From: "Annette Lyon" Subject: Re: [AML] Anti-Intellectualism Date: 30 Nov 2000 13:47:14 -0700 Scott Parkin made the following distinction: > Rather than "uneducated," perhaps I should have used > "uneducable" in some of those places. It's one thing to be short of > knowledge, it's another to be unwilling to seek new knowledge. Just a small connection that popped into my head (of course, everyone else probably connected the dots, too, but for what it's worth): I seem to recall Scott's distinction above as essentially the defentition of one who is not humble (or "teachable"). In a sense, then, much of this discussion of "intellectuals" and "stupid" people is all about those who are or are not humble. The term "humble" is one that is rarely, in my opinion, really looked at closely. Generally when we think about a humble person we picture someone who talks like the scriptures and who prays six times a day. This discussion has made another aspect of humility a bit clearer to me. I hadn't thought about it in terms of what art I am willing to invest the energy to "get" (among other things). Thanks, guys. 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: "Thom Duncan" Subject: RE: [AML] LAAKE, _Secret Cermonies_ Date: 30 Nov 2000 14:16:19 -0700 >I agree with your point Thom, up to the point where it is used as a general >overall female experience with the Church. As long as it is used as her POV >only then I am fine with it, but if it is used to generalize how women are >treated by the Church, then it loses validity. Laake does not speak for me >and sometimes I fear that POV's such as hers are used a such. > >Eileen Stringer >eileens99@bigplanet.com I wonder if there's any way to get around the possibility of a reader NOT reading more into a story than was there. During one of the post-production discussions of my play _Matters of the Heart_, a commenter walked out in a huff making it clear to everyone within earshot that, as far as he was concerned, the play was suggesting that ALL stake presidents were as close-minded as the character in my play. There were only three people in the show, the SP, his liberal son, and the mother. I don't know where he got the idea I was making a statement about all church leaders. But people extrapolate, sometimes against our best efforts as writers. You and I certainly saw the subjective POV in Laake's book, but mayber other Mormons and some non-Mormons didn't, the former assuming she's writing an anti-Mormon book, the latter assuming her experience is universal. FWIW, Laake painted with a pretty broad brush, implying for all she was worth that all Mormon men want to subjugate women, but, if you know anything about human nature, you know that no group of people on earth is as monolythic as she paints them to be. Thom - 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] Local Utah Artist Christmas CD (Shameless Self-Promotion) Date: 30 Nov 2000 13:36:46 -0700 (MST) Hello to everyone on the AML-list and LDSF! My band Organic Greens just got their first cut on a Christmas CD of local Utah artists. The CD "Timpanogos Christmas" also contains acts such as Ryan Shupe and the Rubberband, Shane Jackman, Fiddlesticks, Cherie Call and Peter Breinholdt - 17 songs in all. It's a very eclectic collection. It was created under the auspicies of the Timapnogos Singer/Songwriter Alliance (TSSA) who also brought you the limited edition Food and Care Coaltion/Freedom Festival 200 CD "Bottle Rockets and Lemonade." Anyway the CDs are TEN BUCKS ($10) each. There may be a few copies floating around at some local stores, but the only real way to get the CD (as it really wasn't produced on any label - but was compiled by several of the artists working together) is from the artists on the CD. Such as - you can get some from me. Or you can go to any of the following shows and buy some there also - Dec. 1st an 15th at the Read Leaf in Springville Dec. 7th at the BYU varsity theatre Dec. 14th at the UVSC Ragan Theatre showtimes are 7 pm. Organic Greens will be at the Dec. 1st and 7th shows. If you are out of town or state and want a copy you can email me and i'll mail it to you (of course you have to pay for it, though). check out these websites for more info and track listings: http://organicgreens.freeyellow.com http://www.timpanogos.org --Ivan Wolfe - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Scott Tarbet" Subject: RE: [AML] _Savior of the World_ (Drama) Date: 30 Nov 2000 14:14:20 -0700 [Moderator's compilation of two of Scott's posts.] I said: > > we have got to give it a chance. If we as an arts > > community within the larger LDS community rip it to shreds, this new > > opportunity will become even more circumscribed and may disappear > > altogether. And Steve said: > But Scott, are you really saying that if a show--any show--is bad, critics > shouldn't say so, just because those involved meant well? I don't think > that attitude improves and furthers LDS art or even missionary work, nor > does it do much to perfect the saints. Oh geez! Absolutely not! My comment wasn't meant to stifle criticism. Or Criticism either ;-). Neither did I mean to excuse or promote performance mediocrity in the name of correlation. But SOTW has to be viewed and reviewed as what it is, not as something else. Reviewing "Testaments" is a very different exercise from reviewing "Ben Hur". Sure they're both celluloid and employ a number of the same crafts and trades, but after that the similarities peter out. "Les Mis" and "SOTW" both employ many of the same crafts and trades too, but their aims are vastly different, and they should be viewed and reviewed through different lenses. So is SOTW good theatre, by a Broadway definition? Nope. It would close out of town. Or get ridden out of town on a rail. Or something. Is it good perfecting the Saints missionary work? Yep. Very. That's what the patron wanted, and that's what the patron got. -- Scott Tarbet > -----Original Message----- > From: Thom Duncan > > >If we as an arts > >community within the larger LDS community rip it to shreds, this new > >opportunity will become even more circumscribed and may disappear > >altogether. > > Suppose you were a plumber and the Church asks you to come fix > the plumbing > in a temple. Only you don't get to decide when the job is really done. A > committee who knows nothing about plumbing comes in looks over your > shoulder. At each point, you are given notes: "Don't use that > wrench. Use > this one." You're an experienced plumber and you know that the > wrench they > want you to use is too small and you will end up with an inferior > product." > I can't imagine any plumber worth his toolbox would sit still for such > abuse. I don't think artists should either. As an actor I'm actually very used to directors and producers and and writers and theatre owners telling me which wrench to use. And I often disagree with them, sometimes vigorously. As a director I'm very used to telling actors which wrench to use and having them disagree with me. But ultimately I have a vision of what I want the final product to be, and while I will try my best to explain that vision and get the actor to share it, if after all s/he still doesn't, then my creative vision is the one that will prevail. The producer of SOTW is the Church, in the person of the Brethren assigned to the task. They had a creative vision before they authorized the project, and I don't see a thing wrong with them exercising oversight. -- Scott Tarbet - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Steve Subject: [AML] Spiritual Passion in Art (was: _Savior of the World_) Date: 30 Nov 2000 15:21:24 -0700 on 11/30/00 10:35 AM, Eric R. Samuelsen at ersamuel@byugate.byu.edu wrote: > Instead they chose to make Jesus boring. I don't get it. I don't get how > that's supposed to strengthen testimonies. > Eric, This made me actually jump up and down saying "Yes! Yes!" Presentations about the life of Christ, especially his last week, are often called "Passions" or "Passion Plays" and for good reason. I need that passion in my life--it takes a lot of spiritual passion to get my wife and I up to lead our 4 less-than-enthusiatic elementary and pre-school children in reading and discussing the scriptures every morning. (Luckily for us, the scriptures themselves and the heart-felt cries and admonitions of prophets past are often passionate enough to help me discover some sparks of relevance for these recalcitrant youths I love.) I need that spiritual energy flowing into me as often as possible to keep me going. I long to connect with it at church, though those moments are less frequent than I'd like, despite my constant attempts. Most often the connection is found and I am fed and recharged through spiritually passionate music (from all genres and most denominations--almost never LDS recordings). Nearly as often I find it in live theater well done. Less often I find it through literature, though that may not be the case for most of you on a literary list! :-) I am not talking about frenzied enthusiasm, showmanship, or flashing lights. In simplicity I often find that moment which though still and small can pierce to the very core. To make the life, the mission, or the personage of Jesus boring seems to render ineffective the medicine most needed for the ills of the world. The recent proliferation of warmly glowing "beauty parlor Savior" paintings (fresh from a good shampoo, clip, and blowdry) have sent me on a search for other images of Christ from other eras--even the dark-circled eyes of Byzantine icons. I hope I never write anything about Jesus without enough fervor, testimony, trained technique, and unselfconsciousness that people will find it "nice, okay, bland," rather than being either be spiritually thrilled and lifted, or hate it (and probably me). God himself said he'd spew the lukewarm out of his mouth. Now there's an image that needs painting and printing in the Ensign! Now there's a helpful and passionate image that wouldn't pass correlation! :-) Steve - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Jim Cobabe" Subject: Re: [AML] Shaken Faith and Truth Date: 30 Nov 2000 15:35:18 -0700 Tom Matkin: --- It takes me on a vacuous journey in a tight circle. --- Ah!--REAL LIFE(TM). --- Jim Cobabe _____________________________________________________________________________________ Get more from the Web. FREE MSN Explorer download : http://explorer.msn.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Scott Tarbet" Subject: RE: [AML] Shaken Faith and Truth Date: 30 Nov 2000 16:55:46 -0700 > I have never claimed that our literature should consist of or depict only > the Super Mormon or virtual perfection. This is not my argument. > All I am asking for is that the Gospel, > God, or the Spirit have *some* role in a story that claims to be > representative of the LDS experience. We all struggle, but we > had better be > striving for the influence of the Gospel, God, or the Spirit or > what is the > point? And a story that purports to be about faith and the church and yet > neglects any movement by the Gospel, God, or the Spirit is not going to > reach me or ring true. > > Jacob Proffitt I agree with your point as far as it goes, that a story purporting to be about the faith, the religious aspects of being a Mormon, needs to have the Gospel, God, and/or the Spirit in it. But it *is* possible, and I hope something that we'll begin to see more of, for stories about Mormons to be about the way our unique subculture operates and the way it affects our lives. Stories about Irish Catholics don't have to center on how and when they pray, and I don't think there is any reason ours have to either. We have a unique and interesting subculture, with tons of wonderful stories to be told. -- Scott Tarbet - 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] LAAKE, _Secret Cermonies_ Date: 30 Nov 2000 20:39:16 -0500 At 06:12 PM 11/29/2000 -0800, you wrote: >still remain in my mind. I read several books a year >and they sort of come and go through my consciousness, > >but there is something about the images Laake's word >conjured that has had staying power. > >[Kathleen Meredith] >__________________________________________________ Interesting. I read the book, felt a lot of pity for anyone so self invloved that her wedding was miserable because of a self conjured image of an affront to her personal beauty and who never seemed to accept any responsibilty for any of here actions, then forgot it. . . until this discussion dredged some memories back. Of course I'm a male, but I gave the book to my wife, who read for almost an hour before she threw it the ground in disgust. I asked her what was wrong and she made some comment about swimming in self pity. 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: "Scott Tarbet" Subject: RE: [AML] _Savior of the World_ (Drama) Date: 30 Nov 2000 16:21:16 -0700 Eric Samuelsen, I just love reading what you write, even when (or maybe especially when) we disagree strenuously. I get to the end of your posts and feel like I've had a nice spicy intellectual meal. No need for your helmet. Nothing incoming. Gotta love this list. In one thread I'm arguing that the majority of us aren't super Mormons and shouldn't expect to be portrayed that way, and in this one I find myself cast as the defender of orthodoxy and correlation. Gotta love life's little ironies. As I mentioned before, I auditioned for SOTW, and spent four long nights there and in call-backs, before David and Eric decided they wouldn't use me, presumably (I hope I hope) because of my stated rehearsal conflicts with performances of another show. So I read SOTW as it then stood. I performed a number of segments of it in audition. It isn't drama in the conventional sense, it isn't risky or cutting edge -- it is supposed testimonies of people who knew the Savior during his mortal ministry. To my absolute amazement I came away from that grueling and otherwise profitless audition experience spiritually fed. On that level it worked very well indeed, at least for me. So in the case of this particular actor scorned, I have no hard feelings whatsoever, and I wish I had been privileged to be in the show. I'm sure many of the audience members will be even more spiritually fed than I was. Eric, I assume that you probably won't be one of them, since you're going with your mind already made up that it's drek and a waste of time. A few points: PERIL. No, there is no artistic or financial peril in SOTW, which is no more important than the lack of peril in the Young Women In Excellence Worldwide Celebration I attended the other night at my local stake center. But I am supposing that the Brethren perceive at least some institutional peril in involving the Church in the sponsorship of live theatre, and if there's one thing no bureaucracy likes, it's any whiff of institutional peril. They're doing something that could be perceived as "artsy", and I don't know of a single one of those intentionally orthodox, fine, upstanding, conservative men who would be comfortable having the adjective "artsy" within a country mile of his emminent self. Twice in my life in recommend interviews I have had bishops question me closely on moral issues, including my sexual orientation, with no other reason than that I'm a theatre person and there's a frequent automatic assumption that we're a bunch of libertines. Yes, there's an institutional bias in the Church against arts and artists. THE FORM: I think we need a new term for material like SOTW. Maybe "devotional stage presentation" or something of the sort? Because it's not really a pageant or a play, and content-wise we can't compare it to Shakespeare or Broadway-style productions. But that doesn't mean it doesn't have considerable merit of its own. If the production values that ultimately came out on the stage are lacking, that's one thing, but I don't think a criticism of the content of the presentation comparing it with non-faith-promoting forms is valid. THE MORMON SHAKESPEARE: No, the Mormon Shakespeare's plays won't be produced on the Conference Center Theatre stage -- at least not for the first couple of hundred years after s/he dies ;-). But does that make the venue and the presentations done there without merit? There is a great deal that can be done there, including exposing many thousands of people to live theatre who otherwise wouldn't come any closer than driving past the Capitol Theatre on their way to a Jazz game. I'd hazard a guess that the Mormon Shakespeare's plays will be performed in venues that don't even exist yet, because as a people we don't yet support enough live, LDS-oriented theatre to allow much of anybody to make a living at it. DAVID WARNER, CHAMPION OF ORTHODOXY: David came to all the auditions and call-backs dressed in a very conservative suit, white shirt, and tie. The jacket stayed on. In 4 decades on the stage I had never seen such a thing from a director. (I thought he was auditioning for the part of a mission president or a rising young Church bureaucrat ;-)). And he stood up and told everyone at the first night of call-backs that the Brethren were part of every decision regarding this show and were overseeing it closely and personally. He set the tone of correlation and orthodoxy from the get-go. So any gripe from a cast member that the show was sanitized after the fact shows a failing of memory or attention. -- Scott Tarbet - 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] Shaken Faith and Truth Date: 30 Nov 2000 20:43:13 -0500 At 01:08 AM 11/30/2000 -0700, you wrote: >Scott Tarbet wrote: > >> Rather than looking for a depiction of how faithful Mormons >> should/would/could act, isn't it much more telling and true to the Mormon >> experience to depict us as the majority of us really are? > >No, it's more telling and true for the author to create whatever >characters he wants to create, then make them feel realistic, and be >true to the personality of those characters throughout the story. >Characters "should" not be anything--faithful members who do much of >what's expected of them, mediocre members who do some but fail at a lot, >inactive members who do nothing, bitter former members who attack the >church. Any of these characters "should" be written about, depending on >what the author wants to do. To say our literature should depict only a >certain type of Mormon, even one in the majority, is merely a form of >political correctness. I loathe political correctness. > >-- >D. Michael Martindale >dmichael@wwno.com > A double Amen to that. (one who has suffered though 36 years in academia, the deepest center of political correctness. - Actually I enjoyed every minute of being the center of negative reaction almost everytime I opened my mouth outside the classroom or the rehearsal hall.) 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: Larry Jackson Subject: [AML] MN Elder Oaks Dedicates New Washington DC Temple Visitors' Date: 01 Dec 2000 00:03:00 EST Center Theater: Jane Dumont 28Nov00 D1 [From Mormon-News] Elder Oaks Dedicates New Washington DC Temple Visitors' Center Theater WASHINGTON, DC -- Elder Dallin H. Oaks, Quorum of the Twelve Apostles presided and offered the dedicatory prayer for the Washington D.C. Temple Visitors' Center Rededication and Dedication of the Theater on Tuesday, November 28, 2000, at the Center in Kensington, Md. Elder David E. Salisbury, Visitors' Center Director, conducted the program and spoke about the history and purpose of the visitors' center. Sid Foulger, the benefactor and builder of the theater, related how the theater was "created by a committee." He also commented on his 38 year history of work on the Washington D.C. Temple from the ground breaking in 1962, the temple dedication in 1974, to the present renovation of the center along with the new theater. Washington D.C. Temple President Sterling D. Colton offered the opening prayer. "The Testaments of One Fold and One Shepherd" was previewed prior to the dedication ceremony. This film will be shown twice daily beginning in January 2001. The film, "Legacy," is currently shown twice a day and will continue to be shown in 2001. The 23rd Annual Festival of Lights, Trees and Music will be held in the new theater and begin Thursday, December 1 with 30 minute performances nightly at 7 and 8 p.m. during December. Musical presentations scheduled throughout the year will now be held on the theater's stage. ___________________________________________________________ ____ NOTES FROM THE PRINTED PROGRAM ____ As the Washington, D.C. Temple was nearing completion in 1974, the decision was made to construct a Visitors' Center on the temple site. The building was completed in June of 1976 and because it was the bicentennial year, Church officials decided to dedicate the center on July 3rd, the nearest possible date to the nation's birthday. The Mormon Tabernacle Choir was present and the dedicatory prayer was offered by President Spencer W. Kimball. A major modification took place in early 1986 and on June 4, 1988, after further remodeling, the unveiling of the Christus statue was held with Elder Dallin H. Oaks as the speaker. The Visitors' Center was closed from January 1 to August 1, 1999, for extensive remodeling, redecorating and the installation of many new state-of-the-art exhibits. Shortly after the Center was reopened, ground was broken for the new 544 seat film and performing arts theater which, along with the rededication of the visitors' center, is being dedicated this evening. VISITORS' CENTER DIRECTORS Clarence E. Stoker (Barbara) 1976-78 Donald P. Lloyd (Helen) 1978-79 Wayne A. Reeves (Madge) 1979-81 Ralph Hill (Afton) 1981-82 Ray Loughton (Elsa) 1982-83 Robert E. Sackley (Marjorie) 1983-85 Elmo P. Humphreys (Amy) 1985-86 Richard Grant Rees (Dorothy) 1986-87 David S. Hatch (Barbara) 1987-89 Bruce E. Belnap (Phyllis) 1989-90 Roland R. Wright (Marjorie) 1991-93 Spencer F. Jenson (Joyce) 1993-95 Don L. Christensen (Marva) 1995-97 F. MacRay Christensen (Joan) 1997-99 David E. Salisbury (Carol) 1999-01 >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 ________________________________________________________________ GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO! Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less! Join Juno today! 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: "Andrew Hall" Subject: Re: [AML] Maureen Whipple Date: 01 Dec 2000 23:19:27 +0900

I'm glad to hear the Whipple biography is back on track.  Looking in the back of "Bright Angels and Familiars", I see that you (Veda) and Lavina Anderson were also working on a collection of unpublished stories by Whipple, tentatively called "Maurine Whipple: The Lost Works".  Those were the stories found (by you?) in Whipple's house soon before she passed away, right?  Are there any plans to publish those anytime soon?

Andrew Hall

- 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: References to Native Americans in Mormon Lit. Date: 01 Dec 2000 23:27:16 +0900
Michael Fillerup is probably the Mormon author who writes about Native Americans the most effectively and consistently.  About half of the stories in his collection "Visions" (Signauture, 1990) are set on the Indian reservations in the Southwest.  Several of his stories that have appeared since then in Dialogue and Sunstone have Native American settings as well, including "The Last Cod Talker" (Dialogue, 1999), which one an AML short-story prize.
- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Ruth Starkman Subject: Re: [AML] LAAKE, _Secret Ceremonies_ Date: 01 Dec 2000 10:25:41 -0800 (PST) On Tue, 28 Nov 2000, Alan Mitchell wrote: > > Thank you for your comments--I thought that may have come through the book. > The question of why the revenge on faith is not a question for those of us > who have read Church History. Why should a Laake surprise us? The best, > real Anti-Mormons are ExMormons and have been since the early days. > > Is this the case with Judaism? I have the impression that the best > Antisemites are northern European Nationists. Are there disgrunted Orthodox > who bite back? Or do they just find a more liberal flock? Yes, I think that's true, former members of the flock usually mount the most hair-raising attacks. Sometimes they demonize their faith, others they pursue it with the vengeance of a spurned lover. Laake did both. There are Jewish examples of demonizers and spurned lovers as well. Some of those Northern European anti-Semitic demonizers, Richard Wagner, for one, were of Jewish descent. Maybe Sigmund Freud counts in the spurned category (Moses and Monotheism??), there's others for sure. In general though, Jewish rebellion usually has more to do with being a minority culture and how Jews feel about their culture in relation to others. Some Jews choose assimilation or conversion, some go othe opposite route andjoin a more conservative sect. Mormons have an assimilation issue too, but that wasn't Laake's problem per se. Patriarchy is an issue for Jewish women, but it's much more ambiguous and confusing because there's a different approach in every sect. An orthodox man won't shake my hand, but in my Conservative synagogue, I'm allowed to become a Rabbi--and had even onced considered that path--though some Conservative members don't like seeing a woman read from the Torah. My Reform husband, who's from the supposedly most liberal sect, will do just about anything not to change a diaper... but this just goes to show that not every male POV has to do with one's religious institution :-) > > Did she have the same trials and tribulations as Jewish women? I'd had the > same questions myself. > > > And the answers? I guess the answer is no, we didn't get a lot answers from Laake, as her book wasn't about finding a place for the self within a religious community. But we were sad for her. In every faith, there's a Deboarh Laake, someone who can't fit in. --Ruth Starkman - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Ruth Starkman Subject: Re: [AML] LAAKE, _Secret Cermonies_ Date: 01 Dec 2000 10:11:36 -0800 (PST) > > How about whiney? My impression was that she was > blaming all her problems with men/relationships on the > Church instead of accepting responsibility for them > herself. > > A shame that her book was (is still?) used by ASU in a > course exploring different contemporary religions from > the female perspective. > > Valerie Holladay This can actually be interesting and productive for students. Sometimes such texts show up on syllabus because they're the only ones available widely, or the only ones the instructor knows (this case would be a product of Laake's bestsellerdom as opposed to other voices), or perhaps because the instructor hopes it will provoke discussion. It can be good practice for college students to learn how dissect an ad hominem argument like Laake's and not to answer in kind. Laake denounces LDS patriarchy? A student demures? Great! The class will see both perspectives and the student can write a good argument. Though emotions can run high, the point is greater understanding. No one should take a book in class for face value. --Ruth Starkman - 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] _Savior of the World_ (Drama) Date: 01 Dec 2000 18:11:39 Scott Tarbet: > >So is SOTW good theatre, by a Broadway definition? Nope. It would close >out of town. Or get ridden out of town on a rail. Or something. Is it >good perfecting the Saints missionary work? Yep. Very. That's what the >patron wanted, and that's what the patron got. > The problem is that the church isn't touting this as a missionary tool or a method of perfecting the saints. They're calling it a theatrical production. I agree that you have to judge a work by what it is ... but what if the artist himself is incorrect about what it is? Do we judge "Savior of the World" by theater standards (which is what the church says it is), or do we judge it by make-the-audience-feel-fuzzy standards (which is what it actually is)? Eric D. Snider _____________________________________________________________________________________ Get more from the Web. FREE MSN Explorer download : http://explorer.msn.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Steve Subject: Re: [AML] _Savior of the World_ (Drama) Date: 01 Dec 2000 12:40:46 -0700 on 11/30/00 4:21 PM, Scott Tarbet at starbet@timp.net wrote: > THE FORM: I think we need a new term for material like SOTW. Maybe > "devotional stage presentation" or something of the sort? Because it's not > really a pageant or a play, and content-wise we can't compare it to > Shakespeare or Broadway-style productions. But that doesn't mean it doesn't > have considerable merit of its own.... Scott, This is an excellent point. An "Oratorio," or "A Choral Celebration of______," or some other yet-to-be-coined term might hit the nail right on the head. I see the ads for the LDS Church's new "Christmas Musical" and have a certain expectation. There is a sort of quasi-cantata/oratorio genre emerging in the church right now. Lots of stake youth choirs and other groups are putting on Kenneth Cope's "Greater Than Us All," and "My Servant Joseph," and my own "From Cumorah's Hill," and others. They are not dramatic works, but musical works with some parts for readers or narrators. So far, we (Prime Recordings) have called these "a musical presentation on the Book of Mormon for soloists, chorus, and readers" or something to that effect. Steve - 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] Role of Inspiration in Art Date: 01 Dec 2000 13:05:25 -0700 This story about the angelic chorus is an invention. Handel borrowed the Hallelujah chorus from an earlier opera. No tear stains on the manuscript either, unfortunately. Though, given his habits, he may have spilled a bit of whiskey there. Sorry, folks, but this is a nifty piece of folklore, on a par with George Washington's cherry tree. > > Eric Samuelsen I'm not so sure. I understand the manuscript has been/is on display in a museum, and that the splotches are clearly visable and that this is the explanation given there. I had this story from a very reliable and scholarly source (which I can't remember at this time :-)). I'll have to check into it. I've been surprised to find that not all such stories really are myths. Richard Hopkins - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Kathleen Meredith Subject: Re: [AML] LAAKE, _Secret Cermonies_ Date: 01 Dec 2000 12:32:11 -0800 (PST) "...then forgot it. . . until this discussion dredged some memories back. Of course I'm a male, but I gave the book to my wife, who read for almost an hour before she threw it the ground in disgust. I asked her what was wrong and she made some comment about swimming in self pity." Richard B. Johnson Don't misunderstand, I'm not trying to imply that I embrace Laake's message, just that the images created were quite vivid. If one is able to get past being defensive in regards to the anti-Mormon slant, she spins a pretty vivid and colorful yarn. The imagery of the clumsy wooing of her first husband. The icky priesthood leader with whom she has that terribly inappropriate interview, and who could forget the scene involving the car and the in-laws? Laake's talents, I feel lie in her ability to tell a story. She is lacking, however, in comprehending reality and the bigger picture. -Kathleen Meredith __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Shopping - Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products. http://shopping.yahoo.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] Shaken Faith and Truth Date: 01 Dec 2000 14:38:04 -0700 On Thu, 30 Nov 2000 16:55:46 -0700, Scott Tarbet wrote: >I agree with your point as far as it goes, that a story purporting to be >about the faith, the religious aspects of being a Mormon, needs to have = the >Gospel, God, and/or the Spirit in it. But it *is* possible, and I hope >something that we'll begin to see more of, for stories about Mormons to = be >about the way our unique subculture operates and the way it affects our >lives. Stories about Irish Catholics don't have to center on how and = when >they pray, and I don't think there is any reason ours have to either. = We >have a unique and interesting subculture, with tons of wonderful stories= to >be told. A story about Irish Catholics dealing with the death of a friend of their child should very well attempt to represent the faithful response to that death in the context of that story. Particularly if that story claims to represent the faithful Irish Catholic father. Don't get me wrong--I've never asked that the gospel, God, or the Spirit = be central to all our stories. I don't think it is too much to ask for it = to be *present* in those stories about faithful LDS people, though. Jacob Proffitt - 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, Tanners To Settle Lawsuit Over GHI: Salt Lake Tribune Date: 01 Dec 2000 17:29:48 EST Salt Lake Tribune 1Dec00 N1 http://www.sltrib.com/12012000/utah/49481.htm <<<<< ] Tribune 1Dec00 N1 [From Mormon-News] LDS Church, Tanners To Settle Lawsuit Over GHI SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH -- The LDS Church and its long-time critics, Jerald and Sandra Tanner, are poised to settle the Church's lawsuit over the Tanner's publication of 17 pages of the General Handbook of Instructions (GHI) on their website. The Tanners, who run the Utah-based Utah Lighthouse Ministry, posted the GHI chapter on church discipline to their website in July 1999, to aid those trying to leave the LDS Church, and the Church sued to get the pages, and links to the GHI elsewhere, removed from the website. Now, the parties appear to be ready to settle the lawsuit. Attorneys for the LDS Church have drawn up a settlement agreement which requires the Tanners to destroy all copies of the GHI they have and remove links to and any mention of websites that contain the GHI. Under the agreement the LDS Church would drop the lawsuit and its claim for damages. The Tanners have signed the agreement, but the Church has not yet signed it. The Tanners say they are settling because the lawsuit distracts from their primary purpose. "We have entered into this settlement only to end unnecessary, prolonged and expensive litigation," Jerald Tanner said. His wife, Sandra added, "Our resources are better spent for their intended purpose: to examine the claims of the LDS Church and contrast those teachings with Christianity." They maintain that they did not violate the copyright law, but an LDS Church statement says that the Church maintains "its position -- as recognized by the federal court -- that the Tanners illegally published church copyrighted materials." After the LDS Church obtained an injunction last year forcing the Tanners to take the GHI material off their website, the Tanners then posted a reader's letter detailing other websites where the GHI could be obtained. This led to a new injunction requiring that they take the links off their website, claiming the links were contributing to the infringement of the Church's copyright. This injunction against links caused a controversy on the Internet, as free speech advocates attacked the injunction. The San Francisco-based Electronic Frontier Foundation was just one of many groups to attack the injuction, calling it a threat to the free exchange of ideas and information on the Internet. The Tanner's attorney, Brian Barnard, says he thinks the ruling about links was a mistake, "Judge Campbell's decision we think was a mistake and could have a broad influence on the Internet. Under the proposed agreement, the injunction would be vacated, and replaced by a permanent injunction that would keep the Tanners from posting the GHI or links to it on their website. Source: LDS Suit Nearing Settlement Salt Lake Tribune 1Dec00 N1 http://www.sltrib.com/12012000/utah/49481.htm By Ray Rivera: Special to the Tribune >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 Railroad History Continues Advance On Bestseller Lists: Date: 01 Dec 2000 17:29:48 EST Larsen 30Nov00 A4 [From Mormon-News] Railroad History Continues Advance On Bestseller Lists NEW YORK, NEW YORK -- Stephen Ambrose's history of the construction of the transcontinental railroad, which tells about the involvement of Mormon pioneers in the project, continues rising on best seller lists in the US, while Richard Paul Evans' Carousel continues to drop. Unfortunately, the new paperback of Martha Beck's "Expecting Adam," which won an award last year from the Association for Mormon Letter's award, has dropped from the lists. Last week's new title, the pop-lit book about the recent season of MTV's "The Real World," which featured a Mormon, former BYU student Julie Stoffer, dropped on the few lists in which it appeared, but added the prestigious New York Times' Advice, How To and Miscellaneous list, probably a reflection of the delay in the Times' publication. The current titles on bestseller lists are: Nothing Like it in the World, by Stephen Ambrose A history of the building of the transcontinental railroad in the US. Ambrose, a highly regarded historian, details the involvement of Mormons in building crucial portions of the road, including the driving of the "golden spike" in the heart of Mormon territory. Currently on the following bestseller lists: This Last List 9 9 Amazon.com Non-Fiction Hardcover 19 23 Amazon.com 100 27 34 Barnes & Noble Top 100 10 11 BooksAMillion Non-Fiction Hardcover 5 3 Booksense (Nov 27) Non-Fiction Hardcover 5 6 Knight Ridder Non-Fiction 4 5 New York Times (Dec 3) Non-Fiction Hardcover 9 10 Publishers Weekly (Dec 4) Non-Fiction Hardcover 42 55 USA Today (Nov 26) 8 8 Wall Street Journal (Nov 24) Non-Fiction Hardcover 5 2 WordsWorth Independent Bookseller (Nov 28) Non-Fiction Hardcover See: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0684846098/mormonnews More about Stephen E. Ambrose's "Nothing Like It in the World: The Men Who Built the Transcontinental Railroad" at Amazon.com The Carousel, by Richard Paul Evans LDS author Evans writes about the love between a man and a woman, which is tested by the demands of family and work. Currently on the following bestseller lists: This Last List 17 14 BooksAMillion Fiction Hardcover 14 11 Knight Ridder Fiction 15 14 New York Times (Dec 3) Fiction Hardcover 75 73 USA Today (Nov 26) See: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0684868911/mormonnews More about Richard Paul Evans' "The Carousel" at Amazon.com The Seven Habits of Highly Effective People, by Stephen R. Covey This ten-year-old personal management classic is still selling strongly. Currently on the following bestseller lists: This Last List 15 15 Amazon.com Non-Fiction Paperback 93 - Amazon.com 100 74 61 Barnes & Noble Top 100 141 125 USA Today (Nov 26) 5 ? Wall Street Journal (Nov 24) Business See: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0671708635/mormonnews More about Stephen R. Covey's "Seven Habits of Highly Effective People" at Amazon.com MTV's The Real World: New Orleans Unmasked, by Alison Pollet Inside story of Mormon Julie Stoffer and the rest of the New Orleans cast. Currently on the following bestseller lists: This Last List 5 5 Amazon.com Non-Fiction Paperback 10 - New York Times (Dec 3) Advice, How To & Misc. 109 95 USA Today (Nov 26) See: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0743411277/mormonnews More about Alison Pollet's "MTV's The Real World: New Orleans Unmasked" 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: LuAnnStaheli Subject: Re: [AML] _Savior of the World_ (Drama) Date: 01 Dec 2000 19:46:20 -0700 --------------D9E443579C994A3967950385 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I also know the committee is pretty careful about what they approve. They= looked at a Seminary Film script that I wrote and rejected it because I = let the boy in modern times fall asleep during seminary and have a dream = which brought him to a testimony of Joseph Smith. Their response--no one = can be depicted as falling asleep in seminary (as if that doesn't happen,= just like no one every falls asleep on the stand during sacrement meetin= g.) Oh, well. I respect their direction in these matters. - 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] _Savior of the World_ (Drama) Date: 01 Dec 2000 20:02:19 -0700 Scott Tarbet: > Reviewing "Testaments" is a > very different exercise from reviewing "Ben Hur". [snip] > ... their aims are vastly different, and they > should be viewed and reviewed through different lenses. > > So is SOTW good theatre, by a Broadway definition? Nope. It would > close out of town. Or get ridden out of town on a rail. Or something. > Is it good perfecting the Saints missionary work? Yep. Very. That's > what the patron wanted, and that's what the patron got. First off, my comments were not meant to be a review. I don't do reviews. I can't ever comment on something without my comments winding up being about ME. Reviews should reflect the opinion of the reviewer; yes, but the review should not be about the reviewer. And I'm not a critic either. I can, on occasion get drawn into a discussion of a Critical nature, but I don't have the educational background to support my thinking with theoretical classifications and that sort of thing. Here is what I am: I am a working artist. I have studied (practically -- not theoretically) a particular craft or two and have tried to improve my abilities with these crafts by practicing as much as I can. By practicing I mean, I write, direct and act in as many plays and movies and TV shows as I can. AND I watch as many of the same as I can and make judgements about them so that I can apply my judgements to my own work. My response to "Savior of the World" that I sent to this list was a lament. And my lament stands. You see, when I walked into that theatre I did not have any of the information you had as an insider -- someone who had spent several days auditioning and reading the script and speaking to the director. As far as I knew, it was a play, not a missionary tract. I had to judge it as a play. I could SUPPOSE to myself that the church meant to accomplish a certain thing by the manner of their presentation, but I couldn't know it. By throwing in suppositions that allow for mediocrity -- that explain the reasons for striving for mediocrity -- I become an apologist. That does not help me develop my craft. > [The Director] stood up and told everyone at the first > night of call-backs that the Brethren were part of every > decision regarding this show and were overseeing it > closely and personally. He set the tone of correlation > and orthodoxy from the get-go. So any gripe from a > cast member that the show was sanitized after the fact > shows a failing of memory or attention. Wrong. First off, it wasn't a gripe; I'm sorry if I presented her feelings as griping. Secondly, if it was going to be correlated from the beginning, and throughout, why did the rehearsals and development go along in a particular direction for two months without any correlative involvement until two weeks before opening? Now you will hear griping. From me. Creating shows like this ... creating shows of any kind really ... takes a lot of time and effort. Most people don't realize that, which is fine as long as they remain in the audience. But, as soon as they become a participant, they need to be ready for a big commitment. Producers of shows -- if they want to have a hand in shaping and guiding -- need to stay involved from the very beginning, or trust the people they have hired for the job. Performers need to understand that a play requires about one-hundred hours of rehearsal, a hundred and thirty to fifty if it's a musical. Over a year ago my wife was called as the Stake Young Women's Cultural Arts Specialist with the express purpose of putting together the big Young Women's fireside that occurred in every stake of the church last week. She spent hours upon hours upon hours working on it for a year. Nearer the day of the actual performance, she, and a another woman, spent large portions of entire days working on organizing and writing. She had sent out a letter to all the Young Women's Presidencies in the stake explaining that there was going to be only one rehearsal for two hours on a specific night. Deadlines for certain things were mentioned in the letter as well. When the rehearsal came a couple of the YM presidents started murmuring about the fact that the rehearsal was going to take longer than an hour. "Our girls have homework to do." Many of the girls started leaving before the rehearsal was scheduled to be over. Only eight girls in the stake had submitted experiences to be used in the program by the deadline. Thirty-three came thinking they were going to participate. The next day an edict came down from the stake president that the program (which was only three days away) could not be longer than one hour. Basically what happened is, most of the work my wife did was flushed. She took it in stride ... I was fuming ... still am a little. Back to my lamentation ... many people coming to see "Savior of the World" will think it's great art. That's fine. My daughter loved it. I will not deride their judgement. What I think is unfortunate is that many people will also believe that great art is created by committee with apostles making everything "appropriate" in the end. Again, I am not saying that the church did anything wrong, or underhanded or anything like that. A little unorganized maybe -- several people were cut from the show at the last minute and some of them had their feelings hurt. Now, you can't say that's-the-way-things-are-in-the-real-world-they'll-just-have-to-get-used -to-it, because we have already established that this production cannot be judged or criticized by real-world standards, correct? That type of thing is unfortunate and sometimes occurs. If my friend had any real gripe it was the way those types of things were handled. And she came out all right, so her complaint was on others' behalf. What I'm trying to reiterate here is that the "institutional bias in the Church against arts and artists" that you mentioned will be -- I fear -- fueled by this play, rather than doused. I find that unfortunate. It saddens me ... for myself, yes, and for every artist trying to gain favor in the eyes of their own community. And the questions arise that I must seriously consider now: Is exuberance irreverent? Is the passion in my work unsuitable in the eyes of God? Is the tone of my crafted expression unworthy of divine praise? Up until a week ago I thought the answer to those questions was: No. Now I'm not so sure. J. Scott Bronson--The Scotted Line "World peace begins in my home" "Anybody who sees live theatre should come out a little rearranged." Glenn Close - 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] _Savior of the World_ (Drama) Date: 01 Dec 2000 20:13:17 -0700 Scott Tarbet: > > THE FORM: I think we need a new term for material like SOTW. Steve: > This is an excellent point. An "Oratorio," or "A Choral Celebration > of______," or some other yet-to-be-coined term might hit the nail > right on the head. I agree. I have actually written something like this and have ideas for others but when I try to describe it to people it always comes out sounding stupid. "Conceptual Fireside Kinda Thing." Somebody can come up with something better than that can't they? scott - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "mcnandon" Subject: [AML] Behavior of American Teenagers Date: 01 Dec 2000 19:43:44 -0700 A number of months ago a list member mentioned a fictional story or book about teenagers in Europe throwing stones from an overpass. I wrote back that I had read about a *real* incident in Germany where 3 American teens threw (football sized) stones from a pedestrian overpass. In this real world incident two women were killed, five people were injured and six cars were damaged. They went on trial today. The kids, aged 14, 17 and 18, are from a U.S. military community settlement. They admitted throwing the stones and will face jail sentences of up to 10 years each. How closely does this scenario match the fictional account? Nan McCulloch - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Paynecabin@aol.com Subject: Re: [AML] _Savior of the World_ (Drama) Date: 04 Dec 2000 11:25:51 EST At the conclusion of his lament about the church's Christmas show, Scott asked: << Is exuberance irreverent? Is the passion in my work unsuitable in the eyes of God? Is the tone of my crafted expression unworthy of divine praise? >> I would suggest that, given your clear desire to be exuberant, passionate, and praising, and your commitment to craft, the only relevant question is "Am I telling the truth?" A kid falling asleep in seminary class and having a grace-filled dream is the truth. An angel kneeling to speak lovingly to a frightened shepherd, or to a frightened teen-ager who's about to become inexplicably pregnant, feels to me like the truth. I heard on TV last night a little clip from John Lennon about how the responsibility of the poet is to put into words how we feel, not how we ought to feel. If the artist has taken upon himself/herself the name of Christ and is enjoying the friendship of the Spirit, then telling the truth about how that feels will be most powerful if told personally, uniquely, and freely, sans committee, sans apostles. Of course theatre is highly collaborative, but you're right on about the absolute need for everybody to be equally committed. A last-minute apostolic review-and-fix is not evidence of commitment. But people will quickly point out that apostles can't be available for that kind of commitment--they're committed to more important things around the globe. Bull's-eye. Trust the artists. If I were able to attend "The Savior Of The World," I think I would be asking "Is this the truth? Does this feel truthful?" I have to leave it to you and your daughter (who you say liked the show) to answer that. Marvin Payne - 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 Arthur Hardman, Founder of Second Largest LDS Publisher: Date: 02 Dec 2000 15:10:37 EST Lake Tribune 29Nov00 B2 [From Mormon-News] Arthur Hardman, Founder of Second Largest LDS Publisher SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH -- Arthur Hardman, founder of what has become the second largest provider of LDS products, Covenant Communications, died November 26th in Salt Lake City, Utah. He was 86. Hardman ran Covenant, then known as Covenant Recordings, from its beginings in 1958 until he sold it to its current owners in 1977. Hardman, an Etna, Wyoming native, was born September 7, 1914. He went through a variety of experiences, serving in World War II in Europe and working as a firefighter at Hill Air Force base near Ogden, Utah. He also owned and operated Hardman Auto Sales in Sunset, Utah. According to his family, Hardman founded Covenant to produce word-for-word narrations of the LDS scriptures, at first selling them as "Gold" records. The firm started with door-to-door sales and slowly built its sales to stable levels. In 1977, Hardman sold the business to its current owner, Lou Kofford. Covenant has since broadened its product line to include a full range of LDS products, including book publishing, which started in 1985. It now employs 25 people producing 40 new titles each year. Its best-known books include the "Tennish Shoes Among the Nephites" series, books by LDS author Anita Stansfield, and the recent blockbuster, "Between Husband and Wife." Sources: Arthur Hardman Salt Lake Tribune 29Nov00 B2 http://www.sltrib.com/11292000/obituari/48743.htm About Covenant Covenant Communications Website http://www.covenant-lds.com/guide.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: Larry Jackson Subject: [AML] MN Weyland's Latest Looks At Overcoming Differences Through Date: 02 Dec 2000 15:10:37 EST Unconditional Love: Deseret Book Press Release 28Nov00 A2 [From Mormon-News] [This is being sent as posted to MN. I hope the typo in the last paragraph (About the Author) was not in the original press release. Larry.] Weyland's Latest Looks At Overcoming Differences Through Unconditional Love SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH -- Jennifer Hobbs and Ashley Bailey couldn't be more opposite. Jennifer runs with the cowboys at school, talks tough with a rebellious spirit and hates going to church. Ashley is a model daughter and student with a perky personality, good looks and cheerful attitude. But there's a secret that binds them together -- a secret from which both will learn about the things that matter most in life. Against this background, acclaimed author Jack Weyland has penned his newest novel, Ashley and Jen (Bookcraft, $16.95). In this, is 23rd novel, Weyland explores once again the fun and frustration that are part of growing up while at the same time illustrating a secretive and destructive behavior that plagues a surprisingly large number of young women -- bulimia. In his usual compelling style, Weyland shows us how the compulsion threatens the lives of its victims, both physically and emotionally. Ashley and Jen illustrates the power of friendship and how the strength of family and friends can help us overcome differences and difficulties. About the Author Jack Weyland teaches physics at Ricks College in Rexburg, Idaho. He has published a score of best-selling novels and short stories, securing himself the distinction of being the most popular writer of fiction in the LSD adolescent and young adult market. He and his wife, Sheryl, are the parents of five children and have four grandchildren. >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: Jonathan Langford Subject: [AML] Editorial: Micro-Politics and Power Structures Date: 04 Dec 2000 11:10:50 -0600 Every now and then, it occurs to me to think about the variety of power structures that define the experience of each of us, and that interact in important ways with our use of language. Back when I was studying English, one of the major strands of criticism--broadly describable, perhaps, as cultural criticism--sought to analyze the ways in which literature both shapes and is shaped by cultural forces, including patterns of social/political dominance and their reflection in language. (That's an unfairly narrow and simplistic description, but it focuses on the part I want to talk about in this post.) It seemed to me that there was always a tendency (at least in the classes I took) to focus on the macro-patterns: the ways in which large groups, on the whole, exercise dominance over other large groups: men over women, whites over other racial or ethnic groups, rich over poor, members of predominant religions over members of minority religions, the educated over the less well-educated. And understandably so: these are patterns that are historically verifiable and, like the magnetic field of the earth, exercise a large, universally present effect, and yet one that is easily ignorable at any specific location. (I say "easily ignorable" because historically, much literary criticism *has* ignored these patterns and the way they play out in--or are even furthered by--literature.) I still think this kind of literary criticism is both necessary and important. (I know this puts me at odds with some others on this List who object to cultural criticism and feel art should be criticized only on artistic grounds--a distinction I think is both artificial and unrealistic--but those kinds of disagreements simply give us something to talk about on the List...) But I'm taken with the notion that as individuals, we are often much more sharply affected by the local influences in our lives, the local power structures--those patterns which, like the effect of a strong but small magnet, may be discernible only within a small area, but which can enact havoc or order with devastating effectiveness within that limited range. Case in point: I've been in--and heard about--a number of classrooms where the teacher, vigorous in pursuit of a particular agenda that has been culturally and historically unpopular, has made people who disagreed with that agenda feel uncomfortable, even oppressed. Are these teachers justified in setting up the terms of discourse within their classrooms in this way, because it is a reversal of the larger patterns of society? Or are they engaging in an act of oppression just as morally dubious, if on a smaller scale, as that to which they are reacting? Personally, I'm uncomfortable with either alternative--or rather, I see some justification in both points of view. People *should* at times be made to feel uncomfortable with familiar, received ideas, forced to view them from another perspective, particularly in a classroom setting. On the other hand, the classroom to a certain extent is a world unto itself--a micro-world, where the effect of the teacher is like a powerful localized magnet. Injustice within that context has a great potential to wreak harm, regardless of what may be the patterns of the larger world. After all, the individual student does not experience all classrooms, but only a finite, fairly small number. A classroom practice which (for example) is designed to "balance" what other instructors in other sections of that class are doing is largely pointless, because the individual student takes a class only once. Injustice to a group and injustice to an individual cannot quite be weighed against each other in the same set of scales. Take another case: marriage. Since being married myself, and observing other marriages, I've become aware that generalizations about patterns in marriage are of only limited usefulness in characterizing any individual's experience of marriage--because there is such a wide variation among marriages that the effects of any broad patterns are easily overwhelmed, or at least concealed, by the particulars of any specific marriage. Which isn't to say that generalizations and research studies about marriage aren't important and valuable: they provide a framework for social policy in its broadest sense, from politics to the preachings of prophets. And the preachings of artists, for that matter. But they are of little use to the artist in depicting any individual marriage, any specific family--because the realm of the artist (the fiction artist, at least) is to a great degree the particular. We write about only one family (or a small number) at a time, not all families. And so what we write will inevitably be local, as opposed to general--which, I think, is part of the reason for the frustration of a particular set of moralists with fiction, from Plato down to some of the more doctrinaire feminist critics. (I don't mean to speak ill of feminist criticism in general, which has contributed some powerful, important tools--and questions--to literary studies.) All of which is (I think) important, and interesting, though I'm not sure how many others on the List share this particular interest of mine. What brings it to mind again at this time, however, is a certain matter of List dynamics that I've recently (again) become aware of. That is: It's much easier for all of us to feel ourselves in the minority than in the majority; much easier for us to be aware of the ways in which our own statements and ideas do not seem to be respected by others on the List, but much harder for us to see ways in which the reverse may be true as well. I'd like to encourage everyone to speak freely on the List, within the limits of the List guidelines. I'd like to encourage a much broader range of voices than we typically experience in any given week. I'd like to encourage more participation by women, in particular--there are some days that pass when it seems that almost no female voices are heard. Thanks as well to those of you who do contribute regularly, who raise new topics for discussion, who strive to express points of view you feel aren't being adequately represented. Thanks to those who attempt to reach out to those on the other side of particular issues and clarify both their own point of view and that of others. We will never reach unanimity or agreement on many issues we discuss on the List--I don't even think that's a worthwhile goal--but mutual understanding and respect, ah, that is achievable, and well worth working for. In my opinion. The micro-structure of this List is, in a certain sense at least, a world apart, and a place where--as I would prefer--no particular voice ought to be privileged above others. I invite the ongoing help of all of you in keeping it that way. Jonathan Langford AML-List Moderator jlangfor@pressenter.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] SORENSEN, _A Little Lower than the Angels_ Date: 02 Dec 2000 14:30:11 -0700 Because of some recommendations on the list, I started reading A Little Lower Than the Angels, if nothing else than to familiarize myself with early LDS literature. After ten chapters and almost a hundred pages, I'm livid, and I'm asking anyone for one good reason to keep reading it. So far the main character, Mercy, is the most faithless latter-day saint I've read about in a long while (reminds me of a current thread of discussion). She follows her husband into the church because she's married to him, not because she believes. She doesn't take her own baptism seriously, and almost laughs at it. But the worst part, in my opinion, is the blatant misrepresentations of history. For example, it shows Joseph Smith passionately kissing and wooing Eliza as his only true love, saying that they were meant to be together, that Emma is nothing more than a good mother, and that as soon as he can arrange it, they will marry. That Eliza is finally someone who can understand him (they have a lengthy comparison between a poet and a prophet, and how they're similar). Puhleese! Anyone who has read anything about Joseph and Emma know that the two of them were deeply in love with each other. They eloped, for crying out loud. The commandment for Joseph to enter into plural marriage nearly broke him. And I cannot believe that Joseph would put advances on Eliza before the ceremony, since the purpose of the marriage was to obey a commandment. I'm sure Joseph never kissed Eliza (let alone so passionately as in the book) until they were married. It wouldn't have been right, and Joseph knew it. I'm aware that historical fiction is just that, fiction, but to take real people and events, toss them aside, and create a new set with similar names that fits better into some romantic notion is ludicrous. She misrepresents other historical figures, as well. The sad part is that Sorensen has some beautiful writing, but the content awful. Lund isn't the greatest writer in the world, but at least he tries to be true to the people and events he writes about. If this book is about only a faithless woman, and otherwise little more than a rewriting of history, then I'm returning it to the library and not looking back. I've got too many titles on my "To read" list to bother with such drivel. 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: "Debra L. Brown" Subject: [AML] DUTCHER, _God's Army_ Date: 04 Dec 2000 14:03:00 -0500 As an anniversary gift to my husband, I bought the video, _God's Army_. My husband loved it! I'm ok with it. His one question was why it was rated PG. Anyone who can answer that? There were a few things that bugged me, like how inept Allen was at tying ties after being at the MTC for 6 weeks, how he seemed to know **nothing** about being a missionary, how we could see through the dress of the girl being baptized, the death of the companion, burying the companion in his suit! for pete's sake..........there's probably more, but I'll shut up. I could also see the point of the dissatisfaction in the character of the Mission President, and how clueless he was in the lives of the Elders. On the other hand, I liked the music, and the toilet scenes. Debbie Brown - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Russ Hartill Subject: RE: [AML] DUTCHER, _God's Army_ Date: 04 Dec 2000 12:34:17 -0700 The DVD version of this movie has a director's commentary, wherein he addresses some of the things he struggled with while making the movie, and afterwards. The girl being baptized, it turns out, is his wife in real life. To whom he listed in credits as "Sexy LDS Lady...." The character of the mission president was Dutcher's real life bishop, in whose real home office the scene was filmed. The piles of paper and clutter are the bishop's real piles of clutter, not stage props! The pranks pulled on the missionaries came from Dutcher's own experiences serving in Mexico. Russ Hartill Sandy, Utah - 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] DUTCHER, _God's Army_ Date: 04 Dec 2000 12:52:41 -0700 >As an anniversary gift to my husband, I bought the video, _God's Army_. My >husband loved it! I'm ok with it. His one question was why it was rated PG. >Anyone who can answer that? There was some minor violence in it, the hookers, like that. > There were a few things that bugged me, like how inept Allen was at >tying ties after being at the MTC for 6 weeks, how he seemed to know >**nothing** about being a missionary, how we could see through the dress of >the girl being baptized, the death of the companion, burying the companion >in his suit! for pete's sake..........there's probably more, but I'll shut >up. We had a missionary show up in our appartment with a copy of playboy in his suitcase. A good percentage of missionaries do indeed know nothing about being missioaries. Not all of them go out for the right reasons, they may not have been properly taught, they may have been only recently converted. Lots of reasons why Elder Allen could be entirely believable. Not every baptism runs properly either, with regard to seeing through the dress being baptized. Which, by the way, I do not remember. I've bought the video so I'm going to look at it again. I don't often get the chance to see women's underwear through their clothes. Burying his companion in his suit: You would rather he be decked out in his temple clothes? Thom - 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] DUTCHER, _God's Army_ Date: 04 Dec 2000 20:13:19 > >As an anniversary gift to my husband, I bought the video, _God's Army_. My >husband loved it! I'm ok with it. His one question was why it was rated PG. >Anyone who can answer that? There were a couple of "hells" and "damns," used primarily in the literal, religious sense, but still generally more than you can get away with in a G movie. (Generally. "The Straight Story" had some of the same words and still got a G; I'm sure there are other exceptions, too.) The film was actually first given a PG-13 rating, due to the visibility of drug paraphernalia in someone's apartment (it's been a while since I've seen it, so I don't remember the specific scene). Dutcher discussed it with the ratings board, though, and they agreed that the overall tone of the movie was more consistent with a PG than a PG-13, so they let it slide. > There were a few things that bugged me, like how inept Allen was at >tying ties after being at the MTC for 6 weeks, how he seemed to know >**nothing** about being a missionary, how we could see through the dress of >the girl being baptized, the death of the companion, burying the companion >in his suit! for pete's sake..........there's probably more, but I'll shut >up. The tie thing didn't seem realistic to me, either, nor did the death. (You know, there comes a point where they'll MAKE you go home from your mission for health reasons, no matter how bad you want to stay.) However, I knew missionaries who had been members all their lives who still seemed to know nothing about it. Also, the first time my trainer and I baptized someone, we were both very new at it (he'd only been out a month longer than I had), and it didn't occur to us to ensure beforehand that the baptizee was wearing a dress that wouldn't become see-through when she got wet. Part of what made the film so enjoyable for me was that Matthew Brown did such a good job as the greenie missionary, he reminded me exactly of about five specific missionaries I knew. I guess he was probably just doing "General Naivete" in the actor's handbook (since he's not LDS and probably doesn't know what greenies are like), but it sure seemed like "New Missionary Naivete" to me. Eric D. Snider _____________________________________________________________________________________ Get more from the Web. FREE MSN Explorer download : http://explorer.msn.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Debra L. Brown" Subject: Re: [AML] DUTCHER, _God's Army_ Date: 04 Dec 2000 16:09:45 -0500 Thom said: > Burying his companion in his suit: You would rather he be decked out in his > temple clothes? After I sent that I know I should have been clearer, and as I said to someone else, a white shirt, pants, and tie would have, imo, been ok. The non-member viewing the film wouldn't have seen anything they shouldn't and a in-the-know member would have filled in the blanks. > There was some minor violence in it, the hookers, like that. Seen worse on television > We had a missionary show up in our appartment with a copy of playboy in his > suitcase. Well, everyone has their own taste in bathroom library reading material. > A good percentage of missionaries do indeed know nothing about being > missioaries. Not all of them go out for the right reasons, they may not have > been properly taught, they may have been only recently converted. Lots of > reasons why Elder Allen could be entirely believable. Except I would hope he would learn to tie a tie by the end of his MTC training period, though I realize that the movie needed "cute" moments > Not every baptism runs properly either, with regard to seeing through the > dress being baptized. Which, by the way, I do not remember. I've bought the > video so I'm going to look at it again. I don't often get the chance to see > women's underwear through their clothes. Standard K-Mart issue Eric said: >The film was actually first given a PG-13 rating, due to the visibility of >drug paraphernalia in someone's apartment (it's been a while since I've seen >it, so I don't remember the specific scene). Dutcher discussed it with the >ratings board, though, and they agreed that the overall tone of the movie >was more consistent with a PG than a PG-13, so they let it slide. I'm a jaded woman.........I've seen more violence in Disney movies. But thanks for the explanation. Debbie - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jeffrey Needle Subject: Re: [AML] MN Weyland's Latest Looks At Overcoming Differences Date: 04 Dec 2000 22:33:20 GMT > [This is being sent as posted to MN. I hope the typo > in the last paragraph (About the Author) was not in the > original press release. Larry.] > About the Author > Jack Weyland teaches physics at Ricks College in Rexburg, Idaho. He > has published a score of best-selling novels and short stories, > securing himself the distinction of being the most popular writer of > fiction in the LSD adolescent and young adult market. He and his > wife, Sheryl, are the parents of five children and have four > grandchildren. LOL!!!! LSD market! You know, I had to read it three times to catch the typo. Funny how you= r=20 eyes can see what they expect, rather than what's there. --=20 Jeffrey Needle E-mail: jeff.needle@general.com - 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] DUTCHER, _God's Army_ Date: 04 Dec 2000 19:45:51 -0700 (MST) Just a brief point of reference. I didn't take the greenie constantly retieing his tie as lack of knowledge, but as a point of personal vanity. I have known elders who wouldn't go out for any reason until their tie was the perfect length and their tie knot was exactly dimpled so the tie would lie in the precise way they wished it to fall from their collar. Thus, this was just Dutcher's way, for me, of establishing a personal character trait of this elder. Naturally, it rang true from my experience. Of course, that is just my fallible observation. Respectfully, Skip Hamilton - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Tom Matkin Subject: Re: [AML] DUTCHER, _God's Army_ Date: 04 Dec 2000 21:38:59 -0700 My daughter just came into my computer room and noticed that I was reading a post on AML about "God's Army". "Are they still talking about that!" she exploded, "can't we just go to a movie and enjoy it without picking it apart?" I tried to explain to her that AML was really all about picking things apart, but it didn't really ring true with me either. I suppose it is because this movie is such a monumental step in the growth of Mormon cinema. Hopefully there will be a day when such films are as common as Mormon books are today, and then maybe we will be able to look back and remember it the way we might any other popular cinematic effort. I thought it was a darn fun and engaging couple of hours. And it felt good that it was treating a part of my life and culture that hitherto fore has had no place in a commercial movie theatre. True it didn't reach the same standard as "Johnny Lingo". Thank heaven for that. Tom - 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 "Farley Family Xmas" returns to Pardoe Theatre Dec. 7-30: BYU Press Release Date: 04 Dec 2000 22:05:49 -0600 Press Release 4Dec00 A2 [From Mormon-News] "Farley Family Xmas" returns to Pardoe Theatre Dec. 7-30 PROVO, UTAH -- The Farley Family will once again turn Christmas upside down in Brigham Young University's Pardoe Drama Theatre when James Arrington's "Farley Family Xmas" opens Thursday (Dec. 7) at 7:30 p.m. The popular one-man show will run through Dec. 30 excluding Sundays, Mondays and holidays. Tickets are $10 for general admission and $8 for students and faculty. For more information or to purchase tickets, please call (801) 378-4322. Fans of the dysfunctional Farley clan can once again spend the holidays with Heber, Aunt Pearl and the rest of their zany relatives. Audience members are encouraged to dress in holiday garb for the performance. This holiday spoof has been running in some form for well over a decade, according to creator and performer Arrington, and audiences can expect the usual Farley foolishness. "The show always changes, because I've never written anything down, so it becomes very topical," Arrington said. "Whatever is in the headlines somehow always winds up in the show." The play has become a holiday tradition for some households. "No matter who you are, you're bound to see one of your relatives--or even yourself--on stage, and that's a startling moment, believe me," Arrington said. There's the Martha Stewart-type who turns trash into tinseled treasures, some less-than-virtuoso singers and instrumentalists, poets of the fractured variety, under-trained dancers and other under-prepared performers--all held thinly together by the doggedly persistent and eternally optimistic Heber Farley, patriarch and master of ceremonies. The play benefits greatly from holiday music by Michael Ohman, Lisa Arrington and Sam Cardon. The performance is sponsored by the BYU Department of Theatre and Media Arts and the College of Fine Arts and Communications. -###- >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: "Marie Knowlton" Subject: Re: [AML] _Savior of the World_ (Drama) Date: 04 Dec 2000 23:17:27 -0700

No, I haven't seen it yet. But there are two points here that I think are= worth mentioning: first, the fact that the Church has ventured back into= the territory of live theatre is a good thing. I think live theatre has the= ability to touch people in ways few other experiences can. Brigham Young= recognized this fact and insisted that live theatre be an important part of= the culture in pioneer days. Second,  we should recognize that= Church-produced theatre is not going to be very controversial or venture= too far towards the cutting edge. It's out there to testify, perhaps= illuminate, and maybe bring the Spirit to the stage (and thereby to the= audience). This shouldn't surprise us. If we don't like it, we're certainly= free to stage alternative productions.  I don't believe we have= legitimate grounds for complaining that the Church is quashing us as LDS= artists because it isn't inclusive of all our different views on what it= ought to be staging.  They can't make everybody happy, anyway. =

As to how it should be judged, I'm not feeling any urgent need to compare= it to the likes of , oh, say, "Rent." There's plenty of historical= precedent for religious theatre -- the Passion Plays of the Middle Ages are= a good example. Who says we can't entertain the audience and spiritually= feed them at the same time?

 



 

[Marie Knowlton] - 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] _Savior of the World_ (Drama) Date: 05 Dec 2000 01:16:14 -0700 Scott Tarbet wrote: > As an actor I'm actually very used to directors and producers and and > writers and theatre owners telling me which wrench to use. And I often > disagree with them, sometimes vigorously. As a director I'm very used to > telling actors which wrench to use and having them disagree with me. But > ultimately I have a vision of what I want the final product to be, and while > I will try my best to explain that vision and get the actor to share it, if > after all s/he still doesn't, then my creative vision is the one that will > prevail. The producer of SOTW is the Church, in the person of the Brethren > assigned to the task. They had a creative vision before they authorized the > project, and I don't see a thing wrong with them exercising oversight. At first Scott says that he has no problem with _directors_ telling him, the actor, what tool to use, or that he doesn't feel bad as a _director_ telling actors what tool to use. Then he goes on to say that the Church Brethren should have the same right as _producers_ to do the same thing. But a producer is not a director. The director is a professional, therefore presumably knows what he's doing. The producer is an artistic professional only by chance--many of them aren't. The only requirement to become a producer is to be able to fork over the money. Sure, the producer may have an artistic vision and want it to be realized. But that doesn't mean he has a clue how to accomplish that realization. Sure, he as the paying boss can insist that things be done a certain way. But that doesn't mean he's wise to do so. I haven't seen the play, so I have no idea what my critique of it would be. But if I accept the critiques that have been given and speak hypothetically, I would have to say that the Brethren's vision was _not_ realized, even though they may think it was, because they who don't understand the tools of theater dictated how things should be done. They may get sold-out performances, teary-eyed audiences, and obligatory Utah standing ovations, but are they converting anyone--changing people's lives? Or are they merely preaching to the choir? Is that the result they wanted? I doubt 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: Sally0115@aol.com Subject: Re: [AML] DUTCHER, _God's Army_ Date: 05 Dec 2000 13:26:12 EST << True it didn't reach the same standard as "Johnny Lingo". Thank heaven for that. Tom >> Hopefully nothing reaches the "same standard as 'Johnny Lingo'". I found it interesting how diverse our opinions are regarding "God's Amry". I had no problem with the suit in the casket, but I found the bathroom scenes a bit offensive. But, I'm not complaining, because overall I found the movie delightful and certainly a broad suggestion of how missionary life could be. Ruth Packer - 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] DUTCHER, _God's Army_ Date: 05 Dec 2000 11:01:43 -0700 Debbie Brown wrote: =20 >There were a few things that bugged me, like how inept Allen >was at >tying ties after being at the MTC for 6 weeks. . .=20 Well, I served a mission, and I've been wearing a tie now for thirty plus = years, and I'm still inept at tying them. I wonder if this is a gender = thing. I know a number of men (like myself) that really have no idea how = to dress ourselves, and who never will be able to tie a tie. =20 >how he seemed to know **nothing** about being a missionary,=20 Perfectly believable. The culture shock of leaving the MTC is huge. >how we could see through the dress of >the girl being baptized,=20 I missed this. >I could also see the point of the dissatisfaction in the character of >the Mission President, and how clueless he was in the lives of >the = Elders. He was twenty times more clued-in about the lives of the Elders in his = mission than my mission president ever was. =20 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] _Savior of the World_ (Drama) Date: 05 Dec 2000 10:55:13 -0700 Marie Knowlton, in a post I very much enjoyed, wrote: >the fact that the Church has ventured back into=3D >the territory of live theatre is a good thing. I think live theatre has = >the=3D > ability to touch people in ways few other experiences can. >Brigham = Young=3D > recognized this fact and insisted that live theatre be an important = >part of=3D > the culture in pioneer days.=20 I quite agree. The important thing about the new Conference Center = Theater is that it exists, and as such, affirms the genuine worth of this = art form.=20 >Second,  we should recognize that=3D >Church-produced theatre is not going to be very controversial or >venture = too far towards the cutting edge. It's out there to testify, >perhaps = illuminate, and maybe bring the Spirit to the stage (and >thereby to the = audience). This shouldn't surprise us.=20 The point is, they could be cutting edge and it wouldn't be controversial. = The Church can do anything it likes in that venue; they're essentially = immune from criticism. I don't know what they 'should' do there. It's = not my stewardship. (My stewardship is to sit on the sidelines and carp.) As far as doing shows that invite the Spirit, that becomes a very tricky = issue, actually. My experience is that the Spirit can manifest itself in = many ways and in many venues, and that it's perfectly possible for one = person to be deeply moved by and touched by the Spirit, while the person = sitting next to him is unmoved, even offended. I don't believe that there = are certain kinds of art that are automatically inviting to the Spirit and = other kinds of art that automatically offend the Spirit. I'm far more = moved by and made receptive to the Spirit by Picasso's Guernica, for = example, than by the Christus. >If we don't like it, we're certainly free to stage alternative >production= s. =20 Not just free to, but obligated to. We're all supposed to be anxiously = engaged in, for example, community and public service. I think that for = active LDS people to be engaged politically is compatible with the Gospel. = But that may mean that we are engaged politically in opposing camps and = causes. This doesn't trouble me. By the same token, we LDS artists have = an obligation to express ourselves artistically, and (I'm going to state = this strongly), an obligation to base our work in differing, perhaps even = competing aesthetic principles. We do not all believe in the same = aesthetic. Nor should we. >I don't believe we have legitimate grounds for complaining that >the = Church is quashing us as LDS artists because it isn't >inclusive of all = our different views on what it ought to be >staging. Agree absolutely. Though I do wish the Church treated its artists with at = least some rudimentary courtesy. =20 >As to how it should be judged, I'm not feeling any urgent need to = >compare it to the likes of , oh, say, "Rent." There's plenty of >historica= l precedent for religious theatre -- the Passion Plays of >the Middle Ages = are a good example.=20 Yes indeed. Those wonderful plays of Corpus Christi, the greatest = religious theatre of all time, with all their raucous, bawdy, funny, = violent, crude, poetic, farcical, tragic attempts to connect the sacred = with the vulgar. Wow. What a model for us! Can we compare Savior of the = World to medieval drama? I'd love to, but there's no possible way we'll = ever do work at that level. >Who says we can't entertain the audience and spiritually feed >them at = the same time? As all good theatre does. Eric Samuelsen - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Debra L. Brown" Subject: Re: [AML] DUTCHER, _God's Army_ Date: 05 Dec 2000 13:28:26 -0500 Well, as the one that reintroduced the topic to AML, I kind of take exception to the term picking apart the movie. I made some comments on it, more good comments then bad comments, but I could be wrong. Yes, things are picked apart here on AML, I don't know how many times I have suffered post after post of people picking apart _The Work and the Glory_ series, or even _Legacy_, which I admit isn't perfect, but I like it. I rarely post my opinion on anything because I can't pick apart the lyrics to _I Am A Child of God_ let alone _God's Army_ with the style and finesse of Eric Snyder or D. Martindale. Now again, I could be wrong, but is _God's Army_ immune from being picked apart because it's the first time a film about Mormons has reached such a large non-Mormon audience? It's no more immune from being picked apart than, say, _Orgazmo_ which is: Synopsis: "South Park" creator Trey Parker's film (which was created before South Park's success) centers on Mormon missionary Joe Young and his unusual entry into the pornographic movie industry. Now, I haven't seen _Orgazmo_, but I'm going to assume from the synopsis, that it isn't telling a fun and engaging 95 minutes about the everyday life of a Mormon missionary. Has anyone here seen it? Debbie Brown - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: plus two Subject: [AML] Introductions: William Morris Date: 05 Dec 2000 13:26:44 -0800 (PST) Hello. Since the list seems to have spawned a recent rash of introductions, I'd like to add mine. My name is William Morris. I am a male living in Oakland, CA with my wife Angela and our cat Yeti. I was an AML-Mag subscriver off and on for three or four years until the past summer where a new job (Public Relations Coordinator for San Francisco State University--where I am also a grad student in comparative literature) finally allowed me the time and access to be a full-fledged list member. I think that I will send my connections (some of which are rather dubious) to Mormon literature in a later post and instead mention how I found my way to the list, since I didn't come by way of BYU. When I returned home from my mission (Romania), I moved in with my grandparents and enrolled in a local community college. It was my first college experience (I left for my mission right after high school), and because I was straight out of the mission field, I was jonesing for a straight-up IV feed of knowledge. That first semester I didn't work and my classes were easy so I spent all my time either in the library (re-reading works I had read as a teenager as well as studies in Kaballah, philosophy, and psychology) at school or the small library at the LDS institute across the street (where I plowed through whatever was available with an emphasis on Nibler, the Journal of Discourses, and all the Teachings of.... style books). It was a wonderful, heady time which came to a quick close because the next semester I increased my course load and started working 20 hrs a week. Flash forward two years. I'm beginning my first semester as an English Lit. major at UC Berkeley. I couldn't find a work study job that semester and again found myself with time. My studies in literature and my weaks efforts at writing LDS-tinged fiction for a creative writing class (while I was at community college) had sparked my own thinking about Mormon literature, but beyond "the Bishop's Horserace," I had no idea what was out there. With free time, I once again turned to the Insitute library---Berkeley had three full shelves of Mormon lit! [Almost all of it donated and from the 70's] I read "A Believing People," a couple of Clinton Larsen's plays, one of the early short story collections, even delved into some turn of the century home literature. It was challenging, interesting stuff, and I found myself looking for some sort of theoretical context or critical response to help me frame everything. This desire led me to the Internet, the Mormon-J list, followed their link to the BYU Mormon Lit pages, and linked from there to Benson Parkinson's AMl-List page. I relate this story, not because it is particularly unique or thrilling, but because it illustrates the challenge for those of us outside (and without the benefit of contacts from time at BYU, UofU etc.) of the intermountain west of even discovering this literary history and market. Even with my predisposition for literature (deeply ingrained by my mother) and an interest in Mormon culture, it was only by accident that I discovered that there was Mormon lit. beyond the young-adult market. Bless those either wonderfully giving or ignorant, perhaps distrustful, (what should we do with all of Uncle LaShawn's weird church books that aren't written by GA's? I don't know---give them to the institute. They'll take anything.) saints who filled those three shelves at the Berkeley Institute. ~~William Morris __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Shopping - Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products. http://shopping.yahoo.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] _Savior of the World_ (Drama) Date: 05 Dec 2000 15:54:10 -0700 Loved this long post from Scott Tarbet on SOTW. I wish I had time to = respond more specifically. I actually agree with pretty much everything = he's saying. I just want to add this note: SOTW is not different, or unusual, or particularly valuable in any way. = It's institional theatre, intended to invoke a positive response to a = particular value of the sponsoring institution. Structurally and = aesthetically, it's indistinguishable from, say Soviet drama in the = fifties, or Chinese opera as correlated by Mao, or a business presentation = created by a corporation. A few years ago, I was invited to write a play = to be performed at a theme restaurant. I wish I'd taken the commission, = frankly, because it was pretty lucrative, but I didn't have time. The guy = who got the gig is a friend of mine, and he said that the institutional = micromanagement, and the concern with issues of 'appropriateness' and = 'positive value' were identical to the approach taken by the Church when = it micromanages art commissions. SOTW isn't special or different or = particularly valuable because the sponsoring institution is one to whom I = owe my allegiance. =20 Now, that doesn't mean that it's without any value. It's been created for = a specific purpose, and presumably it achieves that purpose for most of = its audiences. And when I say 'it's a lot like Soviet drama', I'm not = being deliberately incendiary. I'm just saying that institutional drama = has a certain structure to it, and that our insitutional art shares = structural similarities with institutional art created by different = institutions. I well remember the first time I was in Moscow, and got to ride on the = subway. Moscow has a wonderful subway system, the best I've ever = seen--they did a few things right, unimportant ones. Anyway, in the = subway stations, they commissioned some painters to do these big murals, = and I was amazed by the paintings. Arnold Friberg redux. Big sunny = pieces of realism, with wonderfully attractive young people staring = soulfully into the heavens, optimistically embracing a brave new future. = As a Provo boy, I felt right at home. I had the same deja vu feeling when = I visited the Schuller's Crystal Cathedral in Anaheim, and walked through = their bookstore. Thought I was in a Deseret Book. Jack Weyland lives! = The books had exactly the same covers! =20 =20 Theologically, we don't have much in common, frankly, with evangelical = Christianity. Philosophically, we haven't a thing in common with Soviet = socialism. Aesthetically, we're blood brothers with both. And, manifold = ironies aside, I don't think these similarities should give us pause, = frankly. Aesthetics does not necessarily suggest an ideology. And I know = enough Mormon artists to know that we do not share any single aesthetic. = The institutional aesthetic of the Church itself is nothing more important = that an expression of a certain kind of Church culture. And one which, = IMHO, hasn't much, if anything, to do with the Gospel. Eric Samuelsen - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Debra L. Brown" Subject: Re: [AML] DUTCHER, _God's Army_ Date: 05 Dec 2000 21:10:14 -0500 ----- Original Message ----- > He was twenty times more clued-in about the lives of the Elders in his mission than my mission president ever was. > > Eric Samuelsen Then that is just really sad, and I can only hope and pray that my daughter's MP is twenty times better than the both put together. Debbie Brown - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Ed Snow Subject: [AML] DUTCHER, _God's Army_--PG Rating Date: 05 Dec 2000 19:17:36 -0800 (PST) Debra asked: "His one question was why [_God's Army_] was rated PG?" It was language, pure and simple. My ears are still ringing from the "flips", "fetches," and "Oh My Hecks." When I saw the movie here in Georgia (it took forever to get here) I thought I was in Sacrament Meeting. Little kids where rustling about. People audibly said "amen" periodically. Somebody in front of me snuck in a Tuperware stuffed full of Cheerios. And then a guy next to me fell asleep. No one remembered to bring tissues. To top it all off, one "sister" allowed her 2 year old to run around the theater screaming, up and down the aisles, till someone got up and hailed an usher. (What ever happened to ushers in the church anyway? Anybody remember the "Usher" pins?) For me, _God's Army_ was wonderful, in spite of the weird feeling I had wandered into a "Rocky Mountain Picture Show." Ed ===== Among best sellers, Barnes & Noble ranks _Of Curious Workmanship: Musings on Things Mormon_ in its top 100 (thousand, that is). Available now at 10% off http://shop.barnesandnoble.com/booksearch/isbnInquiry.asp?userid=5SLFMY1TYD&mscssid=HJW5QQU1SUS12HE1001PQJ9XJ7F17G3C&srefer=&isbn=1560851368 __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Shopping - Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products. http://shopping.yahoo.com/ - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Covell, Jason" Subject: RE: [AML] _Savior of the World_ (Drama) Date: 06 Dec 2000 14:27:35 +1100 I have a wonderful little book at home called _Marxist Aesthetics_. You'd think so just from the title, right? [Hey, I love the density of "serious" marxist writing (that's a little micro-aesthetic in itself, but not in fact what the book's about), although this book is relatively straightforward in tone. Translated from a French original, I think.] Anyway, one thing I've been meaning to do is to quote slabs of it to some of the most conservative Church members I know, only substituting "gospel" for "marxism", "missionary work" for "promoting class struggle" etc etc. I can almost guarantee that the reaction would be nods, approving noises. The overwhelming focus of the book is on how art is (or should be) harnessed to furthering the cause, how artists have a duty to be aware that everything is either for or against the grand vision. Nothing strange to AML-listers here. I think Eric is absolutely right - and I'm no more horrified than he is, I think. Jason Covell > [Re: _Savior of the World_]... Structurally and aesthetically, it's > indistinguishable from, say Soviet drama in the fifties, or > Chinese opera as correlated by Mao, or a business > presentation created by a corporation... > ... > And when I say 'it's a lot like Soviet drama', I'm not being > deliberately incendiary. I'm just saying that institutional > drama has a certain structure to it, and that our > insitutional art shares structural similarities with > institutional art created by different institutions. > ... > Theologically, we don't have much in common, frankly, with > evangelical Christianity. Philosophically, we haven't a > thing in common with Soviet socialism. Aesthetically, we're > blood brothers with both. > ... > Eric Samuelsen > > > > > > > - > 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: Rob Pannoni Subject: [AML] Orgazmo (was: DUTCHER, _God's Army_) Date: 05 Dec 2000 21:31:20 -0800 "Debra L. Brown" wrote: > > Now, I haven't seen _Orgazmo_, but I'm going to assume from the synopsis, > that it isn't telling a fun and engaging 95 minutes about the everyday life > of a Mormon missionary. Has anyone here seen it? Okay, I will confess. I am a total heathen. I've seen _Orgazmo_. I guess fun and engaging is in the eye of the beholder. If you like South Park and have a high tolerance for graphic sexual humor, it has a few entertaining moments. But it's not a movie about real mormon missionaries any more than _Attack of the Killer Tomatoes_ is about real tomatoes. It is entirely over-the-top farce. The mormon reference is sort of incidental--a generic portrayal of a religious stereotype. The only thing Parker got right about mormons missionaries was the white shirts. The rest was more in line with Bible-belt religions. The missionary ends every phone conversation with his girlfriend with the phrase "Jesus loves you and so do I." He needs to earn money because "temple weddings are so expensive." It makes you doubt that Parker has ever actually had a conversation with a mormon missionary. Fortunately, because of the farcical nature of the movie, I don't think anyone would come away thinking it represented real mormon missionary life or beliefs. It's not intended as an attack on mormonism. Parker has said publicly that he has mormon friends and doesn't have anything against mormonism as a religion. The main character is portrayed sympathetically, if totally erroneously He is the hero--a pretty decent guy in Parker's weird, off-kilter universe. Actually, the movie is as much a lampooning of the porn industry as it is of religion. It stars Ron Jeremy, a widely-recognized porn star, which gives the movie a sort of insider joke "we can laugh at ourselves" quality. Somehow, the porn industry making fun of itself makes the mormon parody seem less offensive, or at least less hostile. It may be in bad taste, but it is intended as good fun. I doubt many on the list would enjoy the movie's "nothing is sacred" style of humor. If you don't see it, you certainly won't have missed much. -- 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: "D. Michael Martindale" Subject: Re: [AML] _Savior of the World_ (Drama) Date: 06 Dec 2000 00:40:39 -0700 "Eric R. Samuelsen" wrote: > As far as doing shows that invite the Spirit, that becomes a very tricky issue, actually. My experience is that the Spirit can manifest itself in many ways and in many venues, and that it's perfectly possible for one person to be deeply moved by and touched by the Spirit, while the person sitting next to him is unmoved, even offended. I would assume when the Brethren make recommendations on how to change a play to make it more spiritually inviting, they are doing so based on what _they_ think is inspiring. But what inspires an apostle of Christ is bound to be radically different from what inspires a person in need of conversion. Therefore, when the Brethren attempt to tweak a work of art to make it more inspiring, I fear they may actually be making it unrelatable to those most in need of inspiration. -- 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] DUTCHER, _God's Army_ Date: 06 Dec 2000 00:45:29 -0700 "Eric R. Samuelsen" wrote: > He was twenty times more clued-in about the lives of the Elders in his mission than my mission president ever was. Or mine. I only figured out after the fact that my mission president considered me a problem elder. I wasn't a problem elder. I was just clueless. I had no idea how to be an effective missionary. Nor did anyone teach me how--not senior companions, not zone leaders, not the mission president. No one ever tried to discuss it with me directly, either; they just beat around the bush and tried to second guess what was in my mind and what would help me. My verdict: if there's anything about the mission president in _God's Army_ that's unbelievable, it was that he wasn't clueless 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: "Christopher Bigelow" Subject: [AML] Christmas get-together on 12/18 Date: 05 Dec 2000 17:14:49 -0700 Monday, December 18, looks like the best date for those who voted for an informal AML get together, prompted by AML-List moderator Jonathan Langford's visit to Utah. As of now, we will meet at Guadalahonky's in Draper at 5:30 p.m. for dinner. That's the only firm plan. Afterwards, different groups could spontaneously go downtown SLC for lights and dept. store windows, or go to a movie in Sandy somewhere, or go to someone's house for some socializing and deep literary talk, or try to make it to Marilyn's Villa musical in Springville, or go their separate ways. I am not personally offering to arrange anything in advance except for dinner reservations at 5:30, but I favor downtown SLC sites and ice cream and maybe a late movie if a group goes to something I want to see (I don't get downtown to the Tower or other artsy theaters very often, so it might be a good opportunity). I'm also open to live music at the Zephyr or elsewhere, if something good is on that night (the band Jerry Joseph and the Jack Mormons might even yield AML-List commentary). Bring newspapers and ideas, if you're up for things beyond dinner and want to see if you can entice anyone else along. Please RSVP directly to me so I can make us reservations at Guad's (chosen mainly for its convenience to both Salt Lake and Utah Counties). Anyone can still jump on board at any point, but if our numbers get unwieldy we may have to split up tables. Also, we could change the restaurant if the chads lean that way. Happy holidays, Chris Bigelow chrisb@enrich.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: [AML] Orgazmo (was: DUTCHER, _God's Army_) Date: 06 Dec 2000 00:52:48 -0700 "Debra L. Brown" wrote: > Now, I haven't seen _Orgazmo_, but I'm going to assume from the synopsis, > that it isn't telling a fun and engaging 95 minutes about the everyday life > of a Mormon missionary. Has anyone here seen it? I'm not too proud to admit I have--although I waited until it was on cable to minimize my financial contribution to it. There are two things to discuss about it: was it offensive, and was it any good? It was definitely offensive. The picture it painted of a Mormon missionary, even as a spoof, was crude and utterly inaccurate, even beyond the bounds of what would expect from a satire. But was it any good, which when dealing with a satire means, was it funny? The answer is no; it didn't even have that redeeming quality. The jokes were just too stupid and irrelevant to genuine LDS culture to have any impact on anyone except the ignorant. Contrary to what one might expect, the film didn't even have any nudity--it doesn't even redeem itself at that prurient level. If you didn't see _Orgazmo_, you didn't miss a thing. -- 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: "Thom Duncan" Subject: RE: [AML] DUTCHER, _God's Army_ Date: 06 Dec 2000 07:57:15 -0700 >Well, as the one that reintroduced the topic to AML, I kind of take >exception to the term picking apart the movie. I made some comments on it, >more good comments then bad comments, but I could be wrong. Yes, things are >picked apart here on AML, I don't know how many times I have suffered post >after post of people picking apart _The Work and the Glory_ series, or even >_Legacy_, which I admit isn't perfect, but I like it. > I rarely post my opinion on anything because I can't pick apart the >lyrics to _I Am A Child of God_ let alone _God's Army_ with the style and >finesse of Eric Snyder or D. Martindale. Don't let that stop you. I use a ham-handed, bull-in-a-China shop approach, and as long as I don't outright insult someone, the moderator usually lets it pass. Like arats, crticism of art has different aesthetics. I agree with Eric Samuelsen virtually 99 percent of the time, but he is a lot more articulate than me -- I tend to foam at the mouth and go ballistic. Both *opinions* are valid. >Now again, I could be >wrong, but is >_God's Army_ immune from being picked apart because it's the first time a >film about Mormons has reached such a large non-Mormon audience? No, I picked it apart quite a bit when it first appeared, but not for the same reasons you did. I thought the ending was contrived, for instance. It seemed tacked on to me. After we'd been seeing an hour and a half of real life missionaries, he throws in a typical Mormon-y ending which, except for his own masterful performance, could have easily been schmaltzy as well as gratuitous. > It's no >more immune from being picked apart than, say, _Orgazmo_ which is: > > Synopsis: "South Park" creator Trey Parker's film (which was created >before South Park's success) centers on Mormon missionary Joe Young and >his unusual entry into the pornographic movie industry. > >Now, I haven't seen _Orgazmo_, but I'm going to assume from the synopsis, >that it isn't telling a fun and engaging 95 minutes about the everyday life >of a Mormon missionary. Has anyone here seen it? >Debbie Brown Before you joined the list, we went the rounds on Orgazmo, also. Thom - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Scott Tarbet" Subject: RE: [AML] _Savior of the World_ (Drama) Date: 06 Dec 2000 08:11:20 -0700 Okay, Eric D. Snider -- you've got the bully pulpit. Don't you agree it's time for a new term for this kind of presentation? And aren't you just the guy to get the ball rolling? If such a term were in use the Church wouldn't have had to apply the term "musical" to SOTW with the concomitant confusion and dissatisfaction by those of us who were expecting a real musical. To be useful the term would have to be quickly adopted, meaning it would have to be intuitively grasped by those hovering at the lowest common denominator at which the Church aims its presentations. It would need to be broadly applicable to devotional presentations done by Young Women and stakes and Relief Societies. And it would need to be snappy, without boring institutional overtones . . . like "devotional presentation" ;-) This reminds me of Chesterton's wager that he could get a made-up word introduced into the English lexicon and into wide use in a period of a few months, as evidenced by it appearing in print in the Times of London from a writer unacquainted with the wager. The word: "quiz". -- Scott Tarbet -----Original Message----- The problem is that the church isn't touting this as a missionary tool or a method of perfecting the saints. They're calling it a theatrical production. I agree that you have to judge a work by what it is ... but what if the artist himself is incorrect about what it is? Do we judge "Savior of the World" by theater standards (which is what the church says it is), or do we judge it by make-the-audience-feel-fuzzy standards (which is what it actually is)? - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Scott Tarbet" Subject: RE: [AML] _Savior of the World_ (Drama) Date: 06 Dec 2000 10:33:11 -0700 > -----Original Message----- > From: Eric R. Samuelsen > As far as doing shows that invite the Spirit, that becomes a very > tricky issue, actually. My experience is that the Spirit can > manifest itself in many ways and in many venues, and that it's > perfectly possible for one person to be deeply moved by and > touched by the Spirit, while the person sitting next to him is > unmoved, even offended. I don't believe that there are certain > kinds of art that are automatically inviting to the Spirit and > other kinds of art that automatically offend the Spirit. I'm far > more moved by and made receptive to the Spirit by Picasso's > Guernica, for example, than by the Christus. I agree that the form of the art doesn't equate to offense or invitation of the Spirit. But I also think there are kinds of art that are more faith-promoting to a greater number of people. "Guernica" may make you and me weep, but it doesn't have that effect on the majority of those who view it, let alone the public at large. That makes us "elite" by definition. And the Church can't aim its efforts at the elite. The responsibility therefore devolves on the faithful elite to understand and support the differing aims of the Church's projects. > >If we don't like it, we're certainly free to stage alternative > >productions. > > Not just free to, but obligated to. We're all supposed to be > anxiously engaged in, for example, community and public service. > I think that for active LDS people to be engaged politically is > compatible with the Gospel. But that may mean that we are > engaged politically in opposing camps and causes. This doesn't > trouble me. By the same token, we LDS artists have an obligation > to express ourselves artistically, and (I'm going to state this > strongly), an obligation to base our work in differing, perhaps > even competing aesthetic principles. We do not all believe in > the same aesthetic. Nor should we. Huzzah! Let me take it a step further and say that I think we have an obligation to challenge the cultural biases of Mormondom. We need to be staging productions that shine a strong light on and hold up a clear mirror to our society. It can only make us stronger. Now if would only put butts in the seats.... -- Scott Tarbet - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Scott Tarbet" Subject: RE: [AML] _Savior of the World_ (Drama) Date: 06 Dec 2000 10:33:02 -0700 Such a wealth of things to respond to! > -----Original Message----- > From: J. Scott Bronson > Back to my lamentation ... many people coming to see "Savior of the > World" will think it's great art. That's fine. My daughter loved it. I > will not deride their judgement. What I think is unfortunate is that > many people will also believe that great art is created by committee with > apostles making everything "appropriate" in the end. I'm really tempted to enter into the "what is art" discussion here, a topic we all doubtless pummeled to death as undergrads. So I'll content myself with saying that there are many different levels of art (starting at the "refrigerator" and "cave" levels ;-)) -- all of it art. I think it's a dangerous trap to fall into that only efforts that tingle the sensibilities of the artistic elite can be considered art. So can a production from a committee be art? Yes. Can it be "great"? Difficult in the extreme, but again, yes. Is SOTW great ? It probably *is* great art in the minds of some audience members. And I don't think that's unfortunate at all. As an LDS artist I'm just happy that the Church is validating my art form, if not turning out stellar examples of it. > Again, I am not > saying that the church did anything wrong, or underhanded or anything > like that. A little unorganized maybe -- several people were cut from > the show at the last minute and some of them had their feelings hurt. Ouch ouch ouch! That would have been devastating. I feel very badly for those who were cut after all that effort, for David and Eric and whomever else the duty of hatchet man fell to, and if it was compounded by being handled badly that was even more unfortunate. > What I'm trying > to reiterate here is that the "institutional bias in the Church > against arts and artists" that you mentioned will be -- I fear -- fueled > by this play, rather than doused. I find that unfortunate. It saddens > me ... for myself, yes, and for every artist trying to gain favor in the > eyes of their own community. I'm curious why you feel that the bias may be fueled? > And the questions arise that I must seriously consider now: Is > exuberance irreverent? Is the passion in my work unsuitable in the eyes > of God? Is the tone of my crafted expression unworthy of divine praise? I think the more appropriate question might be, "Are my exuberance and passion appropriate in a Church-sponsored production?" When my exuberance and passion are called into question I like to remember King David dancing naked in the streets before the Lord in his exuberance, and what trouble it got him into with the Correlation Committee ;-). Bottom line, though, was that divine praise is divine praise, and the story is more about the stick up the back of society than David's love of the Lord. I have come to understand and accept the Church's "lowest common denominator" standards, not just in art, but in all its teaching materials. After all, the Lord himself set the standard when he said, "adapted to the capacity of the weak and the weakest of all saints, who are or can be called saints." Now don't get me wrong -- I'm not preaching a gospel of mediocrity. I'm just saying that the Church's official efforts have to be geared to that standard. Those of us with higher aspirations have a duty to seek out other venues for our praise. BTW, I'm not without hope that the theater at the Conference Center will be used for more exuberant offerings, just not as official Church presentations. -- Scott Tarbet - 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] Anti-Intellectualism Date: 06 Dec 2000 11:43:10 -0800 Back at the beginning of this thread, on Mon, 20 Nov 2000 17:43:35 Jacob Proffitt wrote: > But I don't think that the solution to the problem is to develop > better understanding of intellectuals or of anti-intellectuals. > I think that the root of the problem is the line being drawn > in the first place. This is a fine point. I am uncomfortable with distinctions such as intellectual/anti-intellectual, liberal/conservative. They don't often make sense to me, though I'm not sure how to avoid them, except for refusing to use them as labels for people rather than labels for certain kinds of mental actions. Jacob continues: > Intellectuals fight the hardest battles in the church. Intellectuals have > a tougher fight with pride than most people give them credit for. > Intellectuals have to fight to not try to run people's lives for them. > They have to fight to demur to policies that don't make intellectual > sense based on currently accepted scientific/social knowledge. > They have to fight to express themselves adequately to those around > them without alienating them. I often get a sense when we discuss intellectuals on the list that people use 'intellectual' as a synonym for 'liberal,' votever dot meinz. I have a hard time making sense of that equation. What would you call someone who holds a Yale Ph.D. in AmLit, is a Mark Twain scholar, served as a university president, has a polished literary style, cares passionately about ideas and their consequences and writes books and essays in his spare time if not intellectual? Is he politically liberal? I don't know, and the next time I see him I probably won't ask. (The last time I saw him was at Gene Dalton's funeral in my parents' ward (he and Pat attended there while at BYU), where my father spoke. Afterwards he said to his freshman English teacher, "Marden, I want you to speak at _my_ funeral," and my father missed the opportunity to say, "Only if you'll speak at mine, Jeff." One of those replies you don't think of till later. (I'm afraid that second possibility is more likely than the first and I'm not happy about it. Donna keeps telling how she's seen my father go down hill the last couple of years, and my mother says the dr. says maybe a couple of years. Feels like a personal defeat for me. His uncles and great uncles lived into their 90s and 100s and noone in his generation has made it past the mid 80s. Reminds me a bit of the line in Bela Petsco's "Salem" where Agyar says, "Sometimes I get so angry at Salem [for dying in childbirth].")) Or, what would you call a man who cares passionately about ideas and their consequences, their effects on the family and on civil life, had a career in public communications before moving on to another career that involves a lot of writing and public speaking, reads a lot writes books and essays in his spare time, has a polished literary style and a fine sense of humor with great comic timing, and invites Joe Lieberman to write a blurb for his book. Surely, anyone who uses the intellect in all those ways is an intellectual. Some people would also insist such a person is a liberal. Indeed, that's what the picketers at October General Conference were saying (in the spirit of D&C 123 I collect anti-Mormon pamphlets, "the whole concatenation of diabolical rascality" (love that phrase--anyone who can use words like that must surely care about the intellect and its powers and abilities): "Gordon B. Hinckley is Helping Al Gore and Joseph Lieberman Get Elected . . ." (They should have taken their message to TV, maybe Utah would have voted Democrat--love that line in Dean Hughes' _Rumors of War_, "This is a Democratic state. A vote for a Republican is a wasted vote.") It is more useful to talk about how intellectuals function in public life than to associate them with either the liberal or conservative side of public life, or the left or right arm of the Body of Christ. A look at how intellect functions in people's lives suggests that many people we might not consider intellectuals are, and that the intellect is exceedingly important in knowing the mind of God. It is possible, of course, to define _intellectual_ as a term which has no reference to intellect, learning, love of ideas and concern for their consequences, and give it a wholly negative connotation, but that definition has consequences most LDS would not like. Perhaps the patron saint of anti-intellectual philosophers (not an oxymoron by his definition) is Eric Hoffer, the longshoreman philosopher who describes an intellectual as someone who wants to lead other people, tell them how to live, influence their thinking, control their lives. In one passage (in _The True Believer_, I think, which I've only read a small part of so far) he says that intellectuals from Moses to Lenin have always felt that the current generation is not good enough to enter the promised land and will have to die out before we can have a true utopia. I suppose most LDS would be pretty uncomfortable with Hoffer's including Moses and Lenin in the same three words, especially if they stop to think that Hoffer would also group our modern prophets and apostles with Moses and Lenin as people who spend their lives telling other people how to live, and who are therefore arrogant and dangerous. And from what I gather reading _Working and Thinking on the Waterfront_ Hoffer would consider himself conservative. I mention this to emphasize what I've said before, that it doesn't make a lot of sense to me to equate conservative with Mormon and liberal with 666 (which the White Stone Foundation, who produced the handout quoted above, airbrushed into the forehead of Gordon B. Hinckley in one part of their "whole concatenation of diabolical rascality" (Gotta love a man who can use words like that--hey, wasn't there an intellectual in the Church who said he felt like shouting Hallelujah every time he thought how fortunate he was to have known that man?) Not that I think there's no value in Hoffer's bracing definition, or that his analysis of intellectuals doesn't give us some tools to use in thinking about the world and how we should live. If I can scare up some time I'll post on that later. BTW, the thread on Stupid People reminds me of a rap group in SLC. Part of their act is to play stupid. Another part is to keep time by banging chains on a table. They call themselves the Moron Table Nicker Choir. Harlow Soderborg Clark So few people appreciate the ineffectual qualities of a lady. --Mrs. Malaprop (in Richard Brinsley Sheridan's _The Rivals_) Renounce war and proclaim peace. --Joseph Smith (August 6) We train a man in the art of war and call him a patriot. --Spencer W. Kimball, "The False Gods We Worship," _Ensign_, June 1976 ________________________________________________________________ GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO! Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less! Join Juno today! 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: "Debra L. Brown" Subject: Re: [AML] DUTCHER, _God's Army_--PG Rating Date: 06 Dec 2000 14:51:12 -0500 > Debra asked: > > "His one question was why [_God's Army_] was rated > PG?" > > It was language, pure and simple. My ears are still > ringing from the "flips", "fetches," and "Oh My > Hecks." OH! Is that why my Molly Mormon virgin ears were still ringing after the final credits rolled? He left out "for fun" and "dumber than a box of hair" though. Those are my two personal favorites from living in Ut. > When I saw the movie here in Georgia (it took forever > to get here) I thought I was in Sacrament Meeting. > Little kids where rustling about. People audibly said > "amen" periodically. Somebody in front of me snuck in > a Tuperware stuffed full of Cheerios. And then a guy > next to me fell asleep. No one remembered to bring > tissues. To top it all off, one "sister" allowed her 2 > year old to run around the theater screaming, up and > down the aisles, till someone got up and hailed an > usher. (What ever happened to ushers in the church > anyway? Anybody remember the "Usher" pins?) LOL You are tooooo funny! > For me, _God's Army_ was wonderful, in spite of the > weird feeling I had wandered into a "Rocky Mountain > Picture Show." I was thoroughly disappointed that the mourners didn't not break into _The Spirit of God_ as they were carrying off the casket. That would have been the crowning moment of the whole film. Well, that, and the last toilet picture taking scene. Debbie - 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] _Savior of the World_ (Drama) Date: 06 Dec 2000 13:05:47 -0700 On Wed, 6 Dec 2000 14:27:35 +1100 , Covell, Jason wrote: >I have a wonderful little book at home called _Marxist Aesthetics_. = You'd >think so just from the title, right? [Hey, I love the density of = "serious" >marxist writing (that's a little micro-aesthetic in itself, but not in = fact >what the book's about), although this book is relatively straightforward= in >tone. Translated from a French original, I think.] > >Anyway, one thing I've been meaning to do is to quote slabs of it to = some of >the most conservative Church members I know, only substituting "gospel" = for >"marxism", "missionary work" for "promoting class struggle" etc etc. I = can >almost guarantee that the reaction would be nods, approving noises. Speaking as one of the most conservative Church members *I* know, I = venture to say that I think you might be surprised if you actually tried it. Conservatives in the church get a bum rap from our artists sometimes. = Too often, 'conservative' is equated to 'unthinking cultural drone'. Such comparison does a disservice to faithful members honestly striving to = learn and grow. Just because I don't agree with the currently popular meme = from artistic circles doesn't mean that I disagree because I misunderstand the meme, or because I don't know enough about it, or because I'm dead set on disagreeing with 'those people' (any class of 'those' people). I just disagree with it. My recent statements about faith in literature, for example, don't stem from an inability to understand complex themes, = types, or theory. They don't stem from an unreasoning desire for closure or = Sunday School answers made real. I just don't like certain kinds of stories and= no amount of reeducation will alter that. Specific to your example above, I think you would have to translate too = many terms that are important, even essential, to Marxism to get the agreement you want. It's a nice idea to compare the institutional attitudes about art, but I doubt you can make as straightforward a translation as you suggest. Personally, I think that Eric Samuelsen pegged it pretty well = in his original post. He recognized the similarities and I think he did a great job describing the reasons behind those similarities without having= to attribute the cause to conservatism. Additionally, I think that we run a very real risk when we try to break = each other up into camps. It puts a divide between us that is artificial and = not very useful. A lot of scripture is dedicated to breaking down exactly = this kind of superficial division. Painting someone into a group and then showing them how similar they are to a different, hated group isn't going= to have the desired effect of showing how groups are bad... 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] DUTCHER, _God's Army_--PG Rating Date: 06 Dec 2000 13:30:04 -0700 On Tue, 5 Dec 2000 19:17:36 -0800 (PST), Ed Snow wrote: >For me, _God's Army_ was wonderful, in spite of the >weird feeling I had wandered into a "Rocky Mountain >Picture Show."=20 Oh my! If that didn't elicit the biggest laugh of my day... Thanks Ed! Jacob Proffitt - 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] Orgazmo (was: DUTCHER, _God's Army_) Date: 06 Dec 2000 15:47:55 -0500 Like D.M.Martindale, I too waited for Orgazmo to appear on cable before seeing it. I found it boring and sleep-inducing (re: stupor of thought). But the portrayal of Young's stay-at-home and ever-faithful fiancee made me laugh. She's a wonderfully satired Molly Mormon. Tony Markham - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Covell, Jason" Subject: RE: [AML] _Savior of the World_ (Drama) Date: 07 Dec 2000 09:49:14 +1100 > On Wed, 6 Dec 2000 14:27:35 +1100 , Covell, Jason wrote: > > >I have a wonderful little book at home called _Marxist Aesthetics_... > >Anyway, one thing I've been meaning to do is to quote slabs of it to some of > >the most conservative Church members I know, only substituting "gospel" for > >"marxism", "missionary work" for "promoting class struggle" etc etc. I can > >almost guarantee that the reaction would be nods, approving noises. > > Speaking as one of the most conservative Church members *I* > know, I venture > to say that I think you might be surprised if you actually tried it. > Conservatives in the church get a bum rap from our artists > sometimes. Too > often, 'conservative' is equated to 'unthinking cultural drone'. Such > comparison does a disservice to faithful members honestly > striving to learn > and grow. I just realised the cultural differences at work here. I'm from Australia, where simply being Mormon is at once to be considered conservative, if not ultra-conservative. And personally, I don't feel any need to fight that perception - hey, my family already thinks I'm a lost cause. I grew up in an artistic/intellectual home which was also outspokenly atheistic. My only memory of my eighth birthday is not my baptism (that took another 19 years), but getting Mao's _Little Red Book_ from my sister! I have a very good friend in the Church who is probably one of the most conservative members I know on matters of faith, doctrine and morality. He's certainly one of the most valiant and spiritual people I know, whose greatest weakness is his barely-concealed irritation at those members who pretend to be conservative but pay only lip service to fulfilling their callings. He's also a marxist. Anyway, my point is not to talk about marxism vs the gospel (or in support of it). I hadn't thought that my comments would be taken as an attack on "conservatives" in the sense that you mean - indeed, that word in the Utah context doesn't mean a lot to me in terms of the members I know, and it hadn't occurred that my comments would be taken that way. I only wanted to discuss an interesting little side-issue. > Specific to your example above, I think you would have to > translate too many > terms that are important, even essential, to Marxism to get > the agreement > you want. It's a nice idea to compare the institutional > attitudes about > art, but I doubt you can make as straightforward a translation as you > suggest. Personally, I think that Eric Samuelsen pegged it > pretty well in > his original post. He recognized the similarities and I > think he did a > great job describing the reasons behind those similarities > without having to > attribute the cause to conservatism. > Although I was making point rather glibly (and perhaps a little mischievously as well), my reaction to the particular book I mentioned ran much deeper. I kept reading and expecting to find the point of divergence, and while there may have been a few small dissonances (we are talking about a materialist philosophy here), I really thought much of the book was uncannily familiar. And not just from reading Mao as an impressionable eight-year-old. To do it justice, I'll have to go back and do a bit of a potted summary for the list. Yep, I'll do that. > Additionally, I think that we run a very real risk when we > try to break each > other up into camps. It puts a divide between us that is > artificial and not > very useful. A lot of scripture is dedicated to breaking > down exactly this > kind of superficial division. Painting someone into a group and then > showing them how similar they are to a different, hated group > isn't going to > have the desired effect of showing how groups are bad... > > Jacob Proffitt > Jason Covell - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Scott Tarbet" Subject: Re: [AML] _Savior of the World_ (Drama) Date: 06 Dec 2000 15:05:33 -0700 > At first Scott says that he has no problem with _directors_ telling him, > the actor, what tool to use, or that he doesn't feel bad as a _director_ > telling actors what tool to use. Then he goes on to say that the Church > Brethren should have the same right as _producers_ to do the same thing. > > But a producer is not a director. The director is a professional, > therefore presumably knows what he's doing. The producer is an artistic > professional only by chance--many of them aren't. The only requirement > to become a producer is to be able to fork over the money. Sure, the > producer may have an artistic vision and want it to be realized. But > that doesn't mean he has a clue how to accomplish that realization. > Sure, he as the paying boss can insist that things be done a certain > way. But that doesn't mean he's wise to do so. IMO an artist is anyone who sets out to make art. That makes producers like the Brethren artists, even if only tangentially, and even if they wouldn't like the label much. What the Brethren did in this case was to get artists together to put together a premiere event for the new venue, and anybody who went anywhere near that project without realizing that their hand would be heavy wasn't thinking it through. > I haven't seen the play, so I have no idea what my critique of it would > be. But if I accept the critiques that have been given and speak > hypothetically, I would have to say that the Brethren's vision was _not_ > realized, even though they may think it was, because they who don't > understand the tools of theater dictated how things should be done. They > may get sold-out performances, teary-eyed audiences, and obligatory Utah > standing ovations, but are they converting anyone--changing people's > lives? Or are they merely preaching to the choir? Is that the result > they wanted? I doubt it. I have often waged a Sysiphian battle with my own attitude about the Brethren (particularly and repeatedly Elder Packer) and their public and private stances regarding art, going clear back to my BYU days in the 70's. It has often been difficult for me to reconcile my own desire to support the Brethren fully and my desire to see good art done for all the right reasons, irrespective of its correlatability. In the case of SOTW I am keeping firmly in mind that their clear goal is "perfecting the Saints", and that that is a result very much to be striven for. I don't know that it's their only criteria, but they showed by the way they set the whole thing up and followed through to the end that that was their primary one. Given that that's where they're coming from, and my ongoing struggle to support them fully as as prophets, seers, and revelators, with responsibility for the perfection of the Saints, I can't see my way clear to seriously question their judgement in how they discharge that responsibility. I remind myself that those who understand the tools shouldn't necessarily dictate the architecture. -- Scott Tarbet - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Scott Tarbet" Subject: RE: [AML] _Savior of the World_ (Drama) Date: 06 Dec 2000 15:05:40 -0700 > -----Original Message----- > From: D. Michael Martindale > I would assume when the Brethren make recommendations on how to change a > play to make it more spiritually inviting, they are doing so based on > what _they_ think is inspiring. But what inspires an apostle of Christ > is bound to be radically different from what inspires a person in need > of conversion. Therefore, when the Brethren attempt to tweak a work of > art to make it more inspiring, I fear they may actually be making it > unrelatable to those most in need of inspiration. I wouldn't make that assumption. I may be just one of those "the glass is half full" kind of guys, but my assumption would be that they are a tad wiser than that, and realize that they are making choices for a lower denominator than their own experience. Otherwise wouldn't you think that a group of relatively sophisticated, experienced, intelligent men would make some different choices? -- Scott Tarbet - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: hchester Subject: Re: [AML] Orgazmo Date: 07 Dec 2000 15:45:22 +1000 Could someone please fill me in on this movie. It doesn't sound like a kosher LDS production, but from this post appears related to LDS lifestyle in some way. Helena [Chester] Tony Markham wrote: > Like D.M.Martindale, I too waited for Orgazmo to appear on cable before seeing > it. I found it boring and sleep-inducing (re: stupor of thought). But the > portrayal of Young's stay-at-home and ever-faithful fiancee made me laugh. She's > a wonderfully satired Molly Mormon. > > Tony Markham > > - > 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] Orgazmo Date: 06 Dec 2000 22:48:06 -0800 At 03:47 PM 12/6/2000 -0500, you wrote: >Like D.M.Martindale, I too waited for Orgazmo to appear on cable before seeing >it. I found it boring and sleep-inducing (re: stupor of thought). But the >portrayal of Young's stay-at-home and ever-faithful fiancee made me >laugh. She's >a wonderfully satired Molly Mormon. > >Tony Markham The scene I found funniest was when the protagonist went to pray over whether he should do the movie. He's praying before a statue (what's THAT all about?), asks for a sign, the whole house shakes, and he says something like, "Any sign will do..." Laughed out loud! But on balance, I don't much like these kinds of films. They poke fun at what some consider holy things, and this, to me, can go over the line. --------------- 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: Steve Subject: Re: [AML] _Savior of the World_ (Drama) Date: 07 Dec 2000 08:34:47 -0700 on 12/6/00 8:11 AM, Scott Tarbet at starbet@timp.net wrote: > Don't you agree it's > time for a new term for this kind of presentation? And aren't you just the > guy to get the ball rolling? If such a term were in use the Church wouldn't > have had to apply the term "musical" to SOTW with the concomitant confusion > and dissatisfaction by those of us who were expecting a real musical. Everything I hear about SOTW (and I've tried to get tickets, but it was sold out) says that it actually is a musical. So why not just stick with that and let each viewer judge it accordingly by whatever standards they walk in with? Steve -- skperry@mac.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: John Bennion (by way of Jonathan Langford ) Subject: [AML] John Bennion, Alan Mitchell Readiong Date: 07 Dec 2000 09:49:02 -0600 I have a cold and can hardly focus. Could you announce the following (unless it has already been done and I missed it?) This is brief enough it could be given as a reminder. Reading by John Bennion and Alan Mitchel _Falling Toward Heaven_ and _Angel of the Danube_ 7:00 Friday, December 8 Read Leaf Bookstore 164 South Main Springville, Utah ________________ Professor John Bennion 3117 JKHB English Department Brigham Young University Provo, UT 84602-6280 Tel: (801) 378-3419 Fax: (801) 378-4705 - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "veda hale" Subject: [AML] Easter Service in Zion's Park Date: 06 Dec 2000 22:23:31 -0700 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_000A_01C05FD3.29E22AC0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable >From some research I'm doing..... 1935 and 36 the Zion Park service encouraged an Easter Service in the = park. Springtime in Zion is impressive any way you take it. It seems = like walking into the ambience of Easter where all nature is celebrating = renewal even while most of the surrounding area is still sleepy with = winter. The first two services were very successful and inspirational. Therefore, in 1937 the young Grant Redford instructor of Speech and = English in the then Branch Agricultural college in Cedar sought to do = more with the natural reverence and the surge in the souls of the people = of Southern Utah to celebrate Easter. Before graduating from Utah State = Agricultural college, he had toured the United States for two years with = the European Passion players of Freiburg, Germany. He wrote a pageant. = The C.C.C. boys built an amphitheater in the shadows of the great Alter = of Sacrifice in Zion canyon. The pageant was written to use the natural = setting reminiscent of the hills of Palestine. Scenes were arranged on = natural outcroppings to look natural and the acoustics were such that = artificial amplification wasn't much needed. The audience, minus little = children who wouldn't be able to participate in reverence, was asked to = be there early to find places on the opposite hill. As they took their = places, they listened to an hour of sacred music. D.C. Dix of the Salt = Lake Tribune April 10. 1938 wrote about that years pageant: "As resonant strains of the chorus reverberate from canyon wall to = canyon wall on Easter day at the sunset hour, in humble glorification of = the world's Savior, the last glimmer of sunlight will have faded from = heaven-stretched peaks of Zion national park. High on a ledge, above = the thousands who watch in silent adoration, a flood of lights will = suddenly reveal the spotless white robes of the resurrected Christus. = Powerful notes from the "Hallelujah chorus" from Handel's Messiah, echo = through bright gorges of the canyon to signalize the finale of Zion = park's solemnization of the Easter drama." Some 500 people from the surrounding area, Mormon and nonMormon = participated in the orchestra and chores and in other ways, giving of = their time enthusiastically. 5,000 people attended in 1937 and 10,000 = in 1938. By 1940 it had achieved national attention and was helping Southern = Utah find its place "under the sun". March 11, 1941 from the school paper, The Bucian: "The Zion Easter Pageant, which has achieved national fame during = the last several years, has been discontinued at the request of the = First Presidency of the Latter-Day Saints Church. This request was made to the pageant committee in a letter signed by = J. Reuben Clark and David O. McKay, first and second councilors of te = Church. Reasons given for this move are as follows: The mass exodus from = southern Utah communities breaks the Sabbath and detracts from church = services in those communities, impresonation of the Savior in the = pageant, "with spectators and perhaps participants of various faiths and = degrees of faith would almost inevitably produce an impersonation that = could not receive church approval." The letter concluded, "Finally, the discussion of the Brethren = revealed a feeling that the church must carefully watch giving its = approval of activities which are not strictly church activities . . . = .and there is more and more tendency ...as we more and more mingle with = nonmembers of the church, to take on the activities of nonmembers, = particularly where they have religious character and these accretions = have a tendency to change the simplicity of our ordinances and of our = faith." Because Church sanction was not given to the continuation of the = Pageant it was felt by the committee that it would be unwise to continue = the annual presentation." Well, so it was.... I grew up in Southern Utah. Our tradition was = to picnic on Easter and maybe throw rotten eggs at cars. But we never = got "contaminated" by anyone trying to reach our spirits with "art". Oh = well, I guess the Lord was saving Cedar City for the Shakespeare = festival. What do I know. By the way, does anyone know what happened to Grant Redford? He = left Utah after the pageant was discontinued and taught creative writing = at University of Washington and wrote a number of plays, but that's = about all I know. I need to find out. Veda Hale ------=_NextPart_000_000A_01C05FD3.29E22AC0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
From some research I'm = doing.....
 
1935 and 36 the Zion Park service = encouraged an=20 Easter Service in the park.  Springtime in Zion is impressive any = way you=20 take it.  It seems like walking into the ambience of Easter where = all=20 nature is celebrating renewal even while most of the surrounding area is = still=20 sleepy with winter.  The first two services were very successful = and=20 inspirational.
Therefore, in 1937 the young Grant = Redford=20 instructor of Speech and English in the then Branch Agricultural college = in=20 Cedar sought to do more with the natural reverence and the surge in the = souls of=20 the people of Southern Utah to celebrate Easter.  Before graduating = from=20 Utah State Agricultural college, he had toured the United States for two = years=20 with the European Passion players of Freiburg, Germany.  He wrote = a =20 pageant.  The C.C.C. boys built an amphitheater in the shadows of = the great=20 Alter of Sacrifice in Zion canyon.  The pageant was written to use = the=20 natural setting reminiscent of the hills of Palestine.  Scenes were = arranged on natural outcroppings to look natural and the acoustics were = such=20 that artificial amplification wasn't much needed.  The audience, = minus=20 little children who wouldn't be able to participate in reverence, was = asked to=20 be there early to find places on the opposite hill.  As they took = their=20 places, they listened to an hour of sacred music.  D.C. Dix of the = Salt=20 Lake Tribune April 10. 1938 wrote about that years pageant:
"As resonant strains of the chorus = reverberate from=20 canyon wall to canyon wall on Easter day at the sunset hour, in humble=20 glorification of the world's Savior, the last glimmer of sunlight will = have=20 faded from heaven-stretched peaks of Zion national park.  High on a = ledge,=20 above the thousands who watch in silent adoration, a flood of lights = will=20 suddenly reveal the spotless white robes of the resurrected = Christus. =20 Powerful notes from the "Hallelujah chorus" from Handel's Messiah, echo = through=20 bright gorges of the canyon to signalize the finale of Zion park's = solemnization=20 of the Easter drama."
    Some 500 people from = the=20 surrounding area, Mormon and nonMormon participated in the orchestra = and chores=20 and in other ways, giving of their time enthusiastically.  5,000 = people=20 attended in 1937 and 10,000 in 1938.
    By 1940 it had = achieved national=20 attention and was helping Southern Utah find its place "under the=20 sun".
  March 11, 1941 from the school = paper, The=20 Bucian:
    "The Zion Easter = Pageant, which=20 has achieved national fame during the last several years, has been = discontinued=20 at the request of the First Presidency of the Latter-Day Saints=20 Church.
    This request was = made to the=20 pageant committee in a letter signed by J. Reuben Clark and David O. = McKay,=20 first and second councilors of te Church.
    Reasons given for = this move are=20 as follows:  The mass exodus from southern Utah communities breaks = the=20 Sabbath and detracts from church services in those communities, = impresonation of=20 the Savior in the pageant, "with spectators and perhaps participants of = various=20 faiths and degrees of faith would almost inevitably produce an = impersonation=20 that could not receive church approval."
    The letter = concluded, "Finally,=20 the discussion of the Brethren revealed a feeling that the church must = carefully=20 watch giving its approval of activities which are not strictly church = activities=20 . . . .and there is more and more tendency ...as we more and more mingle = with=20 nonmembers of the church, to take on the activities of nonmembers, = particularly=20 where they have religious character and these accretions have a tendency = to=20 change the simplicity of our ordinances and of our faith."
    Because Church = sanction was not=20 given to the continuation of the Pageant it was felt by the committee = that it=20 would be unwise to continue the annual presentation."
 
    Well, so it = was....  I grew=20 up in Southern Utah.  Our tradition was to picnic on Easter and = maybe throw=20 rotten eggs at cars.  But we never got "contaminated" by anyone = trying to=20 reach our spirits with "art".  Oh well, I guess the Lord was saving = Cedar=20 City for the Shakespeare festival.  What do I know.
    By the way, does = anyone know=20 what happened to Grant Redford?  He left Utah after the pageant was = discontinued and taught creative writing at University of Washington and = wrote a=20 number of plays, but that's about all I know.  I need to find=20 out.
 
Veda Hale
 
 
 
------=_NextPart_000_000A_01C05FD3.29E22AC0-- - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Christopher Bigelow" Subject: [AML] National Inroads for Mormon Lit Date: 07 Dec 2000 11:05:38 -0700 My personal biggest interest in Mormon literature is its prospects for greater national breakthrough. Just on Saturday I mailed out a query letter on my missionary memoir to about 16 agents and 20 editors, and to my surprise I've already had two calls and an e-mail (it hasn't even been a week, and I've never had phone calls before on queries). While I have no idea if my ms. will make the grade, I thought I'd tell you about some responses so far and keep you posted. If we are to break out nationally more, we should compare notes and strategies. Does anyone know Elizabeth Wales at LEVANT & WALES, LITERARY AGENCY, INC.? She used to be an editor at Viking Penguin. She called and asked for the first few chapters of the manuscript and said something like, "We have been expecting some good writing to come out of Mormonism, because it has such extreme dogma." What do you think she meant? Kate Niedzwiecki, an editor at the Villard imprint of Random House, e-mailed: "I received your query letter today, and of the 20 query letters I've read this week, this one caught my attention. I'd be happy to take a look at the full manuscript, if you could send it to me as a Word attachment at your convenience." I queried her because I saw her name in Daily Variety as an editor who is working with "personal narratives of unconventional lives." Mark Ryan at the NEW BRAND AGENCY GROUP called to ask for the whole ms. He said the topic wouldn't have interested him except for the way the query letter was stated with many different levels and what he called good writing (although I can see additional changes I would make). We had an interesting chat about how publishers didn't used to take many autobiographies except for celebrities but now are taking many highly interesting memoirs from yahoos. Who do we have to thank for that, Frank McCourt? So anyway, I'm going to mail these mss. out on Monday, and I'll keep you posted on interesting responses (I don't mind being open even if the news is bad--my wife and I always tell everyone as soon as the pregnancy test is positive, even though things could fail to pan out that early--and yes, the pregnancy test was positive this last weekend). What's most interesting to me and perhaps to you is any evidence of national openness to and interest in Mormon topics. Ruth Starkman told us of some interesting comments she got--anyone else trying to break down national bulwarks with Mormon-themed works? Following is my query letter, which I don't mind if you pick apart and which I could tell you more about my strategy on, if you're interested (for instance, I believe national publishers need to almost be tricked --or at least distracted--into accepting material that has any Mormon faith embedded in it; the decoys in my query letter will be quite evident). I can anticipate some Mormon uncomfortableness with my query and might like to try to defend my approach. Query letters are extremely important, so it might be good to hash out some approaches for Mormon work and find out what you've already learned and what you think, whether you're an active writer or not. Most everyone has seen the boys in dark suits pedaling their bikes and knocking on doors--but what's it really like to be a Mormon missionary? As Mormon novelist John Bennion wrote, "God makes men peak in sexual energy in their late teens and early twenties and calls them to celibate missions. They either translate libido into religious fervor or go crazy." I'm writing to offer you a look at A Southern Cross to Bear: Confessions of a Mormon Missionary, my recently completed memoir made up of three parts craziness to one part fervor. After devoting my adolescence to Dungeons & Dragons and Salt Lake City's underground punk scene, I was scared into a two-year spiritual exile to Melbourne, Australia, by an encounter--perhaps real, perhaps imagined--with dark spiritual forces. My Down Under door-knocking ordeal offered experiences as varied as skirmishing in the street with Jehovah's Witnesses, overhearing a supposed convert extinguish a cigarette in the chapel toilet, being surrounded by wild, hungry kangaroos in the Australian bush, and relieving boredom with illicit movies and Stephen King novels. My struggle to relate to the world as a Mormon missionary from 1986-88 was heightened by all-too-human coworkers, Aussies who responded to the Mormon gospel in unpredictable ways, impossibly strict mission rules and bureaucratic inflexibility, and my own personality and character flaws. As I negotiated intense psychological, social, and cultural conflicts during this rite of passage, I was further troubled by glimpses of my fiancee's spiritual struggles back home. During my final weeks in Melbourne, her revelations of sexual promiscuity spun me into a crisis. Wasn't she supposed to be my reward for serving a mission? Unfolding in real time through my actual journal entries and letters--which I've condensed, edited, and rewritten considerably--my 140,000-word memoir details how a Mormon mission at times resembles an Amway distributorship, the military, and Lord of the Flies. More a chronicle of foibles than of faith--including the foibles of faith--my revealing, intimate account yields insights not only into the modern Mormon mindset and experience but also into what it means to be human in the closing years of the twentieth century. With the Olympics coming to Salt Lake City in 2002, public curiosity about the Mormon culture will only increase (for an example of recent media interest in Mormon missionaries, see www.salon.com/people/feature/2000/11/20/mormons/index.html). At your request, I will immediately send you part or all of A Southern Cross to Bear: Confessions of a Mormon Missionary. Please be advised that this is a simultaneous submission to a handful of other agents and editors. Chris Bigelow - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jonathan Langford Subject: [AML] _Savior of the World_ (Moderator Note) Date: 07 Dec 2000 16:03:03 -0600 Folks, We're probably largely past this point in the discussion by now, but I'd like to request that we try to keep to a certain side of a rather subtle line in our discussion of judgments and decisions by General Authorities. That is, while it's fine to talk about the difficulties raised by institutional constraints--including the decisions by General Authorities--and the (perhaps unfortunate) consequences for art, it would be better if we stopped short of statements that could be viewed as criticisms of General Authorities acting within their callings. Examples of statements that (I think) are okay for our List: * "It's sure hard to make a good play when you have to adjust to outside requirements coming from General Authorities." * "It was a much better play before we had to make the revisions that the General Authorities required." * "I think the revisions made the play less likely to touch the hearts of non-members." * "I think the Church would be better served if it simply hired artists to do the job and then let them do it instead of micromanaging." But not: * "The General Authorities should not have done what they did." The first four statements make a judgment of the artistic results of policies, or whether a particular procedure seems wise within the artistic realm. The last example makes a judgmental statement about the General Authorities themselves, acting within their calling. A fine line, but a potentially important one. Obviously, other people would draw the line elsewhere, not here. For that matter, I haven't necessarily been drawing the line at this point myself--but after consideration, I think this is where I would prefer to draw it from this point on. So rather than deal with this on a case-by-case basis and leave people wondering what my rationale is for my decisions (if any), I thought it would be best simply to spell out my thinking for everyone concerned. Jonathan Langford AML-List Moderator (who is hoping to get back to being more unobtrusive one of these days...) - 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] Anti-Intellectualism Date: 07 Dec 2000 16:01:05 -0700 I haven't much to respond to in Harlow's brilliant post. But I would like = to comment on one aspect of his discussion. On the list, we haven't said much about the current Presidential controvers= y, nor do I propose to say much about it now. However, I have recently = read a Walter Williams column which corresponded, actually, to an email I = received from a friend. In both cases, the writers looked at the states = which voted for Bush and the states that voted for Gore, and attempted to = draw certain moral conclusions about the voters in each. In Williams' = column, for example, he said that voters for Bush tend to be from the = Bible belt, which suggests that they are God-fearing and patriotic, which = suggests in turn a certain moral bent. My friend's email pointed to a = higher degree of education in Gore-voting states, suggesting that smarter = people voted for Gore than Bush. And so we get to judge each other on a = grand national scale, judgment raised to levels of super-patriotism. Bush = voters are moral! (and Gore voters, by implication, less so.) Gore voters = are smart! (And Bush voters, by implication, dummies.) And so on. And perhaps we're doing the same thing on the Church culture level, = extolling, on the one hand, the presumed child-like faith (and implied = faithlessness in the other camp) of church conservative/laypersons, and = the presumed intellectual polish (and implied naive ignorance of the other = camp) of liberals/intellectuals. =20 We can't do this, folks. Someday soon, the courts, likely enough, will = decide who won the election, and the winner will be the President, = deserving and needing the support of the American people. And we're all = brothers and sisters together. Family squabbles are permitted, briefly. = Family quarrels must be mended. Eric Samuelsen - 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] Orgazmo Date: 07 Dec 2000 14:53:08 -0800 There's a howlingly funny (and incredibly poor taste) adult cartoon comedy here in the States called "South Park." Its creators put together this spoof of Mormon missionaries for a full-length film. The idea is that a missionary is enticed into starring in a series of porn movies. Their depiction of Mormon life is spoofed relentlessly. It is definitely not a "kosher" LDS production, and it's not particularly well done. But it DOES have its moments. I actually bought the tape, and found myself alternately amused/offended. At 03:45 PM 12/7/2000 +1000, you wrote: >Could someone please fill me in on this movie. It doesn't sound like a >kosher LDS >production, but from this post appears related to LDS lifestyle in some way. > >Helena [Chester] > - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Marie Knowlton" Subject: [AML] Note from Marilyn Brown Date: 07 Dec 2000 17:54:48 -0700
Greetings, everyone!
Marilyn Brown is having computer difficulties and hasn't been able to go online for a week. She says to tell you that she misses you all dreadfully and will be back as soon as she gets her computer fixed or gets a new one. She would like for someone in Salt Lake (perhaps Darlene?) to make reservations at Guadalahonky's if we are expecting a big group to show up. She will try to be there but may not be able to, due a prior commitment at the theatre.  (I'm going up there and look forward to meeting many of you!   Marie ).

Get more from the Web. FREE MSN Explorer download : http://explorer.msn.com

[MOD: I believe Chris Bigelow is taking care of this.] - 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] National Inroads for Mormon Lit Date: 07 Dec 2000 19:23:52 -0800

Congrats, Christopher! I just have a comment or two about Elizabeth Wales's response:

> Does anyone know Elizabeth Wales at LEVANT & WALES, LITERARY
>AGENCY, INC.? She used to be an editor at Viking Penguin. She called
>and asked for the first few chapters of the manuscript and said
>something like, "We have been expecting some good writing to come out
>of Mormonism, because it has such extreme dogma." What do you think
>she meant?

This kind of response, though I wish it didn't, puts me on the defensive a little. Not because of the assertion that Mormonism has "such extreme dogma," but because of the implication that Mormonism's dogma ought to be what produces "some good writing." In other words, this kind of response makes me wonder what Elizabeth is looking for. Is she hoping to find the juicy piece that "exposes" Mormonism for what it "really" is--an oppressive, repressive, cultish, extremist, sexist, homophobic, or [list a number of other "exposable" traits here] group that is supposedly is? (Admittedly, Mormonism can and does assume some or all of these traits at times, depending on how they're defined or perceived...)

What I mean is, it seems to me that though there are a lot of admirable memoirs out there, there are also a lot of 'em that boil down to someone whining about what a hard-done-by life they've had, and then making money off it in book sales. And Elizabeth's response feels, to me, like that's what she's looking for--someone to write about what a hard-done-by life the "extreme dogma" of Mormonism imposes on its members, so that money can be made (let's face it, the country would love to read about an "insiders" "exposure" of the horrors of Mormonism).

Of course, I'm not even remotely suggesting that this is what your book is about--and your cover letter seems to make that clear, and it's a good one, by the way. And I would certainly go ahead and see how far you can get with Elizabeth, by sending her ms pages, etc. But if it were me, I'd probably be a little wary of her expectations.

But then, I might be acting paranoid, or touchy. I could be reading too much into what she says... Again, though, congrats on the responses you've received, and good luck!

Jason


Get more from the Web. FREE MSN Explorer download : http://explorer.msn.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 Slover's "Joyful Noise" Plays Salt Lake City Also: Salt Lake Tribune Date: 07 Dec 2000 22:21:22 -0600 Tribune 1Dec00 A2 [From Mormon News] Slover's "Joyful Noise" Plays Salt Lake City Also SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH -- LDS playwright Tim Slover's award-winning play "Joyful Noise" is being presented in Salt Lake City this Christmas season. The play was reviewed last week in the Salt Lake Tribune, which said it "blends gentle humor with moments of pathos, and is underlaid with an interesting (and topical) debate about conflicts that arise between organized religion and artistic expression." Reviewer Baker adds that the show is a "practical product for regional theater" with a connection to the Holiday season that makes it appealing. As previously reported in Mormon News, the play is also being produced in Atlanta. While Baker says that the play shows "Tim Slover to be a clever and talented playwright," she is not without some criticism. Baker says that the changes experienced onstage by the characters need more justification, and finds the moral changes experienced by some characters in the play's final minutes "convenient" and says they "don't quite ring true." Baker also criticizes this production, complaining that the thin-sounding recording used for the chorus doesn't do justice to Handel's work. Nevertheless, Baker recommends the play, and suggests that it is well suited for regional theaters. She says the plays small cast and modest staging requirements make it easy to put on, and "Add to that the fact that one of the most enduringly popular pieces of classical music ever written is woven into this play . . . and it's apparent that Slover has come up with a marketable product." "Joyful Noise" continues at the University of Utah's Simmons Pioneer Memorial Theater through December 16th. It also continues in Atlanta's 14th Street Playhouse through December 24th. Source: Slover's Clever 'Joyful Noise' Rates a Hallelujah or Two Salt Lake Tribune 1Dec00 A2 http://www.sltrib.com:80/12012000/friday/49431.htm By Celia R. Baker: Salt Lake Tribune >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: Terry L Jeffress (by way of Jonathan Langford ) Subject: [AML] Folk Etymology (was: _Savior of the World_) Date: 07 Dec 2000 22:57:24 -0600 On Wed, Dec 06, 2000 at 08:11:20AM -0700, Scott Tarbet wrote: >This reminds me of Chesterton's wager that he could get a made-up word >introduced into the English lexicon and into wide use in a period of a few >months, as evidenced by it appearing in print in the Times of London from a >writer unacquainted with the wager. The word: "quiz". The folk etymology for "quiz" goes something like this: Supposedly a Dublin theater owner, James Daly, made a wager in 1791 that he could get a new word in circulation in 24-hours. He then hired street urchins to write the word "quiz" on the walls around the city and won the bet.* So far, no one has produced concrete evidence to validate the story, and the OED lists evidence of the word as early as 1782 and the alt.usage.english clams as early as 1775. Most dictionaries, including Merrimam-Webster and the American Heritage, list the etymology as "origin unknown." -- Terry L Jeffress AML Webmaster and AML-List Review Archivist * For references to the James Daly story, see your nearest search engine or the following: http://www.quinion.com/words/qa/qa-qui1.htm -- Michael Quinion's site is worth exploring for its vast collection of word-related information and trivia http://www.wilton.net/wordorq.htm#quiz http://www.landfield.com/faqs/alt-usage-english-faq/ -- warning LARGE file but lots of interesting tidbits - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Helena Chester Subject: Re: [AML] Orgazmo Date: 09 Dec 2000 05:00:23 +1100 Jeff Needle wrote: > There's a howlingly funny (and incredibly poor taste) adult cartoon comedy > here in the States called "South Park." Its creators put together this > spoof of Mormon missionaries for a full-length film. The idea is that a > missionary is enticed into starring in a series of porn movies. Their > depiction of Mormon life is spoofed relentlessly. Thanks for this information. We get "South Park" in Australia, but TV viewing (except for BYU-TV) is not something I make a lot of time for, and I've only watched one episode in my whole life. I found it really funny, but not the sort of thing I would routinely watch. Helena - 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] _Savior of the World_ (Drama) Date: 08 Dec 2000 00:09:07 -0600 Scott Tarbet wrote: > IMO an artist is anyone who sets out to make art. Does that make anyone who sets out to fix teeth a dentist? I know this takes us in a different direction, but this is a perspective that really causes some problems. Something does separate people who can play music from musicians and people who write from writers. I'm not 100% sure what that is but I have some ideas. As for my initial comment, I don't think it is apples/oranges in the least. -- 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] Mod. Note: Message Formats Date: 08 Dec 2000 09:55:47 -0600 Folks, Several messages have come through recently that are in HTML format. Some List members have difficulty reading these messages, which come through with a great deal of coding on some e-mail programs. I'd like to encourage everyone to send messages in simple text format. Please also avoid making use of special features such as "curly" quotes, bold, italics, etc., in the messages you send. All of these come through as peculiar characters, or get lost entirely, in noncompatible e-mail programs. Lamentably, the e-mail world is still rife with noncompatible programs. I'm not technically savvy enough to know exactly what it is that causes the problem in various cases, nor am I able, at this end, to change the format so that things go out as originally intended--so I can't give specific recommendations on what to do to avoid these problems. (Any of our more technically knowledgeable types should feel free to chime in here with specific suggestions.) All I know is that if it's not plain text, there are some folks who can't read it clearly. Thanks to everyone for your help on this. And please, if there are messages that come through that you can't read, let me know. 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: "Scott Tarbet" Subject: RE: [AML] Folk Etymology (was: _Savior of the World_) Date: 08 Dec 2000 07:09:01 -0700 Ack! I knew I should have checked my facts before I related that little chestnut! - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Eric D. Dixon" Subject: Re: [AML] Orgazmo Date: 08 Dec 2000 09:17:32 -0500 Jeff Needle wrote: >There's a howlingly funny (and incredibly poor taste) adult cartoon comedy >here in the States called "South Park." Its creators put together this >spoof of Mormon missionaries for a full-length film. There have also been some Mormon moments on South Park itself. In an episode where fireworks have been declared illegal in Colorado, the South Park town fireworks display consists of a giant (twelve stories tall, if I recall correctly) snake (the kind that spews a tail of ash when you light it on fire). This snake goes out of control, wreaking fiery havoc throughout the nation, including a scene in Utah where missionaries are baptizing someone in a river with the strains of "The Spirit of God" playing in the background. The snake burns them all to a crisp. In a more recent episode, after Saddam Hussein causes a lot of trouble for Satan in hell, he's finally sent to heaven as punishment (he enjoys hell too much), and the only other people in heaven are Mormons (although they say that God is a Buddhist). Their primary heavenly activities consist of putting on pageants that depict the evils of tobacco, alcohol and other social ills. But I'm with Jeff. South Park is frequently tasteless, but it's also howlingly funny -- in fact, it's the most consistently funny TV show I've ever seen (it even beats the Simpsons in my book, which would have been unthinkable a few years ago). Barry Fagin wrote a good piece for Reason magazine about deciding whether to let his kids watch this show: http://www.reason.com/0005/fe.bf.goin.html The verdict: a few selected episodes, with parental supervision and post-show discussion. He ends with this statement: "If this is a moral sewer, it's one I'm proud to swim in." Me too. Eric D. Dixon "The two-holed button concealed its apprehension." -- Edward Gorey - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Scott Tarbet" Subject: [AML] What Is Art? (was: _Savior of the World_ ) Date: 08 Dec 2000 10:01:04 -0700 I said: > > IMO an artist is anyone who sets out to make art. And Todd asked: > Does that make anyone who sets out to fix teeth a dentist? Overheard at the art supply store: "Ma'am, I've got to see your picture ID from the State Art Licensing Board before I can sell you that tube of cadmium yellow! You know it's a controlled substance!" ;-) Sure, there's good art and there's bad art, just as there are good artists and artists barely worthy of the name. But when a five year old feels the thrill of creation as she slaps paint around or raises her little voice in song or twirls across the living room, and wants to feel that thrill again, how is she not an artist? Art isn't in the training or the peer acceptance or the societal acceptance or even in the competency -- it's in the heart. -- Scott Tarbet - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Helena Chester Subject: Re: [AML] Orgazmo Date: 09 Dec 2000 17:20:41 +1100 Helena Chester wrote: > Jeff Needle wrote: > > > There's a howlingly funny (and incredibly poor taste) adult cartoon comedy > > here in the States called "South Park." Its creators put together this > > spoof of Mormon missionaries for a full-length film. The idea is that a > > missionary is enticed into starring in a series of porn movies. Their > > depiction of Mormon life is spoofed relentlessly. > > > I love comedies that do realistically humourous takes on religous groups, as long as they are not obsene, so you have wet my appetite for this one. I enquired at the local video store and they can get Orgasmo in from another store for me to rent. Now the only thing I have to consider Jeff, is, is this something Dr. Laura would watch? On BYU-TV yesterday, Ann Edwards Connors was giving a very entertaining talk at a women's conference and she contrasted (negative correlation) herself to Dr Laura. Your opinions about Dr. Laura seem to be shared by both male and female LDS people. Helena - 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] What Is Art? Date: 08 Dec 2000 15:43:31 -0600 Scott Tarbet: > Sure, there's good art and there's bad art, just as there are good artists > and artists barely worthy of the name. But at what point are they no longer worth the name? Is that in their heart as well or is it in their work or their dedication? I grant that there are bad artists and good ones, but I also believe that there are people who are not artists, just like there are people who are not dentists. I brush my teeth and floss and use mouthwash occasionally, but that does not make me a dentist. Likewise, someone might draw a picture here and there or write a poem or one-act or story or keep a journal, but that does not grant them the ability to rightfully call themselves artists. A five year-old slapping paint or singing is certainly expressing herself and it is, without a doubt a wonderful thing. She becomes an artist when she becomes consumed and defined by her desire to make, not when she simply wants to feel the sensation again. I think that point at which a person becomes an artist and not someone who simply makes art is when they find themselves working when they don't really feel like it. At this point it's no longer dabbling or playing or anything like that. The true artist, unlike the amateur (the lover of a thing) is someone who has dedicated a significant portion of their life to the pursuit of their art. It really has nothing to do with how good they are, though becoming better is a common side-effect of the dedication. > Art isn't in the training or the peer acceptance or the societal acceptance or even in the competency -- it's in > the heart. I'm not so sure this is true. If it were, I might then be able to say that I have the heart of a dentist so nevermind the fact that I did not go to dental school, that I am not a member of the ADA, that I never took the board exams, or that no other doctors will refer patients to me. Similarly, the crafts fairs that dot the United States are places where lots and lots of wonderful (and not so wonderful) things are displayed, but the juried ones have better stuff. Anyone who goes to those things with any regularity will tell you that. I guess I'm trying to say that Scott's definition of an artist opens things up so wide that it ceases to have any useful meaning as a distinction. If everyone can be an artist, then no one is, really. The fact that art is something a few people seek with any real depth or dedication gives it a particular distinction that is valuble. I believe that among the artisticly-inclined there are dabblers, hobbyists, die-hards, the dedicated, and the obsessed. Somewhere between the die-hard and the obsessed, the true artist lies. I am not willing to say that the artistic impluse doesn't exist in lots and lots of folks, young and old alike, but I would like to assert that there is an important difference between someone being called an "artist" and someone being called "artistic." -- Todd Robert Petersen - 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] Orson Scott CARD, _Lost Boys_ (Review) Date: 08 Dec 2000 15:28:01 -0700 Card, Orson Scott. _Lost Boys._ HarperCollins, 1992. ISBN 0-06-109131-6. $5.99. Unlike _Ender's Game,_ Card's _Lost Boys_ demonstrates that a successful short story cannot always make the transition to a novel. In most of Card's stories, he depicts people with some sort of extraordinary abilities: military geniuses, divas, prophets. Obviously, the lives of exceptional people make for exceptional stories. In _Lost Boys_, Card strays from that formula and makes the prodigy's parents his main characters. Now you shouldn't conclude that the lives of ordinary people cannot make good fiction, but it seems that Card's forte lies with depicting the exceptional rather than the unexceptional. In _Lost Boys_, Card depicts the lives of the Step and DeAnne Fletcher family, who move to Steuben, North Carolina, so Step can take a job with an educational software company. For the majority of the book, the Fletcher family deals with everyday life -- an unsatisfactory job, problems with the third-grade teacher, and acclimatizing to living in a southern state. Their only exceptional quality is membership in the Mormon church, which has almost no bearing on the story's anticlimactic outcome. To explain Card's ending would remove any reason for reading _Lost Boys_, so let me explain why the ending disappointed me while tiptoeing around any spoilers. My life runs at about the same pace as the Fletcher's life. I have to deal with a seemingly never-ending stream of problems and challenges -- no rise and fall of the plot, just a constant level of tension with no variation. Card describes real life quite well, but reading about characters like myself really doesn't interest me. Despite Card's successful demonstration of Step's job anxieties and DeAnne's overprotective personality quirks, the character's traits have almost no bearing on the story's outcome or with their reactions to the outcome. Knowing that Card started with a short story, I have to accuse him of padding the story with insignificant detail to create a novel from a shorter work. In fact, the surprise feels like the mild shock you expect from a short story, not the grand revelation of the unknown you would expect after 500 pages of story. Card doesn't even introduce the suspenseful elements that play on the story's resolution until well into the novel. As a suspense novel, _Lost Boys_ pales when compared to almost any other suspense novel because Card ignores the horror and terror that he could have built. Instead, we have the tension created by an overprotective mother, who turns out to have no power to protect her children anyway. And for me the clincher: Card relies on the fact that most people will sympathize when bad things happen to little children. If you told this same story but substituted older parents dealing with adult or teenage children, the story would loose most of its emotional impact. _Lost Boys_ disappoints as either a horror novel or a mainstream real-life story. I would suggest reading the original short story and then moving on to some of Card's more engaging works. -- Terry L Jeffress AML Webmaster and AML-List Review Archivist - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jeffrey Needle Subject: Re: [AML] Orgazmo Date: 08 Dec 2000 23:42:06 GMT m> <3A3121B7.DA14CE3A@postoffice.tased.edu.au> <3A31CF39.F5D81D1B@postoffice.tased.edu.au> X-Mailer: Mozilla/3.0 (compatible; StarOffice/5.2;Win32) X-Priority: 3 (Normal) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > I love comedies that do realistically humourous takes on religous=20= groups, as long > as they are not obsene, so you have wet my appetite for this one. I = enquired at > the local video store and they can get Orgasmo in from another store f= or=20 me to rent. > Now the only thing I have to consider Jeff, is, is this something Dr. = Laura would > watch? HOWL!!! I'll send her an e-mail... > On BYU-TV yesterday, Ann Edwards Connors was giving a very entertainin= g=20 talk at a > women's conference and she contrasted (negative correlation) herself t= o=20 Dr Laura. > Your opinions about Dr. Laura seem to be shared by both male and femal= e=20 LDS people. > Helena Interesting. Thanks for the info. --=20 Jeffrey Needle E-mail: jeff.needle@general.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: [AML] LABUTE, _Bash_; Thanks for Get Wells Date: 08 Dec 2000 17:38:07 -0800 (PST) I have received a short e-mail from Neil Labute, thanking me for a review of BASH I posted on Amazon.com. So you never know who's watching the net. Also, I would like to thank those on the list who have written to express get well wishes after my recent illness. Those who have experienced a serious health crisis know that afterwards, it's a whole different world out there. So, thanks for your prayers and support. ===== R.W. Rasband Heber City, UT rrasband@yahoo.com __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Shopping - Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products. http://shopping.yahoo.com/ - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Steve Subject: [AML] Minerva Teichert Paintings Date: 09 Dec 2000 20:59:37 -0700 Hi Listers, Any place to find Minerva Teichert paintings online? I've found a single one here or there, but nothing like a collection or retrospective. Maybe I'll have to check out some books? Thanks, Steve -- skperry@mac.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Helena Chester Subject: [AML] Re: Orgazmo Date: 10 Dec 2000 02:52:32 +1100 I have realised just how sheltered a life I have lived and how naiive I am. I was shocked by that video (which I didn't watch right through, but I am sure it doesn't get any better). But, it was still a valuable learning experience in that it highlighted the different concepts of the value of human beings. Thank God for the LDS teaching that we are children of God, made in His image, and can choose not to live like animals and treat others as animals. It makes me feel like weeping that human beings of such great worth can sell themselves so cheaply! And I am not a prude when it comes to intimacy, but there was nothing intimate in any of those scenes - only cheap filth!!!! Helena - 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] _Savior of the World_ (Drama) Date: 11 Dec 2000 12:01:12 -0700 I received a fascinating phone call yesterday from a very bright friend. He is an avid reader and a deeply committed church member. He also tends in his thinking towards a kind of scientism. He has worked with physicians and pharmaceutical companies for many years. He saw _Savior of the World_ the other night and was blown away by it. >From his perspective, it was deeply inspired and inspiring. His testimony was ratified and strengthened. I'm sorry I can't give you a more precise review of his experience, but he thought the production was outstanding. Neal Kramer - 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] Editorial: Micro-Politics and Power Structures Date: 10 Dec 2000 01:40:33 -0700 Jonathan Langford in this editorial asked us to respect differing opinions on the list and not be afraid to speak up. Especially women. Couple of examples: I took a grad English class at Utah State years ago. The professor made the usual negative comment about the happy valley mentality of the local residents--people who just didn't get it. I took offense and made an impassioned speech about my Mormon family and their intelligence and spirit. The prof listened and apologized to me. He recognized that he was making a unfair generalization. I listened to him with much more receptivity after that encounter. When I was in graduate school in English at BYU in 89 I took a class in critical theory from Cecilia Farr. Cecilia was already becoming controversial for her outspoken opinions which she acknowledged from day one as feminist/Marxist. (As you probably know she didn't get tenure at BYU.) I was returning to school after years of staying home as a mom, raising six kids, and acting out the conservative Mormon dream. I was shocked by some of Cecilia's ideas and started to feel very repressed by class discussion because everybody agreed with her. One day I stood up and argued. After class a number of people thanked me for voicing some of their unexpressed feelings. Cecilia and I were at odds to a degree after that at times, but we worked it out. I read her assignments and found things I could agree with. She was willing to respect me. We became friends. I probably am still more conservative than Cecila, but that's okay. I respect her honesty and her commitment. Interestingly, she was the only professor I had in grad school that bore her testimony in class (which fact I indicated to the BYU administration). When I was teaching introductory literary interpretation, I found that students predictably reacted to some stories: "my life isn't like that, so the story is not worth very much." I disagreed, but I still tried to validate their right to an opinion. (If they don't like something that is okay and their opinion should be respected.) But I also wanted them to listen to other people and be willing to acknowledge differing reactions. Encountering something new--and trying to process it--is the valuable experience that literature offers. It is also the purpose of education, I think, because we begin to transcend our limited, local perspective and start to broaden our views. If the teacher is unwilling to listen to and acknowledge the students' opinions when they differ from her own, then she is not modeling a philosophy of learning. Students stop voicing their feelings and the discussion ends. The teacher probably has much less agreement than she thinks. Here Jonathan is encouraging us to listen and respect each other. I want to say that I learn something new every day from reading all of your opinions. That is: It's much > easier for all of us to feel ourselves in the minority than in the > majority; much easier for us to be aware of the ways in which our own > statements and ideas do not seem to be respected by others on the > List, but > much harder for us to see ways in which the reverse may be true as well. > much broader range > of voices than we typically experience in any given week. I'd like to > encourage more participation by women, in particular--there are some days > that pass when it seems that almost no female voices are heard. Women, do you hate arguing or are you just busy doing other things? In our ward Sunday School class almost no women say anything. Thanks as > well to those of you who do contribute regularly, who raise new topics for > discussion, who strive to express points of view you feel aren't being > adequately represented. Thanks to those who attempt to reach out to those > on the other side of particular issues and clarify both their own point of > view and that of others. We will never reach unanimity or agreement on > many issues we discuss on the List--I don't even think that's a worthwhile > goal--but mutual understanding and respect, ah, that is achievable, and > well worth working for. In my opinion. I will say that in light of my recent argument with Jacob about the story in Irreantum, that I admit I felt frustrated that that we obviously did not come any closer to agreement. But in the spirit of Jonathan's post, I will also admit that I understand the kind of reaction Jacob is talking about. I've had much the same feeling when reading material that I thought misrepresented my religion, for example Walter Kirn's story about a Mormon girl who sexually seduces converts into the church (title?). Young Women was never like that in my ward! Of course if I want to follow my own advice then maybe I have to listen? As much as I disliked that story, and I think I disliked it because I thought it would make people think my church was made up of a bunch of weirdoes, I have certainly remembered it. It does make me think about where women find their power and why they sometimes resort to subversive means to get results. Gae Lyn Henderson - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Ruth Starkman Subject: Re: [AML] National Inroads for Mormon Lit Date: 11 Dec 2000 09:03:01 -0800 (PST) Right on Chris! Great news on all fronts. Very sexy query letter too. Highly topical. Undermines stereotypes too. Dunno any of the agents' names you mentioned. You might know about this URL, but thought I'd include a link to a list that provides some info about agents and their reputations. http://www.sfwa.org/prededitors/ Good luck! --Ruth Starkman - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: cgileadi@emerytelcom.net Subject: Re: [AML] What Is Art? Date: 11 Dec 2000 18:56:02 GMT Eh, it doesn't hurt for anyone to call herself an artist. Lots of people call themselves writers too but may not write as well as we'd like. I'd like to think I'm an artist, though my sketches and paintings really fall short of professional. I call myself a dancer (I bellydance and even teach bellydance) although I'm almost 50 and do NOT look the image of a lithe 20-year-old ballet diva. I think it IS in the soul of the person, whatever makes him an artist. Cathy Cathy Gileadi Wilson Editing Etc 15 East 600 North Price UT 84501 This message was sent using Endymion MailMan. http://www.endymion.com/products/mailman/ - 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] Minerva Teichert Paintings Date: 11 Dec 2000 13:13:38 -0700 >Any place to find Minerva Teichert paintings online? I've found a single >one here or there, but nothing like a collection or retrospective. I doubt strongly you'll be able to find anything online. Most of her paintings are held in private collections or by BYU or the Church. >Maybe I'll have to check out some books? This is your best bet, although there's not much. Here's some books and articles: Eastwood, Laurie Teichert, ed. _Letters of Minerva Teichert_. Provo, Utah: BYU Studies, 1998. Welch, John W., and Doris R. Dant. _The Book of Mormon Paintings of Minerva Teichert_. Provo, Utah: BYU Studies, 1997. Cannon, Elaine, and Shirley A. Teichert. _Minerva!: The Story of an Artist with a Mission. Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1997. Wardle, Marian Eastwood. "Minerva Teichert's Murals: The Motivation for Her Large-Scale Production." Master's thesis, Brigham Young University, 1988. Dant, Doris R. "Minerva Teichert's Manti Temple Murals." _BYU Studies_ 38, no. 3 (1999): 6-44. Johnson, Marian Ashby. "Minerva Teichert: Scriptorian and Artist." _BYU Studies_ 30 (winter 1990): 66-70. Johnson, Marian Ashby. "Minerva's Calling. _Dialogue_ 21 (spring 1988): 126-43. biography in the December 1976 issue of the _Ensign_ magazine Hope these help. Marny Parkin - 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] Editorial: Micro-Politics and Power Structures Date: 11 Dec 2000 13:51:32 -0700 Thank you for your comments Gae Lyn. I enjoyed them. Melissa had a = number of classes with Cecilia and I sat in on some of them and found them very interesting. On Sun, 10 Dec 2000 01:40:33 -0700, Gae Lyn Henderson wrote: >I will say that in light of my recent argument with Jacob about the = story in >Irreantum, that I admit I felt frustrated that that we obviously did not >come any closer to agreement. But in the spirit of Jonathan's post, I = will >also admit that I understand the kind of reaction Jacob is talking = about. I think we reached understanding. I don't think we came anywhere near agreement. I think we did our jobs well. When I read this list my aim = is to understand the discussion and the points made by those who post. Similarly, when I post, my aim (idealistically--I don't always live up to= my own ideals) is to attempt to be understood and state my opinion as = clearly as I am able. I think our discussion went just fine on that level. I'm glad we had the opportunity to express our opinions. I'm not really concerned that we didn't come any closer to agreement. I mean, I want everyone to agree = with me because I want to think I'm always right. But since it has been demonstrated to me over and over that I am not, I've come to not only = expect that others won't agree, but also to be grateful when they take the time = to point out why they don't agree. That way, I can see if my opinion needs = to be changed. Sometimes I end up agreeing (as in an earlier discussion on singles in the church). Sometimes I don't (as in our conversation). I'm confident that we agree on all the issues of the gospel with eternal consequences. For the rest, I await further light and knowledge... Jacob Proffitt - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: James Picht Subject: Re: [AML] What Is Art? Date: 11 Dec 2000 14:10:44 -0600 I think there's a big difference between artists and dentists. You aren't recognized as a dentist because the public considers you a dentist, but because you pass educational and licensing requirements. There are objective criteria on the basis of which I can say with some certainty that you are or aren't a dentist, regardless of how much you love teeth and how much you know about gingivitis. I don't need a public accamation of your dentistry, I don't need to look at you in retrospect and say "his dentistry withstood the test of time - he was truly a dentist!" In some countries you've needed a union card to be considered an artist. A hack with a union card could feast on fish of "first freshness" at the "Griboiedov House" while a true poet couldn't get in the front door. But that was in a society that equated art with dentistry, just another profession in the service of the people. But some artists learn their craft with no formal training, others produce work that sees the light of day only after they die, others produce work that's derided as nonsense by their generation, only to be recognized as genius by a later generation. Others are acclaimed as brilliant artists in their own time, only to be (justly?) consigned to oblivion later on. We have no objective criteria for proclaiming someone an artist. All the juries in the world can say you're great when in fact you're merely connected or popular. I'm happy to let anyone who wants to call himself or herself an artist to do so; I think it really is a matter of the heart, and I don't know yours. I might think Norman Rockwell is an artist, you might think he's merely an illustrator; I might think Pollock is a doodler, MOMA might think he's a genius. Tastes vary, fashions change. Perhaps a late third millenium Sister Wendy will agree with me on Warhol, perhaps not. Was he an artist? He might have been a cynical mercenary. We'll never know - we have to divine his intentions, much like an election official contemplating a chad. It's so much easier to deal with dentists, physicians, and other professionals. A degree tells the world you're this or that. A real artist has an art degree - accept no substitutes. Dr. James W. Picht Trust me, I'm credentialed. - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Tom Kimball" Subject: Re: [AML] Orson Scott CARD, _Lost Boys_ (Review) Date: 11 Dec 2000 13:56:06 -0700 One book dealer that I know used to list his top 10 books he read each year= =20 for his clients. I would always buy any of his true-life adventure books on= =20 his list and I was never let down. As a book dealer, I enjoy asking people what their top books are on=20 different subjects, biography, history, novels ect=85 My favorite novel is Lost Boys, by Card. Maybe the book spoke to me because= =20 I read it after my first son was born, or because I was far from home, but I= =20 have rarely been moved by a story like I was with Lost Boys. I mailed the= =20 book to my brother. He read it, loved it. He gave it to his wife. She read= =20 it, loved it, but banned it from the kids. I hope you read the book if you get the chance. Tom Kimball ____________________________________________________________________________= _________ Get more from the Web. FREE MSN Explorer download : http://explorer.msn.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Jim Cobabe" Subject: Re: [AML] What Is Art? Date: 11 Dec 2000 15:02:19 -0700 Art is the guy with no arms and no legs, hanging on the wall. --- Jim Cobabe _____________________________________________________________________________________ Get more from the Web. FREE MSN Explorer download : http://explorer.msn.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Marie Knowlton" (by way of Jonathan Langford ) Subject: [AML] Re: What Is Art? Date: 11 Dec 2000 17:42:10 -0600 Well said, Scott! Art is not defined by the skill level of those creating it, nor are the artists defined by their experience or competency. Were it so, there would be far less art and far fewer artists to enrich our lives. We might also add that one does not necessarily have to act with the fixed intention of "creating art" in order be an artist. Art resonates in the spirit of those creating it and touches the lives of those perceiving it. To insist that theatrical productions or any other art form meet standards of expertise before it is deemed worthy to be callet "art", misses the point entirely. We can debate endlessly about whether "Savior of the World" is good theatre, but what really matters is how it affects the lives of those who see it. > > > > >From: "Scott Tarbet" > >Reply-To: aml-list@lists.xmission.com > >To: > >Subject: [AML] What Is Art? (was: _Savior of the World_ ) > >Date: Fri, 8 Dec 2000 10:01:04 -0700 > > > > >I said: > > > > > > > IMO an artist is anyone who sets out to make art. > > > > >And Todd asked: > > > > > > Does that make anyone who sets out to fix teeth a dentist? > > > > >Overheard at the art supply store: "Ma'am, I've got to see your picture ID > > >from the State Art Licensing Board before I can sell you that tube of > >cadmium yellow! You know it's a controlled substance!" ;-) > > > > >Sure, there's good art and there's bad art, just as there are good artists > > >and artists barely worthy of the name. But when a five year old feels the > >thrill of creation as she slaps paint around or raises her little voice in > > >song or twirls across the living room, and wants to feel that thrill again, > > >how is she not an artist? Art isn't in the training or the peer acceptance > > >or the societal acceptance or even in the competency -- it's in the heart. > > > > > >-- Scott Tarbet > - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Marie Knowlton" Subject: [AML] Note from Marilyn (Resend) Date: 11 Dec 2000 16:12:37 -0700 Marilyn asked me to pass this message along on Friday. I am resending it in plain text format for those who have difficulty reading HTML. Marilyn Brown wants you all to know that she has been unable to be online this past week due to computer difficulties and misses you all terribly. She will be back as soon as she gets her computer fixed. She will try to be at the gathering on the 18th, but may be unable to make it due to a theatrical commitment. She would like someone in Salt Lake to make reservations at the restaurant for us. Thanks! Marie [MOD: Chris is taking care of this.] _____________________________________________________________________________________ Get more from the Web. FREE MSN Explorer download : http://explorer.msn.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] AML-List Review Archive Update Date: 11 Dec 2000 16:59:06 -0700 I have just updated the AML-List Review Archive (http://www.xmission.com/~aml/reviews/index.html). New reviews: 387 Dancing Naked by Robert Van Wagoner (review by Terry Jeffress) 388 Dancing Naked by Robert Van Wagoner (review by Cathy Wilson) 389 Rumors of War by Dean Hughes 390 Since You Went Away by Dean Hughes 391 Dancing Shoes by Erica Glenn 392 I Sailed to Zion by Susan Arrington Madsen 393 As Long As I Have You by Dean Hughes 394 Sy's Girl by Natalie Prado 395 Riptide by Marion Smith 396 The Clearwater Union War by Ron Carter 397 Life Before Life by Richard Eyre 398 The Dinner Club by Curtis Taylor 399 Cassidy by Lee Nelson 400 This Eternal Earth by Rodney Turner 401 A Massive Swelling by Cintra Wilson 402 The Ephraim Chronicles by Lee Nelson 403 Dancing Shoes by Erica Glenn 404 Worth Their Salt, Too edited by Colleen Whitley 405 Jews and Mormons by Frank Johnson and Rabbi Leffler 406 Savior of the World a drama at the Conference Center Theater 407 Lost Boys by Orson Scott Card Statistics: Top reviewers ------------- 48 Jeff Needle 28 Harlow S Clark 26 R. W. Rasband Most rewiewed authors --------------------- 28 Orson Scott Card 9 Margaret Blair Young 9 Benson Y. Parkinson Other Changes: The archive now has titles from over 85 publisher (well, imprints really). So I have split the publishers into alphebetized pages like the other categories. -- Terry L Jeffress AML Webmaster and AML-List Review Archivist - 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] _Savior of the World_ (Drama) Date: 11 Dec 2000 17:10:57 -0700 Neal Kramer wrote: > > I received a fascinating phone call yesterday from a very bright friend. > He is an avid reader and a deeply committed church member. He also tends > in his thinking towards a kind of scientism. He has worked with physicians > and pharmaceutical companies for many years. > > He saw _Savior of the World_ the other night and was blown away by it. > >From his perspective, it was deeply inspired and inspiring. His testimony > was ratified and strengthened. > > I'm sorry I can't give you a more precise review of his experience, but he > thought the production was outstanding. I don't know your friend, but I would be surprised if he were an avid theatre goer. If so, then maybe he uses different standards by which to judge Chuch artistic endeavors than for other theatrical productions. I can't speak for anyone but me, but having sat in tears while Jean Valjean sings, "Send him home," I am less likely to be moved to tears by songs of less artistic merit regardless of the intent of the creator. It's like having studied the greats in poetry and then trying to get through Edgar Guest without wanting to hurl. It doesn't mean that Guest isn't a good poet, it just means that the kind of poetry he writes no longer speaks to you in the same way. You've moved on. Growing up, I loved the works of Edgar Rice Burroughs. Several years ago, I tried to re-read _Princess of Mars_. Couldn't finish it. I had moved on. I had, sadly, become more "sophisticated" in my understanding of what constituted good writing. Your friend no doubt has different taste, is clearly the audience member for such a piece as SOTW, or, as I suggested, he may have very sophisticated artistic tastes but prefers to set them aside when experiencing a Church production. I don't want this post to be construed as the defense of elitism, just an explanation as to how artistsic jugdgement may operate in the lives of different people. Thom Duncan - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Christopher Bigelow" Subject: [AML] AML-List Dinner on 12/18 Date: 11 Dec 2000 16:37:22 -0700 Here is the list so far of people coming to dinner at 5:30 on Monday, = Dec. 18, at Guadalahonky's in Draper: Darlene Young + one Cherry Silver Scott Tarbet + one Scott and Marny Parkin Chris and Ann Bigelow Jonathan Langford (bringing anyone, Jonathan?) So my reservation count stands at 10. Have I missed anyone? [MOD: I'll be coming solo. Also, since this was sent in, I know John Bennion has expressed an interest in coming.] Chris Bigelow -------- For a sample copy of IRREANTUM, the AML's literary quarterly, send $4 to = AML, 262 S. Main St., Springville, UT 84663. - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Steve Subject: Re: [AML] Minerva Teichert Paintings Date: 11 Dec 2000 18:43:58 -0700 > From: Scott and Marny Parkin > Reply-To: aml-list@lists.xmission.com > Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2000 13:13:38 -0700 > To: aml-list@lists.xmission.com > Subject: Re: [AML] Minerva Teichert Paintings > > Welch, John W., and Doris R. Dant. _The Book of Mormon Paintings of > Minerva Teichert_. Provo, Utah: BYU Studies, 1997. Thanks to Parkin(s?) for this help. I've trudged back and forth from BYU's Museum of Art to wandering the halls of the new Joseph Smith Building on campus where Teichert originals from the Book of Mormon are randomly placed in various hallways. (They are now underplexiglass due to an unfortune lipstick incident and subsequent restoration... sometimes I sorta wish I'd have an unfortunate lipstick incident, but that's another story...) Also visited the Church's Museum of Art. After all this legwork I wanna sit down and see it all in one place before my wondering (not wandering) eyes. Isn't this what the internet is for? I may have to check out a lot of library books. Thanks again. Steve -- skperry@mac.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] Orgazmo Date: 11 Dec 2000 14:40:49 -0800 At 02:52 AM 12/10/2000 +1100, you wrote: >I have realised just how sheltered a life I have lived and how naiive I >am. I was shocked by that video (which I didn't watch right through, >but I am sure it doesn't get any better). But, it was still a valuable >learning experience in that it highlighted the different concepts of the >value of human beings. Thank God for the LDS teaching that we are >children of God, made in His image, and can choose not to live like >animals and treat others as animals. It makes me feel like weeping that >human beings of such great worth can sell themselves so cheaply! And I >am not a prude when it comes to intimacy, but there was nothing intimate >in any of those scenes - only cheap filth!!!! > >Helena Yuck -- cheap filth. Sadly, it's what fills the lives of so many people. Take care. --------------- 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: "Scott Tarbet" Subject: RE: [AML] What Is Art? Date: 12 Dec 2000 00:16:46 -0700 Todd said: > I think that point at which a person > becomes an artist and not someone who simply makes art is when they find > themselves working when they don't really feel like it. At this point it's > no longer dabbling or playing or anything like that. Others have commented extensively and excellently on other aspects of Todd's definition, leaving me this one comment to make: A great deal of the art in the world is produced by people who aren't making their livings at it, but who might wish they could. It's made by people who eek out what time they can take from their hand-to-mouth existence because they love what they do and just can't help doing it. This is so well engrained in us that English even has a word for it: avocation: "a subordinate occupation pursued in addition to one's vocation especially for enjoyment" -- Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary Online. How sad it would be if we were to limit the art around us only to that crafted by full time professionals! -- Scott Tarbet - 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] What Is Art? Date: 11 Dec 2000 21:14:13 -0600 I'm going to say something so horrible, that I'm already swallowing hard, not because I think it's wrong, but because I know that I'm going to be slaughtered for it. These notions that art is in the spirit of the endeavor or in the heart are very sentimental and romantic ones, and I worry about them. There is a world of difference between the amateur and the professional in this arena. To be starry-eyed and say that everyone who wants to be and artist is an artist denigrates the work of people who have devoted their lives to their art. Isn't there a difference between somone who writes on the weekend and someone who writes every day, rain or shine, or when they are dying? One might think of themself as an artist, but that doesn't make it so. I know that this will make some people feel bad, but that doesn't make it untrue or not worth saying. I am interested in science but I am no scientist. I haven't, and probably won't, dedicate my life to science so I have no right to claim the title. I have, on the other hand, dedicated my life to art, which means that I write when I don't want to, when it is inconvenient to do so. I write instead of going to the movies and instead of eating or sleeping sometimes. I write when I ought to be doing other things. I have tried to stop writing for a time, but I do it anyway; it comes after me. I write things on slips of paper while I am at dinner with my in-laws. I write on Christmas morning. I lie down to sleep sometimes and have to get out of bed and go write. I have given seven years to the formal study of writing. This is different, in my mind, from someone who writes once or twice a month or from someone who has taken a class or who has an "idea" for a novel. I recognize that I am trying to defend some turf for myself, but I feel like it needs to be done. Not to keep people out, but to keep a sense of identity for myself. To be quite frank one does not hear a great many writers saying that writers are those who believe in their heart that they are such. One hears the opposite, that there are too many people taking up the moniker, of "writer" the primary consequence of which is the fact that title, "writer," stops meaning anything. The problem is that to say that something isn't art, is, as things are presently constituted, to denigrate that thing. [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] Orson Scott CARD, _Lost Boys_ (Review) Date: 12 Dec 2000 01:22:16 -0700 Terry L Jeffress wrote: > > Card, Orson Scott. _Lost Boys._ HarperCollins, 1992. ISBN > 0-06-109131-6. $5.99. > > Unlike _Ender's Game,_ Card's _Lost Boys_ demonstrates that a > successful short story cannot always make the transition to a novel. Terry has put me in a difficult position. I have been working through all of Card's novels, writing reviews of them for AML-List. When I get to _Lost Boys_, I don't know what to say now. About all I'll be able to do is point to Terry's review and say, "Ditto." -- 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: Jonathan Langford Subject: Re: [AML] Orson Scott CARD, _Lost Boys_ (Review) Date: 12 Dec 2000 09:46:35 -0600 I'm in a peculiar position. I haven't read _Lost Boys_ straight through, but did read the short story (before the novel came out), and have read large chunks of the book. (My reasons for not reading straight through have to do with a certain type of stress I have a very low tolerance for in books--not so much with regard to the main "horror" premise of the story, though I'm not a reader of horror, but scenes like the confrontation between the father and the nazi-teacher, which made my stomach cramp when I read it.) As a result, I can't speak to the main point Terry addresses in his review--that is, the sense of how the book succeeds or fails as a whole. But I can speak to one quality that I have seen in the scenes of that book I have read. This is (in my view, of course) by far the best depiction of a believing Mormon suburban professional-type family I have read anywhere. We have lots of literature that shows rural Utah-type Mormon experiences, often very well. But I think we're lacking in realistic depictions of believing Mormons in the environment that probably resembles the lives many of us on the List live. I'm very impressed by Scott Card's accomplishment in that regard, particularly in a book marketed to a mainstream audience. Note that this does not necessarily deny what Terry is saying (and D. Michael seems to be seconding) about whether the book succeeds or fails as a story. It may well be that the Mormon-ness of the characters winds up having little to do with the story's denoument (though on the whole, I'm one of the faction who believe that a character's Mormonness needs no plot justification; it can simply be a part of creating a whole character). And clearly, not being a horror reader, I can't speak to how well it succeeds or fails on that ground. And there are places where Card's depictions of Mormon life tend to the exaggerated/extreme--but it is an exaggeration, in my view, of the life many of us really live. Which, I think, is an immensely valuable contribution to Mormon literature. 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: "Tracie Laulusa" Subject: RE: [AML] What Is Art? Date: 12 Dec 2000 11:24:33 -0500 I think we covered a lot of the feelings of frustration of both men and women on the list who just can not, at this point in their lives dedicate themselves to writing-or any other kind of "art"-in the Family and Art thread. Trying to draw lines is always such a tricky business. Who is it that draws the lines where? Art is in the eyes/ears and whatever else of the beholder. And why worry about the respect that may or may not be generated by the word "writer"? Very few people use that word with any degree of respect. "Oh, a writer." The only people who respect writers are writers or failed writers-those who tried (and as someone else said, they even may have been very good!)-but could not, somehow get anything published. They know how hard it is to write something decent or worthy of someone else's eyes. As I have studied the lives of a lot of "great" writers, I've been appalled at what a wreck the rest of their lives were. Broken families, neglected spouses and children, alcoholism, suicide...... I find that a little scary. That the writing profession seems to have such a high rate of unhappy professionals. I say "seems to" because I haven't done any kind of research to compare it to any other profession. I don't call myself a writer right now. I don't feel I've reached that level of competence. Neither have I been able to find consistent time to dedicate to the craft. But other people call me a writer. People who have read some program (narration) I've written or what have you. I do call myself a musician. I don't play as well as I did as a college major. I've never played professionally. I don't play everyday. In fact, when I had all little kids I went months without playing. That was not a comfortable feeling. I would often rather be playing than doing the other things that demand my attention. However, I do play well. Even to my perfection standards-though no James Gallway. Would he call me a musician? Probably not. He'd probably plug his ears and tell me I sounded like a goat or something. Well that's a nice jumble of thoughts. Tracie Laulusa - 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] What Is Art? Date: 12 Dec 2000 09:29:08 -0700 Todd Robert Petersen wrote: > > I'm going to say something so horrible, that I'm already swallowing hard, > not because I think it's wrong, but because I know that I'm going to be > slaughtered for it. > > These notions that art is in the spirit of the endeavor or in the heart are > very sentimental and romantic ones, and I worry about them. There is a > world of difference between the amateur and the professional in this arena. > To be starry-eyed and say that everyone who wants to be and artist is an > artist denigrates the work of people who have devoted their lives to their > art. For fear of being considered an elitist, I agree with you. > Isn't there a difference between somone who writes on the weekend and > someone who writes every day, rain or shine, or when they are dying? No, the only difference is the quality of their output, not the amount of time they spend on it, but you're not really saying that, are you? > One might think of themself as an artist, but that doesn't make it so. I > know that this will make some people feel bad, but that doesn't make it > untrue or not worth saying. I am interested in science but I am no > scientist. I haven't, and probably won't, dedicate my life to science so I > have no right to claim the title. I may know how to build a simple box with wood, nails, and a hammer. Does that make me a carpenter? > I have, on the other hand, dedicated my life to art, which means that I > write when I don't want to, when it is inconvenient to do so. I write > instead of going to the movies and instead of eating or sleeping sometimes. > I write when I ought to be doing other things. I have tried to stop writing > for a time, but I do it anyway; it comes after me. I write things on slips > of paper while I am at dinner with my in-laws. I write on Christmas > morning. I lie down to sleep sometimes and have to get out of bed and go > write. I have given seven years to the formal study of writing. That doesn't impress me per se. I know several really bad writers who have similar work schedules. What makes anyone an artist, imo, is not the time they spend on their craft, but how well they do it. Of course, many of the greats have similar work schedules but many don't. Thom - 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] What Is Art? Date: 12 Dec 2000 10:16:37 -0600 What interests me is not the way in which Todd's definitions are different from those of others writing on this topic, but one fundamental way in which they are the same. Scott Tarbet and others argue that being an artist is a matter of the heart. Todd Peterson argues that it's a matter of level of dedication. Both of these have reference to an internal characteristic of the person creating the art--not to external factors, such as the quality of the art being produced or the level of financial success achieved through artistic endeavors. If we define an artist on the basis of dedication to the craft/practice of writing, as our sole criterion, then it's possible to still call someone an artist who may not produce anything many of us would deem worthy of the label of art. We may also find that there are individuals who lack the kind of drive Todd has described, but who nevertheless have produced some fine works of art--in passing, and possibly regarding them as nothing more than a hobby. This gives us artists who do not produce art, and art that was not produced by artists--which seems peculiar, to say the least; but then English (and esthetic studies) is rife with peculiarities such as this. At the same time, if we define an artist as anyone who creates art, this creates other problems. I'm honestly extremely skeptical of the notion that the artist is a fundamentally different type of being than the rest of humanity--more sensitive, more observant, whatever. I'm much more inclined to believe that all of us have the potential for artistic creation, "votever dot meanz" (as Harlow might say). But as Todd rightly points out, this kind of universality makes the term "artist" meaningless as a categorization for any specific group of people, because it (at least potentially) includes everyone. My own bias is to consider "artist" as not a terribly useful word as a classification for people. For one thing, it's simply too general, if you're trying to describe it as what some people do to make a living (like dentist) or the type of activity a person engages in. We have writers (not all of them artists--I'm not, for instance--so probably we want to go with something more specific yet, such as "novelist" or "poet" or "creative writer"); sculptors; painters; graphic artists; illustrators; composers; performing musicians; and on and on. All of these give a much clearer sense of what kind of artistic activity the person engages in, and what type of output he or she produces. The term "artist," on the other hand, is sufficiently broad and loose in its application that it seems inherently a qualititative judgment. My point, I think, is that this remains true whether you accept Scott Tarbet's standard or Todd Peterson's standard. Both are essentially qualititative; both have to do with a quality of the person, not of the product; both are a bit problematic when it comes to relating the concept of artist to the concept of art. Which doesn't mean that they don't have value. But I think the whole question is more complex than either definition seems to acknowledge. (By the way, this entire discussion also highlights a problem in my naming of this List thread, which, as it has evolved, should probably be titled "What Is an Artist?" rather than "What Is Art?" Oh, well...) 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: Eileen Stringer Subject: Re: [AML] Orson Scott CARD, _Lost Boys_ (Review) Date: 12 Dec 2000 10:12:34 -0700 >_Lost Boys_ disappoints as either a horror novel or a mainstream >real-life story. I would suggest reading the original short story and >then moving on to some of Card's more engaging works. >-- >Terry L Jeffress >AML Webmaster and AML-List Review Archivist Where can one find the original short story? Eileen Stringer eileens99@bigplanet.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: James Picht Subject: Re: [AML] What Is Art? Date: 12 Dec 2000 11:40:48 -0600 I hesitate to comment further on this thread for fear of redundancy, but there are a couple of ideas I'd like to at least clarify. Part of Todd's problem with the sentimental notion of artist (one who feels in his heart that he's engaged in artistic endeavor) is the distinction between amateur and professional. A dentist is a professional - the idea of an amateur dentist is more than a little peculiar. Dentistry is something you do after long training and professional licensing and that enables you to put the kids through college. Art is a different kettle of fish in my opinion, but Todd is uncomfortable with that opinion: > There is a world of difference between the amateur and the professional in > this arena. To be starry-eyed and say that everyone who wants to be and artist > is an > artist denigrates the work of people who have devoted their lives to their > art. My response is that some great artists have been amateurs, at least if we define the word to mean one who produces art for non-remunerative reasons. Some never made a penny off their art (Emily Dickenson with her drawer-full of poems comes to mind). Art, unlike dentistry, really is something that people with no training "do," something that people do with no hope of financial gain, something that people do in addition to their real careers (how about that insurance agent/composer Ives?). There really is room for the amateur in art. Listen to the Van Cliburn contest for amatures (pianists over 35 who don't teach or perform professionally) - a collection of lawyers, physicians, hairdressers and chefs who play beautifully, emotionally, artistically. We might redefine Todd's terms (as he implicitly does) to mean the "professional" is one who devotes much of his time to his art, even if it isn't remunerated. I can almost agree with him, then. I think someone who loves painting or playing an instrument or writing will devote a great deal of time to the activity. If I call myself a painter and never bother to work on my technique and just dabble on the occasional weekend, I'm deluding myself (like the surfer who stood on his board on the beach and declared, "they also surf who only stand and wait"). We have a word for that sort of person - a crank. There are plenty of science cranks sitting in their garages inventing perpetual motion machines and sending their Earth-shattering theories to journals that ignore them because they're "not part of the scientific establishment." Likewise there are art-cranks, people who can't find publishers for their awful novels or get gallery space for their childish paintings and who claim that the art establishment doesn't want the world to see true genius. Hence I agree with Todd that not everyone who claims to be an artist and fervently believes the claim to be true is really an artist. Still, there are others who claim to be artists and who are acclaimed as artists who are, in my opinion, mercenary hacks (like the guy in NY who was selling for tens of thousands of dollars paintings that he only signed, the actual painters employed by him at near minimum wage). We have those in other professions as well (medical and legal quacks, charlatans, and malpracticers), but there are professional standards, boards and peer-review to keep that sort of thing in check. Art has no professional standards (nor should it), no professional boards, and only a very informal sort of peer-review (juries, critics, and gallery owners), which in my opinion is often best ignored. I suppose my final position is that an artist is one who loves and "does" art, whatever that is. A professional artist is able to convince others that he or she is actually doing art worth paying for, but that person may or may not be a true artist. Society's verdict on that is always changing. Art isn't an activity by or for the elite, nor is it something to which one can devote minimal effort. But returning to Todd's comments: > Isn't there a difference between somone who writes on the weekend and > someone who writes every day, rain or shine, or when they are dying? Yes and no. Hugh Nibley once said that Mormons are more inclined to praise someone who gets up early and devotes himself all day long to writing mountains of drivel than to praising someone who sleeps in, produces a few pages of genius, then takes a nap. Effort and dedication don't always count, as the very amusing _Amadeus_ demonstrates. (By the way, while he's no Mozart, I don't think Salieri's music is half bad. Some is quite pleasant. Heaven forbid you should ever get a review like that.) > I have given seven years to the formal study of writing. My favorite 20th century author never gave it a minute of formal study (he studied medicine). There's one of the important differences between art and other professions. Some great artists have been formally trained, others have been self-taught. > I recognize that I am trying to defend some turf for myself, but I feel like > it needs to be done. Not to keep people out, but to keep a sense of > identity for myself. That's fine, and I don't begrudge you the identity or the effort. I went through quite a bit of trouble to get my doctorate in economics, I identify myself as an economist, and I look with grim displeasure at people with other degrees who try to lecture people on economics (a colleague in the English department dared to tell me that my analysis of the Bush and Gore Social Security policies was wrong - it just felt wrong to her - even though I've written professionally on the subject for the Asian Development Bank and two (admittedly very minor) national governments; it took enormous self-restraint on my part to not dump her soup in her lap and call her an idiot). Some people who call themselves artists *are* artists, and some are not. Those who are may rightly resent the expropriation of that honorable title by hacks, cranks, and self-promoters, but if art is subjective, so is the title, "artist." That's the nature of the work you've chosen to devote your life to. Jim Picht - 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] What Is Art? Date: 12 Dec 2000 11:27:00 -0700 Tracie Laulusa wrote: > I do call myself a musician. I don't play as well as I did as a college > major. I've never played professionally. I don't play everyday. In fact, > when I had all little kids I went months without playing. That was not a > comfortable feeling. I would often rather be playing than doing the other > things that demand my attention. However, I do play well. Even to my > perfection standards-though no James Gallway. Would he call me a musician? > Probably not. He'd probably plug his ears and tell me I sounded like a goat > or something. I wanted to jump in on this thread with another point. What about collaborative artists? The discussion seems to have focused on the lone artist struggling to make his voice heard above the crowd. But is someone an artist if his or her voice works best as part of a choir instead of as a soloist? Tracie's comments about music made me think of my own experiences as a guitarist. I don't consider myself a musician, yet I have played professionally. From a technical standpoint, my playing ability is quite low -- probably around the level of someone who's been learning to play for a year or two. But I was lucky enough to join a band made up of several others like me. Individually we were okay, but together we sounded great! Almost all the music we wrote was a collaboration. Someone would come in with an idea -- a horn line or a bass riff or something. We'd all build on it together until we had created a song. The result was usually much better than any of us anticipated. Sometimes that would happen within a single rehearsal, other times it would take several months. Often our songs would continue to develop even after they'd been recorded and released. When I listen to our songs and compare them to other music within our genre, I realize we did some very good, original stuff. And my guitar was an integral part of the sound we created. However, on my own, I'm not going to win any awards. I don't know if I can claim the title of artist on my own, but I can certainly see my contribution to a larger piece of art. --Mike South - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Scott Tarbet" Subject: RE: [AML] What Is Art? Date: 12 Dec 2000 11:34:27 -0700 Todd said: > I'm going to say something so horrible, that I'm already swallowing hard, > not because I think it's wrong, but because I know that I'm going to be > slaughtered for it. Not by me, and I'm kinda your original antagonist here. We're among friends, honing our brains and keeping them alive with intellectual sparring. No slaughter forthcoming. > These notions that art is in the spirit of the endeavor or in the > heart are > very sentimental and romantic ones, and I worry about them. There is a > world of difference between the amateur and the professional in > this arena. Agree wholeheartedly. There *is* a world of difference between the amateur and the professional, and if we were debating the meanings of "amateur" and "professional" instead of the blanket term "artist" then we'd be in complete agreement. I just can't get on board an assumption that only professionals can be artists. You have equated "artist" with "dentist" which bothers me because it equates art with raw technical skill, which seems to me to deny the soul of what art is all about. So my turn for a little different analogy: "artist" ~ "baseball player". Many people love and live for the game of baseball and call themselves baseball players without making a dime from it. At one time in the life of my missionary son when he was playing in one All Star tournament after another his identity was "baseball player" -- not a professional baseball player, but a baseball player nonetheless. And there are even different levels of professional. I think of the character Archie/Doc Graham in "Field Of Dreams" whose youthful vocation and avocation was baseball player, but ultimately he served a higher purpose by *not* following his avocation. He traveled around playing pickup games, then broke into the minors, and even appeared in the majors for half of one inning. He was a baseball player -- not a Hall of Famer, not even a "journeyman", but a baseball player nonetheless. To attempt to quantify what makes someone an artist places us in peril of those who look down their noses at all but a very narrow band of endeavor and say it isn't art, and that therefore the person who created it isn't an artist. As all of us artists strive to make art that our audiences (readers, viewers, etc.) will accept we constantly expose ourselves to those who don't appreciate what we do. > To be starry-eyed and say that everyone who wants to be and artist is an > artist denigrates the work of people who have devoted their lives to their > art. Another list member who knows me well got a real guffaw out of hearing me referred to as starry-eyed. ;-) I disagree that allowing someone else the appellation of artist somehow denigrates the work of others. Good art floats atop a sea of mediocrity. There's plenty of room for those who provide the contrast and there's plenty of room for the pursuit of art to be as joyous as its conquest. > Isn't there a difference between somone who writes on the weekend and > someone who writes every day, rain or shine, or when they are dying? Absolutely! But does a painter on vacation cease to be an artist? Does a blocked writer cease to be a writer? What about a writer who no longer has the fire in his belly, but forces himself to keep writing because that's how he feeds his family? Has he ceased to be an artist? By your proposed definition he'd be the ultimate artist, wouldn't he? > One might think of themself as an artist, but that doesn't make it so. I > know that this will make some people feel bad, but that doesn't make it > untrue or not worth saying. It will only make them feel bad if they accept it as true. If you yourself had to dig ditches for a living and could only write when life cut you a little break, you would reject the definition too. Most artists I know would reject it out of hand. > I am interested in science but I am no > scientist. I haven't, and probably won't, dedicate my life to > science so I > have no right to claim the title. The putative difference between art and science is subjectivity versus objectivity. It seems to me that the attempt to restrict the term "artist" as you propose is to attempt to objectify the subjective. > I have, on the other hand, dedicated my life to art, which means that I > write when I don't want to, when it is inconvenient to do so. I write > instead of going to the movies and instead of eating or sleeping > sometimes. > I write when I ought to be doing other things. I have tried to > stop writing > for a time, but I do it anyway; it comes after me. I write > things on slips > of paper while I am at dinner with my in-laws. I write on Christmas > morning. I lie down to sleep sometimes and have to get out of bed and go > write. I have given seven years to the formal study of writing. I both salute and console your compulsion ;-). By my definition -- by almost any definition -- you are most certainly a writer. Are you saying that only someone with that degree of fire in their belly can be considered an artist? > This is different, in my mind, from someone who writes once or > twice a month > or from someone who has taken a class or who has an "idea" for a novel. Quantitatively it's different, but qualitatively I don't think it can be said with much certainty. How many times a month does someone need to practice their craft to be considered an artist? 31? 21? 11? I think it's a slippery slope to try to quantify the subjective. > I recognize that I am trying to defend some turf for myself, but > I feel like > it needs to be done. Not to keep people out, but to keep a sense of > identity for myself. I would hate to think that I'm attacking the identity you've taken for yourself by arguing that others should be granted the same right. I would somewhat doubt that anyone formally annointed you an artist -- it's a title you take for yourself. So I think you need to realize that by making the definition so exclusive and narrow you deny that same right to many of us in the work-a-day world who only get to act or write or paint or sing when the demands of life allow it. > To be quite frank one does not hear a great many writers saying > that writers > are those who believe in their heart that they are such. One hears the > opposite, that there are too many people taking up the moniker, > of "writer" > the primary consequence of which is the fact that title, "writer," stops > meaning anything. The old saw is that New York is full of actors waiting tables. Most of them will never land a paying job on Broadway. Now I'm not in New York and I've never waited tables, but I've flipped burgers, nailed boards, slaved in Dilbertland, and starved as an entrepreneur. And I'll keep doing it while I pursue my avocation on the side. On a similar note I hope this isn't too personal, but I note that you're a doctoral candidate in creative writing and critical theory. When you get out of school will you use your doctorate to teach? Perhaps edit? Critique? Or will you write full time? In other words, to what degree do you intend to be a professional artist rather than an academic? > The problem is that to say that something isn't art, is, as things are > presently constituted, to denigrate that thing. It is certainly denigrating something someone produces and calls art to tell them it's not art at all, even if it's bad, and it leaves us at risk of being hoisted with our own petard. -- Scott Tarbet - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Scott Tarbet" Subject: RE: [AML] What Is Art? Date: 12 Dec 2000 12:10:11 -0700 [Moderator's compilation] Thom said: > I know several really bad > writers who have similar work schedules. What makes anyone an > artist, imo, is not the time they spend on their craft, but how > well they do it. Of course, many of the greats have similar work > schedules but many don't. Every year the Professional Golfers Association gives a prize to the officially documented Worst Avid Golfer -- the golfer who gets out there rain and shine and plays the game, but just scores so poorly that s/he can't possibly be called good at the game. Typically the handicap is 80-90, meaning that the golfer is shooting at least twice par on every hole -- 6 on a par 3, 10 on a par 5, etc. And yet they love the game and play nearly every day, rain or shine. They're golfers. It's what they do. We're artists. It's what we do. Doesn't mean we're any good at it. -- Scott Tarbet Jonathan said: > My own bias is to consider "artist" as not a terribly useful word as a > classification for people. For one thing, it's simply too general, and > The term "artist," on the other hand, > is sufficiently broad and loose in its application that it seems > inherently a qualititative judgment. I couldn't agree more. It's a term not terribly definitive of anything at all and it is most definitely qualitative. So the soul of my argument is for the broadest possible general definition, since to narrow it at all forces out many who deserve to be in, and leaves it subject to further narrowing by narrow people. The nightmare scenario for me would be for someone as dedicated to his craft as Todd to be told, and perhaps even believe, that because he doesn't write to some critic's preconception, or isn't making a 6-figure income from his writing, or isn't publishing every month, that somehow any of this equates to a lack of artistry. -- Scott Tarbet - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Eileen Stringer Subject: Re: [AML] _Savior of the World_ (Drama) Date: 12 Dec 2000 12:21:47 -0700 Neal Kramer wrote: > > I'm sorry I can't give you a more precise review of his experience, but he > > thought the production was outstanding. Thom's reply: > I don't know your friend, but I would be surprised if he were an > avid theatre goer. If so, then maybe he uses different standards > by which to judge Chuch artistic endeavors than for other This is the type of judgement that makes me a bit uncomfortable. Firstly you recognize that you do not know this man, but you then proceed to base on judgement about him purely because he like a production that you feel is beneath a sophisticated persons ability to like. He was moved by it, something touched him, why does he have to be an unsophisticated rube to be able to be moved by this. Others on this list have noted that they may not feel the spirit by attending such a program, but do when listening to Metallica. I would probably not feel the spirit when listening to Metallica or watching this church production, yet I do not feel myself an unsophisticated rube. I am an avid reader, an avid theater attendee and participater, enjoy a wide variety of music, and have felt the spirit touch me in what would seem to be the most unlikely of times and places. A production has spoken to me when it has not to anyone around me and some have not spoken to me at all when others around me were deeply moved. Yes, this production may not be on par with Les Miserables, but it speaks to some people and I really am uncomfortable with the fact that we may consider those who do like and are touched by Savior of the World to be less "sophisticated" than anyone who may like Les Miserables. My goodness what kind of person would like them both? > theatrical productions. I can't speak for anyone but me, but > having sat in tears while Jean Valjean sings, "Send him home," The line in the song is that Jean Valjean sings is actually "bring him home" and I sit in tears everytime I hear it sung. > Your friend no doubt has different taste, is clearly the audience > member for such a piece as SOTW, or, as I suggested, he may have > very sophisticated artistic tastes but prefers to set them aside > when experiencing a Church production. > > I don't want this post to be construed as the defense of elitism, > just an explanation as to how artistsic jugdgement may operate in > the lives of different people. > > Thom Duncan I fear Thom that I may have indeed construed your post as a defense of elistism despite your best efforts and even you telling me not to. I may be leaning towards the defensive in my post, but I must admit that I am wearying of what I feel to be a constant barrage on people who attend these functions that "we" may deem to be of lesser artistic value. I have to admit that I did not clamor to get tickets to the production, it really did not interest me. I prefer Dickens' story and Lew Wallace's this time of year and usually read and/or watch them again. Where does this put me in the evolutionary scale or artistic judgment? I do not believe it is necessary to validate ourselves as writers, composers, artists and the like by attempting to invalidate a person's positive experience at a production we would be hardpressed to enjoy and find no meaning in. Neal's friend enjoyed the production. Wonderful! is my reaction, I am pleased somebody was touched by the efforts these people put together and are working hard to make a success. Their success in reaching him in no way invalidates the fact that you and I may not be moved by it at all or usurps our "sophisticated" artistic judgment, just as our so-called negative experience should not invalidate his positive experience. Eileen Stringer eileens99@bigplanet.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] List Vacation Date: 12 Dec 2000 15:57:24 -0600 Folks, This is just to remind you that AML-List will be going down for a two-week vacation starting the afternoon of Friday, Dec. 15. (That's this Friday.) The List will go back online Tuesday, Jan. 2. If you have any announcements that should go out before the break, please make sure to get them in by Friday morning if possible. 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: Jacob Proffitt Subject: [AML] Re: What Is Art? Date: 12 Dec 2000 14:48:01 -0700 I'm not really replying to any of the threads on how you define an = artist. However, I thought I'd mention that this discussion is not entirely of academic or personal interest. Gainesville, Florida recently discovered that their community occupational licensing fees include a statute (in = place since 1953) that lists "artist" as a "professional" category. No = definition of artist is given. Gainesville is a college town and has a decent number of small local = bands. In September, the city's Department of Cultural Affairs began sniffing = after a revenue windfall and began contacting these bands asking for their occupational licensing fees (incidentally, the same fees the city asks = from its dentists). They made the mistake of putting together a little = question and answer session for which they were woefully unprepared. To sum it = up, they were unable to define "artist", unable to even state with any = certainty whether a band as a whole was responsible for the fee, or if the fee = should apply to each member of the band separately. While Gainesville awaits the advice of the state attorney general's = office on what they can or can't get away with, I think this case has some interesting implications for us on the list. Licensing fees exist for a = lot of professions. Usually, membership of a profession is easily = determined. So the question becomes, what is a professional artist and should we = really want to try to become one? Who *could* define what it means to be an artist? Personally, as I read the various definitions offered, I find it more and more difficult to think of art as a professional occupation. There are = too many subjective criteria. Even should we on the list (or a government agency for that matter) agree to a definition, I think we will eventually find that our definition is at once to broad and too narrow to fully encompass what we wish that definition to do. You could create a legally significant definition, or a personally useful definition, but I don't = think anyone will, in this life, come up with a comprehensive definition. 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] _Savior of the World_ (Drama) Date: 12 Dec 2000 15:19:16 -0700 Eileen Stringer wrote: > > Neal Kramer wrote: > > > > I'm sorry I can't give you a more precise review of his experience, but > he > > > thought the production was outstanding. > > Thom's reply: > > I don't know your friend, but I would be surprised if he were an > > avid theatre goer. If so, then maybe he uses different standards > > by which to judge Chuch artistic endeavors than for other > > This is the type of judgement that makes me a bit uncomfortable. Firstly you > recognize that you do not know this man, but you then proceed to base on > judgement about him purely because he like a production that you feel is > beneath a sophisticated persons ability to like. He was moved by it, > something touched him, why does he have to be an unsophisticated rube to be > able to be moved by this. Well, I don't call him an unsophisticated rube. I just suggest that he uses different standards than I would. I do that, when, for instance, I find myself moved to tears on Primary Sunday. The little darlings singing their lungs out are about as far away from music as you possible imagine. OTOH, when I attend a concert for which I've paid money, I expect to hear a good children's choir. If the man in question used different standards to judge SOTW by, more power to him. I couldn't. I use one standard to judge everything I see for which I am required to pay money. > I fear Thom that I may have indeed construed your post as a defense of > elistism despite your best efforts and even you telling me not to. I may be > leaning towards the defensive in my post, but I must admit that I am > wearying of what I feel to be a constant barrage on people who attend these > functions that "we" may deem to be of lesser artistic value. This brings up another point. In the church, we make a big deal about excellence in our everyday endeavors. We strive diligently to obtain salvation. Even the Celestial Kingdom consists of first, second, and third place winners. Why, then, when someone suggests that we should judge earthly works of art by stringent standards, is that someone considered elitist. Our religion is based on elitism. You don't get to the higest degree without working hard. The ultimate quality of immortality differs from kingdom to kingdom. We would never suggest in any of our sermons that it's okay if you just get to the Terrestrial. Trying and being sincere is enough. Well, it ain't in religion, and I don't believe it is enough in the arts. > I have to admit that I did not clamor to get tickets to the production, it > really did not interest me. I prefer Dickens' story and Lew Wallace's this > time of year and usually read and/or watch them again. > > Where does this put me in the evolutionary scale or artistic judgment? You have taste. Thom Duncan - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: cratkinson Subject: RE: [AML] What Is Art? Date: 12 Dec 2000 14:47:50 -0800 (PST) Hearing people defend and define their status as artist has been quite fascinating, because my reaction is the opposite - I don't like to call myself an artist. I don't make art - I make pots. I'm not a master potter and maybe I'm not comfortable enough with my skill level to allow myself the title of Artist, but I don't think that's it. I think it's a streak of anti-elitism. I'm just a regular person, not an artist. I can feel my nose pinching up at the thought of introducing myself as an artist. Are there others on the list who might say, "I'm not an artist, I'm a writer," or "I'm not an artist, I'm a composer," or is that title something everyone is striving for? Perhaps it's the nature of pottery itself. Perhaps it is too functional to be comfortable with the title. But no, I don't consider my non-functional pottery to be art, either. I just make pots. I love it. I live it. I dream pots at night. I see pots in carved bedposts, lamp finials and peoples' profiles. I see possibilities for decoration in wrought iron fences, the lines in quilts and the tracery of veins in a leaf. I even make a little money at it, though not enough to support myself. (Definitely my avocation, not my vocation!) I've studied pottery, dedicated my time to it, gotten up in the middle of the night to work, sacrificed other things to keep doing it and basically done what it takes to earn the moniker, but I don't want it. I don't make art, I make pots. Just my two cents. Or was that three? -Christine Atkinson _______________________________________________________ Send a cool gift with your E-Card http://www.bluemountain.com/giftcenter/ - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "mcnandon" Subject: [AML] SLOVER, _Joyful Noise_ Date: 01 Jan 2000 08:09:19 -0700 I finally saw _Joyful Noise_ at Pioneer Theatre and loved the experience. My non-member friend saw it in New York and said it was well received there. I expected more music, but the play was so well written and well performed that it didn't matter. I am anxious to read the play to pick up on things I might have missed. The plot was skillfully tied together and the insights were satisfying. Delightful! Nan McCulloch - 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] What Is Art? Date: 12 Dec 2000 18:09:32 -0600 Scott Tarbet wrote: > On a similar note I hope this isn't too personal, but I note that you're a > doctoral candidate in creative writing and critical theory. When you get > out of school will you use your doctorate to teach? Perhaps edit? > Critique? Or will you write full time? In other words, to what degree do > you intend to be a professional artist rather than an academic? Not too personal, and answering gives me a chance to make a further point. I plan to teach creative writing at the university level, which will be my avocation. My first thing is writing. Why not simply write? Because I couldn't show my face at church. The church in general (meaning my leaders) would see me as lazy and in violation of the gospel if I chose to stay home and write and let my wife support me. So, teaching is kind of my beard, in the mob sense of the term (a person used as an agent to hide the principle's identity). Teaching will keep the church off my back. I think that in general the true artist's avocation is their day job. Perhaps that's the fundamental difference in my mind. Stevens was a poet who worked for an insurance company, Williams a poet who was a family practitioner. When it's the other way, an insurance executive who writes poems, they are an amateur poet. The main problem I have heard (implicitly) voiced on this thread is that people want the term artist to always have a modifier (good artist, bad artist, amateur, professional, recognized, unrecognized, etc.) attached to it. I am getting the sense that people don't want anyone who is not the artist to decide if they are or are not an artist. That's probably okay. I will just modify the term artist as I mean it with the adjective, "true." This will no doubt cause still more trouble. Furthermore, the fear of the slippery slope has reared its head. I'm not always convinced that slippery slopes are always as slippery as people imagine them to be. I don't think that only professionals can be true artists, but I do think that only the dedicated can. And I don't think there is any serious risk of leaving people out who ought to be there. Thom Duncan said the following about the quality of output being one of the marks of an artists: > I may know how to build a simple box with wood, nails, and a > hammer. Does that make me a carpenter? Gary Snyder said something very similar. This brings to bear something really important. We recognize the difference between master craftsmen and hobbyists without much trouble. A guy builds some shelves and he's not confused with an artisan. I think that there is something to quality, but I'm kind of reluctant to admit it, because I think that this kind of talk makes people nervous, because they get on the defensive about who says what is good or not good. Then the argument goes to pot. Jonathan did notice that I was trying to define my terms by a quality of the artist themself, not by the judgement of the quality of the work. The crummiest thing in the world is the fact that some people are better artists than other people--also that some people are social misfits or ugly while others are not. But these things DO happen and we can't really take away the sting by saying that it's all in the eye of the beholder (SOMEBODY thinks that fellow is handsome; SOMEBODY thinks the neighbor girl is charming). The assumption, and escape hatch, implicit in all this is the fact that the somebody might not be ME. The underlying thing in all this is the fact that I don't seem to think of artist (or art) as a general category, like say, food. I define "artist" as a more specific term that is indicative of a mild to severe obsession with writing, dancing, painting, scuplting and the like. There is something tickling in my head about this thread's connection to LDS artists, but I'm not done thinking about it. I started into it at the beginning, but it petered. -- Todd Robert Petersen - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Merlyn J Clarke Subject: Re: [AML] What Is Art? Date: 12 Dec 2000 21:02:00 -0500 > >At 05:42 PM 12/11/00 -0600, "Marie Knowlton wrote: >> >> >>We might also add that one does not necessarily have to act with the fixed >>intention of "creating art" in order be an artist. Art resonates in the >>spirit of those creating it and touches the lives of those perceiving it. To >>insist that theatrical productions or any other art form meet standards of >>expertise before it is deemed worthy to be callet "art", misses the point >>entirely. We can debate endlessly about whether "Savior of the World" is >>good theatre, but what really matters is how it affects the lives of those >>who see it. >>================================= > Well, then how must it touch the lives of those who see it to be art? While a generous standard, it seems very imprecise and subjective. Our congregation suffered through a piano-vocal duet this Sunday. From the looks on their faces, the performers clearly thought they were giving us art--or at least inspiration. The member of the bishopric conducting the meeting was charitable enough to reinforce their assumption. But for anyone who could mentally measure out four beats to every measure in equal segments of time, the experience was painful. > Someone (Eudora Welty????) said anyone who writes is a writer. Undeniably true. But Garrison Keillor said if you wish to be sure that your writing is consistantly of high quality, the best thing you could do is spend the day typing from the pages of Moby Dick. > I'm only cutting into this thread at this point, but it seems to me that to equate a series of "to do" verbs (to write, to act, to play an instrument, to draw) with art is to dilute meanings and misconstrue. Simply because some "act" by someone else "touches" us may be little more than sentimentality, which very well may have its place, but it should not to be confused necessarily with art. > I think the experts are needed, with time as the probable final arbiter. > >Merlyn Clarke - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Steve Subject: Re: [AML] What Is Art? Date: 12 Dec 2000 20:36:21 -0700 on 12/12/00 5:09 PM, Todd Robert Petersen at peterst_osu@osu.net wrote: > I think that in general the true artist's avocation is their day job. What was Michaelangelo's day job? s. - 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] Orson Scott CARD, _Lost Boys_ (Review) Date: 13 Dec 2000 00:55:38 -0700 [Moderator's compilation of two posts by D. Michael on this topic.] Jonathan Langford wrote: > But I can speak to one quality that I have seen in the scenes of that book > I have read. This is (in my view, of course) by far the best depiction of > a believing Mormon suburban professional-type family I have read anywhere. > We have lots of literature that shows rural Utah-type Mormon experiences, > often very well. But I think we're lacking in realistic depictions of > believing Mormons in the environment that probably resembles the lives many > of us on the List live. I'm very impressed by Scott Card's accomplishment > in that regard, particularly in a book marketed to a mainstream audience. I will readily concede this point. My problem is, I already know what the daily life of a modern suburban Mormon family is like, so that positive trait alone doesn't cut it for me. (perhaps nonmembers would find it much more fascinating.) There's nothing else about the novel-length story to engage me for a novel's length. The supernatural horror aspects are much too sparse to do it. That's why _Lost Boys_ should have remained a short story. -- D. Michael Martindale dmichael@wwno.com Eileen Stringer wrote: > Where can one find the original short story? In the hardback book _Maps in a Mirror_, which is the official comprehensive collection of his short writings. This book was published in paperback as four volumes, and I don't know which one contains the short story in question: The Changed Man Flux Cruel Miracles Monkey Sonatas -- 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: [AML] re: What Is Art? Date: 13 Dec 2000 01:28:38 -0700 If you tell someone you're a writer (or an actor, or an artist, etc.), you'll get one of two reactions. You will be admired and revered by the clueless. Or you will evoke a smirk from someone who's been around the block more than once. Orson Scott Card illustrated the smirk reaction well when I once mentioned to him that I consider myself a writer. He said: "Have you actually written something, or are you still thinking of buying a pencil?" A Tom Hulce character in a forgettable movie expressed the same sentiment in a different way: "We call ourselves actors, but we're all just delivering pizza." I think the important distinction between whether someone is really an artist or not is indeed the commitment. Anyone can call himself an artist, and anyone ought to have the right to do so if he wants to. But there is a dilution of meaning to the term if it's not backed up with something. Thereby comes the smirk reaction. If you want to call yourself an artist, you'd better be ready to back that assertion up with facts. You'd better be producing. You'd better be producing seriously. That doesn't necessarily mean every minute of every day. That doesn't necessarily mean you're a Mozart instead of a Salieri. It does mean you're committed to learning how to be a good artist and are making progress in that direction. One principle expounded by teachers of success is "telling the truth in advance." To get what you want, you claim to already have it before you actually do. This tricks the subconscious mind into acting as if you already are what you claim. If someone is determined to become a quality artist, that person has the right to claim the title of artist before he has actually produced quality art, as long as he is making serious progress in that direction. Someone who may enjoy producing some form of art or another, but who is not making a serious effort to become excellent at it, is not an artist, but a hobbyist. Nothing wrong with that, if that's what the person wants to do. (Note I didn't use amateur vs. professional, because I don't think that's a meaningful distinction in defining an artist.) But we shouldn't be applying the label of artist (or writer or actor or whatever) to either hobbyists or wanna-be artists that never do anything, because it dilutes the term, and only produces the cynical smirk reaction when used. -- 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: Rob Pannoni Subject: Re: [AML] Minerva Teichert Paintings Date: 13 Dec 2000 07:25:01 -0800 The Springville Museum of Art has a brief bio and three of her paintings online at http://www.712.nebo.edu/Museum/teichert.html Apparently, BYU used to have an online gallery of her paintings (it showed up in the search engines) but the page isn't currently available, so I assume it has been taken down. -- 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: "Alan Mitchell" Subject: Re: [AML] What Is Art? Date: 13 Dec 2000 09:03:00 -0700 >pottery, dedicated my time to it, gotten up in the middle of the night to >work, sacrificed other things to keep doing it and basically done what it >takes to earn the moniker, but I don't want it. I don't make art, I make >pots. >Just my two cents. Or was that three? >-Christine Atkinson > I think Christine has touch on a good point. The word _art_ is abstract. Pots are not. Stories are not. Statutes are not. They are real as we create them. Performing art is also real. I think she is saying it does no good for her to enter the calculas (and by that I mean taking derivatives) of art and critique. She still has a pot to throw. I still have a book to write. Others a screenplay, a painting, a portrayal, a decorative egg, a speech, a pine-cone elf, etc. But are all those things ART? Art ART art? I think Christine and I will leave that for others to decide. Another comment: Since much good design agrees with the edict: Form Follows Function, what is the function of Mormon art? Alan Mitchell - 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] What Is Art? Date: 13 Dec 2000 12:19:48 -0600 I claimed that I though that "in general the true artist's avocation is their day job." Steve then asked, "What was Michaelangelo's day job?" My answer: painting frescoes for the Catholic Church. He was primarily a sculptor. Sistine Chapel--duty. David--labor of love. -- Todd Robert Petersen - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Scott Tarbet" Subject: RE: [AML] _Savior of the World_ (Drama) Date: 13 Dec 2000 11:31:57 -0700 Thom said: > I use one > standard to judge everything I see for which I am required to pay > money. I differentiate, even among things I'm required to pay for. I find that lets me enjoy different levels of production because I can screen out semi-expected deficiencies and just not worry about them. I say, "Boy, that was a wonderful high school production!" or "That reeked, even for high school!" Or I say, "What wonderful choreography for a community theatre production!" or "Even a community theatre could have done lots better with those sets!" Of course I have my own high standards for what pros do in terms of production values, direction, performance, etc. I guess that pluralism of standards makes it easy for me to look at a Church production like SOTW and hold it to a less-than-Broadway standard. Come to think of it, at its core SOTW *is* community theatre. -- Scott Tarbet - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Rose Green Subject: [AML] Orson Scott CARD, _Sarah_ (Review) Date: 12 Dec 2000 22:28:10 -0600 Card, Orson Scott. Sarah. Deseret Book Company (Shadow Mountain), 2000. Hardcover. 390 pp. $22.95. Target audience: both LDS and general audiences, including non-sci-fi (this is not a science fiction book); easy to find outside of LDS areas (I found my copy at the public library). Reviewed by Rose Green. First of all, I have mixed feelings about Card. On the negative side, he can be gratuitously cruel to his characters. He has interpretations of things I don't always agree with. And yet, he has also made me look at people in scripture in such a way that gives me spiritual insights I never would have come to otherwise. This is perhaps my favorite book by him so far. He isn't as cruel to Sarah as he has been to other characters (her own real circumstances take care of that element well enough, thank you). He's come up with a possible explanation of how Hagar came to be kicked out and why (and how we can still like Sarah, which is what most LDS seem to want to do). And, he makes a time and place far removed from our own come alive as if it were somewhere he had actually been. Briefly, this is the story of Sarah, her marriage to Abraham, and her own trials of faith. Maybe we don't all struggle with what it's like to be married to a prophet who God talks to personally all the time, and maybe we don't happen to be barren (with the prophecy of endless descendants hanging over us), and maybe we don't have to deal with polygamy in a personal sense. But Card does a wonderful job of making Sarah come alive to us today, because at the root of it all, the struggles she has are with her own faith. Faith in promises that just don't look likely. Faith that she as an individual has a part in the Lord's plan, just as much as the next person. Maybe not everyone has a trial just like Sarah's, but most people can probably relate to disappointments that make one question one's worth: "I will disappear, thought Sarai. I will become nothing; I will turn to dust without even having to go through the step of dying first. "Is this what God intended for me? Then why did he bring Abram to marry me in the first place? Better to have me die a lonely old virgin priestess in the temple of Asherah than to give me a prophet for a husband and then make me nothing in the eyes of his servants. "Nothing in my own eyes, too." "For the worst of it was that Sarai agreed with Hagar. It really was the mother-to-be who mattered, and nothing Sarai was doing amounted to anything compared to that great task." (p. 270) Ouch. Card doesn't back away from difficult or uncomfortable situations in his stories, and the Hagar complication seems to have been set up especially for him. If we can see a theme of faith in the book, we also can see the theme of marriage. There are relatively few novels dealing with the rest of one's life after marriage, compared to how one gets to that magical moment. Presumably because most writers seem to feel that there is no romantic tension after that point (or if there is tension, it's the kind that pulls a couple apart). Without sentimentalizing, Card shows Sarah and Abraham's relationship growing through all kinds of experiences in a way that I think is quite believable (and certainly full of tension). I particularly enjoyed the way he makes them equal partners in whatever goes on in their lives, and showing how each of them are right at times and need to listen to each other about their decisions. I don't know, of course, what the real relationship between them was, but I rather hope it was something like what Card has written. Overall, I was happily surprised by the book. I'm not particularly a Card fan to begin with, and I was skeptical at first to think that a man who has one wife and five children could accurately bring to life the mind of a barren woman living in times of polygamy. I'm pleased to say that he's done an admirable job. This is the first book in a series of three about women from the book of Genesis. I am looking forward to Rebecca, the subject of the next book. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Get more from the Web. FREE MSN Explorer download : http://explorer.msn.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: [AML] Re: What Is Art? Date: 13 Dec 2000 11:28:59 -0700 I see the 'what is an artist' argument as essentially mirroring the 'are = Mormons Christians' argument. We get very offended when other churches = argue that Mormons aren't Christians, and yet the case against us is quite = strong. We surely reject most of the creeds of mainstream Christianity. = I think saying we're not Christians is a defensible point of view. Except = we also worship Jesus Christ and Him crucified, so of course we're = Christians. Call me a Christian, call me a non-Christian; I don't care = either way. I know what I believe, and I know what I'm supposed to do = about it, and I also do it, occasionally. Well, same with artists. I'm surely not an artist. I can't draw worth a = hoot, and my one and only attempt at sculpture came in Cub Scouts some = thirty five years ago when I created a very nice abstract clay work that = started off as an ashtray, which would have been a very thoughtful gift = for my non-smoking parents. I'm not an artist at all. I'm a playwright, = as defined as 'someone who writes three plays a year, regular as clockwork,= and occasionally gets some of them produced.' Is a playwright an artist? = Am I a real playwright, as defined as 'someone whose work gets done on = Broadway regularly?' I could care less about either question. I'm going = to keep on writing anyway.=20 Eric Samuelsen - 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] _Savior of the World_ (Drama) Date: 13 Dec 2000 14:27:14 -0500 Just a few random thoughts before AML takes off for the holidays. Someone on the list echoed a few of my earlier questions about the loss of exuberance within the church. My laments were directed at the ho-hum hosanna shout, theirs were at SOTW. But since then, I have wondered about the wonderful outpouring of energy and spirit associated with the Palmyra Pageant. This production, as surely as SOTW, bears the imprimatur of the GAs and it is wonderful theater by, I think, anyone's standards. "The Church" can make good, maybe even great, theater. It does year after year in upstate New York. So what's the diff? I think maybe, the setting is an obvious place to start. I think the new conference center is a new car straight from the dealership and you don't want to turn a lot of children with dripping ice cream cones loose into the back seat. Yet. Maybe in a year or two after the new-car smell has been worn away...then the artists can get in and muss up the stage. Another thing that occurs to me is how closely The Brethren's artistic productions adhere to the philosophy of Leo Tolstoy as he expressed in "What Is Art?" The last time I admitted to struggling with Plato's ideas and enunciated those ideas, many on the list assumed I was a proponent of those ideas. All I was doing was thinking that the prophets, seers and revelators of this church seemed to be coming from the same direction as Plato and that I, as a believing LDS artist, had a duty to struggle and try to come to an understanding of my place within the Kingdom. Now we have very Tolstoian artistic sensibilities coming out of Church HQ. And again I feel the need to understand, struggle and reconcile this philosophy to myself as an artist laboring in the kingdom. What does Tolstoy say? At the risk of oversimplifying, he says that art communicates on an emotional level and that it is infectious--that if music is sad, people will feel sad as they listen to it. Because Tolstoy was a devout Christian, he believed that the highest purpose (ie. the greatest art) created and communicated feelings of Unity, specifically that all of us are children of a heavenly father, joined in divine brotherhood and sisterhood. Tolstoy also thought that if any art required expertise to appreciate it, that if it was so complex or subtle that its intent was obscured, then it could not qualify as "great" because it was leaving some of its audience behind. He felt Beethoven's Ninth fell short of greatness because the average listener was too often confused by its complexities. I have read with great interest the accounts of the making of SOTW because it seems that Tolstoy himself were the producer. Decisions seem to have been made with the intent of not creating technically superior music or linguistically dazzling dialog or eye-popping spectacle, but rather creating something far simpler and humbler--a production that unites people of average sensibilities with feelings of unity. Again, I say this not as a proponent of this strategy, but as a person who perceives this strategy and may be misreading on top of that. And also as a writer who brings complexity and subtlety into my own writings because as an artist, I'm not satisfied with the other. And now I have to struggle, because I'm at odds with the leadership of my church whom I've sustained. One way of reconciling my practice as an artist (complex and subtle) with the product of the church (simple and obvious) is to take solace in the scriptures. As far as writing goes, the Bible and Book of Mormon are complex and subtle. Or at least I think so. Others may think the scriptures are simple and obvious. And this is the genius of sacred writ--that it works on levels. Few writers achieve this, those whose work can be read and loved by both juveniles and academics. But it is a worthy aspiration. Happy Holidays from Upstate New York, Tony Markham - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Marie Knowlton" Subject: RE: [AML] What Is Art? Date: 13 Dec 2000 13:00:28 -0700 A couple of stray thoughts on this ongoing debate: 1. Yes, Todd, you're going to get slaughtered for your observations by all of us who aren't able to spend every spare moment of our lives pursuing our individual muses. I don't believe obsession is a valid criteria for determining who is or isn't an artist. Controlled excess is often more productive than uncontrolled indulgence. If the sheer quantity of production (or at least time spent producing) is a criteria (which in itself is debatable), then our life circumstances would effectively dictate who can be an artist. I refuse to accept that idea. 2. The other standard you set forth is that a certain level of professional skill must be attained in order to creat "art". I have to agree with Scott that this puts us on the same level as dentists and pest-control personnel. Besides, we are forgetting the very obvious complication that skill is often in the eye of the beholder. Since when have any of us ever managed to agree on such unquantifiable definitions? Who gets to define it? Do we elitists become judge and jury? Do we let the audience decide? The mere fact that one devotes his life to creating art may make him more prone to self-congratulatory labeling, but does not, IMHO, make him an artist. Exclusivity is dangerous ground here! [Marie Knowlton] - 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] Orson Scott CARD, _Lost Boys_ (Review) Date: 13 Dec 2000 14:25:25 -0700 On Tue, Dec 12, 2000 at 10:12:34AM -0700, Eileen Stringer wrote: > > >_Lost Boys_ disappoints as either a horror novel or a mainstream > >real-life story. I would suggest reading the original short story and > >then moving on to some of Card's more engaging works. > > Where can one find the original short story? >From the Mormon SF Bibliography (http://home.airswitch.net/MormonBib/stories.html): "Lost Boys." Magazine of Fantasy & Science Fiction 77 (October 1989): 73-91. Reprinted in Back from the Dead, ed. Martin H. Greenberg and Charles G. Waugh , 83-. New York: DAW, 1991. Reprinted in Maps in a Mirror, 108-20. Reprinted in More Dixie Ghosts, ed. Frank D. McSherry Jr., Charles G. Waugh, and Martin H. Greenberg, 1-. Rutledge Hill, 1994. Reprinted in A Century of Fantasy 1980-1989, ed. Robert Silverberg and Martin H. Greenberg, 310-27. New York: MJF Books, 1996. Reprinted in Children of the Night, ed. Martin H. Greenberg, 193-. Cumberland House, 1999. [Locus Award 90; Hugo Award nominee 90; Nebula Award nominee 89] (Many thanks to Marny Parkin for her work on this bib.) -- Terry L Jeffress AML Webmaster and AML-List Review Archivist - 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] re: What Is Art? Date: 13 Dec 2000 15:06:19 -0700 You know what's weird? All my life, I wanted to be a writer. I viewed a "writer" as "someone who actually makes a living at writing." I don't necessarily hold to this definition now -- someone who doesn't make a living at it could be one, too, I think -- but for sure, if you're getting paid for writing, you're a writer. (You may not be an ARTIST, but that's another issue.) Now that I actually am, by all accounts, a writer -- getting paid to write creatively and analytically -- it's still weird for me to tell people I'm a writer when they ask what I do. Maybe it doesn't sound like a "real" job, or maybe I still can't believe that I'm actually making a living at what I always wanted to do. "Writers" should be novelists, sitting around in sweaters with a dog at their feet while they smoke a pipe and type on an old manual typewriter. I sit in a noisy office and eat food from Wendy's while I try to figure out why, exactly, a particular movie sucked so bad, and I use a computer. (I do occasionally wear sweaters, though.) I guess my point is that sometimes our definitions of things are so precise or romanticized that they automatically can never apply to us. When I was a kid, my image of missionaries was "someone older than me," a definition that would mathematically exclude me no matter how old I got. When I became a missionary, I still kept thinking that everyone who had been out longer than I had was YEARS older than I was. Eventually, my definition had to change to include myself because, for better or worse, there was no denying I was a missionary. As for "artist": I'm still coming to grips with the possibility that I might be an "artist." I actually don't know if I am or not. (Should this be a new thread? "Is Eric D. Snider an artist?") I do write and perform some artistic things, in addition to critiquing other people's art. Some would say definitely, I'm an artist. Yet that title sounds so pretentious to me, like I'm being boastful to even suggest I MIGHT be one. Is an artist necessarily someone who produces masterpieces, great works of art? Or can an artist be someone who produces everyday, ordinary works of art? Is there such a thing as an "everyday, ordinary work of art"? Or is anything that is "art" automatically non-mundane? Just askin'. 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: Terry L Jeffress Subject: Re: [AML] Orson Scott CARD, _Lost Boys_ (Review) Date: 13 Dec 2000 15:19:51 -0700 On Tue, Dec 12, 2000 at 09:46:35AM -0600, Jonathan Langford wrote: > This [_Lost Boys_] is (in my view, of course) by far the best depiction of > a believing Mormon suburban professional-type family I have read anywhere. > We have lots of literature that shows rural Utah-type Mormon experiences, > often very well. But I think we're lacking in realistic depictions of > believing Mormons in the environment that probably resembles the lives many > of us on the List live. I'm very impressed by Scott Card's accomplishment > in that regard, particularly in a book marketed to a mainstream audience. Card depicted a suburban Mormon family, but didn't do anything with it. Sure every character has to live somewhere and probably practices some religion. If "the cigar is just a cigar," then let the man smoke it without making a big deal about the brand. When an author focuses on a detail, I expect that detail to have some bearing on the story. A detail should forward plot, characterization, setting, or something. With the amount of time Card focuses on depicting Mormon characters in _Lost Boys,_ you would expect that some aspect of that Mormonness would have a bearing on the story. But you could make the characters Lutheran (or atheist) without any change to the story or its effect. If a detail has no bearing on the story, then you have created a literary red herring -- a clue that distracts the reader from the real message the story should tell. I like music with electric guitars. I particularly like musicians like Joe Satriani that do mostly instrumental work. Many metal groups have excellent instrumental introductions to their songs, but as soon as they start their tonal screaming, I have to find something else to listen to because the vocals ruin the rest of the song. I could make recordings of just the parts that I like, but then I would have a 90 minute tape with about 180 introductions. But listening to just the parts I like (introductions and an occasional bridge) would not satisfy my ear -- like spraying freshly-baked-bread air freshener instead of baking the real thing. I do grant that Card makes a good depiction of a typical, suburban Mormon family -- one outside Utah even. I can even hail _Lost Boys_ as a valiant missionary effort -- trying to bring an understanding of Mormon values to the general populace. On the sentence, paragraph, scene, and chapter level, Card's writing in _Lost Boys_ functions well. Good execution and depiction. Good character development. You understand the character's motivations and feelings. You could extract just about any chapter and use it as an example of good writing, or a good depiction of a western family in the south or of suburban Mormons. But to me these extracted pieces would have the same satisfaction as a tape full of the good parts of songs. Perhaps useful for academic study, but useless to me as satisfying works of art. I, like Jonathan, would like to see more believing, suburban Mormons depicted in literature. But I think you have to have a reason for emphasizing a character's religion, and it should play an important role in your plot. -- Terry L Jeffress AML Webmaster and AML-List Review Archivist - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Deborah Wager Subject: Re: [AML] What Is Art? Date: 13 Dec 2000 20:58:12 -0700 Marie Knowlton wrote: > 2. The other standard you set forth is that a certain level of professional > skill must be attained in order to creat "art". Heard today on KBYU radio: The country of Iran is going to be requiring pop singers to certify skills in a two-part exam. One part tests musical theory knowlege, the other singing skill. Didn't mention what the restrictions would be if they don't pass. Debbie Wager - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "mcnandon" Subject: [AML] Rolling Stone Interview Date: 01 Jan 2000 10:47:09 -0700 Did you catch the article by Diane Urbani in the Deseret News regarding the interview of Rocky Anderson by Dan Baum of Rolling Stone Magazine? Said Dan Baum, _Salt Lake City is its own place. My picture of Salt Lake City has been radically altered, due in large part to my meeting with Anderson. I came back high on Salt Lake. I'm thinking about writing a novel with a Mormon theme. The Mormons are pretty fascinating...and the political organization of the LDS Church is admirable. I told my wife, 'Maybe we ought to move there. There are all these cool people.'_ Baum also interviewed Salt Lake teenager and _Almost Famous_ star Patrick Fugit. Nan McCulloch [MOD: If anyone wants to clip Diane Urbani's article and send it on to the List, _Deseret News_ is one of those organizations we have permission to post articles from... For that matter, we could certainly use some volunteers to look through local Utah papers and forward articles with a literary slant, since this is something I don't have time and resources to do myself.] - 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] Orson Scott CARD, _Sarah_ (Review) Date: 14 Dec 2000 01:54:17 -0700 Rose Green wrote: > First of all, I have mixed feelings about Card. On the negative side, he can > be gratuitously cruel to his characters. I strongly disagree with this statement. There is nothing gratuitous about the cruelty his characters experience. If that cruelty were toned down, he would be writing nothing more than pleasant, interesting stories. With it, he creates characters that people relate to and care about deeply. I think there's a lot to his premise that the main character in a story is probably the one who suffers the most. Without conflict (which generally causes suffering) there is no story. With great conflict, great suffering, a story has the potential to have great impact. -- 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: "renatorigo" Subject: RE: [AML] What Is Art? Date: 14 Dec 2000 07:42:35 -0200 > ART IS PERSONAL EXPRESSION...WITHOUT JUDGEMENT... [Renato Rigo] - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "renatorigo" Subject: [AML] Merry Christmas and Happy New Year Date: 14 Dec 2000 07:55:11 -0200 I=B4ll be on vacation...and fortunatelly the list will be on vacation too... I wish you, members of the list and moderator, I merry Christmas and a Very Successful New Year.... Renato Rigo renatorigo@ig.com.br __________________________________________________________________________ Preocupado com v=EDrus? Crie seu e-mail gr=E1tis do BOL com antiv=EDrus ! http://www.bol.com.br - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Alan Mitchell" Subject: Re: [AML] What Is Art? Date: 14 Dec 2000 09:29:22 -0700 -----Original Message----- >Why not simply write? Because I couldn't show my face at church. The >church in general (meaning my leaders) would see me as lazy and in violation >of the gospel if I chose to stay home and write and let my wife support me. >So, teaching is kind of my beard, in the mob sense of the term (a person >used as an agent to hide the principle's identity). Teaching will keep the >church off my back. If you allow me to offer my personal experience. I never told anyone in my ward and small town (pop 250 and they know everyone else's business) that I was writing a novel. They assumed I was watching my four-year old and tinkering at the ranch while my wife taught school. Now that it is published, most members of the ward were surprised and proud to have a celebrity in their midst. Very small celebrity but this is a very small town and we take what we can get. Yes, the bishop and my family and I are concerned about my day job since my wife left teaching. It alternates between the ranch, which they all know won't make money, and a tech writing job which makes little and is irregular but lets one belong to ranks of the employed. >Perhaps that's the fundamental difference in my mind. Stevens was a poet >who worked for an insurance company, Williams a poet who was a family >practitioner. How do you know it was not the other way around in their minds? For decades Frost was a farmer who had a poetry problem. And Williams must have had his patient's interests at heart. I am opposed to the idea that an artist must remove himself from the mundane things of the earth! But I read an essay once that slammed William Carlos Williams for his _suburban_ poetry. The author's evil point was that poetry should be left up to the poets and not some country doctor. When it's the other way, an insurance executive who writes >poems, they are an amateur poet. You may be right about the insurance executive. An artist may have to remove himself from the grip of the power/money/popularity ideology. Are their any insurance executives lurking on the list to prove Todd wrong? Finally, do you -Todd- really think that teaching is the best beard to hide behind? Haven't we on the AML gone down this road before? Alan Mitchell - 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: Holiday Date: 14 Dec 2000 11:17:52 -0700 Merry Christmas to everyone on the list!! And a Happy New Year, too! Neal Kramer - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Scott Tarbet" Subject: RE: [AML] What Is Art? Date: 14 Dec 2000 10:04:37 -0700 Todd said: > Why not simply write? Because I couldn't show my face at church. The > church in general (meaning my leaders) would see me as lazy and > in violation > of the gospel if I chose to stay home and write and let my wife > support me. On a brighter note, being an artist is the best of all ways to practice the creative anachronism Dr. Lawrence Peters (he of _The Peter Principal_) recommends for staying away from promotions. You'll never have to worry about getting stuck being a bishop if you're "artsy". Facial hair doesn't quite work, because they can and will ask you to shave it off. Even taking a Jolt Cola to PEC with you doesn't quite work. But being suspiciously creative works like a charm. -- Scott Tarbet [MOD: I'm going to save a post and make a comment here. I know of at least one former AML-List member--a published author of children's sf&f, I think (Bruce Thatcher)--who's a bishop. Gene England was a bishop of a student ward at BYU. Tom Rogers has been a branch president in the Missionary Training Center, and more recently a mission president. And Richard Johnson, on this List, has recounted his experiences serving as a branch president while a professor of theater. So I'm not sure even this is a completely safe precaution...] - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Scott Tarbet" Subject: RE: [AML] _Savior of the World_ (Drama) Date: 14 Dec 2000 10:19:53 -0700 Tony said, speaking of the Palmyra Pageant: > "The Church" can make good, maybe even great, theater. It does > year after year in > upstate New York. So what's the diff? Scott Card wrote it. He's the GA's go-to guy and they pretty much give him free rein. Viz "Barefoot To Zion". Myself, I'd have been tickled if they had put his "Pageant Wagon" or "Stone Tables" on the Conference Center stage as its first offering. -- Scott Tarbet - 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] Rolling Stone Interview Date: 14 Dec 2000 10:02:43 -0700 Deseret News Archives, Tuesday, December 12, 2000=20 Rolling Stone talks to Rocky Writer 'high on S.L.' after doing story about mayor By Diane Urbani Deseret News staff writer=20 Salt Lake teenager and "Almost Famous" star Patrick Fugit and Mayor Rocky = Anderson have something in common: Both received a phone call from Rolling = Stone magazine, and both were almost speechless when it came. Fugit's fictional character William Miller, a teenage journalist, got the = call in the movie "Almost Famous." It started the character's career as a = rock 'n' roll journalist, a role that boosted Fugit's acting career. But Anderson got it in real life, from a journalist he already admired. "I was especially excited that (Rolling Stone) sent Dan Baum," Anderson = said. The mayor had read "Smoke and Mirrors: The War on Drugs and the = Politics of Failure," Baum's book on Drug Abuse Resistance Education, or = DARE, and other efforts to reduce drug abuse in America. "Rolling Stone called me and asked me to write a profile of the mayor of = Salt Lake City," said Baum, a free-lance contributor who lives in = Watsonville, Calif. "Now, at the time, I think Rolling Stone thought of = Salt Lake as a pretty conservative place," not someplace where the city's = top politician would drop the DARE program. "I have since learned," Baum added, "that Utah is a conservative place and = Salt Lake City is its own place." Baum flew here in early October. He interviewed the mayor, chief of staff = Deeda Seed, police and school district officials, students and others who = disagreed with Anderson's cancellation of DARE last July. His article, = headlined "Salt Lake City Drops DARE: Maverick Mayor Rocky Anderson Calls = the School Anti-Drug Program 'An Absolute Fraud,' " appeared in the Nov. = 23 issue. "I didn't get my picture on the cover of Rolling Stone," lamented = Anderson. Actually, he suspected he wouldn't be able to compete with Drew = Barrymore, whose tattooed tummy did front the magazine. Seed, however, = said she made quite a few copies of the article about her boss and = distributed them to friends and associates. Baum's article describes the mayor as "a boyish 49" who "made his = reputation as an ACLU-backed attorney suing the state prison and the Salt = Lake City police for brutality. . . . He supports gay marriage, abortion = rights and stronger gun control, and opposes the death penalty. That = someone of Anderson's politics leads the capital of one of the most = politically conservative states is not so anomalous: Salt Lake City hasn't = had a Republican mayor in 29 years." Baum goes on to assert Anderson's position against DARE: "Parents like it = because, with its high profile, DARE makes it easy to believe something is = being done to keep kids off drugs. It has not been shown, however, that = the program actually works. A raft of peer-reviewed studies, one spanning = 10 years, have demonstrated that current and former DARE students are as = likely to use drugs as those who never took the course." DARE officials declined to be interviewed for Baum's story. Last week, White House drug policy director Barry McCaffrey visited Salt = Lake City and met with the mayor. McCaffrey, long a DARE advocate, urged = Anderson to find a drug-prevention program to replace DARE in schools, but = the mayor has yet to agree with school district officials about which = programs will be most effective and most practical. The McCaffrey-Anderson = conference was productive, according to the mayor, but the two men = continue to disagree over the best approach to the nation's drug problems. Baum quotes Anderson in his article: "It would be preferable to keep kids = from doing drugs, but we're not going to do that in all cases. For them we = ought to do what we can to reduce the harm for everyone." Back home in California, Baum says his picture of Salt Lake City has been = radically altered, due in large part to his meeting with Anderson. "He was well-informed and committed to his positions, without being = knee-jerk ideological," the author said. "He also has a refreshingly = unashamed attitude about the '60s. The tragedy has been that the legacy of = the '60s is either disparaged openly or shied away from. Rocky takes the = attitude that those ideals of peace, harmony and tolerance aren't anything = to shy away from. We should be proud of them." And out to dinner at the New Yorker restaurant, "Rocky was working the = room. He obviously loves his job." "I came back high on Salt Lake," Baum added. He writes nonfiction articles = and books, including this year's acclaimed "Citizen Coors: An American = Dynasty." Now he says, "I'm thinking about writing a novel with a Mormon = theme. The Mormons are pretty fascinating . . . and the political = organization of the LDS Church is admirable. I told my wife, 'Maybe we = ought to move there. There are all these cool people.' " E-mail: durbani@desnews.com =A9 2000 Deseret News Publishing Co. -------- For a sample copy of IRREANTUM, a Mormon literary quarterly, send $4 to = the Association for Mormon Letters, 262 S. Main St., Springville, UT = 84663. - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jonathan Langford Subject: [AML] Merry Christmas Etc. Date: 14 Dec 2000 13:07:44 -0600 Folks, I've started getting multiple "Merry Christmas"-type messages, which could turn into a flood quite easily (with our 200-plus List subscribers). So with apologies to those who have already sent messages, I'm going to pull the plug on this, and instead exercise my moderator's prerogative and send out a general List Christmas/New Year's/Hanukkah's greeting, that everyone List member should consider as coming from every other List member. So, here goes: MERRY CHRISTMAS! HAPPY NEW YEAR! HAPPY HANUKKAH! SALUBRIOUS SOLSTICE! and for all of us in the U.S., A MERRY END-OF-ELECTION TO YOU! 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: "Christopher Bigelow" Subject: [AML] Instructions to Guadalahonky's Date: 14 Dec 2000 12:07:16 -0700 Join an AML family night dinner at 5:30, Monday, 12/18. We've made reservations for those who RSVPed (16 people). Feel free to = join us spontaneously, but we might not all be at the same table. If = desired, people might do other things afterward, like take the train = downtown and back or find somewhere to chat into the night. Guadalahonky's Mexican Restaurant 136 S 12300 S=20 Draper, UT 84020 801-571-3838 >From I-15, take exit 294 (Draper/Riverton) and go east. You'll see it on = the right. Chris Bigelow -------- For a sample copy of IRREANTUM, a Mormon literary quarterly, send $4 to = the Association for Mormon Letters, 262 S. Main St., Springville, UT = 84663. - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Brandi Rainey" Subject: Re: [AML] Merry Christmas Etc. Date: 14 Dec 2000 12:14:31 -0700 and for those of us who celebrate Kwanzaa .... may this be a time of love = and celebration. Brandi Rainey [MOD: Okay, so I missed some...] >>> Jonathan Langford 12/14 12:07 PM >>> Folks, I've started getting multiple "Merry Christmas"-type messages, which could = turn into a flood quite easily (with our 200-plus List subscribers). So = with apologies to those who have already sent messages, I'm going to pull = the plug on this, and instead exercise my moderator's prerogative and send = out a general List Christmas/New Year's/Hanukkah's greeting, that everyone = List member should consider as coming from every other List member. So, = here goes: MERRY CHRISTMAS! HAPPY NEW YEAR! HAPPY HANUKKAH! SALUBRIOUS SOLSTICE! and for all of us in the U.S.,=20 A MERRY END-OF-ELECTION TO YOU! Jonathan Langford AML-List Moderator - 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: "Creative Actions" Subject: [AML] Old Mormon Hymns about Native Americans--Help Date: 14 Dec 2000 17:54:08 -0800 Thanks to those of you who sent suggestions for Mormon fiction about Native Americans a couple weeks ago. I have nearly completed writing a paper for a Native American Lit. class. The major focus of the paper is a brief look at two hymns, "O Stop and Tell Me, Red Man," by W.W. Phelps, and "Great Spirit, Listen to the Red Man's Wail!" by Charles W. Penrose. Both hymns were included in the 1928 edition of _Latter-day Saint Hymns_. I have also included some background about the Book of Mormon Lamanite story, the curse, the "white and delightsome" promise, and the later substitution of "pure" for white, and a premise that the Mormon literature regarding Lamanites would have affected the beliefs about, and attitudes toward, "Lamanites." As I was writing, though, it struck me that it would be interesting to get the response of some LDS people (other than myself) to the hymns, to the old "white & delightsome" scripture, and a couple quotes regarding Native Americans by Brigham Young and Spencer Kimball. I'd appreciate help in the following ways: 1*Tom Murphy steered me in the direction of Jane Hafen. Much to my delight, surprise, and slight dismay, it sounds like she's covered this ground quite thoroughly. Dr. Hafen sent me references for her articles, and she and I will correspond more next week. But, does anyone have easy access to the following, and would you be willing to fax, or e-them to me? Dialogue_18 (Winter 1985): 133-142, "'Great Spirit Listen': The American Indian in Mormon Music" by Dr. Jane Hafen _A New Genesis: A Mormon Reader on Land and Community._ Ed. Terry Tempest Williams, William B. Smart, and Gibbs M. Smith. Salt Lake City, Utah: Gibbs SMith Books, 1998. 35-41, "The Being and Place of a Native American Mormon," by Dr. Jane Hafen. 2*Anyone interested in answering 20 or so questions about your Mormonness, your understanding of Lamanites, your response to the hymns and quotes? So far I have interviewed, mostly, white, male, Ph.D university professors, and would like to have a little more diversity, though if you're white, male, or a Ph.D or professor, don't let that stop you from responding. 3*Do you have any Native American Mormon contacts who would like to participate? I know the list is going on vacation, so you can contact me personally at: creativeactions@mcn.net or leave a message at my office(406)245-7990, and I'll get back to you. Thanks. Jacqui Garcia - 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] Orson Scott CARD, _Lost Boys_ (Review) Date: 15 Dec 2000 01:05:59 -0700 Terry L Jeffress wrote: > Card depicted a suburban Mormon family, but didn't do anything with > it. Sure every character has to live somewhere and probably practices > some religion. If "the cigar is just a cigar," then let the man smoke > it without making a big deal about the brand. When an author focuses > on a detail, I expect that detail to have some bearing on the story. > I, like Jonathan, would like to see more believing, suburban Mormons > depicted in literature. But I think you have to have a reason for > emphasizing a character's religion, and it should play an important > role in your plot. No, I don't agree with this at all. First of all, a character's religion is hardly a "detail." It's an integral part of his life. I defy anyone to write a novel-length story of someone "smoking a religion" without giving it a brand name, and have the story feel satisfying. Many books and films in the 20th century have ignored religion in people's lives, but I also think that's a major defect in 20th century storytelling. On the other hand, if you're going to include a religious character, a generic religion is not likely to work. Not for a novel-length story or feature-length movie. I don't think the problem with _Lost Boys_ is that the LDS religion, so intricately interwoven into the characters, didn't affect the plot. Haven't we discussed before about how things like _Bash_ could be told from the point of view of any religion, but that it's important to be specific when painting a character and a plot? That's all that's happening here. The problem with _Lost Boys_ is that it didn't do much of _anything_ with the main point of the story until the end. Change the religion or leave it out, and that error would still be there bothering us. -- 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] What Is Art? Date: 15 Dec 2000 01:15:04 -0700 Scott Tarbet wrote: > You'll never have to worry about getting stuck being a bishop if you're "artsy". > [MOD: I'm not sure even this is a completely safe precaution...] Write something like _Backslider_ or _Dancing Naked_, and I bet it would be. -- 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] Shaken Faith and Truth Date: 14 Dec 2000 20:41:02 -0600 Jacob Proffitt wrote > A story about Irish Catholics dealing with the death of a friend of their > child should very well attempt to represent the faithful response to that > death in the context of that story. Particularly if that story claims to > represent the faithful Irish Catholic father. Don't get me wrong--I've never asked that the gospel, God, or the Spirit be central to all our stories. I don't think it is too much to ask for it to be *present* in those stories about faithful LDS people, though. I agree with Jacob here, but add one caveat, one that comes to mind as I think of Dickens' A CHRISTMAS CAROL. The Cratchits are faithful, but on Christmas Eve, Mrs. Cratchit won't drink to Scrooge's health. It is a tense moment. She's not showing much kindness, and it's clear that this is both a lapse on her part and something not out of hand. In fact, we'd probably all be less like Bob and more like his wife. This is instructive, in this discussion, because it shows that in the representation of the faithful, one is obligated to also show their lapses, the times when they don't measure up to their own ideals. When the faithful aren't represented as human (and all that means) they become untrustworthy to readers, which makes faithful people suspect in the eyes of all kinds of people. Another example: in my favorite telvision show, THE WEST WING, President Bartlett slaves over a decision to pardon a death row inmate who is up for execution. He and others in the White House seek (and receive unbidden) spiritual advice from all kinds of people--priests, rabbis, and the like--at the end the President realizes that he blew it, and receives confession from Karl Malden. I think this is a good representation of a faithful person who has blown it and must face the music. The danger when asking for accurate representation of the faithful comes when that "accuracy" (and I use this term in the guarded, cautious way of the postmodernist) is sacrificed for romantic and idealized notions of what the faithful are and what they do. The presence of the Gospel, God, or the Spirit in stories of the faithful must, I think, be done with care in order to avoid the sense that the author is evengelizing. It also needs to maintain a story's need for conflict. And in a more complicated sense, sometimes stories of the faithful need to be about those lapses of our interaction with God, when we have forgotten to pray, to act with kindness, to interact with grace. Sometimes God is still there even when we are NOT doing the right thing, when we have neglected our duties and forgotten Him. I think that our literature should show those moments as well. I mention this, because I think that this view is not shared by many readers, who want to be edified by tales of churchy heroism, (e.g. the savvy, in-touch home teacher is prompted to bring his home teaching family a ham and some gifts on Christmas, thus saving the father shame and bringing joy and happiness on Christmas). In literature, I am more interested in "evil and its consequences;" however, in conference, I like something else--reprimand. I very rarely like stories that simply end with; "Prayers were spoken, aloud and in silence. Tears were shed in that sweet, sweet moment of profound and pleading prayer. This hometeacher listened to the spirit and went willingly, without waiting to do his father's will . . ." As it has been mentioned. Some people like these kinds of stories, but I do not. I want the story of the fellow who did not go to visit one of his families on Christmas Eve becuase he and his wife are the only members in his family. The scriptures aren't really melancholy, but I kind of like BEING melancholy sometimes. Literature can help me see and understand this important aspect of being in the world. -- Todd Robert Petersen - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "bob/bernice hughes" Subject: Re: [AML] What Is Art? Date: 15 Dec 2000 07:47:20 -0700 >From: "Alan Mitchell" You may be right about the insurance executive. An artist may have to remove himself from the grip of the power/money/popularity ideology. Are their any insurance executives lurking on the list to prove Todd wrong? Finally, do you -Todd- really think that teaching is the best beard to hide behind? Haven't we on the AML gone down this road before? Alan Mitchell ... And what if there were regular people lurking? Maybe they would write poetry that regular people understood, instead of just for the ivory tower academy. Some of us contend that the academic poets are the ones who killed poetry. Not dead in Mormon arts, you say? Ask a few of your typical ward members if they can name any Mormon poets? Eliza Snow, Orson Whitney. Maybe Emma Lou Thayne. Sorry, but that's it, and two of them don't write for us anymore. Go down to Deseret Book and try to find the poetry section. Good luck. Try and find any books by Mormon poets. Good luck. For your holiday reading pleasure, check out the Atlantic's website article on this topic (poetry/creative writing) by Dana Gioia, and the follow up article at: http://www.theatlantic.com/unbound/poetry//gioia/gioia.htm http://www.theatlantic.com/unbound/poetry//gioia/poetaud.htm Ho! Ho! Ho! Bob Hughes _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Steve Subject: [AML] Re: What Is Art? Date: 15 Dec 2000 08:13:54 -0700 Hi Listers, All this needless haggling over definitions of Art and Artists when someone has already summed it up so neatly! "Art is a lie which makes us realize the truth." -Picasso So, by inference, "Artists are liars who..." :-) Steve - - skperry@mac.com http://stevenkappperry.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] Instructions to Guadalahonky's Date: 14 Dec 2000 14:49:25 -0700 On Thu, 14 Dec 2000 12:07:16 -0700, Christopher Bigelow wrote: >136 S 12300 S=20 Is this one of them newfangled quantum addresses? There's two souths in there... :) Jacob - 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] What Is Art? Date: 15 Dec 2000 10:29:18 -0800 "Eric R. Samuelsen" wrote: > > I can't draw worth a hoot, and my one and only attempt at sculpture came in Cub Scouts some thirty five years ago when I created a very nice abstract clay work that started off as an ashtray, which would have been a very thoughtful gift for my non-smoking parents. This made me laugh because it reminded me that when I was in elementary school I made a light cover for an overhead light out of clay. I was clever enough to at least put a few holes in it, but all-in-all, not one of my better ideas. It blocked out the light nearly completely. I thought about converting it to an ashtray, but the holes were a bit of a problem for that application. And my parents didn't smoke either. I guess it must have been art. It sure as heck wasn't good for anything else. -- 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: John Bennion (by way of Jonathan Langford ) Subject: [AML] AML Annual Meeting Date: 15 Dec 2000 15:39:30 -0600 The following is the program for the upcoming AML Annual Meeting. If you sent me a proposal, and I haven’t contacted you, please let me know (john_bennion@byu.edu). Association for Mormon Letters Annual Conference Zion and New York: Bridges and Innovations February 24, 2001 Gore Auditorium, Westminster College, Salt Lake City, Utah 8-8:30 Registration 8:30 - 9:15 Plenary Session Steven Sondrup and Gideon Burton "Charting the Future from the Past: A History of the Association for Mormon Letters” 9:25 - 10:35 Concurrent Sessions A. Drama and Poetry Tim Slover ‘Worth a few bad dreams’: Toward a Mormon Aesthetic” Susan Howe “Sunstone Magazine and Twenty Years of Contemporary Mormon Poetry” Lisa Bickmore “National Trends in Poetry” B. Mormon Culture Kristi Bell “If We’re Having Doughnuts, It Must Be a Youth Activity: Foodways among the Mormons” Eric Eliason “Mark Twain, Brigham Young, and the Origin of an American Motif” Ivan Angus Wolfe “The Lost Tribes of Mormon SF Literature: Battlestar Galactica in Books and Comics” C. Children and YA Chris Crowe and Jesse Crisler “Then and Now: A Survey of Mormon Young Adult Writers” Anne Billings: “Louise Plummer: Local Grasshopper Made Good” Rick Walton “Mormon Picture Book Authors and Illustrators” 10:45 - 11:55 Concurrent Sessions A. Faith, Reading, Philosophy John-Charles Duffey Emerson as "radical restorationist" Cherry B. Silver “The Trials of Job for Tim Slover and Us” Harlow Clark "Socrates Stretched on Ion's Racke" B. Genre Fiction Gae Lyn Henderson “Conflicted Narratives: Mormon Romances Only Flirt with Feminism” Lavina Fielding Anderson and Paul Edwards “Murder Most Mormon: Swelling the National Trend” C. The Novel Richard H. Cracroft “God-Finding in the 21st Century: The Mormon Salvation Journey in Alan R. Mitchell's Angel of the Danube and John Bennion's Falling Toward Heaven” Douglas Alder “Writing Dixie: Marilyn Arnold’s Desert Trilogy” Connie Lamb and Robert Means “A Historical Survey of LDS Fiction: The Lee Library Collection” 12:00 - 1:45 Conference Luncheon Business Section Annual Awards President's Address by Marilyn Brown: "A Girl in Transition: A True Mormon Letter" 2-3:45 Concurrent Sessions A. Religion and Literature Kristen Allred “The Inner Other: Sharing Testimony through Personal Experiences” Gideon Burton “National Christian Fiction and Publishing: Models for LDS Literature?” Valerie Buck “One of the Last True Genres for Religious Fiction: Card and S. F.” Gene England “Pastwatch: The Redemption of Orson Scott Card” B. The Family in Literature Kelly Thompson “‘Unto the Third and Fourth Generations’: The Influence and Community of Families in Virginia Sorensen’s The Evening and the Morning” Bruce Jorgensen “Notes toward a ‘Marriage Group’ of Contemporary Mormon Stories” Margaret and Bruce Young “‘The holy cords too intrinse to unloose’: Mormon Families in Life and Fiction” 4-4:50 Plenary Session Cheiko Okasaki "Expressing Faith: A Literary Legacy" 6:30 Buffet and Readings by 2000 AML Award Winners Home of Ann Edwards Cannon, 75 O Street, Salt Lake City 2000 Membership Form Name____________________________________________ ________________ Address__________________________________________ ________________ City, State____________________________________ Zip_____________ Phone (___ )___________ E- mail_______________________________ ____$20.00 Member Dues ____$25.00 Couple ____$15.00 Student ____$10 Conference Registration _____ $100.00 Donation _____ $50.00 _____$25.00_____ Other _____ Total Send this form to: AML, 262 South Main, Springville, Utah 84643 ________________ Professor John Bennion 3117 JKHB English Department Brigham Young University Provo, UT 84602-6280 Tel: (801) 378-3419 Fax: (801) 378-4705 - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Jim Cobabe" Subject: Re: [AML] What Is Art? Date: 15 Dec 2000 11:51:48 -0700 Rob Pannoni: --- I guess it must have been art. It sure as heck wasn't good for anything else. --- Ah! That's one of the best definitions yet. --- Jim Cobabe _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.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] Instructions to Guadalahonky's: Correction Date: 15 Dec 2000 12:08:52 -0700 Oops. I copied it straight from www.555-1212.com. That would be 136 E = 12300 S, I'm guessing. -------- For a sample copy of IRREANTUM, a Mormon literary quarterly, send $4 to = the Association for Mormon Letters, 262 S. Main St., Springville, UT = 84663. >>> Jacob Proffitt 12/14 2:49 PM >>> On Thu, 14 Dec 2000 12:07:16 -0700, Christopher Bigelow wrote: >136 S 12300 S=20 Is this one of them newfangled quantum addresses? There's two souths in there... :) 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: Terry L Jeffress Subject: Re: [AML] Orson Scott CARD, _Lost Boys_ (Review) Date: 15 Dec 2000 12:55:56 -0700 On Fri, Dec 15, 2000 at 01:05:59AM -0700, D. Michael Martindale wrote: > No, I don't agree with this at all. First of all, a character's religion > is hardly a "detail." It's an integral part of his life. I defy anyone > to write a novel-length story of someone "smoking a religion" without > giving it a brand name, and have the story feel satisfying. Many books > and films in the 20th century have ignored religion in people's lives, > but I also think that's a major defect in 20th century storytelling. On > the other hand, if you're going to include a religious character, a > generic religion is not likely to work. Not for a novel-length story or > feature-length movie. In my discussion about the use of details in fiction, I thought I had taken a step back from _Lost Boys_ and was discussing fiction in general. IMHO, if you include a detail in your story, that detail colors your story to some extent. If you need a religious leader you can choose a Mormon bishop, Baptist minister, Catholic priest, Buddhist lama, or whatever. The choice you make for that person has a fundamental impact on the course and tone of your story. If you include Mormon people and bring up their Mormonness in a story, that colors your story. People will bring all their preconceived notions about Mormons (true or not) and apply them to your characters. You can't help that. In fact you want that to happen. If you could not rely on readers bringing some history with them to your work, you would have to explain too much. If I want my character to encounter a red light at a busy urban intersection, I need the character to bring a mental construct of that intersection. Otherwise, short stories would have to run to novel lengths with description. If you bring religion into your story, it had better be there for a reason. I agree that a generic religious person won't work. But I contend that if you state that a given character in a story practices Native American religion (just to name one) with no further mention, that story won't work either. If the religion is "an integral part of [the character's] life," then you should demonstrate that the character's religious beliefs shaped the decisions the character makes and thus the outcome of the story. I said that you could replace the religion in _Lost Boys_ with any other religion to demonstrate that the religion had no bearing on the outcome. For me, that makes the religious content in _Lost Boys_ superfluous. Either Card should have not included religion, or he should have written an outcome that could only occur with religious characters. -- Terry L Jeffress AML Webmaster and AML-List Review Archivist - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jonathan Langford Subject: [AML] Shutting Down (Temporarily) Date: 15 Dec 2000 15:46:16 -0600 Folks, It's time for me to get to the last-minute packing and loading, so I'm shutting down the List now. Back on Jan. 2. I look forward to seeing some of you at the AML-List dinner. In the meantime, happy reading/writing/what have you. Jonathan Langford AML-List Moderator - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm