -0600 Some of you may have read "Ghost" by Virginia Sorensen, a short story written in the late fifties or early sixties. It is a subtle exploration of race relations in lily-white Sanpete County in the first part of the twentieth century, but it is clearly intended as a warning to its current readers. It has an ethical edge. Sorensen was among the most capable of the Mormon writers of the middle part of the century at stepping outside the culture, as a critic, as opposed to an enemy. She is a beautiful stylist and has a kind of authority as a writer that can make you feel uncomfortable about many prejudices. Neal Kramer - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Brandi Rainey" Subject: [AML] SORENSON, "The Ghost" (was: Race and Culture in LDS Lit.) Date: 23 Jun 2000 10:34:07 -0700 It's been a year or so since I read Sorenson's story, but I don't remember = any suggestions that the ghost at the party was a member of the clan. The = idea disturbs me. Can you point out a few textual references to ease my = troubled mind? >>> Kristi Bell 06/22 9:25 AM >>> The Virginia Sorenson story is called "The Ghost" and actually the man is dressed as a member of the Klan. It is an interesting story that explores the themes of prejudice and marginalization through the eyes of a young girl. - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: debbro@voyager.net Subject: Re: [AML] Marion SMITH, _Riptide_ (review) Date: 23 Jun 2000 13:13:57 -0400 Was this book, telling this story, seriously only 191 pages?? I can read 191 pages in an hour! Having been abused myself, I think I may pass on this particular story, thanks for the review. If you haven't read it already, Yorganson's _Secrets_ is an excellent fiction account (though I know some of the stories were true) of sexual abuse. _Riptide_ sounds too contrived. Debbie Brown - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jacob Proffitt Subject: Re: [AML] Race and Culture in LDS Lit. Date: 23 Jun 2000 11:07:46 -0600 On Thu, 22 Jun 2000 15:10:44 -0600, Bill Willson wrote: >I wasn't referring to just this country when I made my statements about = the >white minority, even though my particular reality call took place in San >Francisco. I was referring to the entire human race. However the fact >remains, those who live in Utah and have never been anywhere else for = any >length of real time, IMHO, live in a racial cocoon. I think your assessment of Utah is as much a stereotype as the racial and cultural prejudices we are discussing. Come visit us in West Valley sometime for example. Go to the mall, or KMart or Shop Ko or = particularly =46ood 4 Less. You will find an incredible mix of race, culture and = language presented there. Not many African Americans, but quite a few pacific islanders, hispanic, and slavic people present, most of them speaking a language other than english. In our church building we have a Samoan = ward. I still do a double take when I see a man in a dress at church (made of = fine suit material, BTW--very interesting cultural adaptation). Can you avoid other races and cultures in Utah? Sure, but you can do = that anywhere through a self-selection process. Jacob Proffitt - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jacob Proffitt Subject: Re: [AML] Where's our LDS Pulitzer prize winner? Date: 23 Jun 2000 11:51:23 -0600 On Thu, 22 Jun 2000 16:39:45 -0600, Terry L Jeffress wrote: >But these people do have an affect on the market. In my ward, the young >women's president told the youth (both boys and girls) that reading = fiction >is a sin because they should be reading the scriptures, and that writing >fiction attempts to take over God's role as a creator. I still have to = deal >with my kids telling me how sinful I am for reading fiction. Brigham Young on reading material: =46rom the DISCOURSES OF BRIGHAM YOUNG 2:93-94 "Shall I sit down and read the Bible, the Book of Mormon, and the Book of Covenants all the time?" says one. Yes, if you please, and when you have done, you may be nothing but a sectarian after all. It is your duty to = study to know everything upon the face of the earth in addition to reading = those books. We should not only study good, and its effects upon our race, but also evil, and its consequences.=20 9:173. I would advise you to read books that are worth reading; read reliable history, and search wisdom out of the best books you can procure.=20 Novel reading--is it profitable? I would rather that persons read novels than read nothing. [Jacob Proffitt] - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Todd Robert Petersen" Subject: Re: [AML] Where's our LDS Pulitzer prize winner? Date: 23 Jun 2000 13:52:17 -0500 D Michael Martindale wrote: >> I don't understand what you mean. I see no reason to deal with such an >> extreme opinion except to ignore it. How will these people affect LDS >> literature, other than just not being part of the market? Terry Jeffress countered: > But these people do have an affect on the market. In my ward, the young > women's president told the youth (both boys and girls) that reading fiction > is a sin because they should be reading the scriptures, and that writing > fiction attempts to take over God's role as a creator. I still have to deal > with my kids telling me how sinful I am for reading fiction. I have two quotations from Brigham Young for that Young Women's President and for Terry's kids. That should solve the problem (that is if she's the kind of woman who listens to the brethren). I'm not always convinced that self-righteous people are. "Shall I sit down and read the Bible, the Book of Mormon, and the Book of Covenants all the time?" says one. Yes, if you please, and when you have done, you may be nothing but a sectarian after all. It is your duty to study to know everything upon the face of the earth in addition to reading those books. We should not only study good, and its effects upon our race, but also evil, and its consequences." The other is a paraphrase: I'd rather have people read novels than nothing at all. And by novels Brigham Young was talking about romance potboilers for the most part. So Terry, have at her. (In righteousness, I mean, showing an increase of love afterwards.) Todd Robert Petersen - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: eedh Subject: Re: [AML] Where's our LDS Pulitzer prize winner? Date: 23 Jun 2000 11:54:25 -0700 Terry L Jeffress wrote: > > But these people do have an affect on the market. In my ward, the young > women's president told the youth (both boys and girls) that reading fiction > is a sin because they should be reading the scriptures, and that writing > fiction attempts to take over God's role as a creator. I still have to deal > with my kids telling me how sinful I am for reading fiction. > Earlier I wrote: "This horrifies me! Where is this place? Please tell me it's not Utah." Now I add: I'm more than horrified. I'm fighting mad. I ran to my bookshelf and found this quote from *The Teachings of Spencer W. Kimball* (P. 384. The capitalized emphasis is mine.): "There is available a wide selection of books which will give development to the aesthetic and the cultural. Music, drama, poetry, FICTION, and other cultural fields are available to everyone. The contributions come to us from great minds and great hearts and great sufferers and great thinkers. "In addition to all the serious study there should be time for just plain reading for pleasure. Here one needs assistance to select that which is pleasurable in a worthwhile way. THERE ARE COUNTLESS WORKS OF FICTION WHICH HELP US TO UNDERSTAND OURSELVES AND OTHERS BETTER, AND TO GET REAL PLEASURE IN THE LEARNING." -Beth Hatch - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Morgan Adair" Subject: Re: [AML] (Andrew's Poll) Best Mormon Novel of the 90s Date: 23 Jun 2000 15:17:44 -0600 Record one vote for=20 Van Wagoner, Robert Hodgson. "Dancing Naked" Signature, 1999. I'm sure I'll find other Mormon novels from the '90s that I like, once = I've read more=20 of them, but of the ones I've read, this is by far the best. MBA - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Clark Goble" Subject: RE: [AML] _The Real World_ Date: 23 Jun 2000 15:33:06 -0600 ___ Ivan ___ | I think many of the "young adults" in our church are less | naive then we (or MTV) would like to believe. ___ I think that for MTV and perhaps the majority we are na=EFve in that we are not sexually adventurous. So the woman in question was na=EFve because she didn't have much experience with homosexuals. I suspect race has a lot to do with it as well, although I don't recall that really being much of an issue for her - but I admit I've no paid that close attention. I suspect this is the view that comes through most non-Mormon literature. We aren't exposed to crime and sex like everyone else is. This makes us overly trusting (which we in general are) and ignorant (which in general we are). Those aren't necessarily bad things, except when we end up encountering such things. Then we don't know how to react. ___ Ivan ___ | I just have no real desire to watch MTV anymore (where have all | the videos gone?) ___ MTV2. It's just that most cable companies don't carry it. ___ Ivan ___ | I think a returned missionary who had served in a foreign country | (male or female) would have made an interesting addition and | wouldn't have seemed so naieve and sheltered ___ I don't think that's really true. Most missionaries are pretty sheltered in terms of how they encounter things. Yes they see more than the average American does, but in a really different way. Of course I think those experiences are great and give us knowledge other Americans don't. But as I said, MTV is really equating na=EFve with not being worldly. It's the old in the world but not of the world thing. MTV is at present giving a great example of how Mormons attempt to deal with that command. Who knows, in some ways perhaps this girl will end up doing the youth of the church a great service by showing how it can be done. All too often we try to be 'not of the world' by not being in the world. (i.e. insular and cliquish) -- Clark Goble --- d.c.g@att.net ----------------------------------- - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "J. Scott Bronson" Subject: [AML] Re: Writing About Religion Date: 23 Jun 2000 16:04:27 -0600 I got the same message Skip Hamilton got from Kristen. Here is the response I sent to her the other day: > I think it is never easy to write about religion. And I'm not > sure people should. [snip] > I suspect that the strongest writing we will ever get that can > be said to be "about" religion will be either expository or, if > fiction, bitter. Why? I've never read Dante's "Inferno" but is it bitter? Is Shakespeare bitter when he writes about Christ in his plays? I remember kneeling onstage during a rehearsal of King Lear, watching Ivan Crosland, as Lear, take Edgar's arms and hold them out -- like wings -- like the bar of a cross -- and ask that muddy, naked man, "What hast thou been?" Then Edgar describes a person who is a servingman who has committed many sins. I realized that night that he was associating himself with Christ's lot. They were both innocent men, servants to one degree or another who were made to suffer for the sins of others. It was a tearful epiphany for me. > It is easier to write about God with clarity when you are > writing about disappointment and estrangement, because you can feel > those things so strongly, so vividly, and put words to them with > such passion. Perhaps this is your experience, but it's not mine. I've just finished a play called Tombs, that is largely a conversation between Christ and his mother in Joseph's tomb. I wrote vividly, with passion and not a bit of it had anything to do with disappointment or estrangement. > The Lord himself says that the attention a proud prayer gets > for his piousness will be his reward - a temporal reward for a temporal > act. But that real prayer takes place in closets, in private joy, > in personal sorrow. He says we are to make public our faith, and to fear not what man can do. Boyd K. Packer said, "Because of what [artists] do, we are able to feel and learn very quickly through music, through art, through poetry some spiritual things that we would otherwise learn very slowly. All of us are indebted to them for their generous service." > So, how are you going to write about such things if they are > true? And how dare you write about them if they are not? How dare I not? I have a testimony. This is the best way I know how to express it. What am I to do? > What good, pray tell, does it do to trump up a bunch of fictional > miracles for the sake of a story, or a story for the sake of a > bunch of fictional miracles? Is that supposed to do anybody > any good? So, what good is *any* writing then? > I would not choose to write about these > things. They were too specific, too subtle, too personal. They > could not be generalized The best fiction is not general; it is specific. > A story that demands the number of coincidences and > sudden breaks that allowed our studio to become a reality for us, for > example, would make a story that would seem too facile. Why? You're assuming that all the readers out there are cynical heathens who laugh at truth and righteousness. Why? > As I read her, I wondered if I could write my own God as > passionately, as concretely as she writes her own bitterness and > disappointment. I don't think I can. I'm not sure I should. But what else is there? All good stories are Jesus stories. "The Iron Giant." Sacrifice, redemption, forgiveness. Good stories are about these things. And these things point to Christ. You are writing about religion, or God, or you're not writing about anything. All of your [Kristen's] books are about Eve leading Adam back to the Garden. And they give me a great deal of pleasure, because they resonate with my spirit ... and they lead me to Christ. That's what good they are. scott [bronson] - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "J. Scott Bronson" Subject: Re: [AML] Revealing Ourselves in Writing Date: 23 Jun 2000 16:19:39 -0600 > In what ways do we as LDS writers reveal > ourselves in our writing? It's not just LDS writers. All writers, I believe, reveal their deepest feelings about Life, the Universe, and Everything in their writing. Scott Card calls it their "world view." I agree with Card's contention that writers can't help but reveal their deepest rooted understandings in their writings. How these things are revealed would take more time and brain power than I've got right now. However, I think it would be a fascinating project to explicate someone's world view through an intricate analysis of their writing. scott - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "J. Scott Bronson" Subject: Re: [AML] re: Movie Ratings Date: 23 Jun 2000 17:40:52 -0600 > ___ Scott ___ > | Currently, the ratings are hard on violence and easy on sex. > ___ > > While I think Hollywood has become much more liberal with sexuality > and has started to feel uncomfortable with violence, I really don't think > the above is true. What I meant -- what I tried to imply in the remainder of the post -- was that currently, the ratings are harder on violence and easier on sex than they used to be back in the early seventies when they first started using (abusing) squibbs and I saw the same kind of blood and gore in GP movies that I see now in R movies. If I were a conspiracy theororist I'd say it was a Hollywood plot (designed by Satan) to recast moral issues so that we will believe that unwholesome (using Steve Perry's definition of the word) sex is better for our viewing than wholesome violence. That sounds a bit twisted, but my personal belief is that there are treatments of both sex and violence that can be instructive and edifying or destructive and demoralizing. For the most part I think the MPAA board puts the serious, wholesome treatments out of reach, as it were, by giving them an R rating, while putting the unwholesome treatments well within our grasp by giving them PG or PG-13 ratings. As I said though, that's a generalization; the dividing line is a wavy line drawn in the sand of a beach where the water keeps washing it away and someone has to keep going out there and try to remember where they drew it the last time. scott bronson - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jeff Needle Subject: Re: [AML] Marion SMITH, _Riptide_ (review) Date: 23 Jun 2000 19:33:05 -0700 I really appreciated this review. Some years ago there was a book titled, I think, "Secrets." It was from Deseret Book and dealt with the issue of abuse from the standpoint of a totally out-of-touch bishop. Has anyone else read this book? At 04:13 PM 6/22/00 -0600, you wrote: --------------- Jeff Needle jeff.needle@general.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "mcnandon" Subject: RE: [AML] Marion SMITH, _Riptide_ (review) Date: 05 Jun 2000 08:21:07 -0600 Re Marion Smith's book _Riptide_: This may be fiction, but there is a well know case here in the SLC area that is stunningly similar. The difference is that the abuser didn't get killed, but has *finally* gone to jail where he belongs. In this case there were many Mormon enablers along the way. Kind, naive souls who forgave 7 x's 70. Forty Five years of *abusing* leaves a devastating wake. Nan McCulloch - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jacob Proffitt Subject: [AML] Baby Announcement Date: 24 Jun 2000 01:08:16 -0600 Hi all. Just a note to announce the birth of Cordelia Elinor Proffitt. Happened at 11:20 pm on June 23rd. Mom and baby are healthy and doing = well. She weighed in at 8 lbs. 5 oz (baby, not mom). Jacob - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "D. Michael Martindale" Subject: Re: [AML] Where's our LDS Pulitzer prize winner? Date: 24 Jun 2000 02:59:11 -0600 Terry L Jeffress wrote: > But these people do have an affect on the market. In my ward, the young > women's president told the youth (both boys and girls) that reading fiction > is a sin because they should be reading the scriptures, and that writing > fiction attempts to take over God's role as a creator. I still have to deal > with my kids telling me how sinful I am for reading fiction. That is scary! I would be curious to hear if you did anything about it. I know what I'd do. It wouldn't be pretty. I would classify this behavior as more than just foolish interpretation of doctrine. This is a destructive thing to do, and ought not to be tolerated. I had a similar, if milder, experience with my six-year-old. His Primary teacher said they should never watch any shows with guns in them. I guess that means "Be vewy quiet, I'm hunting wabbit" is right up there with R-rated movies now. -- D. Michael Martindale dmichael@wwno.com ================================== Check out Worldsmiths, the new online LDS writers group, at http://www.wwno.com/worldsmiths Sponsored by Worlds Without Number http://www.wwno.com ================================== - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Sharlee Glenn" Subject: Re: [AML] (Andrew's Poll) Vote Date: 24 Jun 2000 06:51:27 -0600 I'm breaking my self-imposed vow of silence on the AML-list in order to cast my vote for Best Mormon Novel of the 90's. (The vow is aimed at keeping me focused on my own writing projects and deadlines. The allure of the list is such a distraction! :-) My choice would have to be _Salvador_ by Margaret Young. I was completely wowed by this book--though I must admit more by the style than by the content. The very first page of the book let me know right away that I was dealing with a major talent here, someone who obviously loved language and knew how to make it do her bidding. The style reminded me of a mix of Annie Dillard, Anne Tyler (at her best), and Barbara Kingsolver, who I had just discovered and fallen in love with. I was in complete awe of Margaret's ability to turn a phrase, to create a mood, to establish a locale, to develop these zany and wonderful characters. I think that the mother in _Salvador_ is one of my favorite characters in all of Mormon literature. Though the book didn't completely live up to my initial expectations (I felt that a few of the characters became pawns of the author and that the climax was rather forced), I still think that it's the best thing, stylistically, that's been produced by an LDS writer since _The Backslider_. Sharlee Glenn glennsj@inet-1.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Larry Jackson Subject: [AML] re: LDS Church Magazines Are Going Online Date: 24 Jun 2000 12:20:06 EDT Kent Larsen: My apologies, Larry. I shouldn't have assumed so much. _______________ Not a problem. I think most, if not all on this list understand the feeling of having something we created taken and either copied or used in other ways without credit. I was sorry to see this happen with your article. I was also very pleased to see another list-owner politely, but publicly jump on a poster who did this with your piece, clearly pointing out to his list that both attribution and permission are required when someone else's work is involved. I believe you do a great service, Kent, with your Mormon-News list. An important part of it's value is that you always include the original source of the article, where it is available. And I enjoyed your background information on this particular story, as well. Since someone (sorry, I was too quick on the delete key) asked what curriculum materials would be in the magazines, I have included that information below. For those who are not interested, now is the time to "press any (delete/next) key", which always brings to my mind the image of the fellow standing over his keyboard with the big sledge hammer ... Larry Jackson This is the additional information I posted to another list. I have summarized it from a one-page enclosure to the letter: Nine times a year, a page in each magazine will identify articles to help parents, teachers, and leaders in preparing family home evenings, teaching Sunday lessons, fulfilling other Church assignments, and in enhancing personal study. The May and November issues of the Ensign will contain the subjects and resources designated by the First Presidency for Melchizedek Priesthood and Relief Society instruction on the 4th Sunday of each month. This was previously published in "Teachings for Our Time". The May and November issues will also identify resources that can be used to update Aaronic Priesthood and Young Women lessons. Items already included in the magazines will continue, such as the First Presidency and Visiting Teaching Messages in the Ensign, and Primary sharing time materials in the Friend. Larry Jackson ________________________________________________________________ YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET! Juno now offers FREE Internet Access! Try it today - there's no risk! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj. - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Noel Stott" Subject: Re: [AML] (Andrew's Poll) Best Mormon Novel of the 90s Date: 24 Jun 2000 10:20:36 -0700 I would like to vote for my favorite. There is a wide variety of authors with many well known and some not so well known. You ought to break your voting down to two groups and use the above criteria. I have read all of Lisa Peck's books and really enjoy her characters and her gospel information. Her Aunt Betsy is a lovable character. She's easy to relate to because she is not perfect and doesn't live a perfect life. She makes mistakes but it's okay you still love her. She pulls on your heart strings with her care and concern for others. And she makes me laugh. I find her delightful. So my vote is for Lisa Peck. You didn't include Lisa's sequel to Dangerous Memories which is More Precious Than Diamonds. The second book is better than the first. You can see how Lisa has sharpened her writing. Lisa's books left a lasting impression with me and I look forward to the third sequel in this series which will be out some time in the fall. Judy Anderson (email judy@stott-family. com) - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Larry Jackson Subject: [AML] MN Ricks Looking For Stories, Photos, Artifacts of Spori Date: 24 Jun 2000 13:36:19 EDT Building: Inside Ricks 20Jun00 D3 [From Mormon-News] Ricks Looking For Stories, Photos, Artifacts of Spori Building Inside Ricks 20Jun00 D3 REXBURG, IDAHO -- Ricks College officials are collecting personal stories, photographs and artifacts pertaining to the historic Jacob Spori Building. The stories and photographs will be used in a number of projects that college officials are preparing to commemorate the legacy of the historic building that was built in the early 1900s. The building is scheduled to be replaced with a new structure in the near future. "We are looking for memories that involve the building," says Steve Moser, assistant director of Public Relations. "We would prefer written remembrances. However, if you are reluctant to commit your memories to paper, we'd like to interview you in person." Stories may be mailed to Moser at Ricks College, Rexburg, ID 83460-1660 or e-mailed to him at mosers@ricks.edu. Moser is also interested in photographs that are at least 20 years old and of good photo quality. While many photographs exist of the exterior of the building, Moser says interior shots of classrooms and people are needed. He is particularly interested in a photograph of the old staircase. Photographs will be copied and returned, or may be donated to the college archives collection. Memorabilia and artifacts pertaining to the building are also being collected for a future museum display. Such items also may be donated or loaned to the college. For more information, contact Moser at (208) 356-1153. >From Mormon-News: Mormon News and Events Forwarding is permitted as long as this footer is included Mormon News items may not be posted to the World Wide Web sites without permission. Please link to our pages instead. For more information see http://www.MormonsToday.com/ Send join and remove commands to: majordomo@MormonsToday.com Put appropriate commands in body of the message: To join: subscribe mormon-news To leave: unsubscribe mormon-news To join digest: subscribe mormon-news-digest - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Jerry Enos" Subject: Re: [AML] Adoption Stories (addition) Date: 24 Jun 2000 12:29:59 -0600 Have you concidered the grandparents? Either the giving or receiving end? It puts another light on the story but it may be a very good one. Just a thought. [Konnie Enos] - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Kathleen Woodbury Subject: Re: [AML] Adoption Stories Date: 24 Jun 2000 12:24:31 -0600 At 04:52 PM 6/22/00 -0700, Christopher Bigelow wrote: >I have accepted a freelance writing job from LDS Family Services to write some articles about >adoption for placement in newspapers and Church publications. Catherine Poelman (an LDS writer which makes my post germane to AML-list) has a new book out entitled THE SOUL OF ADOPTION. I think I've seen it at Deseret Book (publisher is Eagle Gate, ISBN is 1=57345-655-1). Kathleen Dalton-Woodbury workshop@burgoyne.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Jerry Enos" Subject: Re: [AML] Sexuality in LDS Lit Date: 24 Jun 2000 12:51:25 -0600 I don't understand. I write to entertain, not to spiritually motivate. As long as a book doesn't take away the Spirit altogether it should be judged individually. No two people are alike and what one likes another will hate. Konnie Enos - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Jason Steed" Subject: Re: [AML] Re: Writing About Religion Date: 24 Jun 2000 14:39:08 PDT >I got the same message Skip Hamilton got from Kristen. Here is the >response I sent to her the other day: > > > I think it is never easy to write about religion. And I'm not > > sure people should. > >[snip] > > > I suspect that the strongest writing we will ever get that can > > be said to be "about" religion will be either expository or, if > > fiction, bitter. > >Why? I've never read Dante's "Inferno" but is it bitter? Is Shakespeare >bitter when he writes about Christ in his plays? I remember kneeling >onstage during a rehearsal of King Lear, watching Ivan Crosland, as Lear, >take Edgar's arms and hold them out -- like wings -- like the bar of a >cross -- and ask that muddy, naked man, "What hast thou been?" Then >Edgar describes a person who is a servingman who has committed many sins. > I realized that night that he was associating himself with Christ's lot. > They were both innocent men, servants to one degree or another who were >made to suffer for the sins of others. It was a tearful epiphany for me. I agree, writing about religion does not have to be bitter--but I feel I should interject here that, to my knowledge, Shakespeare never alludes directly to Christ or Christianity. At least, the general consensus among Shakespeare scholars/critics (as far as I know) is that he remains perfectly ambiguous about religion and religious matters--any "Christian" reading of his play (which would include a particular performance of it) is more the work of the reader or the performers than Shakespeare per se... As for others who have written about religion without being "bitter"--I think Flannery O'Connor, John Updike, Allegra Goodman, James Baldwin, G.M. Hopkins, John Donne, George Herbert, Emily Dickinson, and many others have done it and done it well. > > > It is easier to write about God with clarity when you are > > writing about disappointment and estrangement, because you can feel > > those things so strongly, so vividly, and put words to them with > > such passion. > >Perhaps this is your experience, but it's not mine. I've just finished a >play called Tombs, that is largely a conversation between Christ and his >mother in Joseph's tomb. I wrote vividly, with passion and not a bit of >it had anything to do with disappointment or estrangement. And who says disappointment or estrangement are equal to "bitterness"? I think a crucial part of writing about religion is writing about the struggles religion involves--I can feel disappointed at the gap between my ideals and my reality, and write about the inherent conflicts therein, without being "bitter"... > > What good, pray tell, does it do to trump up a bunch of fictional > > miracles for the sake of a story, or a story for the sake of a > > bunch of fictional miracles? Is that supposed to do anybody > > any good? > >So, what good is *any* writing then? Is the utilitarian view the only view? (i.e. Do we need to even ask "what good is writing"?) > > As I read her, I wondered if I could write my own God as > > passionately, as concretely as she writes her own bitterness and > > disappointment. I don't think I can. I'm not sure I should. > >But what else is there? All good stories are Jesus stories. "The Iron >Giant." Sacrifice, redemption, forgiveness. Good stories are about >these things. And these things point to Christ. You are writing about >religion, or God, or you're not writing about anything. This is a bit strong. The Christ archetype is not the only archetypal story (there is also, for example, Faust--a sort of opposite to Christ). And are you saying "The Iron Giant" is a _good_ story? (I didn't care for it so much.) Yes, there are good stories that contain Christ figures, or are archetypally Christ-stories. But I would argue the vast majority of literature out there is not directly related to religion or God. If it is, then again, that seems more the reader's doing than the writers'. You may posit that all that is written that is NOT directly related to religion or God is worthless, irrelevent (therefore, if we don't write about religion/God, we aren't writing about anything). But even that, I think, is a bit strong. The only way I can live with this is if we make it explicit that to write about humanity is to in some way write about God (we are, after all, related to God, gods in the making, etc.)--but even this inflicts a "Mormon reading" onto much that is written that is of worth, but that is not explicitly/directly related to God or religion... Still, I agree overall: it is possible (some might even argue mandatory) to write about religion and/or God without being "bitter" or "anti-", etc. Jason ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jeff Needle Subject: [AML] _Secrets_ (was: Marion SMITH, _Riptide_) Date: 24 Jun 2000 16:30:49 -0700 I've read "Secrets" and found myself wondering about the central character, the bishop who has to handle all the problems of his rather dysfunctional ward. I had a non-member question to ask, and since you've read the book, maybe you can help me. It seemed that a rather large number of families in his ward suffered from some dysfunction, including his own family. And yet he seemed blissfully unaware of many of the problems. Do you think one of the purposes of the book was to alert priesthood to the idea that they may be overlooking problems in their wards? I found the bishop to be a curiously sympathetic fellow. At 01:13 PM 6/23/00 -0400, you wrote: >Was this book, telling this story, seriously only 191 pages?? I can >read 191 pages in an hour! Having been abused myself, I think I >may pass on this particular story, thanks for the review. If you >haven't read it already, Yorganson's _Secrets_ is an excellent >fiction account (though I know some of the stories were true) of >sexual abuse. _Riptide_ sounds too contrived. >Debbie Brown > --------------- Jeff Needle jeff.needle@general.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: aml@xmission.com Subject: [AML] GATES, _Brigham's Day_ Date: 25 Jun 2000 09:24:05 -0700 (MST) The West Under Cover: Past Haunts the Present in Gates' 'Brigham's Day' Sunday, June 25, 2000 BY MARTIN NAPARSTECK SPECIAL TO THE TRIBUNE Brigham's Day By John Gates; Walker & Company; $23.95 In the opening three pages of Brigham's Day, John Gates' first novel, John D. Lee sits on his coffin at Mountain Meadows in 1877 waiting to be executed. He is asked if he knows the location of "that which is sought" and he says no. On the final page of the book, he is executed. The 182 pages in between are set, almost entirely, a century later. During that time, "that which is sought" results in two murders, and although the exact explanation of "that which is sought" is not revealed until near the end of the book, most Utah readers likely know what it is: a document that proves or disproves whether Brigham Young ordered the massacre near Cedar City in 1857 of more than 100 men, women and children on a wagon train heading west. This is a novel about how the past haunts the present. It's a theme with the potential for greatness, one of the themes used repeatedly by William Faulkner. And it saves Gates' novel from a mundane style, stereotyped characters and carelessness in some details. Although the Mountain Meadows Massacre itself appears in only one brief scene in the novel, more than anything else the book is about that most infamous day in Utah and Mormon history. In the book's more modern sequences, Brigham Bybee is a middle-aged attorney not fully recovered from a drinking problem. He has just lost the biggest case of his life, a suit on behalf of a teen-age girl against the man most likely to be next president of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Bybee is court-appointed to assist a much younger attorney, the brash Ronnie Wallers, in a murder case in Kanab, which is about as far south as someone can go in Utah and not be in Arizona. (In fact, whether the RV where the murder suspect lives in a trailer park is in Arizona or Utah is a key point in determining his guilt or innocence.) Wallers believes the victim was killed by members of a secret society known as Daughter of Zion (a group better known as the Sons of Dan and the Danites, men who will use violence to carry out the will of church leaders; why Daughter of Zion is singular, or feminine, is never explained). Bybee at first believes Wallers is crazy, as well as obnoxious, but eventually he is converted. Wallers' view is that the victim, an elderly man named Douglas Farnsworth, possessed a document telling some hidden truth about Mountain Meadows. Bybee, meanwhile, romances the beautiful Zolene Swapp, granddaughter of Farnsworth, and shares a prolonged sex scene with her -- a scene that will convince many readers that Gates learned to write from studying not the great master from Oxford, Miss., whose theme he shares, but that other Oxford writer, John Grisham, who makes a lot more money than Faulkner precisely because there are prolonged sex scenes in oddball murder cases (of course, Faulkner also had his share of sex scenes, as readers familiar with Sanctuary will recall). The local sheriff is fat and sloppy and corrupt, the defendant is illiterate and clueless (and, oddly, a minor character), and the granddaughter is one of the most beautiful women the protagonist has ever seen. All out of a Grisham novel/movie, not one of them with anything close to the complexity Faulkner instilled in his characters. There are plot tricks designed more to show the author can come up with clever plot tricks than to reveal characters, as when Wallers tricks the defendant, Owen Parks, to sign a confession as a way of showing co-counsel Bybee that Parks is illiterate and therefore not likely to have murdered someone to steal a document. Why he simply didn't ask Parks if he could read, or give him something to read aloud, isn't even mentioned, let alone explained. The style is unremarkable, adding nothing to the narrative, except when it slips in carelessness, as when, in a brief flashback, we are told that one of the Mormons at Mountain Meadows murders two girls by firing "a bullet into the backs of their necks" (which is possible, of course, if he lined them up, but far more likely Gates intended to say he fired not "a bullet" but two bullets, one for each of the girls). Listing all these shortcomings can make Brigham's Day sound like a bad novel. It's not. It is, in fact, a very good novel, a compelling read, a work that reminds us that the past never goes away, no matter how much we deny it, and that, in fact, the more we hide the past and the more we lie about it, the stronger it grows and the more it controls our lives. ------ Martin Naparsteck is author of the novels War Song and A Hero's Welcome. Copyright 2000, The Salt Lake Tribune - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: aml@xmission.com Subject: [AML] YOUNG, _I Am Jane_ Date: 25 Jun 2000 09:34:19 -0700 (MST) [From the Sunday Salt Lake Tribune] Springville's Villa Playhouse Theater, 254 S. Main, Springville, is the venue for "I Am Jane," the story of a black Mormon pioneer. Most members of the cast of 25 are African-American Mormons who are members of the Genesis group -- an official arm of the LDS Church that supports members of African descent. Traditional spirituals are included in the telling of Jane's history. Opens Friday; runs Fridays, Saturdays and Mondays until July 10 at 7:30 p.m. Tickets are $8 for adults; $7 for seniors and stude - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Craig Rossiter" Subject: RE: [AML] _The Real World_ Date: 25 Jun 2000 12:50:13 -0700 My contributions to this list over the last year or so have been next to nothing. But the discussion on the Real World has really got my attention. Last Sunday I was in a motel room in San Marcos, CA, bored out of my mind, to the point of actually surfing through channels like MTV. I ran across the interview with Julie, and that was immediately followed by the first episode. I was hooked. To me, Julie is the typical Mormon young woman that we all want our sons to take to the temple. I find her very fresh and alive, and not so much na=EFve as sheltered. After just two episodes, I am seeing her widen her view of humanity, and look past some of the behaviors she doesn't condone to the person underneath. I was moved by her comment that she was too quick to judge her gay housemate, and maybe she has been too quick to judge others as a matter of course. I can't wait for Tuesday night to see the next episode. In my opinion, it would do a lot of the BYU student body good to cycle through this type of experience. Regarding the comment that missionary service provides real world experience-It may have 20 or 30 years ago when we had to manage our money and find our own apartments and even cook our own meals, but now I am not so sure. The opportunity is there to experience some real world stuff, but the missionaries from my ward return to describe a fairly sheltered experience. I understand why things have changed, so that they can worry less about physical needs and focus on the work, but I am not convinced that it offers the growth potential that it once did. Hooray for Julie, I will be rooting for her on Tuesday. And I will be rooting for the other six as well. Craig Rossiter - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jeff Needle Subject: [AML] STEWART, _The Zarahemla Vision_ (review) Date: 25 Jun 2000 05:49:47 -0700 Review ====== Gary Stewart, "The Zarahemla Vision" (c) 1986, St. Martin's Press Fiction, 280 pp., hardback, $15.95 Not sure if it's still in print Reviewed by Jeff Needle "The Zarahemla Vision" is the second novel in a series of Salt Lake City-based novels featuring Gabe Utley, a private investigator. Born and raised Mormon, he has since departed from the faith, but continues to live in Salt Lake City, chasing bad guys and solving mysteries. His cast of characters includes a friend inside the Church hierarchy, at least one Native American, lots of odd-ball Mormons of all stripes, and a wildly-improbable plot. If this all sounds familiar, it's because the formula is identical to Robert Irvine's efforts. (I haven't checked to see which author released the earliest first novel.) "The Zarahemla Vision" opens with Gabe being summoned by an aunt who claims that their crazy relative Parley has kidnapped the President of the Church. Gabe dismisses it as wild speculation, but when the President suddenly "dies" and is buried in a closed-casket funeral (no viewing), he becomes suspicious. He teams up with his erstwhile lover/competitor Mona (a reporter for the Deseret News) to discover the truth. Central to all this is a file containing the so-called "Zarahemla Vision." Everyone seems to want to get their hands on this file, but it disappears in a frenzy of confusion and murder. In the meantime, the Church organization is taken over by evil business interests and their cowardly followers. Gabe, however, won't give up. The book is filled with loony characters, and not a single normal Latter-day Saint. The Church is portrayed as directionless, wrongly-motivated and evily inclined. Some years ago I coined a phrase "distractive fiction." (I think it's original to me -- if it isn't, I apologize and earnestly solicit correction.) It describes a type of writing that presents a veneer of historical authenticity, but in fact so thoroughly distorts the history to a point where the reader, confronted with an entirely unbelievable story line, ceases to wonder whether the underlying "facts" are indeed facts. "The Zarahemla Vision" is just such a work. An example will illustrate: Fundamental to the plot is the passion of the current President of the Church to bring the gospel to the Lamanties. Given the world mission of the Church, this really, so far as I understand, has not been a central focus of the Church for many years. The uninformed reader will hardly question the authenticity of the presentation of the mission. The way in which it is pursued is so ludicrous that it "distracts" from even a casual exploration of the underlying "factual" basis for the story. The author, who grew up in Salt Lake City, and who, according to the jacket "...grew up assuming that most of the civilized world was Mormon," nonetheless displays some interesting views of both the Book of Mormon and the city of Salt Lake. Throughout the book, Lemuel is spelled "Lemual," something that should have been caught in editing. I've walked, and driven, both 13th East and South Temple, referred to in the book as "13 East Street" and "South Temple Street." I'm not certain what the official street names are, but I'm very certain I've never heard the word "Street" appended to the street names. Most serious is the author's attitude toward the subject of racism in the Church. An organization called the Indian Placement Mission is portrayed at one as a benevolent association to bring the Gospel to the Native Americans, and then as an extension of an arrogant, racist ecclesiastical organization that has no purpose but to subdue, and ultimately to transform the "red savages" into a people "pure and delightsome." I found this picture to be both distasteful and distracting to the real mission of the Church. Had the book not been placed in the Mormon setting, the story line might have been amusing and interesting. In fact, Stewart is a pretty good writer. He keeps the action moving; he keeps you guessing as one character after another turns out not to be who you thought he was. But there is a real danger that casual readers will think that the author is trying to buttress a wild, improbable plot with an authentic setting. The setting is anything but authentic. "Distractive fiction" worries me. "The Zarahemla Vision" is every bit as inaccurate as anything I've ever read in the field of Mormon-oriented fiction. Clearly Stewart had a lot of fun writing this book, but I fear for the negative impact such literature may have on the Church. --------------- Jeff Needle jeff.needle@general.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Linda Adams Subject: Re: [AML] Where's our LDS Pulitzer prize winner? Date: 25 Jun 2000 23:25:03 -0500 Along these lines, I don't have time to look up quotes but I *know* it's in the biography of President Gordon B. Hinckley that good books, INCLUDING FICTION and especially the classics, were a very large part of his upbringing and education. I remember reading about the library in his home as a child and getting the distinct impression from either his biography or media interviews that he loves to read a good book. (Fiction, even. Gasp!!) I am certain that not only B. Young and S. Kimball but our CURRENT prophet must disagree with this statement by the sister in your ward!! I wonder where on earth people come up with such ridiculous "doctrines" as the one quoted below? It's not in the scriptures... and I have read and do read those too. As well as good books. For the love of.... well, fiction--didn't Jesus himself TEACH mainly through parables? The parables are fiction, are they not? Therefore, there is fiction right *in* the scriptures themselves--does this woman read all the scriptures save for the parables? And aren't we supposed to emulate and be like Christ? I think I'm justified here. In both reading and writing fiction. Linda Adams At 01:54 PM 6/23/00, you wrote: >Terry L Jeffress wrote: > > > > But these people do have an affect on the market. In my ward, the young > > women's president told the youth (both boys and girls) that reading fiction > > is a sin because they should be reading the scriptures, and that writing > > fiction attempts to take over God's role as a creator. I still have to > deal > > with my kids telling me how sinful I am for reading fiction. > > - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Terry L Jeffress" Subject: Re: [AML] Marion SMITH, _Riptide_ (review) Date: 26 Jun 2000 10:26:24 -0600 Debbie Brown wrote: > Was this book, telling this story, seriously only 191 pages?? I can > read 191 pages in an hour! Having been abused myself, I think I > may pass on this particular story, thanks for the review. If you > haven't read it already, Yorganson's _Secrets_ is an excellent > fiction account (though I know some of the stories were true) of > sexual abuse. _Riptide_ sounds too contrived. Yes, 191 pages. And $14.95 for all that, too. _Contrived_ didn't come to mind while reading _Riptide,_ but _narrow_ did. -- Terry Jeffress - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Terry L Jeffress" Subject: Re: [AML] Where's our LDS Pulitzer prize winner? Date: 26 Jun 2000 10:58:50 -0600 Replying to several posts at once quoting prophets and their recommendation to read literature widely: > "This horrifies me! Where is this place? Please tell > me it's not Utah." South Jordan to be exact. For exact geographic placement, the Jordan River Temple sits in my ward boundaries. In fact, about once every two months, someone gets up in testimony meeting and mentions how Uncle/Grandpa X donated his land for the temple site. (Some of these accounts would make excellent oral history, but the disdain of writing will probably condemn this history to oblivion.) Some in my ward to condone reading, if done in conjunction with doing your Genealogy. When I first moved into my ward, I think I was one of two families that weren't related to all the rest. I think my wife was the only one with an advanced university degree. The woman I quoted comes from one of the hardest core, and most interrelated families. As you can imagine, our attendance at youth night might reach 20% on good nights. These fundamentalists also disdain going to the doctor because we should rely on faith and the priesthood, not the knowledge of man. Ok, enough venting. Due to the farmer types selling their land to developers, my ward now has a better balance. I have seen youth reading Dean Hughes in the meetinghouse without a word from those who disdain the practice. -- Terry Jeffress - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Margaret Young Subject: Re: [AML] Marion SMITH, _Riptide_ (review) Date: 26 Jun 2000 11:32:38 -0600 Are you thinking of Linda Sillitoe's book published by Signature? I don't recall the title, but it might've been _Secrets_. I would be REALLY surprised if Deseret Book published a book about an out-of-touch Bishop. Jeff Needle wrote: > I really appreciated this review. > > Some years ago there was a book titled, I think, "Secrets." It was from > Deseret Book and dealt with the issue of abuse from the standpoint of a > totally out-of-touch bishop. > > Has anyone else read this book? > > At 04:13 PM 6/22/00 -0600, you wrote: > > --------------- > Jeff Needle > jeff.needle@general.com > > - > AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature > http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "J. Scott Bronson" Subject: Re: [AML] Where's our LDS Pulitzer prize winner? Date: 26 Jun 2000 12:33:04 -0600 I said: > > National attention certainly doesn't equate with talent or > > superior skills as a writer. Terry Jeffress said: > Perhaps I did blend the concepts of popular ("best-selling") with > award-winning ... Now do you consider "national attention" > to mean only popular works? Or, does that also include the > various national awards? Nope. I was going off your earlier comment that went like this: "I theorize that most writers of high quality material know that they write well and thus submit their work to the national markets. Those who get published in the niche markets, although the best in their field, usually do not write with the same quality (or genius) as those at the national level." What I'm saying is that that theory is rather superficial. Margaret Young is clearly a better writer than Betty Eadie and Richard Paul Evans (who are Mormons publishing in the "national" arena), and John Grisham and Nicholas Sparks (who are not-Mormons publishing in the "national" arena). The fact that she is not publishing in a "national" arena has nothing to do with her quality or genius as a writer; it has everything to do with who she writes to. Sparks, Grisham, Eadie and Evans may all be good storytellers to a certain degree, but that doesn't mean they're great writers. The reading masses are willing to forgive certain technical deficiencies for a "ripping yarn." Now, I happen to think that Margaret Young is a fabulous writer AND storyteller, but her stories simply don't have a "national" appeal: They're Mormon Stories. This is a simple truth in the world of publishing, that Mormon stories are not bestselling stories. Card's _Lost Boys_ would never have been published if it had been his first novel. That Mormon story was put into the "national" arena based on his reputation as a bestselling author of not-Mormon stories. ("Hey, it's by Scott Card. His audience will buy anything he writes.") Saying that the reason Margaret Young publishes in a niche market is because her writing lacks true quality or genius is tantamount to saying that the audience she's writing to in that niche is not sophisticated enough to appreciate writing of true quality or genius. That's simply not true ... even though the major publishers in that particular niche market still believe that it is. J. Scott Bronson--The Scotted Line "World peace begins in my home" We are not the acolytes of an abstruse god. We are here to entertain--Keith Lockhart - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: harlowclark@juno.com Subject: Re: [AML] _The Real World_ Date: 26 Jun 2000 13:24:56 -0700 On Thu, 22 Jun 2000 00:36:03 Gae Lyn Henderson writes: > For example, there is much to be learned from the intimacy, the bonding, > between mother and infant. That's part of what my story "Marginalia" is about, but it's twisted a bit because the main character's ideas of appropriate bonding have been influenced by sexual abuse, and the sense that a child can bond with only one parent. > And Mormon women practice that > relationship more than many other people do! Bela Petsco told me once that he was planning a story about a woman who would marry and have children then divorce, repeatedly. She wanted to be a mother in Zion, but not a wife in Zion. Bela had such wonderful ideas for stories that whenever he tells me, "I'm dead, Harlow, leave me be," I can't. > I had written about a childhood conflict between my desire to > while away the summer days reading and my mother's imperative that > her daughters work in the garden, picking peas, beans, raspberries, and > then spend the remainder of the day canning and preserving those > foods. To me it was the most ordinary of topics. Linda Brodky > commented, though, on the possibilities such writing has to > discuss traditional women's work, to figure out what value it has, > to help women (and men) reconfigure roles. This is one of the powers of art. It's also one reason people find art dangerous. Imagine a story about the conflict between a RS president and a bishop who makes several raids on RS to staff other organizations. She fights him when he calls her counselor into YW. A few months later he calls her secretary into cub scouts, and wounds her when he says, "This time let's do it the Lord's way." She thinks, but doesn't say, "Don't my prayers count for anything?" The task in writing such a story is to show the bishop as a humane loving steward of his ward, just as the RS president is of the women, and of showing him as insensitive to the RS president's inspiration in her calling. One story that does something similar very well is Eileen Gibbons Kump's "Sayso or Sense." A woman whose husband keeps redesigning her dream home has a dream one night about the pre-existence, where the men got to choose sayso, or sense, but not both. But she doesn't pursue the dream. She forgives her husband's use of his sayso. My mother told my father she ought to read the story to Josie, her brother's wife, whose dream home suffered a like fate. My father thought the story might be too painful for her. > And so I suddenly saw my Utah upbringing as the richest of mines to > explore. Indeed it is. A lot of my own writing has been moving me towards finding ways and developing skills to value and mine the riches of my culture. The husband in "Marginalia" is a man who takes copious notes at church. He wants to be a writer (is there anything more boring than stories about writers?:)). His wife thinks he's just exploiting the people at church, but my stories about him are partly about his gradual discovery of how much he loves the culture he writes from and about. > Moreover, I argue it is vital that we (LDS women) cultural-insiders > also notice and value our precipitous discovery of authority. How > easy it is to lapse into temporary weakness, to forget our strength. Reading the beginning of Susie Orbach's _Hunger Strike_ one day in the Seattle Public Library, set me thinking a bit about anorexia and authority. I found a copy at DI recently. ("That's you," Donna said, but it's not. I'm just thin.) I keep thinking how I would put together a story about a male anorexic, probably with some title like, "He Ate and Drank the Precious Words." I love the irony of such a title, because while Dickinson's poem says, "His spirit grew robust," his wife notes that without losing any weight he has lost two belt sizes. I also like the bulimic implications of the title: a man spewing forth torrents of words. I can imagine a scene where a woman sees his anorexia and feels anger at this man appropriating a woman's disease. I'm not sure whether the story would be a comedy or tragedy. Both perhaps. > If many of us have been told we don't fit into the preconceived > image that people hold of women or men > in our culture, then remember: those images must be enriched, > complicated, deepened. We can do it. Indeed we can. Harlow S. Clark ________________________________________________________________ YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET! Juno now offers FREE Internet Access! Try it today - there's no risk! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj. - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Neal Kramer Subject: [AML] Re: SORENSON, "The Ghost" Date: 26 Jun 2000 14:17:15 -0600 Here's the passage Kristi Bell mentioned from Virginia Sorensen with its subtle reference to the KKK: "When it floated through the door alone, we were not even sure whether it was man or woman. There were almost no eyes cut in the hood, only the merest slits through which one caught a glimpse of eye-shine now and then." "It was a terrible costume, actually, was it not, the one in which we had heard people did unmentionable things to the poor colored people of the South?" _Where Nothing is Long Ago_, "The Ghost," p. 127. Neal Kramer - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Jason Steed" Subject: Re: [AML] Revealing Ourselves in Writing Date: 26 Jun 2000 13:18:51 PDT > > In what ways do we as LDS writers reveal > > ourselves in our writing? > >It's not just LDS writers. All writers, I believe, reveal their deepest >feelings about Life, the Universe, and Everything in their writing. >Scott Card calls it their "world view." I agree with Card's contention >that writers can't help but reveal their deepest rooted understandings in >their writings. How these things are revealed would take more time and >brain power than I've got right now. However, I think it would be a >fascinating project to explicate someone's world view through an >intricate analysis of their writing. > >scott This, of course, is often what is being done in literary criticism, in literature departments and classes around the world. And of course, each bit of criticism is a piece of writing itself--so that, as the critic explicates and analyzes the world view of the author, the critic, too reveals her/his own world view... Jason ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Richard Johnson Subject: [AML] Re: Nudity Date: 26 Jun 2000 16:45:18 -0400 At 01:43 PM 6/21/2000 -0600, you wrote: >Linda Adams wrote: >No frontal nudity in "Monty." I forget the rating, but it was >definitely not NC-17. > >NC-17 is reserved for films of explicit sexual scenes, not just nudity >per se. > >-- >Thom Duncan Old subject, new post, but I was away at Puppet festival last week and couldn't answere on time. While there I saw _The Full Monty_ for the first time, and indeed there was NO "full" frontal nudity. (And the movie was a hoot) Richard B. Johnson Husband, Father, Grandfather, Puppeteer, Playwright, Writer, Director, Actor, Thingmaker, Mormon, Person, Fool I sometimes think that the last persona is the most important http://www2.gasou.edu/commarts/puppet/ Georgia Southern University Puppet Theatre - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: AEParshall@aol.com Subject: Re: [AML] Where's our LDS Pulitzer prize winner? Date: 26 Jun 2000 17:45:55 EDT > But these people do have an affect on the market. In my ward, the young > women's president told the youth (both boys and girls) that reading fiction > is a sin because they should be reading the scriptures, and that writing > fiction attempts to take over God's role as a creator. I still have to deal > with my kids telling me how sinful I am for reading fiction. I'm still trying to figure this one out. Growing up in our family was probably not all that different from growing up in most list members' families. We three kids saw our parents reading a lot, fiction, nonfiction, and the scriptures. They read stories to us when we were too little read; they listened to us read our own stories while we were learning to read; we read books aloud as a family long after we became experienced readers. We all had library cards, and weekly visits to the public library were part of our routine. We were surrounded by books in the home, and books were favored Christmas gifts. Dad recited poetry, Mom wrote poetry. We read The Children's Friend (filled with fiction) and heard hundreds of Primary lessons illustrated by obviously fictional stories about little Johnny and Mary exploring nature and learning to obey and taking their places in a happy family. With all those countless and continuing examples of the enjoyment and utility of literature surrounding us, I know exactly how we would have reacted to an anti-fiction speech or lesson by one unenlightened ward Young Women president -- some phrase from the talk would have become an instant private joke used within the family as shorthand for bizarre gospel hobbyhorses. The Young Women president's talk completely overrode the lifelong example you have been setting for your children? Really? Ardis Parshall AEParshall@aol.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Kenny Kemp" Subject: [AML] re: Movie Ratings Date: 26 Jun 2000 15:49:08 -0700 Hello, everyone: I've listened to the discussion of movie ratings with great interest, both as a filmmaker and an audience member. Here's a little background on the rating system courtesy of the Dove Foundation, a Christian media-watch organization: http://www.dove.org/fyi/articles/Rating_the_Ratings.htm KENNY KEMP President and CEO ALTA FILMS & PRESS "films and books that entertain, enlighten and inspire." www.alta-films.com Address: Box 71395 Salt Lake City, UT 84171 Tel: 801.943.0321 Fax: 801.943.0321 Email: kenny@alta-films.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jacob Proffitt Subject: Re: [AML] _The Real World_ Date: 26 Jun 2000 15:55:38 -0600 On Sun, 25 Jun 2000 12:50:13 -0700, Craig Rossiter wrote: >My contributions to this list over the last year or so have been next to >nothing. But the discussion on the Real World has really got my = attention. >Last Sunday I was in a motel room in San Marcos, CA, bored out of my = mind, >to the point of actually surfing through channels like MTV. I ran = across >the interview with Julie, and that was immediately followed by the first >episode. I was hooked. To me, Julie is the typical Mormon young woman = that >we all want our sons to take to the temple. I find her very fresh and >alive, and not so much na=3DEFve as sheltered. After just two episodes,= I am >seeing her widen her view of humanity, and look past some of the = behaviors >she doesn't condone to the person underneath. I was moved by her = comment >that she was too quick to judge her gay housemate, and maybe she has = been >too quick to judge others as a matter of course. I can't wait for = Tuesday >night to see the next episode. In my opinion, it would do a lot of the = BYU >student body good to cycle through this type of experience. I saw the first two episodes as well this Saturday (the kids had gone to = bed and I couldn't sleep and I was curious). The Julie story was about as = you'd expect. She's not really a stereotypical Mormon girl--which is good. = She has a hint of rebellion and comments that she doesn't want to follow the standard plan and marry an RM as soon as she can. It's a minor comment = and one I hope doesn't represent the wedge in the tree or chink in the armor.= I prefer to see it as a healthy introspection that all real people should = be prone to. But more than anything else, I remember vividly wishing that all parents would watch the show, if only to catch those brief moments of stark = honesty as the roommates discuss parents. It shook me up and reaffirmed my dedication to my kids. Jacob Proffitt - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jeff Needle Subject: [AML] _Secrets_ (was: Marion SMITH, _Riptide_) Date: 26 Jun 2000 15:31:56 -0700 Nope, it was a Deseret Book title. When I find the book, I'll post about it. Thanks. At 11:32 AM 6/26/00 -0600, you wrote: >Are you thinking of Linda Sillitoe's book published by Signature? I don't >recall the title, but it might've been _Secrets_. I would be REALLY >surprised if Deseret Book published a book about an out-of-touch Bishop. > >Jeff Needle wrote: > >> I really appreciated this review. >> >> Some years ago there was a book titled, I think, "Secrets." It was from >> Deseret Book and dealt with the issue of abuse from the standpoint of a >> totally out-of-touch bishop. >> >> Has anyone else read this book? >> --------------- Jeff Needle jeff.needle@general.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Terry L Jeffress" Subject: Re: [AML] Where's our LDS Pulitzer prize winner? Date: 26 Jun 2000 16:57:08 -0600 > Saying that the reason Margaret Young publishes in a niche market is > because her writing lacks true quality or genius is tantamount to saying > that the audience she's writing to in that niche is not sophisticated > enough to appreciate writing of true quality or genius. That's simply > not true ... even though the major publishers in that particular niche > market still believe that it is. I probably should have thrown in a "generally" here and there in my statement of theory. I still maintain that good writers recognize that they produce good writing, and thus generally submit that writing to the larger markets. That does not preclude a good writer from submitting to the niche markets, but most writers I have known motivated themselves through dreams of fame and riches (in spite of their talk about being artists). Larger markets bring more fame and riches. As an interesting corollary, bad writers cannot tell the difference between bad writing and good writing. Thus, bad writers believe that they produce good writing because they don't have the skill to recognize the shameful prose in their manuscript. This is the only explanation for some of the slush I have read. (Then there's the rest of us stuck somewhere between the geniuses and the 1 million monkeys.) Now to the subject of audience. (And to add more fuel to the fire for those of you forming opinions about Terry's literary elitism.) I content that most audiences only recognize "a ripping good yarn" and couldn't tell, except peripherally, that the book was written well or poorly. For the majority, if a book tells a story sufficiently well to create vivid pictures and sufficient tension and none of the really big words get in the way, they like the book. Books that one must appreciate for its writing and not its pace will never do as well because the audience that wants to appreciate that book is much smaller. I think the audience that _could_ appreciate the book is actually quite large. But since, I believe, most people read as an escape, they don't want to have to extend the mental energy needed to appreciate "artistic" works. For example, I read on the train while commuting. I love to read Umberto Eco, but I cannot read it on the train. The surrounding noise and bustle distracts me from the meaning in his page-long paragraphs. But I can easily read some simple thriller (King and Koontz come to mind). I have to actually create a time when I can read Eco, an effort that keeps _The Island of the Day Before_ still unread, although I have owned it for 2 years. I didn't mean to insult Ms. Young with my theory, but I still think the story will sell over the writing. -- Terry Jeffress - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: ViKimball@aol.com Subject: Re: [AML] Re: Writing About Religion Date: 26 Jun 2000 19:36:08 EDT In a message dated 6/26/00 2:17:02 PM Pacific Daylight Time, jpsteed@hotmail.com writes: << As for others who have written about religion without being "bitter"--I think Flannery O'Connor, John Updike, Allegra Goodman, James Baldwin, G.M. Hopkins, John Donne, George Herbert, Emily Dickinson, and many others have done it and done it well. >> Don't forget John Milton. Violet Kimball - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Katie Parker Subject: [AML] ADAMS, _Prodigal Journey_ (Review) Date: 26 Jun 2000 18:40:28 -0600 Adams, Linda Paulson. _Prodigal Journey_; volume one of _Thy Kingdom Come_ trilogy. Cornerstone, 2000, 517 pp. Softcover, $14.95. Reviewed by Katie Parker _Prodigal Journey_ is set in the second half or so of the 21st century and follows the story of Alyssa Stark, who is not religious, and to a lesser extent two of her LDS friends, as they negotiate life through increasingly troubled times. To my understanding, the Second Coming is to occur at a later point in the trilogy. But the story is not about moving toward the Second Coming, but rather is about how a few characters live their lives while the world as a whole moves in that direction, for the most part unaware. Adams first sets forth a brief history of the events we have missed between now and the time of the book. While I have no way of judging if any of it would actually happen this way, the setting seems fairly plausible and opens the door for some interesting storylines. Without going into much detail here, some of the conditions of the American society of _Prodigal Journey_ include legalized drug use and prostitution, while outward discussion of one=92s religion unless specifically asked is strictly prohibited. (You have to read the book if you want more background on how these laws came about. :-)) With this backdrop, the actual story begins relatively calmly on a farm in eastern Iowa. Alyssa=92s family has been friends with the Richardsons for a number of years, and the two families have often celebrated holidays together. But on this particular occasion, at about the same moment that fourteen-year-old Alyssa and sixteen-year-old Peter Richardson are sharing their first kiss, Peter=92s mother breaks the news to Alyssa=92s mother that the Richardsons (Peter=92s family) are going to= be baptized into the LDS faith. Mrs. Stark (Alyssa=92s mom; an unstable individual) flies into a rage and forbids her family to have further contact with the Richardsons. This would be a traumatic way for any fourteen-year-old to lose her first love, but Peter and the Richardsons have been some of the only stabilizing forces in Alyssa=92s life, and to face life without them is no easy task. Alyssa=92s mother is verbally an= d physically abusive; her father does little to intervene and eventually becomes an alcoholic. Alyssa=92s turbulent family life throughout her high school years is depicted in Part One of the book. Throughout it there is a recurring theme of Alyssa longing to escape from her chaotic life and find the steadiness that Peter and his family would offer, were they available to her. The story here is interesting, and I found Alyssa=92s father a pretty convincing character, but the real story begins after Part One. Alyssa then goes on to college and to a long but riveting journey to maturity, relative safety, and peace. There are plot twists at every corner that are unexpected but spin naturally from the established setting and characters. I found the book difficult to put down and usually ended up reading more at one sitting than I=92d intended. There is a lot that I like about this book. For one thing, it comes closer to the middle ground between fluffy-but-faithful and thoughtful-but-on-the-fringe LDS fiction than most other works that I=92v= e read. It=92s generally well-written, very intriguing, and it=92s true to = the faith. Granted, it is speculative, but the author covers her bases well and I myself found nothing that couldn=92t be possible given the context. I also found nothing that would cause me to question my beliefs or standards. There are a few very moving scenes that reminded me, forcefully, that the Savior knows us and loves us each and is very involved in our lives. Many of the characters, particularly some of the non-LDS ones, are vividly drawn; a few of them seemed to me as if they could walk off the page. One haunting character in the slum area is Bert, who had been an outward Christian until he was forced into =93therapy=94 by the governmen= t. As a result, he spends his days counting meaninglessly, and he communicates cryptically by numbers. Another is Margret, a woman who has a pretty rough background that includes two children by two different men. But she loves these children and is fiercely protective of them and walks three miles every night to work the graveyard shift in a factory to provide for them. Not all of the characters are so vivid. I found a couple of the =93bad guys=94, including Alyssa=92s mother, somewhat two-dimensional. They are unlike some of the better characters who seem more fully developed with flaws and consciences and human spirits. I would have liked to see a complex story such as this one go into more depth on a couple of these villains, showing that they are indeed feeling humans and yet how they can still do the things that they do. But this is a minor complaint, and these characters still perform their functions in the story very well. _Prodigal Journey_ does contain drug use and a few references to sex. But most characters do not actually go beyond LDS standards of behavior, and if they do they eventually experience logical consequences. I thought that the drug usage was handled well, with the consequences ultimately being rather dire but natural, and never pointed out in a preachy way. It=92s an intricate situation, though; it=92s not black and white. Unchaste behavior is also handled well, in an interesting way: a nonmember couple considers it (mostly in passing; it=92s not a major issue for them) in a way that is natural for these characters (i.e., having no reason to think that such an encounter is immoral, and having every reason to think that it=92s normal), while in seemingly unrelated scenes, an LDS couple through their discussions and experiences leave the reader no room for doubt as to the LDS position on this matter. This book is difficult for me to describe in detail because there is so much that happens along the way, and I honestly don=92t want to spoil the story for anyone. I greatly enjoyed following Alyssa and her friends through all 517 pages of the book, and quite literally having no idea where the story would take me. The territory is uncharted, and there are no promises of easy answers by the book=92s end. I thought that the ending was just about perfect, though; enough was resolved to satisfy me as a reader, but there are multitudes of problems and situations left to continue on. Linda Adams has successfully created something that is not just a story with a few conflicts to deal with, but a whole world that at times seems to take off on its own. There is much left to explore. And as this world approaches the Second Coming, the only aspect of the story that I can feel sure about is that situations in their society will get worse. This may not be good in real life, but it=92s great for fiction. I will be eagerly awaiting Volumes 2 and 3 of the trilogy. Furthermore, I=92m really excited to see Cornerstone coming out with interesting, well-written and faithful books like this. I hope to see many more in the future. - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: owner-aml-list@lists.xmission.com Date: 27 Jun 2000 09:08:03 -0600 [38.31.170.131]) by snipe.prod.itd.earthlink.net (8.9.3-EL_1_3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA17630 for ; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 10:43:30 -0700 (PDT) User-Agent: Microsoft Outlook Express Macintosh Edition - 5.01 (1630) Message-ID: Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-aml-list@lists.xmission.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: aml-list BYU Theater Dept. announced its new season, including the following play by LDS playwright Tim Slover: HANCOCK COUNTY Feb 7 - 24 Margetts Theatre (smaller experimental theater) "In June 1844, in a small jail in Carthage, Illinois, a mob murdered Mormon prophet and presidential candidate Joseph Smith and his older brother Hyrum while they were detained to face a charge of treason; another Mormon leader, apostle, and future church president, John Taylor, was grievously wounded. Eleven months later, in May 1845, five prominent citizens went on trial for the murders. _Hancock County_ chronicles the trial's twelve eventful days, as well as dramatizing the story of the incidents leading up to the trial, and the terrible aftermath. A compelling new play commissioned by the Department of Theatre & Media Arts through the generosity of Don and Shirley Oscarson." [Steve Perry] - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Hall Andrew" Subject: [AML] _Secrets_ Date: 27 Jun 2000 12:28:42 JST Linda Sillitoe's book was _Secrets Keep_ (Signature, 1995). _Secrets_ was by one of the Yorgansons and Sunny Oaks. >From: Margaret Young >Reply-To: aml-list@lists.xmission.com >To: aml-list@lists.xmission.com >Subject: Re: [AML] Marion SMITH, _Riptide_ (review) >Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2000 11:32:38 -0600 > >Are you thinking of Linda Sillitoe's book published by Signature? I don't >recall the title, but it might've been _Secrets_. I would be REALLY >surprised if Deseret Book published a book about an out-of-touch Bishop. > - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Kathleen Woodbury Subject: Re: [AML] Where's our LDS Pulitzer prize winner? Date: 26 Jun 2000 21:56:19 -0600 At 04:39 PM 6/22/00 -0600, Terry L Jeffress wrote: >But these people do have an affect on the market. In my ward, the young >women's president told the youth (both boys and girls) that reading fiction >is a sin because they should be reading the scriptures, and that writing >fiction attempts to take over God's role as a creator. I still have to deal >with my kids telling me how sinful I am for reading fiction. Adding my two-cents worth (or whatever it comes out to be in email) here: Terry, I wouldn't worry about that YW president. You can't argue with that kind of conviction. I'd take all those great quotes people have given you and show them to your children. The words of the prophets of God should have more clout with them. And then I'd tell them that not everyone who is a member of the church is guided by inspiration. They should pray about everything they are told by anyone and get a confirmation from the Holy Ghost that what they have been told is according to Heavenly Father's will. That's one of the reasons we are given the gift of the Holy Ghost. (That's also something I have heard recommended by the president of the church at the ends of many general conferences.) Sometimes, the values expressed in the media aren't the only ones we need to talk with our children about. It's too bad when we have to talk to them that way about values expressed in church.... Kathleen Dalton-Woodbury workshop@burgoyne.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Kathleen Woodbury Subject: [AML] _Secrets_ Date: 26 Jun 2000 21:37:47 -0600 At 07:33 PM 6/23/00 -0700, Jeff Needle wrote: >I really appreciated this review. > >Some years ago there was a book titled, I think, "Secrets." It was from >Deseret Book and dealt with the issue of abuse from the standpoint of a >totally out-of-touch bishop. > >Has anyone else read this book? I did. I found the bishop very believable, for whatever that's worth. One thing I thought was interesting about the book was that it showed a really painful repentance process in one of the characters. Repentance doesn't come so hard in most of the other LDS fiction I've read. Kathleen Dalton-Woodbury workshop@burgoyne.com [MOD: Thanks to everyone who's contributed to this discussion, and especially to Andrew Hall for his recent post clarifying that there are two different but similarly-titled books that we're talking about here. At this point, I can't distinguish which comment goes with which book. From this point on, if anyone has comments on one of these books, I'd request that you make it clear (if you can) which of the two books you're talking about.] - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Samuel Brunson" Subject: [AML] Re: [AML-Mag] Writing About Religion Date: 26 Jun 2000 22:41:26 MDT I've been thinking about how to respond to this post all weekend. By way of introduction, I'm Sam Brunson, a BYU senior and aspiring author and musician and lawyer and politician and anything else I can get involved in. Kristen Randle's post was so interesting because it was so well reasoned, and because I disagreed with it so fundamentally. And that was what was so hard to think of in writing a response--exactly where our opinions split. One point is that there can be an African American lit, but the LDS and Jewish experiences are so disparate ("piebald") that they cannot produce a unified lit. Which is true, but the African American experience is equally piebald. Black literature embraces everything from Ishmael Reed to Maya Angelou to a whole bunch of other stuff. But that's not it, because that wasn't central to her thesis. I think it's when she writes: >I think it is never easy to write about religion. And I'm not sure people >should. I know they should not write about it at all if their motivation >outstrips the spontaneity of their story, because the inevitable result of >such an imbalance is didacticism, or worse, putting words into the mouth of >God. I agree that the didacticism can be there whenever we write incapably out of an ideology, including religion. I was reminded of that today, when I read _The San Diego Writer's Monthly_'s (where I work as a college intern) slush pile. One gentleman wrote a clever story in which the ideologically leftist parents are more repressive and racist than their adopted Republican son. The problem was not in the ideology (I disagree with what I perceive about his central thesis, but it didn't get in the way of my enjoying the story). The problem was that he was so enthralled with his ideological message that he stereotyped his characters poorly, he wrote unconvincing prose, and he couldn't convince me it was worth suspending my disbelief. It reminded me of Richard Wright's _Native Son_. The book is spectacular, reads powerfully and convincingly. Then, almost at the end, the communist lawyer delivers a speech in court explaining the repressive state apparatus that created Bigger and made him a remorseless killer. And the sixty or so pages of his plea ticked me off. Wright was no longer writing a character he cared about or I cared about. He was pushing his ideology on me. It was still remarkably well written, and still incredible thoughts, but aesthetically he had given up on letting me figure out his book and he told me what to think. > I suspect that the strongest writing we will ever get that can be said to >be "about" religion will be either expository or, if fiction, bitter. > As I read her, I wondered if I could write my own God as passionately, as >concretely as she writes her own bitterness and disappointment. I don't >think I can. I'm not sure I should. People who hate the LDS church write >and speak about it, making their accusations plainly. I'm tempted here just to write "Flannery O'Connor" and be done with it. She wrote deeply Christian fiction about a Christian Savior she passionately believed in. And not only did it occur powerfully to her--she communicated it. Kurt Vonnegut, a decidedly non-Christian author, called her the greatest writer of his generation (in his intro to his new volume of short stories which I don't have handy). The thing was, she didn't equivocate. She didn't preach. She let her characters do the talking, but she trusted in the world they lived in. She trusted that the grace would be so central to her stories' world that she didn't need to write "P.S.--Believe in Christ." And stories written out of ideological bitterness--unless the author has a stunning reason to be bitter AND the writing ability to pull it off (try Jamaica Kincaid's _A Small Place_)--rarely work. Like O'Connor, like Vonnegut, and like most enjoyable authors, an author needs to have some sort of affection for her subject to pull off the story. An ideology that gets in the way of people feels imposed. My last example: I'm reading Kurt Andersen's _Turn of the Century_ right now, based on the horrible review it got in George Will's column. It's a spectacular book (it's remarkably worth reading, but chock-full of bad language, so consider yourself warned), and the basic impression I got from Mr. Will's column was he didn't like it because it has a leftist agenda. Except that it doesn't--the main characters are Republicans who feel guilty about not being Democrats. But Mr. Andersen isn't writing an ideologically leftist tract--he's created characters, put them in a world that doesn't quite mesh with what people need, and trusted them to work it out. I believe that we can, and perhaps should, write fiction about our most sacred beliefs. We don't need to be bitter to do it, nor do we need to be didactic. Instead, I think, we need to trust our worldview (NOT have faith; faith is essential, but good members of the LDS church can be bad writers and it shouldn't reflect on their testimonies) to work. Like O'Connor, we need to trust the Plan of Salvation to be a part of the landscape that we don't need to call explicit attention to, but a part that can motivate and affect what happens in the world. Our stories don't have to be trial-of-faith stories; they just have to ring true. Sam Brunson ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "D. Michael Martindale" Subject: Re: [AML] Definition of Terms (was: Race and Culture in LDS Lit.) Date: 27 Jun 2000 01:59:21 -0600 Jason Steed wrote: > I don't think we can stop the changing nature of language. Yes, words become > "diluted" over time and with use; a word doesn't carry as much weight or > power (or it carries more); things aren't the way they used to be. But not > only do I think this can't be prevented--I'm not sure it ought to be. That's > what makes language so rich, is the ability to use a word that wouldn't > normally be associated with a certain image or idea, bringing two seemingly > disparate things together. How would we ever use metaphors, for example, if > we were worried about the "corruption" of words? As someone who thinks everyone who opposes the normalization of "alright" are out of touch with reality, I have no problem with the fluidity of language--in fact, when there's a controversy about it, I virtually always come down on the side of supporting fluidity. But I think we're talking about two different phenomena here. Diluting a word like "racism" to mean whatever the user wants it to mean so he can call anyone he wants a racist has nothing to do with the normal fluidity of language. It's a political maneuver that falls squarely under the category of propaganda. (Not that I believe any of this is Jason's intention, but I fear the result can be the same even if the intention is not there.) It degrades the language because it's not a natural evolution, but an artificially imposed one. People are not aware of the change in meaning and are assuming its original definition still holds--therefore miscommunication occurs. Plus, no new word comes in to fill the role the corrupted word used to fill. We can no longer discuss the original meaning of racism without all the baggage of the new, artificial meaning getting mixed up in the process. This is nothing more than Orwellian Newspeak. When the word that labels a concept is diluted, the concept is diluted. People see that the word is being used for trivial things, and begin to think the concept behind it is trivial. Then real racism gets treated lightly. I think this phenomenon is well-illustrated with the term "sexual harrassment." That concept has been so diluted that a six-year-old who gave a classmate a kiss for Valentine's Day was suspended from school for sexual harrassment. Meanwhile, what's happened to real sexual harrassment? The concept has been trivialized. I believe I've observed this trend in real time as we've discussed racism on the List. I've read messages calling some things racism that I find hard to label as such. Human beings are designed to be suspicious of those who are not similar to them: the tribal mentality that was an important survival mechanism for most of history. To suddenly label this natural suspicion racism, which some of us have been doing, I maintain dilutes the concept in a destructive way. Humans will always be suspicious of those who are unfamiliar or dissimilar. Racism is when a person elevates this tendency to habitual harmful behavior or philosophical self-superiority. A person who feels the suspicion, but does his best to override the tendency, should not be called racist--even if he doesn't understand the other race, or has had little experience with the race, or doesn't include the race in his literature. It's not my responsibility to people my fiction with a bunch of characters of other races. It might be a good idea; it might make my fiction more believable if I did. But I'm not a racist if I don't. I'm just a white guy who is familiar with and interested in white issues and writes about them. It's the responsibility of those of another race to write about the issues of that race. My responsibility is to support their ability to do so as much as I can. Is it wise to use the same word for my mother, who years ago was hesitant about having her kids sleep over at a black family's house, but overcame her kneejerk reaction and let us; and the KKK'er who dresses up in a white sheet and castrates black men? This really looks like destructive corruption of the language to me. -- D. Michael Martindale dmichael@wwno.com ================================== Check out Worldsmiths, the new online LDS writers group, at http://www.wwno.com/worldsmiths Sponsored by Worlds Without Number http://www.wwno.com ================================== - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "D. Michael Martindale" Subject: Re: [AML] Writing About Religion Date: 27 Jun 2000 02:03:22 -0600 Kristen Randle wrote: > I think it is never easy to write about religion. And I'm not sure people > should. > I suspect that the strongest writing we will ever get that can be said to > be "about" religion will be either expository or, if fiction, bitter. It is > easier to write about God with clarity when you are writing about > disappointment and estrangement, because you can feel those things so > strongly, so vividly, and put words to them with such passion. > How do you explain faith? How do you explain the spun glass moment of a > prayer answered, a heart comforted? And should you? Should you talk about > those things when they happen to you? Or isn't the discussion tantamount to > close examination of a snowflake - get close enough, and your breath melts > it away. Plaster words over spun sugar, and they disappear under the weight. That's the strength of literature well written--to be able to describe the snowflake up close when in reality it would melt. Words are more ethereal than spun sugar, and the latter can hold up the former with ease. What need have we of literature which describes the obvious? > The Lord himself says that the attention a proud prayer gets for his > piousness will be his reward - a temporal reward for a temporal act. But > that real prayer takes place in closets, in private joy, in personal sorrow. > So, how are you going to write about such things if they are true? And how > dare you write about them if they are not? Who said fiction is not true? It's a different kind of truth from concrete facts that exist in the world, but truth nonetheless. > What good, pray tell, does it do > to trump up a bunch of fictional miracles for the sake of a story, or a > story for the sake of a bunch of fictional miracles? Is that supposed to do > anybody any good? > I've seen [miracles] a couple of times. No angels. No trumpets. No crowds. No > drama. Just things falling into place, or things stopping, or a small, > sudden epiphany. I would not choose to write about these things. They were > too specific, too subtle, too personal. Here Kristen seems to disproves her own hypothesis by explaining how to do what she says can't be done. How to write about a miracle? As they usually happen: no angels, no trumpets, no crowds, no drama. A straightforward telling of the events. This has been done recently, in the film _God's Army_. A miracle without angels, trumpets, crowds, or drama beyond the inherent drama in the simple recounting of the event. The scene didn't work for everybody, but I got the impression that it didn't work for them because the screenplay neglected to foreshadow it well enough. That's a sin of technique, not content. > They could not be generalized, > because the answers to prayer cannot be anticipated. A story that demands > the number of coincidences and sudden breaks that allowed our studio to > become a reality for us, for example, would make a story that would seem too > facile. A miracle, like anything else in fiction, must be handled with the same established techniques of verisimilitude as any other plot event. _No_ kind of event, miraculous or otherwise, works well in fiction if those techniques are not applied. That's why the justification "but it really happened" won't save you if an event in fiction doesn't seem plausible: you can't just write reality to write good fiction. Truth is stranger than fiction because fiction has to be plausible, while truth only has to happen. Miracles are no different this way than any other fictional event. Or is the miraculous healing of Ben-Hur's leprous mother and sister in the film _not_ a powerful moment? > As I read her, I wondered if I could write my own God as passionately, as > concretely as she writes her own bitterness and disappointment. I don't > think I can. I'm not sure I should. People who hate the LDS church write > and speak about it, making their accusations plainly. The church does not > answer. Or answers quietly, without engaging in debate. It does not defend > itself by revealing the slightest detail about the accuser. I suppose that > the church actually believes that, as Christ said, "By their works, ye shall > know them." Perhaps Kristen is confusing passion with pietous excess. I believe I could write directly about my God with great passion, and expect one day to do so. I plan on using a great deal of matter-of-factness and understatement to accomplish it. Some of the best passionate writing is that done with words of directness and simplicity. If we follow Kristen's prescription, then literature becomes the monopolized domain of bitter people. Religion can never be positively portrayed in fiction. If that is the only lot of literature, get me far away from it--I want nothing to do with it. -- D. Michael Martindale dmichael@wwno.com ================================== Check out Worldsmiths, the new online LDS writers group, at http://www.wwno.com/worldsmiths Sponsored by Worlds Without Number http://www.wwno.com ================================== - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Steve Perry Subject: [AML] SLOVER, _Hancock County_ Date: 26 Jun 2000 11:40:14 -0600 [MOD: I'm going to try sending this out again, hopefully not duplicating the error that I think led to this message being sent out without author or subject line.] BYU Theater Dept. announced its new season, including the following play by LDS playwright Tim Slover: HANCOCK COUNTY Feb 7 - 24 Margetts Theatre (smaller experimental theater) "In June 1844, in a small jail in Carthage, Illinois, a mob murdered Mormon prophet and presidential candidate Joseph Smith and his older brother Hyrum while they were detained to face a charge of treason; another Mormon leader, apostle, and future church president, John Taylor, was grievously wounded. Eleven months later, in May 1845, five prominent citizens went on trial for the murders. _Hancock County_ chronicles the trial's twelve eventful days, as well as dramatizing the story of the incidents leading up to the trial, and the terrible aftermath. A compelling new play commissioned by the Department of Theatre & Media Arts through the generosity of Don and Shirley Oscarson." [Steve Perry] - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: eedh Subject: Re: [AML] _The Real World_ Date: 27 Jun 2000 09:36:30 -0700 Jacob Proffitt wrote: > But more than anything else, I remember vividly wishing that all parents > would watch the show, if only to catch those brief moments of stark honesty > as the roommates discuss parents. It shook me up and reaffirmed my > dedication to my kids. We don't have cable tv, so I will probably never get to see this show. What sorts of things did the roommates say that parents should hear? -Beth Hatch - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jonathan Langford Subject: [AML] Re: Writing About Religion Date: 27 Jun 2000 11:39:22 -0500 Several people have written in disagreement with parts of what Kristen said. I'd like to take a different tack--because I think that even if you disagree with some of her conclusions, what she's talking about is a real problem, in practical terms. I see part of the problem as residing in that phrase: that literature (a particular book, story, etc.) is "about" something. And I think that's part of what Kristen is writing about (in her message that was forwarded to the List). Some authors can write a work of art that's "about" something and have it turn out well; John Milton is an example that's already been raised, although it's been a common critical judgment for centuries that he does a better job with Satan than with God. It's harder in regular narrative fiction, though--and I'm not sure it's really a good usage of the form. I personally tend to the suspicion that when we talk about a work of literature being "about" a particular theme or concept, we're making the mistake of treating stories as if they were essays. This is one reason I prefer the notion of "worldview" to that of "theme": the first suggests something that comes through and undergirds the writing, whereas the second suggests something for which the story serves as little more than a vehicle. A fine distinction, perhaps--but one I think has important consequences for how we read literature. And for how we write it. There's a real problem in writing directly about that which is most precious to us. I've heard authors talk about how if you feel the emotion while you're writing, that emotion will come through to the reader--but I've also heard (read) other writers talk about how if they're deeply moved while writing a particular scene, it generally ends up in the wastebasket, because the emotion they felt while writing it got in the way of doing a good job of writing. "Emotion recollected in tranquillity" was Wordsworth's formula, if I recall correctly--but the "recollected in tranquillity" was an important part of conveying the emotion. Kristen's issue strikes me as a somewhat different, but related problem. I think it's impossible, ultimately, not to reveal what we believe about the world in our writing--but if we set out with that as our goal, that we're going to "tell the truth" about some particular element of life, most critics tend to believe that the results will be artistically poor. We've had at least one review on the List recently that criticized a book for this very failing (Marion Smith's _Riptide_). What seems to be the more common positive practice is for a writer to write a story that interests him or her, then discover later--or have readers discover for themselves--ways that the story reflects things about the world as the writer believes it to be. Retrospective discovery of the theme, if you will. But not a conscious process of setting out to write "about" God, or religion, or whatever. This raises a real problem for the LDS artist who wants to write "about" gospel truths. I admit that when I read a statement by an artist who says something like, "I wanted to write about the plan of salvation," or "I wanted to show the consequences of sin in my writing," I immediately brace myself for the worst. Unfair perhaps, but a realistic reflection of my experience of most authors who set out with a deliberate didactic intent in their writing. Then there's the problem of doing it right--Kristen's dual questions, "So, how are you going to write about such things if they are true? And how dare you write about them if they are not?" I think I agree with Kristen that it's easier to "get it right" if you do so obliquely--or if you simply set out to tell a story, and follow it where it goes, rather than setting out to communicate a message. One of the problems I have with didactic LDS fiction is that I almost always find somewhere or other that I disagree with the author's interpretation of the gospel. Because the fiction is didactic, I find it harder to ignore such doctrinal disagreements, because the doctrine is more central to the story. On the other hand, with more indirect fiction, I may be troubled if the author's worldview is significantly different from mine, but I'm not so bothered by minor differences. I remember a letter from Scott Card to _Dialogue_ (if I recall the source correctly) where he said that he would never write about overtly Mormon characters in his science fiction. Now, he's gone on to change that resolution--but I think we need to respect the difficulty that he, and Kristen, attest to in writing about one's own religion and doing it both faithfully and well. Were I to write fiction, I know I would have many of the concerns Kristen shares. The fact that she expresses these concerns actually gives me more confidence that in writing about God and religion, she's likely to get it right--because she knows and has a proper respect for the issues involved. Jonathan Langford speaking for myself, not the List jlangfor@pressenter.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Eric R. Samuelsen" Subject: Re: [AML] _The Real World_ Date: 27 Jun 2000 10:35:20 -0600 Here I am, back from 8 weeks and London, and suffering from major AML-list = withdrawal.=20 Very quickly responding, Real World has fairly good ratings for MTV, but = I'm blessed if I can figure out why. I've watched it a few times, never = for more than 5 minute stretches, which is all I can take, and I think = it's the most tedious thing imaginable, as well as fairly pornographic--not= pornographic in a sexual sense, but in a voyeuristic sense. Buncha whiny = twenty year olds sitting around griping to each other. What I darkly = suspect is that they're setting this Mormon girl up to be the group's = villain. (They do that every year, I gather; bring in one obnoxious = person to liven things up). Maybe she'll really impress everyone. I'm = not holding my breath. But really, I don't get these reality based shows. = I know they're popular, but I don't get it. They seem deadly dull to me. Eric Samuelsen - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Eric R. Samuelsen" Subject: Re:[AML] Movie Ratings Date: 27 Jun 2000 11:03:22 -0600 I'm sorry, y'all, but movie ratings are that proverbial red flag which = this particular bull cannot resist. Charge! The rating system is, IMHO, without value of any kind, and absolutely must = be dispensed with completely. Personally, I have dispensed with it. I = make a point of not knowing what the films I watch are rated. I go out of = my way to not know. I close my eyes in the theatre when that particular = piece of information is flashed on the screen. I have programmed myself = to forget it immediately, in the unlikely event that I accidentally learn = what a film is rated. The rating system cannot be improved, and it cannot = be made to work better. It simply must be abandoned. The rating system damages the filmmaking process. It's a marketing tool, = pure and simple, and one that's particularly pernicious. Filmmakers talk = about what extraneous material they're going to have to add or delete in = order to get the rating that they think will best market the film. = Imagine if novelists worked that way; how horrendously inimical to the = creative process such nonsense would be. Furthermore, the rating system itself creates and sustains a wholly false = and dangerous aesthetic, one that privileges the image over the context, = the word over the message, the form over the substance. A film is given a = certain rating if one sees certain images or hears certain language, quite = apart from what those words or language are meant to accomplish in the = story. I just got back from London, where I saw one of the most wonderful = plays ever, David Edgar's play Albert Speer. In the beginning of that = film, seven captured Nazi leaders arrive at Spandau prison. They are told = to strip, and are dressed in the clothing worn by the Jewish prisoners in = Dachau; this, in an effort to convey to these prisoners the moral outrage = of their captors. What an amazing theatrical moment, an incredible scene. = So we see seven naked old men. So that's an R-rated moment? We're meant = to equate that moment with some exploitative scene in a sexy thriller? = What nonsense.=20 The rating system is shallow, it's hypocritical, it's altogether despicable= . It was created with the very best of intentions, and it paved the road = to aesthetic hell. Ignore it. Pretend it doesn't exist. The rating = system is other people telling you how you should raise your kids. It's = damaging and corrupt. It provides you, as a parent, with no information = you can't get in an infinitely more useful form from reviews and ads and = word of mouth. If I see an ad for Gladiator, and I see hundreds of Roman = soldiers gathered for a battle, I know that's a film my six year old won't = be seeing, and I also know it's a film I want to read some reviews on, = because I might very well want to see it. And then I read some reviews, = and I know the director is Ridley Scott, and I decide to see it, and the = result is a terrific film experience, and a deeply moving, deeply = spiritual experience. What's it rated? I could care less. Eric Samuelsen - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: debbro@voyager.net Subject: Re: [AML] (Andrew's Poll) Best LDS Novel of th Date: 27 Jun 2000 13:16:01 -0400 I would read more mormon fiction if it were more readily available to me location wise and certainly price wise. Two weeks ago my husband and I went to the Science Center in Columbus, Ohio (we live almost 3 hours away in Cleveland) and on the way home we went to the LDS bookstore that is close to the temple. I walked out with three books, but certainly wanted more. My selections were Children of the Promise Vol 3 $19.95 or $21.95 Food Storage For The Clueless $16.95 Singled Out $8.95 (which I didn't realize until I got home) All three were great, but were they worth the cost? Last night I went to Sam's Club and bought a paperback of _The Color Purple_ for $3.98 and I like the binding and the cover better than _Singled Out_. I found SO awkward to hold as it seemed to "flop" in my hands and the words seem to run to the binding. We've had numerous dicussions about the cost of mormon fiction and other books, so this isn't a new subject, just my two cents. [Debbie Brown] <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< I could go into Deseret Book today and find thirty Mormon novels on the shelf. I'd find more mainstream American fiction. But that doesn't mean that Mormons don't like to read Mormon fiction. They just don't read it exclusively. Maybe all the gentiles are buying the Mormon fiction :) Neal Kramer - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------- End of forwarded message ------- ------- End of forwarded message ------- - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Bill Willson" Subject: Re: [AML] Baby Announcement Date: 27 Jun 2000 11:45:18 -0600 Hi Jacob Your daughrter shares her birthdate with some good company. President Hinkeley of course and My oldest daughter was also born on the 23rd of June 37 years ago. Enjoy her presence in your home because *before you know it* you will have to give her away to another man. Regards, Bill Willson Keep your hand moving and your muse alive. bwillson@mtwest.net ----- Original Message ----- Sent: Saturday, June 24, 2000 1:08 AM > Hi all. Just a note to announce the birth of Cordelia Elinor Proffitt. > Happened at 11:20 pm on June 23rd. Mom and baby are healthy and doing well. > She weighed in at 8 lbs. 5 oz (baby, not mom). > > Jacob > > > > > - > AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature > http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm > - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Tony Markham Subject: [AML] YORGASON & BLAIR, _Secrets_ Date: 27 Jun 2000 14:10:31 -0400 Last year I checked out Secrets (Yorgason and Blair) from our tiny branch library. My take on the book is that it was important for the church to wake up to the problem of abuse and any kind of literature on the subject, no matter how badly written, embarrassingly transparent, obtuse, clumsy, infantile, dilletantish, didactic, pedantic, pamphleteering, and hack, is better than no literature on the subject at all. One scene that particularly gave me fits comes early in the book. The female victim of abuse takes some down time by floating on an air raft in her pool. We then have a page-and-a-half description of physical sensations she experiences in the pool, on this raft. It was embarassing. Had these references to waves and warm tinglings in the nether regions come with an appropriate context or from a writer who had shown some degree of sophistication, then the act of reading them would not have felt voyeuristic and invasive. The most entertainment I could squeeze out of the moment was the wry irony of Deseret Book publishing R-rated material. Tony Markham - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Tony Markham Subject: [AML] re: Nudity Date: 27 Jun 2000 14:25:36 -0400 Although I haven't written about nudity in any detail, and have no immediate plans to, I think an awareness as to why we have such different attitudes towards male and female nudity is essential, part of a clear artistic sensibility. Just an opinion, but there seems to be a correlation between an organ's connection with the sacred function of procreation and how dearly we seek to keep it private, protected from the profane view of strangers. Posteriors are only distantly connected to procreation so they are less provocative, and men's less than women's. So we tend to see more male mooning than female. But the reverse side is opposite (I always wanted to say that!). With males, the actual organs of reproduction are more exposed, hence more apt to be kept from view. For females there is little to actually hide. You don't show the womb, the ovaries, the uterus, etc. with frontal nudity so it tends to be more common. Tony (blushing head-to-toe) Markham - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Steve Perry Subject: [AML] Mahonri YOUNG link Date: 27 Jun 2000 10:18:49 -0600 This link: http://www.meridianmagazine.com/arts/index.html has an article and pictures about the current exhibition of Mahonri Young sculptures and paintings, as well as quotes and insights from the artist himself. I thought it interesting reading. Steve - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Terry L Jeffress" Subject: Re: [AML] Where's our LDS Pulitzer prize winner? Date: 27 Jun 2000 13:31:21 -0600 Ardis wrote: > The Young Women president's talk completely overrode the lifelong example you > have been setting for your children? Really? You got the tone correct. My wife and I discussed this with my kids. Of course you want to balance the support you give to church leaders because you sustained them and just saying that the leaders are idiots. Whenever I think about these people, my heart rate goes up, and I must loose some of my clarity. My children tease me about reading fiction, but they do not in any way believe that reading fiction is sinful. (And again, I struggle with balance. Teasing in this way continually puts a member of my ward at the butt of a long-running joke that undermines any authority or positive influence that she might otherwise have had.) -- Terry Jeffress - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Ronn Blankenship Subject: Re: [AML] Definition of Terms Date: 27 Jun 2000 14:31:28 -0500 While we're on the subject of hijacking perfectly good words for political purposes, let's not forget the takeover of the word "gay." -- Ronn! :) - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Linda Adams Subject: Re: [AML] ADAMS, _Prodigal Journey_ (Review) Date: 27 Jun 2000 15:56:55 -0500 >Adams, Linda Paulson. _Prodigal Journey_; volume one of _Thy Kingdom >Come_ trilogy. Cornerstone, 2000, 517 pp. Softcover, $14.95. > >Reviewed by Katie Parker Katie, you've made my day!! I could kiss your feet. Thank you so much for this very pleasant review. (And to other list members, NO, I didn't have to pay her to say all that!) This is my first novel, and I've been waiting anxiously to see how reviews come out. Katie's is the first official one, I believe. It was a little nerve-wracking just to see it come through today, even though I saw the review notice go out and I knew it was coming. I'm so glad you enjoyed it! Whew. Relief! Thank you, also, for the comments that Joan and some of the other characters were a bit flat still. That does help me. I'll have time to work on them in the next volumes. :-) The physical book itself is still being held up at the printer's, although they first said it would be done by June 21st. Now they're saying July 6 or 7. (Richard, you're here too, you can correct me if I'm wrong, or fill in any blanks you like.) So as of this moment you can't run out and buy it at your nearest Deseret Book--yet--but you'll be able to very soon. There's a graphic of the cover on my website (it's not exactly the version being printed, but it's close enough that you'll recognize it once you see it in stores): http://members.xoom.com/adamszoo I can't wait for Volumes 2 and 3 either. Three volumes are projected and outlined. But as I write the rest I still discover things I hadn't expected would happen either--outline in hand or no. I'm still working on it as quickly as I can, with four kids home for the summer and expecting #5 September 20th. (No worries--I wrote a good, large portion of Volume 1 with my last baby nursing on my lap, typing one-handed.) My goal is to get them out about a year apart. I just wanted to say a hearty thank you to Katie! I will smile all day! Linda ================= Linda Adams adamszoo@sprintmail.com http://members.xoom.com/adamszoo http://home.sprintmail.com/~adamszoo - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jacob Proffitt Subject: Re: [AML] _The Real World_ Date: 27 Jun 2000 15:25:49 -0600 On Tue, 27 Jun 2000 09:36:30 -0700, Beth Hatch wrote: >Jacob Proffitt wrote: > >> But more than anything else, I remember vividly wishing that all = parents >> would watch the show, if only to catch those brief moments of stark = honesty >> as the roommates discuss parents. It shook me up and reaffirmed my >> dedication to my kids. > >We don't have cable tv, so I will probably never get to see this show.=20 >What sorts of things did the roommates say that parents should hear? The reason I want parents to see it is because it can't be adequately described. At least, not by me. The effects of the parents were just = very obvious in some of the kids (young adults? Teens?). Especially as you = hear the kids (fledglings? Youths? How would you describe this age group?) discuss their parents. The things they say and how they say them spoke volumes about the relationships and dynamics present in their families. Personally, I found it heartbreaking. Particularly for the unstable Melissa. Jacob Proffitt - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Kathleen Woodbury Subject: Re: [AML] Where's our LDS Pulitzer prize winner? Date: 27 Jun 2000 15:33:22 -0600 At 04:57 PM 6/26/00 -0600, Terry L Jeffress wrote: >I still think the story will sell over the writing. I agree. Story sells to a much larger readership than writing does. This is the case even when you've got someone who =can= appreciate good writing. Example: I ran the short story contest for the Salt Lake City science fiction convention one year and had the convention guest of honor serve as the final judge. There were supposed to be three prizes, but there were really only two entries that were even close to being prize worthy, so I had to pick among the rest to find something for that third prize. The two prize worthy stories were an adequately written story, and a beautifully written slice of life. (You don't often get such apt representations of the two ends of the spectrum--wordsmithing and storytelling being the ends.) I was curious to see which the guest of honor--a writer who has sold very well, a good storyteller who is also a good wordsmith--would choose for first prize. The adequately written story won, and the judge almost apologized to me when I was given the results--even though the judge appreciated the beauty of the writing in the slice of life, the story because it told a story won out. I told the author of the slice of life to send her entry to ASIMOV'S--that I was sure Gardner Dozois would buy it. And he did. The story still hasn't sold, so far as I know--but I think that's because it is still only adequately written. Story wins out, but the writing still has to be better than adequate (unless the story part is phenomenal). So what do you concentrate on? Both. Why concentrate on only one when both are worth doing well? Kathleen Dalton-Woodbury workshop@burgoyne.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Jason Steed" Subject: Re: [AML] Definition of Terms Date: 27 Jun 2000 14:44:33 PDT >While we're on the subject of hijacking perfectly good words for political >purposes, let's not forget the takeover of the word "gay." > > >-- Ronn! :) This goes on all the time (though I'm uncomfortable with calling the phenomenon 'hijacking', because this implies it's illegal or immoral somehow). If I'm not mistaken, we did it ourselves. Our non/anti-Mormon friends, back in the days, used the word "Mormon" in ways not altogether unlike the N-word was used for blacks. After some time, we appropriated the word for our own purposes, and turned it into (so we said) a good thing (and some would say that African Americans have made moves in this direction with the N-word). Again, I don't think this is 'hijacking.' And I don't think it's "unnatural," as Michael has asserted (with the implication that there is a natural way that words change meanings, without someone deliberately changing it--a claim I find little evidence for). This is simply how language works: a word has acquired some meaning, users of the word stretch or bend that word to incorporate new meanings (but usually relying on a greater or lesser extent on the word's old meaning), and this goes on and on, ad infinitum. Speaking of "political purposes"--again, if I am not mistaken--you can go back far enough and find that "Republican" and "Democrat" have almost entirely traded their positions as signifiers...And a scriptural example is the phrase "by and by", which (again, if I am not mistaken) presently denotes something like "after a while," whereas it used to (a long, long time ago) denote something more like "immediately." Jason ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Richard Johnson Subject: Re: [AML] Re: Writing About Religion Date: 27 Jun 2000 18:21:23 -0400 At 11:39 AM 6/27/2000 -0500, [Jonathan Langford] wrote: >I see part of the problem as residing in that phrase: that literature (a >particular book, story, etc.) is "about" something. And I think that's >part of what Kristen is writing about (in her message that was forwarded to >the List). I personally tend to the suspicion that when we talk about a work of >literature being "about" a particular theme or concept, we're making the >mistake of treating stories as if they were essays. One of my mentors, a marvelous curmudgeonly scene designer/playwright/theatre theoretician, Mordecai (Max) Gorelik, was fond of saying that if a play isn't "about" something, that is, if it doesn't take some kind of stand on some issue, that it is a waste of time, both for the playwright and the audience. He followed that quickly with the comment that if the message is easy to decipher or blatant that the play ceases to be a play and becomes a broadside or a tract. In other words (his) "the message of the play must evolve from the inherent nature(s) of the characters and the conflict. Indeed Kristen opens up a variety of issues about the nature of writing (but then she always did----We (I) miss you on the list Kristen) >Kristen's issue strikes me as a somewhat different, but related problem. I >think it's impossible, ultimately, not to reveal what we believe about the >world in our writing--but if we set out with that as our goal, that we're >going to "tell the truth" about some particular element of life, most >critics tend to believe that the results will be artistically poor. Perhaps (and even when not writing a play, I tend to think in terms of drama) our task is not to "tell the truth" but to illustrate or "show _a_ truth". I am always hesitant to use "the" before the word truth. I always remember that the Lord's words _Say what is truth?_ was a question and not always an easy one to answer. >positive practice is for a writer to write a story that interests him or her, >then discover later--or have readers discover for themselves--ways that the >story reflects things about the world as the writer believes it to be. >Retrospective discovery of the theme, if you will. But not a conscious >process of setting out to write "about" God, or religion, or whatever. Possibly! >This raises a real problem for the LDS artist who wants to write "about" >gospel truths. I admit that when I read a statement by an artist who says >something like, "I wanted to write about the plan of salvation," or "I >wanted to show the consequences of sin in my writing," I immediately brace >myself for the worst. Unfair perhaps, but a realistic reflection of my >experience of most authors who set out with a deliberate didactic intent in >their writing. Back to "telling" and the absolute article "the". >Then there's the problem of doing it right--Kristen's dual questions, "So, >how are you going to write about such things if they are true? And how >dare you write about them if they are not?" Were I to write fiction, I know I would have many of >the concerns Kristen shares. The fact that she expresses these concerns >actually gives me more confidence that in writing about God and religion, >she's likely to get it right--because she knows and has a proper respect >for the issues involved. > >Jonathan Langford >speaking for myself, not the List > >jlangfor@pressenter.com Yep! Richard B. Johnson Husband, Father, Grandfather, Puppeteer, Playwright, Writer, Director, Actor, Thingmaker, Mormon, Person, Fool I sometimes think that the last persona is the most important http://www2.gasou.edu/commarts/puppet/ Georgia Southern University Puppet Theatre - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Todd Robert Petersen" Subject: Re: [AML] Where's our LDS Pulitzer prize winner? Date: 27 Jun 2000 17:08:41 -0500 Terry L Jeffress > As an interesting corollary, bad writers cannot tell the difference between > bad writing and good writing. Thus, bad writers believe that they produce > good writing because they don't have the skill to recognize the shameful > prose in their manuscript. This is the only explanation for some of the > slush I have read. I can't second this loudly enough. I read tons of fiction submissions for the literary magazine for which I am an editor. Less than one percent is any good, some is downright rotten. I mean one or two sentences tell you that this is not good. We have, in this and on other threads made the assumption that if writers are trying hard then they're good. This is not true. Some stuff is almost always bad, like evangelical prison writing. (Yes, we see enough of this that it is a sub-genre for us at Cimarron Review.) One of the primary problems is the fact that people write what they read, and they don't read widely enough. As a result, most stories feel the same, like I'm driving across the great West Texas of comtemporary writing as I read submissions. The language is flat, there is almost no attention to saying something of value to the community, in trying to address the tradition. Most contemporary writers of any stripe have forgotten that Chekhov, Flaubert, and Melville even existed. Nobody really investigates the connection of fiction to philosophy anymore, which D.H. Lawrence said was one cause of the demise of the novel. I think he's right. People want writing to be easy--easy to do, easy to write. Very few are striving for greatness, the result for them is that they only acheive shallowness. And I have to read a lot of this material, and I have to send out a lot of rejection slips. Again Terry wrote: > For the majority, if a book tells a story sufficiently well to create vivid > pictures and sufficient tension and none of the really big words get in the > way, they like the book. . . . But since, I believe, most people read as an > escape, they don't want to have to extend the mental energy needed to > appreciate "artistic" works. And I agree. For the most part, I hear that people want entertainment from their books. But you don't hear that from people who like painting. Imagine someone saying, "Hey, let's go to that Picasso/Matisse exhibit and kill some time." "Great idea, I need an escape." Mormon literature, excepting, Margaret's work, Fillerup's, Thayer's, and the like, is generally written to delight. There's not much more to it, unless it is to propagandize the pioneers, or keep our youth in line. The minute someone tries to look seriously at the culture, they're given the cold shoulder. (Very few LDS writers write negatively of the prophet and the brethren, at least I've never seen it.) Great books changes us, we seek after them (or at least I do) to be transformed in surprising ways. For me the best books allow me a kind of conversion and progression. Similarly, I am surprised also at the focus we've given on novels. There has has been great work done in the short story. Our passing up of this causes us to forget John Bennion's collection, BREEDING LEAH, Evenson's ALTMANN'S TONGUE, Margaret Young's LOVE CHAINS. Poetry has been overlooked too, which means we forget Dixie Partidge, Lance Larsen, and Sue Howe. Also, Terry Tempest William's two non-fiction books REFUGE and LEAP are the real contenders for National recognition. LEAP is the book we've been talking about when we bemoan someone who will take our faith to the masses. Terry is concerned that Mormons won't get what she's doing with language and structure and that non-Mormons won't fully grasp the doctrine (and she goes deep in this one). The reviews thus far show that this is indeed the case. It need not be this way forever, not if we're stretching as readers. If nobody reads another LDS book this year it should be LEAP. It would be a great catalyst for our discussions. Todd Robert Petersen - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jeff Needle Subject: Re: [AML] YORGASON & BLAIR, _Secrets_ Date: 27 Jun 2000 15:47:47 -0700 > >I did. I found the bishop very believable, for whatever that's worth. > >One thing I thought was interesting about the book was that it showed a >really painful repentance process in one of the characters. Repentance >doesn't come so hard in most of the other LDS fiction I've read. > >Kathleen Dalton-Woodbury >workshop@burgoyne.com Quite right -- I too found the bishop to be very believable. I hope many read this book and became more aware of the problems around them. As you may remember, this bishop's wife had a tortured past, and he showed very little sensitivity to her situation until he awakened to his spouse's need. A very touching book. --------------- Jeff Needle jeff.needle@general.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Edgar Snow Subject: [AML] Re: Writing About Religion Date: 27 Jun 2000 15:53:03 -0700 (PDT) D. Michael Martindale wrote: "Truth is stranger than fiction because fiction has to be plausible, while truth only has to happen." Amen. Twain said something similar: "Unlike reality, fiction is limited by possibilities" (my paraphrase). And here I throw in my two shiblons: Truth is stranger than fiction, but usually not as funny. Ed Snow ===== My collection of humorous essays entitled _Of Curious Workmanship: Musings on Things Mormon_ has just been released and can be ordered from Signature Books at 1-800-356-5687, or from their website at http://www.signaturebooksinc.com/curious.htm or from Barnes & Noble at http://shop.barnesandnoble.com/booksearch/isbnInquiry.asp?userid=5SLFMY1TYD&mscssid=HJW5QQU1SUS12HE1001PQJ9XJ7F17G3C&srefer=&isbn=1560851368 __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get Yahoo! Mail - Free email you can access from anywhere! http://mail.yahoo.com/ - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Eileen Subject: Re: [AML] Where's our LDS Pulitzer prize winner? Date: 27 Jun 2000 17:56:16 -0600 Todd Robert Petersen wrote: > Mormon literature, excepting, Margaret's work, Fillerup's, Thayer's, and the > like, is generally written to delight. There's not much more to it, unless > it is to propagandize the pioneers, or keep our youth in line. The minute > someone tries to look seriously at the culture, they're given the cold > shoulder. (Very few LDS writers write negatively of the prophet and the > brethren, at least I've never seen it.) Please clarify, I do not want to read this too narrowly, but do you mean that in order for our literature to be great we *must* write negatively of the prophet and the brethren? I am asking for clarification because I do not wish to misunderstand. > If nobody reads another LDS book this year it should be LEAP. It would be > a great catalyst for our discussions. Upon such a recommendation I shall read it then. Eileen eileens99@bigplanet.com "When the freedom they wished for most, was freedom from responsibility then Athens ceased to be free and was never free again." - Edith Hamilton - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Benson Parkinson Subject: [AML] AML-List Lunch Date: 27 Jun 2000 18:15:59 -0700 (MST) Folks of the Wasatch Front (and any beyond who may be interested), How would you like to meet for an AML-List lunch Thursday, 29 Jun 2000? We used to do these on the first Thursday, I think, but people will be on vacation then. We'd meet at noon in the lobby of the Church Office Building or slightly later at the restaurant that gets the most votes. If you're interested, send your vote on where to eat to Ben Parkinson at . We've got one vote for Baba Afghan and one for Hunan Chinese so far. Ben - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Larry Jackson Subject: [AML] MN LDS Church Confirms Mormon News Report - Magazines Online Date: 27 Jun 2000 22:03:28 EDT Next Month: LDS Church Press Release 23Jun00 N1 [From Mormon-News] LDS Church Confirms Mormon News Report - Magazines Online Next Month (Church Internet Site Expands, Improves) LDS Church Press Release 23Jun00 N1 http://www.lds.org/med_inf/new_upd/20000623_Portal.html SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH -- The LDS Church confirmed Friday Mormon News' report that the Ensign, New Era and Friend are going on line. Mormon News reported Tuesday that the magazines will be put on line 90 days after publication, according to a letter to local leaders from Elder Boyd K. Packer, acting president of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles. The Church's press release, dated Friday, says that the magazines will be put on its www.lds.org . and will include the past 30 years of Church magazines, every issue since the magazines were reorgnized into four magazines in 1971. In addition, the website is being redesigned to make navigation easier and to add a tour of LDS Church historical sites. The site will also now include some multimedia resources, such as photos and recorded interviews. >From Mormon-News: Mormon News and Events Forwarding is permitted as long as this footer is included Mormon News items may not be posted to the World Wide Web sites without permission. Please link to our pages instead. For more information see http://www.MormonsToday.com/ Send join and remove commands to: majordomo@MormonsToday.com Put appropriate commands in body of the message: To join: subscribe mormon-news To leave: unsubscribe mormon-news To join digest: subscribe mormon-news-digest - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: KGrant100@aol.com Subject: [AML] Ensign article on singles Date: 27 Jun 2000 23:58:59 EDT Hi all, Back in 1996, a lot of singles wards were shut down and singles over 30 were asked to return to "conventional" (aka "family") wards. As a single in one of the first wards to be disbanded, I saw the results first-hand, both positive and negative. So I wrote an article for the Ensign on the topic of helping singles become integrated into family wards. The Ensign bought the article but never published it, so I figured they decided not to use it. But I recently got an e-mail from one of the editors and they have decided to use it after all. At the time I wrote the article I was living in Utah, and most of the people I quoted also lived in Utah. The editor asked me to get more quotes from people *outside* Utah, particularly single men and married members of either gender. (But insights from Utah members are also welcome.) So, if you are intersted in being quoted in an Ensign article :) please send me your thoughts or short experiences on any or all of the following topics: * Challenges of being single in a conventional ward/how to feel more at home in a conventional ward when you're single * How married and single members can help singles feel more at home in conventional wards (you can comment on what should or shouldn't be done :) ) * The place of the single adult program in conventional wards * I especially need quotes/anecdotes from married members about how they got to know singles, or came to understand them better. Stories that illustrate prejudices or misconceptions being replaced by compassion and understanding would be particularly welcome. Also, the Ensign is apparently very careful about quoting members, because they asked me to get contact info for everyone I quote so they can verify that the member is okay with being quoted. So along with your response, please send at least an e-mail address, and also a phone number if you feel comfortable with that. I will not give this information to anyone except the editor. Also, please include the ward and stake you are in. It's probably better to e-mail me directly at kgrant100@aol.com than to send answer to this list just so we don't flood the list. [MOD: Yes, unless you want to make a comment that has a literary tie-in you want to share with the List.] It would be helpful if I could receive any responses by the end of the week (July 1). Thanks! Kathy kgrant100@aol.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Annette Lyon" Subject: [AML] Andrew's Poll: vote Date: 27 Jun 2000 22:04:12 -0600 Nunes's Ariana Series. Great LDS work--and *her* best work, too. Instead of listing my other favorites, I've got a gripe to vent. I've read quite a lot of other LDS fiction recently, and much of it seems to be getting sloppy. For example, I really enjoy the middle volumes of WORK AND THE GLORY (3, 4 and 5), but by the end he got lazy (ie bad) in his writing. On recommendation, I read Lund's FIRE OF THE COVENANT, and had to mentally rewrite every sentence just to get through the thing. It could easily be cut (and I'm an not exaggerating here) by a few hundred pages without sacrificing plot or characters--it was that sloppy. And boring. There were times I thought I was reading chapter notes, but it turned out to be a bunch of history and research thrown in, stopping the story cold. My poor husband got to hear nightly rantings on my part as I plowed through the thing, but I'll spare you any other criticisms here. Why is this? It seems to me that the more popular an author becomes (and Lund is just one example, I've seen this happen time and again), the more a publisher knows the name will sell, the sloppier the end product. Don't popular writers care about the craft anymore? And don't their editors care about producing a decent product? Or does the editor believe the writer is beyond editing? Unfortunately, I'm afraid that it's just the sales they care about, and so they (all parties) don't bother polishing the manuscript because after all, the book will fly off shelves if certain names on on the cover. Just my current gripe. Annette Lyon ________________________________________________________ 1stUp.com - Free the Web Get your free Internet access at http://www.1stUp.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Gae Lyn Henderson" Subject: RE: [AML] Where's our LDS Pulitzer prize winner? Date: 28 Jun 2000 01:26:43 -0600 Todd Robert Petersen said: > Great books changes us, we seek after them (or at least I do) to be > transformed in surprising ways. For me the best books allow me a kind of > conversion and progression. Todd, I agree. Books invite us to remake ourselves in their image (in the worldview the author advocates). In this way, fiction is indeed a usurper of God's creative power. The young women's president (mentioned on another thread) who disparaged fiction for this reason had it right in one sense. The creative power evidenced in fiction writing is, I believe, an evidence of the God-like potential of the human spirit. My feeling is that the purpose of great literature is ultimately change (social or personal). The warnings against fiction usually fall into an old tradition of seeing novels as an escapist waste of time. If those who see fiction in this limited way could envision the way a novel or story can disturb the reader, plague the reader, and eventually compel the reader to go out and DO something, they may re-evaluate its value. > > Similarly, I am surprised also at the focus we've given on novels. There > has has been great work done in the short story. Our passing up of this > causes us to forget John Bennion's collection, BREEDING LEAH, Evenson's > ALTMANN'S TONGUE, Margaret Young's LOVE CHAINS. Don't forget Levi Peterson. I just reread his "Canyons of Grace." This remarkable story brings up some very disturbing questions about women in an authoritative culture. The protagonist succumbs to a forced "marriage" (or should I say rape?) based on the "spiritual authority" of a self-proclaimed prophet. Her vulnerability stems from a lifetime conflict between her will and what she is told is God's will. (I'm working on a paper for the AML session of RMMLA this November in which I want to compare this story with _Salvador_. In both texts the protagonist experiences a problematic "laying on of hands".) Troubling? Yes. Challenging? Yes. And memorable and possibly world-view changing and life-changing. Writing of this caliber challenges the reader to a wrestling match. Escapist fiction lets us sit on the sidelines. Gae Lyn Henderson - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "D. Michael Martindale" Subject: Re: [AML] Re: Writing About Religion Date: 28 Jun 2000 01:37:37 -0600 Jonathan Langford wrote: > I see part of the problem as residing in that phrase: that literature (a > particular book, story, etc.) is "about" something. > It's harder in regular > narrative fiction, though--and I'm not sure it's really a good usage of the > form. I personally tend to the suspicion that when we talk about a work of > literature being "about" a particular theme or concept, we're making the > mistake of treating stories as if they were essays. This is one reason I > prefer the notion of "worldview" to that of "theme": the first suggests > something that comes through and undergirds the writing, whereas the second > suggests something for which the story serves as little more than a > vehicle. Technically, I think laying the blame on literature being "about" something misses the mark. But this association is understandable: since writing literature "about" something can be so difficult, as Jonathan pointed out, people tend to blame the problem on the genre itself. Again I refer to _Ben-Hur_ as an example (this time the book). As I understand it, author Lew Wallace was challenged to write a book about Jesus, showing him as "a man among men." Wallace took up the challenge and did his research on the life of Christ. At the end of the research, he had become convinced that Jesus really was the Son of God, so he wrote the book with a new focus, the one emphasized in the subtitle: "A Tale of the Christ." He wrote a book that was "about" something: that Christ was the Son of God. But the book he produced is considered great literature because Wallace did it right. He didn't write the book as an argument to convince readers that Jesus was divine. He took the divinity of Christ as a presupposition, and wrote a good yarn within a worldview that assumed the divinity of Christ. That in my opinion is the secret to writing a book "about" something without coming across as didactic, preachy, or any of those other bad things people call books "about" something. This method not only produces more enjoyable literature, but is also more effective for getting the "message" across than a more blatant approach. If the conscious mind detects even a whiff of argumentation, immediately the filters drop into place and the logic center begins to critically analyze everything. But if the conscious mind can be lured into inattentiveness by a good story, the presuppositions of the story's worldview can seep into and influence the subconscious without the reader even being aware. This leaves us with the interesting paradox that the most effectively didactic of literature is that which is least didactic. I think Kirsten's comments come from a belief that writing "about" something is so difficult to do well as to be practically impossible. I agree with her if the author uses the traditional, but off-putting approach to writing "message" literature. But if the author is wise and couches his message in presuppositions and a fascinating story peopled with real characters that are honestly handled, he can write "about" something to his heart's content. -- D. Michael Martindale dmichael@wwno.com ================================== Check out Worldsmiths, the new online LDS writers group, at http://www.wwno.com/worldsmiths Sponsored by Worlds Without Number http://www.wwno.com ================================== - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Christopher Bigelow" Subject: Re:[AML] Movie Ratings Date: 28 Jun 2000 09:23:07 -0700 Current Church policy on movies is perhaps best reflected in the current = _For the Strength of Youth_ pamphlet. I snipped the relevant part below = from the Church's official web site, lds.org. There is a noticeable = absence of any reference to ratings, R or otherwise--and one very = significant statement about ratings, which I've CAPPED:=20 Our Heavenly Father has counseled us as Latter-day Saints to seek after = "anything virtuous, lovely, or of good report or praiseworthy" (Articles = of Faith 1:13). Whatever you read, listen to, or watch makes an impression = on you. Public entertainment and the media can provide you with much = positive experience. They can uplift and inspire you, teach you good and = moral principles, and bring you closer to the beauty this world offers. = But they can also make what is wrong and evil look normal, exciting, and = acceptable. =20 Pornography is especially dangerous and addictive. Curious exploration of = pornography can become a controlling habit leading to coarser material and = to sexual transgression. If you continue to view pornography, your spirit = will become desensitized, and your conscience will erode. Much harm comes = from reading or viewing pornography. It causes thoughts within you that = weaken your self-discipline.=20 Don't attend or participate in any form of entertainment, including = concerts, movies, and videocassettes, that is vulgar, immoral, inappropriat= e, suggestive, or pornographic in any way. MOVIE RATINGS DO NOT ALWAYS = ACCURATELY REFLECT OFFENSIVE CONTENT. Don't be afraid to walk out of a = movie, turn off a television set, or change a radio station if what's = being presented does not meet your Heavenly Father's standards. And do not = read books or magazines or look at pictures that are pornographic or that = present immorality as acceptable.=20 In short, if you have any question about whether a particular movie, book, = or other form of entertainment is appropriate, don't see it, don't read = it, don't participate.=20 * * * * * * Interested in novels, stories, poems, plays, and films by, for, or about = Mormons? Check out IRREANTUM magazine at www.xmission.com/~aml/irreantum.ht= m. - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Christopher Bigelow" Subject: Re: [AML] AML-List Lunch Date: 28 Jun 2000 09:39:48 -0700 I can't make it for a lunch because I work in Utah County, but I would = love to have dinner sometime with AML-Listers in Utah County or even in = the north country (Sandy, Midvale, even downtown). Would anyone be = interested in that? If I get enough responses, I'll coordinate something = on the dinner end.=20 Have fun at lunch (it's been a long time since I had Baba Afghan)-- Chris Bigelow * * * * * * Interested in novels, stories, poems, plays, and films by, for, or about = Mormons? Check out IRREANTUM magazine at www.xmission.com/~aml/irreantum.ht= m. - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Katrina Duvalois" Subject: RE: [AML] YORGASON & BLAIR, _Secrets_ Date: 28 Jun 2000 08:55:20 -0700 I am currently reading this book as an assignment from a church leader to help overcome my own childhood abuse. My Bishop was also advised to read it and that has been EXTREMELY helpful as he has been acting as my "therapist" in a way. I have found it to be true to the feelings and frustrations one feels and wish there were more books in the LDS market that were like this, i.e., had "touchy" subjects. I am currently writing a novel from the victim's viewpoint (self-inflicted-therapy, if you will) and wish there were other resources for LDS people suffering from emotional difficulties (including homosexuality). Katrina - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Eric R. Samuelsen" Subject: [AML] Re: Writing About Religion Date: 28 Jun 2000 10:01:04 -0600 As usual, Jonathan's thoughtful and carefully written post on this topic = provided all sorts of food for thought. But let me just add that I = strongly prefer novels that are 'about' something, as long as that = something is specific and tangible. I love The Backslider, in part, = because it's about cowboy life in southern Utah. Levi captures that life = so completely, it's utterly compelling. Now, his novel is also about the = atonement, but within the context of a specific and real world, superbly = rendered. I'm reading Jane Smiley's new novel, and am amazed at her = ability to convey with such clarity the world of horses and thoroughbred = racing. For me, her most compelling character is a horse named Justabob, = but he's not an anthopomorphized horse, like Richard Adams' rabbits, but a = real horse, described in terms of horse-life. Her novel is about horses, = and it's superb. It's also about loneliness and loss and adultery and = vanity and greed and lots of other dandy abstractions. But if it weren't = about horses, we wouldn't care about all those abstractions. =20 By all means, write about the gospel. But that's in the background, after = you've done the hard work and research to make the novel or short story or = play about something else, something tangible and real. =20 Eric Samuelsen - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Margaret Young Subject: Re: [AML] Where's our LDS Pulitzer prize winner? Date: 28 Jun 2000 10:44:02 -0600 I always enjoy reading Todd's posts--I think the world of him. I was flattered by his line excepting me and Michael Fillerup and Doug Thayer from other Mormon writers whose function is to "delight," but then I read the next line--"[or] propogandize the pioneers." I thought about that a moment, since my current projects are, of course, about Black pioneers. I asked myself if Todd should exclude me from that group of propagandists. My very brief thought (and Todd, I owe you SEVERAL e-mails, and you owe me one very detailed one, if you recall) is that my objective is not what Stegnar calls "ancestor worship" but actually letting the reader FEEL what it was like to be not only a pioneer but a pioneer of color. (Whether or not I succeed can be discussed after the play and first novel are reviewed.) I would hope that I allow the reader to not just stand in amazement at what the pioneers suffered, but to actually experience some of it vicariously. And I would hope I convey not just the sorrows, but the joys--the completeness of the experience. We hear so much about the Martin Handcart company and its tragedies, but I don't think we get a full picture of what actually bound the pioneers and made them willing to form a suffering community--writing poetry about eachother's losses and deaths, singing "And should we die before our journey's through, HAPPY DAY, all is well!" Well, my success or failure in conveying that will come under review very shortly, since _I Am Jane_ premiers this Friday. (I will write a separate post about that and the challengees of community theater.) - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Terry L Jeffress" Subject: Re: [AML] Where's our LDS Pulitzer prize winner? Date: 28 Jun 2000 10:46:41 -0600 Todd wrote: > Mormon literature, excepting, Margaret's work, Fillerup's, Thayer's, and the > like, is generally written to delight. There's not much more to it, unless > it is to propagandize the pioneers, or keep our youth in line. The minute > someone tries to look seriously at the culture, they're given the cold > shoulder. (Very few LDS writers write negatively of the prophet and the > brethren, at least I've never seen it.) It seems that only through humor can writers (and artists) take a serious look at Mormon issues. Look at all the issues Robert Kirby and Pat Bagley get to bandy about in the SL Tribune. Kirby produces some scathing criticisms of Mormon culture, but because he couches his criticism in humor, he doesn't take as much heat as an essayist or a novelist would who made the same criticism in those respective genres. -- Terry Jeffress - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Todd Robert Petersen" Subject: Re: [AML] Where's our LDS Pulitzer prize winner? Date: 28 Jun 2000 12:21:30 -0500 Eileen and all > Mormon literature, excepting, Margaret's work, Fillerup's, Thayer's, and the > like, is generally written to delight. There's not much more to it, unless > it is to propagandize the pioneers, or keep our youth in line. The minute > someone tries to look seriously at the culture, they're given the cold > shoulder. (Very few LDS writers write negatively of the prophet and the > brethren, at least I've never seen it.) I should have said The minute someone tries to look seriously at the culture, they're given the cold shoulder; however, very few LDS writers write negatively of the prophet and the brethren, at least I've never seen it. So really they're only addressing the culture, which is not a problem in my mind. In fact, the great satirists like Swift, Rabelais, and Twain try to heal the culture by exposing and diagnosing its ills in public. Our culture needs that kind of uplift and strengthening, but people still confuse church culture and the church doctrine to the detriment of artists trying to reform their cultural institutions. Better? Worse? Todd Robert Petersen - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Margaret Young Subject: [AML] Community Theater Date: 28 Jun 2000 11:43:23 -0600 This post will ultimately be a tribute to Bill and Marilyn Brown, though there will be an implicit invitation to all list members to support _I Am Jane_ which has its debut in the Brown's Villa Theatre at 254 South Main in Springville this Friday at 7:30. Today is the first day in two weeks that I feel I have a little space to breathe. (I've wanted to thank Jeff Needle and Andrew Hall and Todd Peterson for the kind things they've said about me, but I honestly have barely had time to make my kids peanut butter sandwiches for lunch.) I HAD NO IDEA WHAT GOES INTO PRODUCING A PLAY. I stand in utter awe of Bill and Marilyn, who have devoted MUCH of their own money and their time and dedication to community theater. When BYU did a play of mine a few years ago, I got to be simply the playwright, and didn't appreciate all the work going on around me to pull off the play. "Little" things like designing publicity posters and getting media attention, constructing a set, assembling competant actors, designing and cutting tickets, GETTING MONEY for all the incidentals, accessing costumes, preparing sound effects, setting up lights, providing ushers, etc., etc. I thought I had delegated this thing pretty well, but have found myself overwhelmed by all the work. To think that Bill and Marilyn do this all the time--I think Marilyn told me they've done forty shows--absolutely amazes me. I am so appreciative of what theater can do. As a mother, I have been so grateful to have my children involved in drama--especially Shakespeare--because their minds are being filled with such wonderful language, their own creativity is being opened, and they are learning about working with an ensemble of others. I love the fact that the Villa sponsors drama workshops for children--all non-profit. As a FORMER actor (though I do take a role in _Jane_), I am so grateful for the friends I have made on stage. (I had read Marilyn's book of poetry, _Rain Flowers(?)_ before I ever met her and was always intimidated by her when we performed _Man of La Mancha_ at the Castle as part of Scott Card's reperatory theatre company which eventually went bankrupt.) Tim Slover and I began our lifelong friendship as fellow actors at Provo High--and I still have really sweet friendships with many people I've met or re-met through a play, certainly including the wonderful Eric Samuelson. (Welcome home, Eric!). I must say that after I've seen everything a play requires and all the good it can engender, I resent any mean-spirited reviews. (So if any of you are planning on reviewing _Jane_, be very careful. The Young family owns LOTS of toilet paper.) Seriously, I can't think of any play which deserves to be "panned." Honesty is fine, and good criticism can inspire better work, but I really don't think mean reviews should ever comprise the thanks a show gets. Surely there is SOMETHING kind a reviewer can say, even if some criticism needs to be given. This may seem a self-serving piece, or an announcement of my fears of a bad review, but I assure you, it's not. I have a strong sense of what my own play's weaknesses and strengths are. I know which actors do their parts well and which aren't quite there. I also know how hard they've worked. I do not want any of my company publicly humiliated. I do believe many reviewers have gotten into the unfortunate habit of using their often formidible wit to bash a show without paying it due respect--and I now understand that respect is due to ANY show which attempts to bring a play to life, even if it falls short. I am not directing this post to any reviewers, only standing back in this little breathing space and recognizing the worth and WORK of theater, saying a very loud THANK YOU to Bill and Marilyn for letting us use their stage and for providing such wonderful opportunities to our community (particularly our children). We've seen a lot of statements by Brigham Young on worthless novels. Maybe this is a good time to remember how important theater has always been to the Saints--and not just "Pageant" type theater, but comedies like _Box and Cox_ (performed during Brigham Young's lifetime in Salt Lake City) and _Pizarro_, performed in Nauvoo (along with several other productions). I understand better than I ever have why the Church leaders have valued theater from the beginnings of this religion. I even understand why they had us do all those silly road shows. I fully suspect we'll be doing plays in Heaven as well. And I hope Bill and Marilyn Brown are in charge of at least one heavenly theater. [Margaret Young] - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Thom Duncan Subject: Re: [AML] Re: Writing About Religion Date: 28 Jun 2000 14:49:34 -0600 "D. Michael Martindale" wrote: > > I think Kirsten's comments come from a belief that writing "about" > something is so difficult to do well as to be practically impossible. I > agree with her if the author uses the traditional, but off-putting > approach to writing "message" literature. But if the author is wise and > couches his message in presuppositions and a fascinating story peopled > with real characters that are honestly handled, he can write "about" > something to his heart's content. I saw _Fiddler on the Roof_ last night at Sendance. On the surface the musical is about Jews. If that were true, however, only Jews would appreciate it. What the musical is really about is the universal theme of New vs. Old., the transitory nature of tradition. At some level, anyone over a certain age has felt the nostalgia for the goold old days that will never come again, so the theme is universal. This is what Mormon literature will have to become to be great. We have to learn how to address universal themes against the backdrop of our own religion. -- Thom Duncan Read the further adventures of Moroni Smith, the LDS Indiana Jones! The long-awaited second episode in the Moroni Smith LDS adventure series, _Moroni Smith: In Search of the Gold Plates_ is now available as an e-book at the Zion's Fiction web page: http://www.zfiction.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Terry L Jeffress" Subject: Re: [AML] Where's our LDS Pulitzer prize winner? Date: 28 Jun 2000 13:17:42 -0600 > One of the primary problems is the fact that people write what they read, > and they don't read widely enough. As a result, most stories feel the same, > like I'm driving across the great West Texas of comtemporary writing as I > read submissions. The language is flat, there is almost no attention to > saying something of value to the community, in trying to address the > tradition. I, too, have suffered windburn on the West Texas desert. While reading slush, I always kept a balm nearby -- some author's work that refreshes my sense of what writing can achieve -- lest I get blinded by a sandstorm and mistake the storm's eye for a rainbow. But I must augment "people write what they read" with "people write what they THINK they read." And now for the next phase in Terry's theory of slush literature. When we read, we fill in detail from our experiences. If an author places a character on a New York City street corner, most people will fill in detail from memories -- other stories, films, personal experience. Good writers understand the reader fills in the background details and, thus, only mention those additional details important to plot or characterization. Ammauture writers THINK they have read the entire scene, including those parts their own brains produced. With this misconception, they write scenes that have loads of extraneous detail, most of which produces no forward motion or additional understanding for the reader. Understanding the reader's ability to fill in detail presents an interesting challenge to the religious writer who wants to depict characters having a spiritual experience. How much detail should you include about the spiritual experience? First, assume that your audience has already had a spiritual experience. To make the story plausible, you must effectively show the events that lead a character to seek the spirit and show the character's change afterward. The audience will fill in the detail of the experience from their own. Now, assume that your audience has not had any experience with the spirit. No matter how effectively you lead the character up to a spiritual experience, you must try to depict the charcter's overwhelming emotion and conviction of the truthfulness of the Lord's message. Thus, in writing about spiritual experiences, you will always miss a segment of the audience. If you try to describe the detail in full, your writing will seem tedious to those who have already had such an experience. And as Jonathan said in the "Writing about Religion" thread, your depiction may run contrary to the experience of the reader. If you imply a spiritual experience, the reader without any such experiences will claim that your character changes seem unfounded. I conclude that any Mormon literature to gain (inter)national recognition will not be the same literature that gains recognition within the Mormon culture. A text that can appeal to a national audience will only contain peripheral mention of the real spiritual struggles depcited in literature directed at the Mormon culture. > People want writing to be easy--easy to do, easy to write. Very few are > striving for greatness, the result for them is that they only acheive > shallowness. And I have to read a lot of this material, and I have to send > out a lot of rejection slips. People want to write as easily as they read. They do not understand that they read easily because the writer has worked hard to manipulate the archetypes, symbols, and stock footage already in the reader's head. Those works that we consider (or will become) classic deal not the specifics of the character's situation, but with deep human emotions and issues that cross the boundary of time, class, and culture. Why can we relate to _Hamlet_? Not because we have any real concern for Danish history, but because we must all deal with situations where people we love do things that hurt us deeply. -- Terry Jeffress - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Christopher Bigelow" Subject: [AML] Re: Writing About Religion Date: 28 Jun 2000 16:37:03 -0700 <<>> I'm currently reading (aloud to my wife) Jane Smiley's previous novel, = _Moo_, a humorous take on university life in the Midwest. I will avoid her = new novel exactly BECAUSE it is about horses, even though those other = themes interest me (adultery is abstract? Hmmm). Having books be about something gives us a hook to categorize them. In my = wide reading, I always avoid everything deeper than captions and headlines = about sports and politics unless it concerns someone I know personally. I = didn't know I avoided books about horses until I read the Jane Smiley = profile in a recent _Book_ magazine and decided no horse stories for me = (not because of the profile, but just because I don't have time for = horses).=20 I wonder how many mainstream readers out there would say, "No Mormon = stories for me" in the same knee-jerk way I say no horse stories, even = though I like the author and haven't given the book a look. It it possible = for a writer to be so charming or compelling that people will overcome = their topic aversion? Chris Bigelow=20 * * * * * * Interested in novels, stories, poems, plays, and films by, for, or about = Mormons? Check out IRREANTUM magazine at www.xmission.com/~aml/irreantum.ht= m. - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Mike South Subject: Re: [AML] Where's our LDS Pulitzer prize winner? Date: 28 Jun 2000 16:49:11 -0600 Terry L Jeffress wrote: > It seems that only through humor can writers (and artists) take a serious > look at Mormon issues. Look at all the issues Robert Kirby and Pat Bagley > get to bandy about in the SL Tribune. Kirby produces some scathing > criticisms of Mormon culture, but because he couches his criticism in humor, > he doesn't take as much heat as an essayist or a novelist would who made the > same criticism in those respective genres. I met Robert Kirby a few years ago shortly after I moved to Springville. We were standing in line together at the grocery store and I recognized him from his photos in the Journal. I asked him if he was, indeed, Robert Kirby. His response? "Umm...would that be a good thing or a bad thing?". I suspect he's taken more heat for his stances than most of us realize. I used to look forward to every issue of the Journal that landed on my porch just to read the letters to the editor. The responses to his columns were often as hilarious as the columns themselves. --Mike South - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Rex Goode" Subject: RE: [AML] YORGASON & BLAIR, _Secrets_ Date: 28 Jun 2000 18:58:39 EDT I agree very much with Katrina about _Secrets_. Such fiction is sorely=20 needed. As an abuse survivor myself, I found it to be compelling and=20 accurate. I disagree with the comments about it not being well-written or=20 prurient in its approach to the feelings experienced by abuse survivors. I= =20 felt as if I was reading about myself and have heard from many, many other= =20 LDS abuse survivors who have said the same. Most negative comments about the book that I have ever read only confirms=20 the basic premise of the book, which is that LDS people are either largely= =20 in denial about the existence of abuse in our community, skeptical of the=20 emotional toll abuse takes on individuals, or at odds with the idea of=20 discussing it so openly. I do think that Yorgason takes a big risk in stirring together a novel and a= =20 self-help book to come up with a fictional expos=E9. I suspect that fiction= =20 purists will resent such an end product. That doesn't make it poorly=20 written. Regarding resources for those struggling with difficult problems, including= =20 homosexuality, I recommend my own website, www.springsofwater.com. There you= =20 will find essays, poetry, support forums, and book reviews on such topics=20 from a Mormon perspecitve. Katrina, for your novel, I'm always happy to answer questions about my own= =20 struggle with homosexuality. If it would help your writing process in any=20 way, please don't hesitate to ask. Rex Goode ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Thom Duncan Subject: Re: [AML] Community Theater Date: 28 Jun 2000 17:07:46 -0600 Margaret Young wrote: > >I must say that after I've seen > everything a play requires and all the good it can engender, I resent > any mean-spirited reviews. (So if any of you are planning on reviewing > _Jane_, be very careful. The Young family owns LOTS of toilet paper.) Mayilyn, I love you, you know that, but the above perfectly reflects the short-sighted understanding of theatre that novice producers often possess. They somehow think that the hard work and effort of their cast and crew warrents special attention beyond whatever faults the final production may have. Years ago, Chris Hicks wrote a scathing review of a Lyman Dayton film. Dayton responed in the paper that the review was unwarranted, that Hicks had taken into sufficient account the sincerity of the LDS participants to provide wholesome films. The fact that they were sincerely motivated should have been taken into consideration. In reality, the only thing that matters, regardless of the sincerity of the creators of a work of art, is the final product. Is it worth the money one pays to see it? If the actors are hopelessly amateurish, that's relevant, just like if you were to self-publish a book but because you knew nothing about cover design, you select a cover with five or six different fonts because it "looks cool." > Seriously, I can't think of any play which deserves to be "panned." I can. That play which is advertised to be the end all and be-all of theatre but when viewed is barely above the road show in production level. Having said that, were I still a reviewer, I would never completely pan any play produced by a community theatre. Having been there, done that, I realize how difficult it can be to get the best talent when you're not paying anyone. OTOH, when I see a lame actor in a play at the Sundance Summer Theatre, I am bothered because they use professional actors for at least the lead parts. > Honesty is fine, and good criticism can inspire better work, but I > really don't think mean reviews should ever comprise the thanks a show > gets. Surely there is SOMETHING kind a reviewer can say, even if some > criticism needs to be given. The kinds of reviews I hate (and which constitute the majority of reviews by papers in Utah county) is the kind where the reviewer seems to go out of his or her way to NOT look for anything good. This is an aesthetic crime especially when amateur theatre is involved. Another thing I see is when not all aspects of a theatre piece are reviewed. For instance, I still can't believe that most of the reviews I received for PROPHET failed to even mention that my set was designed by Eric Fielding and my choreography was by Pat Debenham, two BYU professors of no little reputation as anyone who know anything about theatre in Utah county should surely know. I mean, how can you review a musical and say nothing about the dance numbers? > This may seem a self-serving piece, or an > announcement of my fears of a bad review, but I assure you, it's not. I > have a strong sense of what my own play's weaknesses and strengths are. > I know which actors do their parts well and which aren't quite there. I > also know how hard they've worked. I do not want any of my company > publicly humiliated. Well, sadly, that goes with the territory. When we put our work out there for the public to see, we take a chance that not everyone will see it the way we do. > I do believe many reviewers have gotten into the > unfortunate habit of using their often formidible wit to bash a show > without paying it due respect--and I now understand that respect is due > to ANY show which attempts to bring a play to life, even if it falls > short. Within the above boundaries, I agree. No community show should ever be savaged. That should be saved for shows with professional casts. -- Thom Duncan Read the further adventures of Moroni Smith, the LDS Indiana Jones! The long-awaited second episode in the Moroni Smith LDS adventure series, _Moroni Smith: In Search of the Gold Plates_ is now available as an e-book at the Zion's Fiction web page: http://www.zfiction.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Benson Parkinson Subject: Re: [AML] AML-List Lunch Date: 28 Jun 2000 20:27:51 -0700 (MST) Chris Bigelow wrote: <<<<<<<< I can't make it for a lunch because I work in Utah County, but I would = love to have dinner sometime with AML-Listers in Utah County or even in = the north country (Sandy, Midvale, even downtown). Would anyone be = interested in that? If I get enough responses, I'll coordinate something = on the dinner end.=20 >>>>>>>>> Maybe we could repeat last year's list dinner during the CES conference (2nd week in August). (I'm game for a dinner in SLC too.) Ben Parkinson - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Shawn and Melinda Ambrose" Subject: [AML] Selling Your Writing Date: 28 Jun 2000 22:37:04 -0400 I have been reading _Rich Dad Poor Dad_ by a Hawaiian author. It's about how to obtain and maintain wealth. The author tells of an interview after he had written a bestseller. The interviewer was a female reporter whose writing he had read before. He felt her writing was excellent, very to the point, and it held his interest. During the course of the interview she mentioned that she wished she could be a bestselling author. He told her he liked her writing and asked what the problem was. She said everyone liked her work but it didn't sell. He suggested she go to a class on how to sell things, in other words, salesmanship. She was insulted. She said she hated salesmen because all they wanted was money, and she had a Masters' degree in English literature; therefore sales was beneath her. The man was saddened to realize this. He pointed out to her that in her notes she had written his name and followed it with, "best-selling author", not "best-writing author". She said some rather angry words and left. My question is, do classes on how to sell your manuscripts really teach what you need to know? I need a boost. I wonder if the kind of class offered at writing conventions is the best for this or if I should take salesmanship courses at the university near me. Or is there some other alternative I haven't thought of? Thanks much! Melinda L. Ambrose - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Tracie Laulusa" Subject: RE: [AML] AML-List Lunch Date: 28 Jun 2000 22:42:55 -0400 I know some of us will be in Provo for the children's lit and writers conferences. Could we do something then? We'd just have to fit it into the workshop schedule. Tracie - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Kathleen Woodbury Subject: Re: [AML] Where's our LDS Pulitzer prize winner? Date: 28 Jun 2000 21:39:58 -0600 At 10:46 AM 6/28/00 -0600, Terry L Jeffress wrote: >It seems that only through humor can writers (and artists) take a serious >look at Mormon issues. Look at all the issues Robert Kirby and Pat Bagley >get to bandy about in the SL Tribune. Kirby produces some scathing >criticisms of Mormon culture, but because he couches his criticism in humor, >he doesn't take as much heat as an essayist or a novelist would who made the >same criticism in those respective genres. Good point. I believe it was George Bernard Shaw who said something along the lines of "if you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, or they'll kill you." (Paraphrased--I guess I should go look it up....) Kirby's novel DARK ANGEL has been rereleased, by the way. There are touches of humor in it, but it's not what you'd call a funny novel. Lot of truth there, though. Wow! I strongly recommend it. Kathleen Dalton-Woodbury - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Andrew Hall" Subject: [AML] New Mormon Fiction Date: 29 Jun 2000 12:36:57 JST While looking around Amazon.com (http://www.amazon.com/) for some things for Andrew's Poll, I ran into a few new books by Mormon authors that have or are scheduled to come out in 2000. Here they are, with reviews from the Amazon.com page where there were any. 1. Louise Plummer, A Dance for Three. Doubleday, 2000. Amazon.com summary: Plummer (The Unlikely Romance of Kate Bjorkman, 1995, etc.), provides a complex story of teenage pregnancy. Hannah Ziebarth, 15 and pregnant, lives in Salt Lake City. Her Mormon bishop looks after the family, but remotely, and doesn't see that Hannah's mother has become an emotional invalid since her husband's death. Hannah, overwhelmed with her responsibilities, falls for the smooth moves of rich and popular Milo. When she tells him she's pregnant he hits her. Never emotionally stable, she spirals out of control and wakes up in a hospital for troubled teens. Hannah's perspective as she makes her voyage through therapy and through pregnancy alternates with commentary from her best friend, Trilby, and Milo's put-upon younger brother, Roman, who is especially amusing in his take on his parents' hero-worship of their oldest son. While the plot is wrapped up a bit too neatly, Hannah is a rich and rewarding presence; her aching losses nearly throb on the page. Plummer is not afraid to say that it is possible to overcome life's demons, but it's hard; that people can change, but not all do; that giving up a baby hurts. Sobering and definitely a page-turner. (Fiction. 13-15 year olds) 2. Darrell Spencer. Caution, Men in Trees Hardcover - 216 pages (March 2000) Univ. of Georgia Press Amazon.com summary: Spencer writes stories about men. Men who are men among men and lost among women. Men who feel useless, outmoded, impotent, and out of step. Spencer's men don't go in for male bonding. They're much more at home with swagger, snarl, and bluster, signaling their intentions in a manly code in which silence rings louder than speech. The nation's fraying social fabric makes a lousy safety net--one story plays out against the backdrop of television coverage of the O. J. Simpson and Susan "a black carjacker stole my babies" Smith trials. But men don't speak of these things, any more than they speak of the heavy burden of love. "Why does everything have to be a competition?" asks the wife of one protagonist. That question is at the heart of this award-winning collection. An Amazon.com Reviewer said, "No one writes with more pathos about modern life than Darrell Spencer. . . he finds nobility in the mundane, mostly by giving voice to the perplexed Mormons (and faithless but still looking-for-faith Mormons), puzzled husbands, fabric store clerks, trailer park host, and deaf people who suffer, joke, and survive in these stories." (http://www.amazon.com/) (Spencer had a novel, Strange Fish, which won the 1996 Utah Arts Prize, but it hasn't been published yet. I wonder why.) 3. John S. Bennion. Falling Toward Heaven. Signature, paperback, 300 pp., $19.95. Due out in October. (Professor Bennion, I remember from the "Christmas to the World" anthology it said you were working on a novel-length version of your "The Burial Pool" story. Is this it?) 4. Elousie Bell. Madame Ridiculous and Lady Sublime Signature, paperback, 250 pp., $17.95. Due out in December. 5. Brian Evenson. Contagion and Other Stories Paperback - 152 pages (July 15, 2000) Wordcraft of Oregon 6. Orson Scott Card. Sarah Deseret Books, about Sarah and Abraham. (September, 2000) Shadow of the Hegemon. Sequel to Ender's Shadow, due out in Jan. 2001. The first chapters to the two Card books are available on his web site, www.hatrack.com Plus, as we have heard them mention, Linda Adams' "Prodigal Journey" will soon be out, followed sometime by Margaret Young and Darius Gray's "I am Jane". Looking at the list, most of these folks are BYU related in one way or the other. Spencer, Bennion, and Young teach in the English Department, Evenson and Bell used to (Evenson, as I think you all know, was forced out, Bell retired a couple of years ago). Card went to BYU as an undergrad, and did a bunch of his plays there in the 70s. I think Plummer teaches there to, in any case she lives just up the hill from it. Also, a reminder to vote for the Best Mormon Novel of the 1990s if you haven't already. So far we have a tie with two books with two votes each, and a bunch with one. Be the one that breaks the tie! I'll announce a winner next week. Andrew Hall Nagareyama, Japan ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Eric D. Snider" Subject: Re: [AML] Community Theater Date: 28 Jun 2000 22:46:10 -0700 Margaret Young: >I must say that after I've seen >everything a play requires and all the good it can engender, I resent >any mean-spirited reviews. As well you should. There's no cause for mean-spiritedness in reviewing. Unfortunately, many people take honest criticism as mean-spiritedness. (I got an e-mail the other day from a lady who said, "The purpose of a review should be to make people want to see the show, and I don't think your review will do that.") > > >Seriously, I can't think of any play which deserves to be "panned." >Honesty is fine, and good criticism can inspire better work, but I >really don't think mean reviews should ever comprise the thanks a show >gets. Again, you're equating panning a show with being mean-spirited. The two are not one and the same. Most reviewers have the same goal as everyone else: To promote and foster high-quality theater. If that means criticism, or even an outright pan, so be it. To say no play deserves to be panned 1) ignores all the plays that are just plain badly written to begin with and are therefore unlikely to be any good when they're staged, and 2) ignores the fact that even really good plays can, and often are, performed very badly. A reviewer might try to say all the positive he can about a show, but the fact is, the negatives sometimes far outweight the positive, and he does his readers a disservice if he pretends otherwise. I know you didn't mean to start a debate, but I just wanted to clarify a couple things. I also know you said you weren't directing your comments toward any critics in particular (I'm sure there are quite a few theater critics on this list), but I will take this chance to mention that I won't be able to see the show until closing night, which means someone else is reviewing it for The Daily Herald. Good luck with the show, and watch for the big feature story about it in Friday's paper. Eric D. Snider -- *************************************************** Eric D. Snider www.ericdsnider.com "Filling all your Eric D. Snider needs since 1974." - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "D. Michael Martindale" Subject: Re: [AML] AML-List Lunch Date: 29 Jun 2000 00:11:14 -0600 Christopher Bigelow wrote: > I would love to have dinner sometime with AML-Listers in Utah County or even in the north country (Sandy, Midvale, even downtown). Would anyone be interested in that? If I get enough responses, I'll coordinate something on the dinner end. As someone who lives in the "north country" (Sandy) and who sleeps during all the AML-List lunches, I am very interested. In fact, I'd like the "down south" AML-List dinner to become a regular monthly event for those who can't so easily make the lunch (lunch attendees would be welcome too, of course). Perhaps we could alternate between south SL County and Utah County. You could coordinate the Utah County dinners, and I'd be willing to coordinate the SL County ones. -- D. Michael Martindale dmichael@wwno.com ================================== Check out Worldsmiths, the new online LDS writers group, at http://www.wwno.com/worldsmiths Sponsored by Worlds Without Number http://www.wwno.com ================================== - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Benson Parkinson Subject: [AML] AML-List lunch Date: 29 Jun 2000 06:14:59 -0700 (MST) Well the vote for the location of the AML-List Lunch in Salt Lake City today came out in favor of Baga Afgan's. We'll see you at noon in the lobby of the Church Office Building or slightly later at the restaurant. (Any who did not RSVP are still welcome to come. If you could still RSVP before 11:00 we'll know to look for you, but if you don't, we'll see you there.) Robin and Ben Parkinson - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Christopher Bigelow" Subject: Re: RE: [AML] AML-List Lunch Date: 29 Jun 2000 11:14:46 -0700 Sure. One of you plan something and let us know when and where, as your = schedule allows. >>> "Tracie Laulusa" 06/28 7:42 PM >>> I know some of us will be in Provo for the children's lit and writers conferences. Could we do something then? We'd just have to fit it into = the workshop schedule. Tracie - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Darvell" Subject: [AML] RITCHEY,_Disoriented_ (Brief Review) Date: 29 Jun 2000 13:31:19 -0500 I recently found an interested book here in my Las Vegas Deseret Book sotre. After resisting the temptation to buy because of the price (it was hardbound, but is now on sale in Deseret Book's Advantage program) I picked it up and spent a little time reading it. It's _Disoriented_ by Michael Ritchey, published by Cornerstone. An email discussion with the editor Richard Hopkins prompted me to read it. I'm glad that I did! I would highly recommend it. I have never read an LDS novel quite like it, tho I'm not terribly well-read in the LDS marketplace. I've had a hard time with some books, like the Tennis Shoes series, because they seemed so youth-oriented, and even _The Hope and the Glory_ series, even tho it's targeted toward adults. _Disoriented_ can be enjoyed by youth as well as adults. _Disoriented_ is about a return-missionary physicist who discovers that matter can be disoriented by "temporarily confusing" the matter. It's an interesting idea that conforms to LDS beliefs, referring to how matter follows the command of God. It's a great LDS romantic thriller, the likes of which I haven't seen yet. I've been very disappointed with some of my latest LDS fiction reading, but this was very refreshing and quite entertaining, with reasonably good writing and interesting plot twists. There were a few things about the story that really bothered me, but for the most part it was believable and intriguing, almost in the realm of science fiction, but not quite. Apparently this book is going to be reviewed in the new issue of Irreantum, so I'll keep this short. (See http://www.adherents.com/lit/book_Disoriented.html ) I just thot that I'd mention that I really enjoyed it. Congrats to Michael and Richard! You got a winner here! Darvell Hunt _____________________________________________ Free email with personality! Over 200 domains! http://www.MyOwnEmail.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Rachel Ann Nunes" Subject: Re: [AML] New Mormon Fiction Date: 29 Jun 2000 13:00:09 -0600 >Plus, as we have heard them mention, Linda Adams' "Prodigal Journey" will >soon be out, followed sometime by Margaret Young and Darius Gray's "I am >Jane". My new novel, Tomorrow and Always, will also be out September 1st with Covenant Communications. I originally entitled the novel, Karissa's Choice, since it deals with a past abortion, but Tomorrow and Always is a fairly accurate title, when I think about it. Also, I wanted to let everyone know that The Midwest Book Review reviewed my last book, A Greater Love. They said "A Greater Love is a memorable, passionate, and inspirational novel of love, humanity, desperation, shame, need, and deliverance. To see the full review, visit Amazon and search for A Greater Love. Take care, Rachel ________________________________ Rachel Ann Nunes Author of the best-selling Ariana series rachel@ranunes.com http://www.ranunes.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Melissa Proffitt Subject: Re: [AML] New Mormon Fiction Date: 29 Jun 2000 14:30:21 -0600 On Thu, 29 Jun 2000 12:36:57 JST, Andrew Hall wrote: >1. Louise Plummer, A Dance for Three. Doubleday, 2000. I get Amazon.com's YA newsletter and this book was one of their = recommended picks for new teen fiction. I was impressed because so far all the books I've read on their say-so have been very high-quality. Melissa Proffitt - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Christopher Bigelow" Subject: [AML] _Irreantum_ Summer Issue Date: 29 Jun 2000 13:49:54 -0700 [Please forward this message to any person or group who might be interested.] The summer issue of IRREANTUM, the Mormon literary quarterly published by the nonprofit Association for Mormon Letters, has been released. Please scroll down for a printable order form you can use to order a sample copy, a subscription, or back issues. Here is the table of contents for the summer issue: Letters to the Editor Editorial: A Community of Mormon Literature, Jonathan D. Langford News of the Association for Mormon Letters The Irreantum Interview: Dean Hughes Essays: "All Is Well in Zion"?: Publishing among the Gentiles, John Bennion Cookies for the World: Why I Write Children's Books, Sharlee Mullins Glenn Fiction: Long after Dark, Todd Robert Petersen Daughters of Hysteria, Christopher K. Bigelow The Bond of Love, Margaret Young and Darius Gray Poetry: April 1996, Sharlee Mullins Glenn Blood and Milk, Sharlee Mullins Glenn Gold Time, Jolayne Call Broken Pansy, Mildred Barthel You Know Scent of Beauty, Mildred Barthel Woman with Bound Feet, Carol Clark Ottesen The Sweet Potato Man, Carol Clark Ottesen The Crow at 4:00 A.M., Carol Clark Ottesen Heat, Marilyn Brown Rx, Michael Collings Reviews: Tathea, Anne Perry Reviewed by Melissa Proffitt Response by Eric A. Eliason God's Army, Richard Dutcher Reviewed by Eric D. Snider Leap, Terry Tempest Williams Reviewed by Jana Bouck Remy Into the Field, Benson Parkinson Reviewed by Neal Kramer Brief Notices Mormon Literary Scene AML-List Highlights - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - IRREANTUM and AML Order Form (Print out and use this!) ( ) Please send me a sample copy of the Summer 2000 issue of IRREANTUM. Enclosed is $4 (includes postage). ( ) Please subscribe me for a year of IRREANTUM. I've enclosed $12. ( ) Please sign me up for membership in the AML. I've enclosed annual dues of $20 (or $15 for full-time students), which includes an IRREANTUM subscription, a copy of the book-length AML Annual, and other benefits. ( ) Please send me the following back issues of IRREANTUM. I've enclosed $3 per copy (includes postage). ( ) March 1999 (Fiction by Ed Snow, essay by Benson Parkinson, and more) ( ) June 1999 (Interview with Marvin Payne, essay by Robert Paxton, and more) ( ) September 1999 (Interview with Levi Peterson, fiction by John Bennion, and more) ( ) Winter 1999-2000 (Interview with Rachel Ann Nunes, fiction by Scott Parkin, and more) ( ) Spring 2000 (Interview with Margaret Young, fiction by Marilyn Brown, and more) ( ) Please accept my tax-deductible donation to the AML of $______. Total enclosed: $ ______ Name __________________________________ Address __________________________________ __________________________________ Mail to: AML, 1925 Terrace Drive, Orem, UT 84097 * * * * * * Interested in novels, stories, poems, plays, and films by, for, or about Mormons? Check out IRREANTUM magazine at www.xmission.com/~aml/irreantum.htm. - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Kathleen Woodbury Subject: Re: [AML] Selling Your Writing Date: 29 Jun 2000 14:41:20 -0600 At 10:37 PM 6/28/00 -0400, Melinda Ambrose wrote: >My question is, do classes on how to sell your manuscripts really teach what >you need to know? I need a boost. I wonder if the kind of class offered at >writing conventions is the best for this or if I should take salesmanship >courses at the university near me. Or is there some other alternative I >haven't thought of? Good question. The BYU writing workshop on children's books (which is scheduled for July) purports to help with selling said books. Whether that will be what actually happens or not remains to be seen. There was a presentation on writing selling fiction given at BYU a few years ago. Speakers were Dean Wesley Smith and Kristine Kathryn Rusch. I have an article I wrote about that presentation on my website, if anyone wants to read it (it talks about maybe half of what they said). http://www.sff.net/people/Dalton-Woodbury/deankris.htp There's a book out there with a title that includes the words "Blockbuster Novel" (I believe). That may be of more use to you if you want to sell than a workshop. I'd advise two things if you want to sell: never give up, and continue to do everything you can think of to improve--make your writing better, make your storytelling better, make your characterization better, make your research better, make your description better, etc, etc, etc. Kathleen Dalton-Woodbury workshop@burgoyne.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jeff Needle Subject: Re: [AML] RITCHEY,_Disoriented_ (Brief Review) Date: 29 Jun 2000 14:13:10 -0700 I've seen this book on the shelves at the local San Diego DB, but haven't purchased it yet. Yes, these books have become a bit pricey. I really appreciate this review. Looks like I'll have to get a copy! At 01:31 PM 6/29/00 -0500, you wrote: >I recently found an interested book here in my Las Vegas Deseret Book >sotre. After resisting the temptation to buy because of the price (it was >hardbound, but is now on sale in Deseret Book's Advantage program) I picked >it up and spent a little time reading it. It's _Disoriented_ by Michael >Ritchey, published by Cornerstone. An email discussion with the editor >Richard Hopkins prompted me to read it. I'm glad that I did! --------------- Jeff Needle jeff.needle@general.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Benson Parkinson Subject: Re: [AML] AML-List Lunch Date: 29 Jun 2000 17:59:36 -0700 (MST) Tracie Laulusa wrote: > I know some of us will be in Provo for the children's lit and writers > conferences. Could we do something then? We'd just have to fit it into the > workshop schedule. Tracie, when is the conference? I'd like to have a dinner. Ben Parkinson - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Richard Johnson Subject: RE: [AML] AML-List Lunch Date: 29 Jun 2000 22:31:22 -0400 At 10:42 PM 6/28/2000 -0400, you wrote: >I know some of us will be in Provo for the children's lit and writers >conferences. Could we do something then? We'd just have to fit it into the >workshop schedule. > >Tracie My wife and I are coming to Provo the first week in August (she will be attending a geneology conference, and I am hoping to get in one day of my very first Sunstone Symposium (I hope I don't have the wrong weekend).if something can happen I could actually put faces with names. Richard B. Johnson Husband, Father, Grandfather, Puppeteer, Playwright, Writer, Director, Actor, Thingmaker, Mormon, Person, Fool I sometimes think that the last persona is the most important http://www2.gasou.edu/commarts/puppet/ Georgia Southern University Puppet Theatre - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: John L Needham Subject: Re: [AML] (Andrew's Poll) Vote for Mormon Short Fiction Date: 29 Jun 2000 23:01:59 -0400 Although I enjoyed many Mormon novels published in the 90s, I just can't get excited enough about voting for any one of them. Call me a crank, but I don't foresee critics of Mormon lit talking about anything on the nomination list beyond a few years or so, nothing like we discuss earlier Mormon novels anyway. Instead, I will vote for Mormon short fiction--the true breakthrough of the decade. I realize that this may figure later in Andrew's polls, but I'd like to get my vote in now: Levi Peterson's _Night Soil_ (1990) far outstrips _Aspen Marooney_ (1995) in quirky, lovable characters--the odd-ball Mormon types whom, whatever his attempts to write "serious," non-farcical fiction, readers will always seek in his work. I cannot think of the debut of any 90s Mormon novel that holds a candle to Brian Evenson's _Altmann's Tongue_ (1994) for innovation and gripping narrative voice(s), certainly not his own _Father of Lies_ (1998). Phyllis Barber has been appropriately praised for her heavily remaindered _And the Deseret Shall Blossom_ (1991), but her true accomplishment is the stories of _Parting the Veil_ (1999), the result of a twenty years' imaginative reworkings of Mormon folk motifs that crackle with Mormon idioms and folk images. Although I really liked, though was somewhat bothered by the representations of Mormons in, Walter Kirn's _Thumbsucker_ (1999), I was enamored by his collection of stories, _My Hard Bargain_ (1990), in which the engagements with Mormonism stir much greater empathy in the reader. And then there are our two Flannery O'Connor Award winners of the decade just past (three, if you count Darrell Spencer's recently published, _Men in Trees_), Paul Rawlins's _No Lie Like Love_ (1997) and Mary Clyde's _Survival Rates_ (1999). Clyde's stories shine, in seriousness of theme and prose style, like no recent Mormon novel I can think of, except perhaps van Wagoner's _Dancing Naked_ (1999). And let us not forget the smile-enticing stories of Brady Udall's _Letting Loose the Hounds_, yet another dazzling debut in short fiction. Wow, that was a lot of modifiers for me. But I feel that strongly about these recent works of Mormon short fiction. I certainly don't mean to disparage the many writers who contributed to the list of novel nomminees (though, I hope you'll pardon my elitism if I say I believe a good third of them don't rise above the mark of literariness and are better suited in a discussion of Mormon formula fiction). Some are important in terms of theme or national reception. Others sparkle with innovation and writerly style. But, if marooned on Gilligan's island with only a handful of books to read, I'd sooner have my short fiction nominations than a whole run of 90s Mormon novels. John ______________________ John L. Needham Monsey, New York jlneedham@mindspring.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Larry Jackson Subject: [AML] ADAMS, _Prodigal Journey_ (Review) Date: 30 Jun 2000 00:19:18 EDT Linda Adams : This is my first novel, ... I can't wait for Volumes 2 and 3 either. Three volumes are projected and outlined. But as I write the rest I still discover things I hadn't expected would happen either-- outline in hand or no. I'm still working on it as quickly as I can, with four kids home for the summer and expecting #5 September 20th. (No worries--I wrote a good, large portion of Volume 1 with my last baby nursing on my lap, typing one-handed.) My goal is to get them out about a year apart. _______________ The books, right? Yes, Linda must be speaking of getting the books out about a year apart ... :-> Larry (quiver full) Jackson ________________________________________________________________ YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET! Juno now offers FREE Internet Access! Try it today - there's no risk! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj. - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Todd Robert Petersen" Subject: Re: [AML] Re: Writing About Religion Date: 29 Jun 2000 20:29:21 -0500 To Chris and everyone. Sit down, this is a whopper > I wonder how many mainstream readers out there would say, "No Mormon > stories for me" I daresay nearly all of them. When I was taking workshop classes, the students continually commented that they couldn't comment because of the Mormon content, which in my most LDS stories, is minimal (i.e. I use minimal jargon and rely on nearly no assumptions of my audience). But the word Mormon gets in there and, pow! Here come the knock-out drops. > It it possible for a writer to be so charming or compelling that people will > overcome their topic aversion? Yes, but it will take a concerted effort, I think, among our best and brightest to do a kind of literary "missionary" work. By this I mean what we hear all the time about setting a fine example among our brothers and sisters. We will have to set aside attempts to write about our religion and simply write our lives and the lives of those people we want to understand. I have written a collection of short stories that looks at latter-day saints more or less directly. The stories themselves have done well in LDS markets (Sunstone, Dialogue, Irreantum). I'm now turning my attentions to stories about seeing the church from without. As a convert, I think I can still do this with some degree of fairness. For example I'm writing a novella about the neighbors who live next to Mormons, Mormons who are really pulling out the stops to prosyletize. I've got another story about a southern redneck who has been tracted out and is trying to convince his family that the Indians "knew Jesus." Another has a couple of bandits driving across Texas. One is Mormon and he gets killed by the other, who doesn't believe that he is sufficiently far enough away from the church to be "trustworthy." Editors from Esquire, Cream City Review, StoryQuarterly and Mid-American Review have writen back to me expressing that they liked the stories, but . . . No one says that Mormonism is the problem, but I think it is. How to solve the problem? I have some answers, I think. 1) We need to write better than any of them. I mean better than the best, and that will take a lot of work and some training. BYU could be instrumental in this, but they have no MFA program, so it becomes difficult. Like I said it's hard to write Mormon out there in the hip, atheistic world of the 21st cynics. 2) We need to worm our way into the arenas of publication (e.g. as editors, agents, teachers, etc.) Which is going to mean New York, and Boston for some. Maybe even London. As an editor I have been able to print a few LDS things, but there are problems. I just published a story that had a Mormon in it. He is not favorably protrayed, and I'm not even sure if the writer is LDS. But the other editor, freaked out and said, "Who took this Mormon propaganda?" I didn't even accept the story, some other junior editor liked it. 3) We need to set our sights on the national market and stop preaching to the choir. 4) If you'll allow me a little conceit. The Victorians believed in a concept of femininity and womanhood they called, "The Angel in the House," which meant that women were top dogs in the house and there only. They were to be stunning hosteses, deferential, etc., etc. Virginia Woolf said that women writers had to kill The Angel in the House if they are to be accepted as anything more than tokens. Similarly, I think that LDS writers need to kill "The Angel Moroni in the House." This will mean that we can no longer rely on shortcuts and simple answers, and that we will have to write from our faith and not necessarily about it. Later on, we can break out doctrine and so forth. But not now, not yet. It is really too soon for that. We'll spook the gentiles and send them running. 5) We need to win some awards. I know people on this list have eschewed them. William Gass does too, but that doesn't change the fact that a writer will make the A-list if they win an award. Evenson won an O Henry, and that's a big deal, which translates into a lot more exposure. If a Mormon were to win a PEN/Faulkner like David Guterson did, it would be all over but the shouting. I was hanging out with Brett Lott in Powell's bookstore in Portland, Oregon three years ago and he was buying used copies of his books becuase he couldn't find them anymore; everything was out of print. Once he got picked for Oprah, the dang things are in the grocery store checkout aisle. So what we need is a Mormon writer on Oprah, someone like Margaret Young (Sheesh, Margaret, if that happens your kids could go to college on Mars if they wanted to) would be great. Anyway, that's what I think. Todd Robert Petersen - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "D. Michael Martindale" Subject: Re: [AML] Re: Writing About Religion Date: 30 Jun 2000 02:04:28 -0600 Christopher Bigelow wrote: > I wonder how many mainstream readers out there would say, "No Mormon stories for me" in the same knee-jerk way I say no horse stories, even though I like the author and haven't given the book a look. It it possible for a writer to be so charming or compelling that people will overcome their topic aversion? It must be possible. In my in-person writers group, I have three people who are decidedly not in the audience of my novel that I'm forcing them to read. If the novel were on a bookshelf, they would run as far from it as they could because of the topic. Yet seven chapters deep into it, they are asking for chapters early because they don't want to wait for the regularly scheduled time to see what happens next. Is that charming or compelling enough for you? Is that blatant enough of a self-plug for you? -- D. Michael Martindale dmichael@wwno.com ================================== Check out Worldsmiths, the new online LDS writers group, at http://www.wwno.com/worldsmiths Sponsored by Worlds Without Number http://www.wwno.com ================================== - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Larry Jackson Subject: [AML] MN Martyrdom Remembered: New York Times Date: 30 Jun 2000 00:19:18 EDT [AML-LIST MOD: This isn't within our normal "literary" purview, but I thought it might be interesting in light of recent discussions of national awareness/tolerance of Mormon culture, i.e., potential Mormon literature markets. Besides, there's not too much in the in-box today (yet).] [From Mormon-News] Martyrdom Remembered (Today's Highlights in History) New York Times 27Jun00 N6 http://www.nytimes.com/learning/general/onthisday/000627onthisday.html"> NEW YORK, NEW YORK -- The Martyrdom of Joseph and Hyrum Smith was recognized in the New York Times' Today in History page and has also been included on similar lists distributed by Reuters and by the Associated Press. The Smith brothers will killed by a mob that attacked the Carthage, Illinois jail that they were staying in. >From Mormon-News: Mormon News and Events Forwarding is permitted as long as this footer is included Mormon News items may not be posted to the World Wide Web sites without permission. Please link to our pages instead. For more information see http://www.MormonsToday.com/ Send join and remove commands to: majordomo@MormonsToday.com Put appropriate commands in body of the message: To join: subscribe mormon-news To leave: unsubscribe mormon-news To join digest: subscribe mormon-news-digest ________________________________________________________________ YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET! Juno now offers FREE Internet Access! Try it today - there's no risk! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj. - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Larry Jackson Subject: [AML] MN Huntsman's Dispute With U. of Utah Newspaper May Lead To Date: 30 Jun 2000 00:19:18 EDT Changes: Excite News (Daily Utah Chronicle) 21Jun00 B2 [From Mormon-News] Huntsman's Dispute With U. of Utah Newspaper May Lead To Big Changes (COLUMN: It could have been dead and buried) Excite News (Daily Utah Chronicle) 21Jun00 P2 http://news.excite.com:80/news/uw/000621/university-32 By Scott Lewis: Daily Utah Chronicle and Old controversy between regents, campus paper arises with proposal Excite News (Daily Utah Chronicle) 21Jun00 B2 http://news.excite.com:80/news/uw/000621/university-29 By Matt Canham: Daily Utah Chronicle SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH -- On October 12, billionaire Jon M. Huntsman wrote a letter to the editor of The Daily Utah Chronicle, criticizing an opinion article written by Dave Hancock, former Chronicle editor in chief. Huntsman perceived the August 31 column as personal attacks on his wife. Dave Hancock had criticized Gov. Michael O. Leavitt for appointing Karen Huntsman to the Utah State Board of Regents. He argued that a member of the governing board of Utah's system of higher education should have a college degree. Five months after Jon M. Huntsman's article, it was learned by the Publications Council of the Daily Utah Chronicle that the administration of the Utah State Board of Regents drafted a proposal to add a full-time faculty adviser to The Chronicle's staff. The Chronicle asked administrators why the proposal was necessary and began an investigation. A month later the Board of Trustees changed the council makeup. This change in procedure has council members believing the trustees violated their bylaws with this process. According to Publications Council member Norman Waitzman, the Hancock column started a controversy that "shook the foundations of this university." In Huntsman's Oct. 12 letter he stated, "Sadly, the Trustees of the U have exercised no accountability or responsibility over a periodical that bears the institution's name." Huntsman requested a printed apology, but Hancock said he would "think about it." Huntsman has said that if an apology is not forthcoming he will withhold future donations to the University. Former Publications Council Chairman Howard Lehman said that could be as much as $500 million. "Jon did say what happened would impact what he did for the U in the future," Trustees Secretary Michael Benson said. "There were consequences to what Dave said and those actions would have an impact on his future giving to the university." Subsequently, Hancock wrote the apology. Huntsman's letter also brought up questions about the board's relationship to the newspaper and the role of the Publications Council. If the proposal is implemented it would set class requirements for The Chronicle editor and staff. Chronicle editor in chief Shane McCammon said he is "disturbed by how vague the proposal is." The proposal states the the trustees "affirm a long-standing prohibition of censorship." Council member Norman Waitzman said, "The council was sidestepped and left out of the loop." "I think they believe we are just a bunch of kids," McCammon said. "They feel they can walk over us, because they don't think we know what we are doing." Barbara Snyder, vice president for student affairs said, "In hindsight, we should have been more inclusive." Under the administrations plan the adviser would meet with reporters after publication to discuss ways to improve the newspaper and would conduct classes where the entire Chronicle staff would learn the basics of journalism. "Why this (adviser position) needs to be formalized is an issue I don't have an answer for," Waitzman said. The decision to implement this proposal is in the hands of the council. The new council will take up the proposal when it reconvenes in August. >From Mormon-News: Mormon News and Events Forwarding is permitted as long as this footer is included Mormon News items may not be posted to the World Wide Web sites without permission. Please link to our pages instead. For more information see http://www.MormonsToday.com/ Send join and remove commands to: majordomo@MormonsToday.com Put appropriate commands in body of the message: To join: subscribe mormon-news To leave: unsubscribe mormon-news To join digest: subscribe mormon-news-digest ________________________________________________________________ YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET! Juno now offers FREE Internet Access! Try it today - there's no risk! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj. - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Larry Jackson Subject: [AML] MN Mormon Book Achieving Notice Nationwide: St Martins Press Date: 30 Jun 2000 00:19:19 EDT Press Release 19Jun00 A4 [From Mormon-News] Mormon Book Achieving Notice Nationwide St Martins Press Press Release 19Jun00 A4 NEW YORK, NEW YORK -- A new book on the Mormon faith is selling well across the nation and gaining comment in some unusual places. Utah author Coke Newell says his book "Latter Days: A Guided Tour Through Six Billion Years of Mormonism," released nationally by New York's St. Martin's Press only a few weeks ago (April 5), has risen quickly to the top one percent of sales at online superstore Amazon.com. And it appears the book is appealing to audiences outside the Mormon heartland. All of the publishing industry magazines have reviewed it, says Newell, referring to Booklist, Kirkus Reviews, the Library Journal and Publishers Weekly, but it has begun to show up either in review or as a reference work in places like the Baltimore Sun, the Ft Worth Star Telegram, the Arizona Republic, and the Nashville Tennessean. One of Newell's favorite reviews to date appeared in an online Christian bookstore not customarily kind to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints: "...an excellent, albeit one-sided and besparkled, delineation of Mormon ideas, theology and history. A bold and nerve-filled presentation of Mormon beliefs and history that accentuates the positive -- as much as possible." (See http://www.integrityonline15.com/jpholding/tekton/CN.LD_0312241089.html Tekton Apologetics Ministries) Another is from Allan Carlson, president of the Howard Center for Family, Religion and Society, and a committed Lutheran: "Latter Days [is] a most welcome volume. False and flawed opinions about Mormon beliefs and practices aboud. Coke Newell's forthright, clearly written, even fascinating account of Latter Day Saint doctrine and history should help clear the air. I truly enjoyed the book." (See http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0312241089/mormonnews Amazon.com) The publication of "Latter Days" marks the first time any national trade publisher has ever published a book on The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints written by a Church insider -- Newell works out of headquarters as the Church's manager of Public Affairs for eastern North America. And it stands apart from other Mormon books in a number of ways, all apparent within mere moments of reading either the dust jacket or the preface. Its tone is different; its approach is different. And its author is differet: ironically, or perhaps appropriately, the author of this first "faithful" book on The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints to come from a national trade publisher is a convert to the faith. In the author's own words from the book's Preface: "straight out of the rock-n-roll, vegetarian, whole earth and homeschool homeopathic Colorado mountains. And still into most of it. Faithfully." The author's web site contains extensive extracts from the book, a contents listing and a biographical sketch. See it at http://www.cokenewell.com/">www.cokenewell.com # # # See also: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0312241089/mormonnews More about Coke Latter Days" at Amazon.com >From Mormon-News: Mormon News and Events Forwarding is permitted as long as this footer is included Mormon News items may not be posted to the World Wide Web sites without permission. Please link to our pages instead. For more information see http://www.MormonsToday.com/ Send join and remove commands to: majordomo@MormonsToday.com Put appropriate commands in body of the message: To join: subscribe mormon-news To leave: unsubscribe mormon-news To join digest: subscribe mormon-news-digest ________________________________________________________________ YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET! Juno now offers FREE Internet Access! Try it today - there's no risk! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj. - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "lynn gardner" Subject: RE: [AML] New Mormon Fiction Date: 30 Jun 2000 07:21:49 -0700 My newest suspense novel, Jade and Jeopardy, published by Covenant Communications, the seventh in the gem-based series, should be on the bookshelves mid-July. This time Allison is on the run, picking up strays in need of help as she flees for her life from Los Angeles to Charleston, South Carolina. I'd planned a 10 book series, ending with Rubies, but as I'm only working on number eight now, Opals and Outlaws, Allison and Bart and their anti-terrorist group are going to go underground for a couple of years while my husband and I go on a mission. We'll see what happens when we return. They'll probably be history! Who knows, the next may become the missionary adventures of Ma And Pa Gardner in Timbuktu! Lynn Gardner > - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Ronn Blankenship Subject: Re: [AML] Selling Your Writing Date: 30 Jun 2000 09:54:56 -0500 At 22:37 28-06-00 -0400, Melinda L. Ambrose wrote: >I have been reading _Rich Dad Poor Dad_ by a Hawaiian author. It's about >how to obtain and maintain wealth. The author tells of an interview after >he had written a bestseller. The interviewer was a female reporter whose >writing he had read before. He felt her writing was excellent, very to the >point, and it held his interest. During the course of the interview she >mentioned that she wished she could be a bestselling author. He told her he >liked her writing and asked what the problem was. She said everyone liked >her work but it didn't sell. He suggested she go to a class on how to sell >things, in other words, salesmanship. She was insulted. She said she hated >salesmen because all they wanted was money, and she had a Masters' degree in >English literature; therefore sales was beneath her. The man was saddened >to realize this. He pointed out to her that in her notes she had written >his name and followed it with, "best-selling author", not "best-writing >author". She said some rather angry words and left. I think this one sentence >He pointed out to her that in her notes she had written >his name and followed it with, "best-selling author", not "best-writing >author". could be a starting point for discussion of the whole issue of the correlation between writing quality and sales. For example Is good writing _necessary_ to becoming a best-selling author? Is good writing _sufficient_ to becoming a best-selling author? Is good writing possibly _detrimental_ to becoming a best-selling author? Does quality of writing have _anything_ to do with sales? What think ye? And for other writers who have proved time and again to be failures in the sales world, is there any hope? -- Ronn! :) - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Edgar Snow Subject: [AML] (Curiouser & Curiouser) GUNDRY ET AL. (eds.), _Best-Loved Humor of the LDS People_ (Review) Date: 21 Jun 2000 13:42:25 -0700 (PDT) CURIOUSER & CURIOUSER: MORMON MUSINGS Gundry, Parry & Lyon, eds. _The Best-Loved Humor of the LDS People_. Deseret Book, 1999. 297 pages. $23.95. Reviewed by Edgar C. Snow, Jr. Mormon humor, believe it or not, was the topic of an Associated Press article appearing in the _The New York Times_, July 9, 1999, titled: "Mormon Humor? Get Serious." This article featured interviews with Elouise Bell and Robert Kirby, the reigning queen and crown prince of Mormon humor practitioners (just as in Elizabethan and Victorian England, there is no king yet-- if anything, I consider myself the janitor). It also featured the then newly-released Deseret Book title in its "Best-Loved" series, _The Best-Loved Humor of the LDS People_. The teaser for this AP article was, of course, the apparently ridiculous assertion that Mormon humor even exists. It's like saying that there's such thing as an Amish mafia (wait, there was an Amish drug ring busted about a year ago, heard it on NPR: "Brother, wouldst thou partake of a nickle bag?"). In my own elder's quorum about a year ago we also discussed whether Mormons had no sense of humor and took themselves too seriously, especially considering some of the pronouncements in the D&C about loud laughter and such. The prospect that Mormons didn't have a sense of humor wasn't very amusing to us. We pondered the question deeply; several members of the quorum even flipped desperately through the Topical Guide and Bible Dictionary for answers but were found wanting. And since no one had a copy of McConkie's _Mormon Doctrine_, we were left for the moment with a stupor of thought. Then intelligence (whether pure or not I leave to you) stroked my mind and I then asked the following questions: *When was the last time anyone had a really good belly laugh during a Catholic Mass? *Are Buddhist or Muslim jokes funnier than Mormon jokes? *Have you ever seen a copy of a text titled: _The Best-Loved Humor of the Jehovah's Witnesses_? *How frequently would you chuckle at the droll wit of a Baptist minister while he's literally trying to scare the hell out of you at a revival? *Do Pentecostalists ever crackwise in tongues? *How many amusing anecdotes are shared during a typical Quaker meeting, even if someone speaks? I'm sure my defensive questions would have given us more comfort had it not been for the weakness evident in some of our religious competitors (okay, okay--Catholics and Jews do have a well-developed humor tradition). With a collective sigh, we returned to the topic of the lesson. And then along came _The Best-Loved Humor of the LDS People_, the subject of this book review. In its favor, it should be noted, I guess, that it carries the currently theologically correct name "LDS People" rather than "the Mormons." Yet in the argument to prove the existence of Mormon humor to a hostile world, this book might be necessary, but it is not sufficient. It's not that _Best-Loved Humor_ isn't funny; some parts are tolerably amusing. But the collection is arranged for the convenience of someone researching a talk or lesson in church, and, as a result, doesn't really lend itself to the enjoyment of gratuitous humor at your leisure. It's similar to taping "The Late Show" with David Letterman and watching it the day afterward in the bright sunshine while eating breakfast--it's just not as funny as when you're sitting semi-conscious in the dark, which, actually, may be the best way to read this book. I recommend on the dust jacket for the second printing that it carry the label: "WARNING: Do not read while operating heavy machinery." _Best-Loved Humor_, at best, should be viewed as a correlated topical guide to _Ensign_-worthy humorous jokes and anecdotes. The more I think about it, in fact--and I'm not accusing anyone of plagiarism--this book looks suspiciously like a collection of amusing anecdotes and jokes that were edited out of William Bennett's _The Book of Virtues_. The biggest problem with _Best-Loved Humor_ is that some of the funniest parts have nothing to do with Mormonism in particular, weren't written by Mormons, and have likely never been quoted in any Mormon meeting (unless by the editors) before they were compiled into this book. Yet, to their credit, the editors of this book anticipated my cranky comments by suggesting in the introduction that any such passages in their book will *eventually become* best-loved by the Saints, presumably through the self-fulfilling prophecy marketing strategy of encouraging people to quote such passages in Mormon meetings until they become best-loved. In fact, in order to fulfill that prophecy, I even quoted the book last week in my gospel doctrine class--people groaned, the ones who were awake, that is. Finally, one last gripe about _Best-Loved Humor_: I secretly wish I had come up with the idea myself to write this book first. I give it two and a half golden plates (out of five). Ed Snow ===== My collection of humorous essays entitled _Of Curious Workmanship: Musings on Things Mormon_ has just been released and can be ordered from Signature Books at 1-800-356-5687, or from their website at http://www.signaturebooksinc.com/curious.htm or from Barnes & Noble at http://shop.barnesandnoble.com/booksearch/isbnInquiry.asp?userid=5SLFMY1TYD&mscssid=HJW5QQU1SUS12HE1001PQJ9XJ7F17G3C&srefer=&isbn=1560851368 __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send instant messages with Yahoo! Messenger. http://im.yahoo.com/ - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Ronn Blankenship Subject: Re: [AML] Selling Your Writing Date: 30 Jun 2000 10:07:32 -0500 In my earlier message, I wrote: "And for other writers who have proved time and again to be failures in the sales world, is there any hope?" What I meant by that was not necessarily writers who have published an earlier non-best-selling work -- clearly not everybody can create a best seller the first time. In light of the discussion on "salesmanship," though, I was thinking of those of us who, to pay the bills while working on the Great Mormon Novel, have taken jobs requiring sales talent and proved, perhaps repeatedly, that we have absolutely no talent in that area. I expect that such a combination of talents is not an unusual thing (Tom Clancy being a conspicuous exception), since sales is usually considered a "people" skill and writing is generally carried out in solitude . . . Any thoughts on the necessity or desirability of sales talent in a writer, or what to do if one could not sell ice water in Hades? -- Ronn! :) - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: AEParshall@aol.com Subject: [AML] GARDNER, _Gem_ Books (was: New Mormon Fiction) Date: 30 Jun 2000 11:18:06 EDT In a message dated 6/30/2000 9:06:35 AM Mountain Daylight Time, lgardner@hughes.net writes: << My newest suspense novel, Jade and Jeopardy, published by Covenant Communications, the seventh in the gem-based series, should be on the bookshelves mid-July. This time Allison is on the run, picking up strays in need of help as she flees for her life from Los Angeles to Charleston, South Carolina. >> Lynn, you may be interested in this: I spend too much of my life waiting for bus transfers at the stop on the UVSC campus where a lot of other riders pass the eternal waits by reading. A number of student-age readers have had your "gem" books lately. I wanted to question a couple of them about issues in recent AML threads and have watched for a chance to catch their eyes so I don't interrupt, but the darn kids won't take their noses out of the books long enough! They glance up just long enough to see what bus has pulled up and then go right back to reading. Is some UVSC professor using your books in class, or is it just coincidence that I've seen your books being read there so often lately? Ardis Parshall AEParshall@aol.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Thom Duncan Subject: [AML] Re: Writing About Religion Date: 30 Jun 2000 10:36:42 -0600 Todd Robert Petersen wrote: > > How to solve the problem? I have some answers, I think. > I have felt for a long time that the Church itself is unwittingly our own worst enemy when it comes to being taken seriously in the literary marketplace. The Church's efforts to proselytize the world and the image it conciously presents to the world seems at odds with the best of traditional literature. Scott Card has said that when non-Mormons first learn he is LDS, they are dumbfounded because of the fairly radical things he's written about. I know other LDS writers who've had similar experiences from fans and editors. To the world, we appear as a fairly right-wing conservative Christian church and, I believe, unwittingly carry the current contempt that group carries in the larger society. When you've got Jerry Falwell making news because he says the purple Telletubby is gay, we get some of the fall out by assocation. Unlike the Catholic Church, or the Jews, whose great thinkers are legendary and well-known, ours are not. The outside world doesn't know of our Thomas Acquinas, B.H. Roberts. They don't know, generally about our St. Pauls, otherwise known as Orson Pratt and his brother Parley. Instead, they think of as an homogenous group of tea-totallers with lots of kids. It is significant that the first serious in-depth look at Joseph Smith in the media happened only this last year in _An American Prophet._ What could a Mormon writer possibly have to say to the world? is the attitude of the general public. I think we are too young as a church to tet be taken seriously by the rest of the world. This perception may change over the next decade or so. I hope so. -- Thom - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Edgar Snow Subject: [AML] Topic Aversion (was: Writing About Religion) Date: 30 Jun 2000 09:54:52 -0700 (PDT) Chris Bigelow wrote: As a kid, I used to read comic books constantly. I had no real favorite super heroes, just favorite illustrators. Once the illustrator switched comic books, I followed him regardless of which new super hero he was drawing. I had no "topic" aversion then. Nowadays, I think I can say the same thing about some of my favorite authors. I will read whatever Garrison Keillor, P.J. O'Rourke, Bill Bryson, or Roy Blount write about--skunks, etiquette, economics, hairdos, girdles, grammar, printing fonts--you name it. I am 99% sure that their personalities and style will appeal to me and make their topic interesting. I think this quality is what makes them good writers. Ed Snow ===== My collection of humorous essays entitled _Of Curious Workmanship: Musings on Things Mormon_ has just been released and can be ordered from Signature Books at 1-800-356-5687, or from their website at http://www.signaturebooksinc.com/curious.htm or from Barnes & Noble at http://shop.barnesandnoble.com/booksearch/isbnInquiry.asp?userid=5SLFMY1TYD&mscssid=HJW5QQU1SUS12HE1001PQJ9XJ7F17G3C&srefer=&isbn=1560851368 __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get Yahoo! Mail - Free email you can access from anywhere! http://mail.yahoo.com/ - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Kathleen Woodbury Subject: Re: [AML] Selling Your Writing Date: 30 Jun 2000 13:00:24 -0600 At 09:54 AM 6/30/00 -0500, Ronn Blankenship wrote: >I think this one sentence > >>He pointed out to her that in her notes she had written >>his name and followed it with, "best-selling author", not "best-writing >>author". > >could be a starting point for discussion of the whole issue of the >correlation between writing quality and sales. For example > >Is good writing _necessary_ to becoming a best-selling author? >Is good writing _sufficient_ to becoming a best-selling author? >Is good writing possibly _detrimental_ to becoming a best-selling author? >Does quality of writing have _anything_ to do with sales? > >What think ye? > >And for other writers who have proved time and again to be failures in the >sales world, is there any hope? Of course, first of all, you have to define "good writing." Among the kinds of writing that can be described as "good writing" include beautiful prose invisible prose clear and incisive prose exciting and interesting prose and so on. The above are not necessarily the same thing. In fact, they are often very different. I would submit (once again) that if you want to sell, a great story can cover a multitude of less than "good" writing sins much more easily than "good writing" can cover even one story telling sin. That's =if you want to sell=. The ideal is to combine a great story with writing that does not distract from the great story. (So more points go to the latter three of the four listed above that to the first kind of "good writing.") That said, my vote on Ronn's questions is as follows: >Is good writing _necessary_ to becoming a best-selling author? yes >Is good writing _sufficient_ to becoming a best-selling author? no >Is good writing possibly _detrimental_ to becoming a best-selling author? no, though if the writing is too beautiful/fancy/intelligent/multi-syllabic, it may distract too much from the story and be detrimental in that way >Does quality of writing have _anything_ to do with sales? sure--if it isn't at least clear and interesting, it won't be read Dare I quote Card's three obligations a writer has to a reader? Yeah, why not? Writers are obliged to answer three questions for their readers: Oh, yeah? So what? Huh? (He says answering them correctly, gives the reader, respectively, faith, hope, and clarity.) All three of them =require= "good writing" of some level or another. Kathleen Dalton-Woodbury workshop@burgoyne.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Kathleen Woodbury Subject: RE: [AML] New Mormon Fiction Date: 30 Jun 2000 13:02:50 -0600 At 07:21 AM 6/30/00 -0700, lynn gardner wrote: >I'd planned a 10 book series, ending with Rubies, but as I'm only working on >number eight now, Opals and Outlaws, Allison and Bart and their >anti-terrorist group are going to go underground for a couple of years while >my husband and I go on a mission. We'll see what happens when we return. >They'll probably be history! > >Who knows, the next may become the missionary adventures of Ma And Pa >Gardner in Timbuktu! Lynn Gardner Is that really where you're going, Lynn? Kathleen Dalton-Woodbury workshop@burgoyne.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jonathan Langford Subject: [AML] Holiday Schedule Date: 30 Jun 2000 17:41:37 -0500 Folks, The List will be up Monday and Tuesday, but will be limited to the typical Saturday volume (i.e., 10-12 posts maximum). Have a happy July 4th. Take care, drive safely--all those sorts of things. Jonathan Langford AML-List Moderator - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Barbara@techvoice.com (Barbara R. Hume) Subject: Re: [AML] Re: Writing About Religion Date: 30 Jun 2000 13:31:06 -0700 > When I was taking workshop classes, the >students continually commented that they couldn't comment because of the >Mormon content, which in my most LDS stories, is minimal (i.e. I use minimal >jargon and rely on nearly no assumptions of my audience). This business of the jargon in religious fiction is interesting. I'm currently reading the Jan Karon books about an Episcopelian priest, and I find them quite enjoyable. But the jargon sometimes brings me out of the story. Just what is a rector? a vicar? a warden? a curate? a vestry? What does it mean to "sit on the gospel side" during a service, or to "sit on the epistle side"? The character, of course, would have no need to explain them--it would be like defining car or bread or sofa. It's part of his everyday environment. Mormon jargon would have the same effect, I should think. Those of us who are converts all have our stories about expecting to be fed when we went to the stake center, or wondering why teenage boys would be called elders. It can be a strong distraction. One must also consider the natural prejudice people feel when you use the "wrong" terminology, meaning terminology that differs from what they're accustomed to. If you're used to thinking of a bishop as some grand poo-bah in fancy robes, then the term seems strange when applied to an ordinary man in a business suit. barbara hume - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Bill Willson" Subject: Re: [AML] Selling Your Writing Date: 30 Jun 2000 13:58:37 -0600 Hi Just thought I'd get my two cents in early and then stand by in the dark corner and lurk. Ronn Blankenship wrote: > Is good writing _necessary_ to becoming a best-selling author? ***Yes! But sometimes poor writers or even people who aren't really writers hit the best-selling ranks. > Is good writing _sufficient_ to becoming a best-selling author? ***No! You must be a promoter or a salesman too. > Is good writing possibly _detrimental_ to becoming a best-selling author? ***No! How can the literary world consistently ignore good writing? Sooner or later someone who knows what good writing is will recognize it > Does quality of writing have _anything_ to do with sales? ***Yes! But a famous name or an exciting theme or subject is also a contributor. Unfortunately the people who purchase books aren't always looking for what good writers are writing. They are looking for what is popular. > > What think ye? (See *** above) > > And for other writers who have proved time and again to be failures >in the sales world, is there any hope? ***Yes! As long as they never give up the dream, and they keep on reading and writing. Regards, Bill Willson Keep your hand moving and your muse alive. bwillson@mtwest.net - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Linda Adams Subject: Re: [AML] New Mormon Fiction Date: 30 Jun 2000 00:15:32 -0500 At 10:36 PM 6/28/00, you wrote: >Plus, as we have heard them mention, Linda Adams' "Prodigal Journey" will >soon be out, followed sometime by Margaret Young and Darius Gray's "I am Jane". > >Looking at the list, most of these folks are BYU related in one way or the >other. Including me--BYU is my Alma Mater, too. Hopeful release date for my book is July 6-7th. Crossing my fingers! Linda Adams ----------------------- Linda Adams adamszoo@sprintmail.com http://members.xoom.com/adamszoo http://home.sprintmail.com/~adamszoo - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Linda Adams Subject: Re: [AML] Writing About Religion Date: 30 Jun 2000 17:05:49 -0500 I think the reason for editors/readers' aversion to the word "Mormon" might have something to do with our proactive proselyting as a Church. I think others think of the word "Mormon" the same way many think of the word "Amway Representative." (Apologies to any such on the list!) But you have to admit, we have a reputation as a church, as a people, for strong-selling the Gospel. And you also must admit the vast majority of Mormon fiction to date has got a missionary or at least a faith-affirming slant to it, from _The Work and the Glory_ to Weyland to the Yorgasons--the "top sellers" to date. Not that these things are bad in and of themselves, either. But I personally don't care to read fiction/writing that's only a tract in disguise, especially if I don't want anything to do with the tract or Being Converted to the Cause. No matter what the Cause is. So I'd guess it's got to do with "outsiders" not wanting to read stuff that's only going to try to convert them. I'm not saying we shouldn't share the Gospel with others or hold up our member-missionary duties when we can. I'm just stating a possible cause for the obvious aversion. That might be why only negative sorts of stories-with-Mormons-involved seem to get published out in the (rest of the) literary world. Just a thought. Linda ----------- Linda Adams adamszoo@sprintmail.com http://members.xoom.com/adamszoo http://home.sprintmail.com/~adamszoo - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Linda Adams Subject: Re: [AML] ADAMS, _Prodigal Journey_ (Review) Date: 30 Jun 2000 16:53:54 -0500 >(No worries--I wrote a good, large >portion of Volume 1 with my last baby nursing on my lap, >typing one-handed.) My goal is to get them out about >a year apart. > >_______________ > >The books, right? Yes, Linda must be speaking of >getting the books out about a year apart ... > > :-> > >Larry (quiver full) Jackson > Yes, yes, the *books* a year apart. I was tired when I wrote that. We've already done the baby-a-year thing (1990, 1991, early 1993--our third was born before the first turned 3). Seems we've slowed down some. Knock on wood. :-) Linda ------------- Linda Adams adamszoo@sprintmail.com http://members.xoom.com/adamszoo http://home.sprintmail.com/~adamszoo - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Terry L Jeffress" Subject: Re: [AML] Selling Your Writing Date: 30 Jun 2000 16:13:02 -0600 Ronn! wrote: > Is good writing _necessary_ to becoming a best-selling author? I think the answer depends on how you define "good writing." If by "good writing" you mean a construction of words in which the construction (rather than just the story) provides aesthetic pleasure, then you must answer no. Because we must deal with aesthetic values, my examples might serve as your counter examples, but you can think you your own exaples, can't you. At the top of the list, I place Steven King. Without a doubt, his works sell well, but his writing makes me gag. If by "good writing" you mean, a combination of aestheticly pleasing construction, an engaging plot, and memorable characters, then you might have to answer yes. Some writers have such a strength in one area, that they overcome their weaknesses (or neglect) of other areas. For me, this explains King's success. He writes amazingly engaging plots with moderately interesing characters. (This brings up another point altogether. Perhaps we should hypothesize two classes of books: one meant for fast, plot based reading; the other meant for slow enjoyment of the word construction [would you call this "literature"?]. Then we could argue about the frequency of the second class appearing on the best-seller lists.) > Is good writing _sufficient_ to becoming a best-selling author? At this time, no. Good plot reigns. Reader tastes might change in the future, but for now, if you cannot create a supsenseful plot, give up (your hopes at best-sellerdom). > Is good writing possibly _detrimental_ to becoming a best-selling author? Possibly. Some authors consiously attempt to create art, often at the expense of story and character. Such pretense will not climb the best-seller list. > Does quality of writing have _anything_ to do with sales? Let's assume a linear scale for assigning writing skill (monospace font required for the following graph): average writing skill | <----+----|----+----|----+----0----+----|----+----|----+----> | (substandard writing) (above average) | | | --- approaching illiteracy approaching genius -------- If you assign zero to average writing skill (subjects and verbs match in number, commas and apostrophes in the right places), then in most cases you must have at least this skill level to get published. (Even Stephen King has a slightly positive score on this scale.) No matter how brilliant the plot or characters, you must write with a certain level of skill to communicate your ideas. Although writers with negative skill scores can get published, their manuscripts often provide the material for editorial breakroom humor. So my answer to the question: yes "quality of writing" has a definite relationship to getting published, and getting published has a definite relationship with sales. You must write with some quality to get published. I suggest that for scores below zero, there exists a direct relationship between quality and publication,but above zero, you cannot find such a relationship. For writers with positive scores, sales depends entirely on how the writer handles other issues, including how well the writer can address trends in popular culture. -- Terry Jeffress - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm